The rotary engine is not as efficient because the combustion chamber is very long and narrow. It has to use two spark plugs even in non-emmisions configuration. However, the difference in efficiency is not really that great. The engine looses less power in friction, but more due to poor combustion. Consider what MPG any other 3000 lb 230-240 HP car gets, and you'll see the RX-8 is not that far off - perhaps 10%.
In the RX-8, the biggest waster of fuel is idling - it uses almost as much fuel idling as it does at 100 km/hr (about 60 mph).
Because the combustion chamber is an inefficient design, the engine becomes more efficient when boosted. For example, my third gen RX-7 burns between 9.5 and 10 l/100 km on the highway, which translates to about 10-20% better than an RX-8. However, because you have to take measures to protect the engine in throttle transitions, the "city" mileage is terrible!
This was not lost on Mazda engineers, which is one reason they boosted the RX-7s (the other being they wanted much more power). The downside was cost and complexity. With the RX-8 they have taken a different path. Power with less cost and more engineering. They raised the engine rev. limit by reducing mass in some components and design tweaks in others. They moved the exhaust ports from the rotor housing to the side housing - this helps in high RPM operation because when the apex seals moved over the exhaust port they "bounced" and this limited their life and the speed they could reliably run at.
I asked this question last month and was told Nov/Dec. The 04 are still on the lot because they are a tough sell at this point. They got a reputation for unreliability, and the 05 are discounted heavily, so people tend not to see the point of buying a "new" 04.
I'm going to be getting an RX-8 after thanksgiving... now... should I wait until the '06s come out? Because I'm going to be getting an MT, and heard that the big changes are going to the ATs, I might not wait, but maybe somebody might have more news. Thanks in advance!
Nope. Go for the deals on the 2005 MT, but be sure that you get a Group 2 2005 (made after June) so you don't need to worry about the recall gas tank heat shield or the tweaks to the PCM software.
Also, even if you get an earlier one, it "MUST" have the updates installed before they can deliver it to you (the must is from the Mazda documentation). So I don't think there will be any problem either way.
You can still wait to see what the new manuals are like, as I suspect there will still be discounted 05s on the lot. Your choise.
I'm thinking very hard (now that my Miata is smashed) about getting an RX-8. The local dealer has 3 04 GT's leftover. They're all black and they want $24300 or so for the cheapest one.
One of the dealers in St Louis (2 hours away) has some 05 GT's if that is the route to go. How much off of a discount from MSRP should I expect to take home an 05? The 04's are about $7000 off...are people getting 05's for this kind of discount?
That's actually only a little less than what the dealer's cost was. You will be able to get a 2006 base model(in a month or so) with automatic for about $25-26K with incentives.
The 2004? Offer them $20K - the second the 2006s come out, you're looking at a three year old, still on the lot car. At best, it is worth only a little more than what it would go for used.
thel....judging by what I've seen in southern OH, leftover '04s are going for $7K off MSRP. '05s are going for $5K off MSRP.
Used '04s are being advertised in the newspaper from private owners for around $23K. Probably buy one for about $22K....maybe $21.5K. Haven't seen any used '05s crop up.
There is now a picture posted on the RX-8 Club site of the 2006 six speed automatic shown at Sevenstock. It's the new grey colour. You can just see the 6 port engine in the pic.
Now if we can just get them (Mazda) to develop a 9000 RPM torque converter...
Is that at this point the dealer will be stubborn enough to just hold onto them at this point rather than take a loss...which I'd imagine they'd be doing selling them for under $24k.
That said, it seems dumb to pay $24k for an 04 when 05's can be had for $2k more and the 05's don't have the issues the 04's do.
I'll try to stop by the dealer soon and I'll let you know what happens.
And I sat in the an 04 RX-8 GT in the showroom. I could get plenty comfortable in the drivers seat. Using the power feature on the seat, I was able to lower it so I could fit my head in with the moonroof. I was not so lucky in the passenger seat. I could not fit in the back seat at all. I'm 6'1", 200 lbs...not that big, but I just don't see how adults can fit back there.
Between the small rear seat room and the low roof with the moonroof (must have), I've pretty much scratched the RX-8 off my list.
"Between the small rear seat room and the low roof with the moonroof (must have), I've pretty much scratched the RX-8 off my list."
Just out of curiousity, what else is on your list? The reason I ask is because the only vehicle I could compare to the RX-8 which offers more rear seat room would be a Subie WRX (marginally more rear leg room) or a Pontiac GTO.
Depends on your requirements, I'm sure. If someone is just looking for a speedy car with a backseat for ~$30k or less, there are many cars that qualify. Are they all direct competitors? No. Do they fit those 3 requirements? yes.
For example, one at the top of my list would be an Accord Coupe. Decent backseat, much less than $30k, and 0-60 in ~6 secs (5.9 according to one test i have in mind). Again, not a direct competitor, necessarily, but fits the bill stated above.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
I'm 6'1" 220lb. The moonroof was simply not interesting to me. Even if the 2" loss of space for the moonroof was OK, the point where the moonroof is installed does not make it much fun for the front or rear passengers, especially compared to the near full roof of glass offered by Pontiac, Mini Cooper and others. Moonroof's are old school, full glass tops are where it's at.
Give me the double bubble head room instead. I don't need the Sun on my bald spot either.
You're certainly correct when you say it depends on your requirements. Mine would be RWD (for the handling traits), manual tranny, and decent rear-seat room for a sub-$30k pricetag narrows the field down pretty quick. BTW - the RX8 has more rear seat room (both head and leg) than the Accord Coupe, and much better access due to the clamshell design.
interesting. i didn't know that. i never got past the fact i can't fit in the RX driver's seat. maybe they should take away from some of that rear seat room so taller drivers can buy the car, too.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
I'm only going by what the specs say since I haven't actually tried the Accord Coupe (not terribly interested in FWD anymore). Also, the specs show the RX8 to have more FRONT head and leg room than the Accord Coupe. Of course, I'm sure these are specs for a non-sunroof RX8. Also, I realize that specs aren't everything and that only trial fit will show if a car is acceptable or not.
Be that as it may, I'm 6'-0" (most of my height is in my legs), slim, and fit fine in the 8 (both sunroof and plain versions). Also, I think the clamshell door design works well for letting kids in/out of the back seat. Mine seem to like climbing in/out of the 8 better than every other coupe my wife and I looked at during the last car show. When I test drove the 8, I thought it handled/braked quite well; but I thought it needed more oomph. It was pretty quick, just not as powerful as 238hp had led me to expect.
I'm 6'5". I didn't have a problem with headroom in the 8, just the leg room. I only tried the top-level Accord (eg, power seat) and fit with room to spare. So, like you said, the numbers don't always tell the whole story (especially since the forward and aft tilt on a power seat makes a HUGE difference in terms of me fitting in most cars).
When I was looking, I wasn't concerned with the backseat (hence I wound up buying a 350Z at that time).
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
I'm not really looking at coupes per se...I like the RX-8 b/c it has the suicide doors for better acces to the back...almost like a sedan. Other possible candidates were the aforementioned WRX (no moonroof until 04), Lancer Evo 8 (haven't driven one so who know's), Mazda3 / MS Protege / Mazda6 (FWD is a negative for me), and the Lexus IS300 (preferably 02 or so for the manual).
Most of these cars have limited back seat space according to the spec sheet but the RX8 seemed to have less than the 32" figure here on Edmunds. The IS300 shows 30". The WRX isn't much better, but seemed to be more than the RX8. The 3, 6 and the Protege all have the most...but it's due in part to being FWD.
I may try to get back to the dealer with the rear-facing car seat to see if it will fit at all. If not, the RX8 will have to be off the list. Anyone out there have any luck putting one back there?
I think 'will fit' is highly dependant on the fore/aft location of the front seat. I would recommend that the rear-facing car seat be tried in ANY car being considered regardless of perceived leg/head room by an adult.
Also, consider the difficulty in actually placing/removing the infant seat rather than just front seat comfort with the car seat in place.
I am considering both of these (also the 350z... but I haven't driven it yet).
1st I drove the WRX, I have to say - initaily climbing behind the wheel I was unimpressed (the best feature of the interoir is ironicaly, the wheel!) The gearshifter felt sloppy and cheap.. it was all very plasticly. After a few stoplights though very fun but as others have said: unrefined.
2nd was the RX-8. Now this is what a sports car cockpit should be like
(interesting side note, the sales man showing me the WRX and the RX-8 was clearly a subaru guy. For some reason he made me sit in the seat of the RX-8 while he crouched outside the passenger side mirror and kept asking "can you see me?!" not sure what this was supposed to prove to me, I could still see him, and this was the 2nd subaru salesman to give me this 'demo')
On to the drive
If the subaru is a wolverine, the RX-8 is a fox. The gearshifter was smooth and precise, bliping the throttle sent chills down my spine... oh and the wonderfull sound of those little rotors screaming their way up to 9,500 RPM. When the WRX dug its way out of corners, the RX-8 simply sliced through effortlessly.
Unfortuantly the dealership was about to close before I could drive the WRX STi, or the 350z. But the RX-8 is now at the top of my list.
Nice write up. You certainly can't go wrong with any of the cars you're looking at, but me thinks you caught the RX8 "bug". That's really hard to shake.... :shades:
I am close to getting my RX-8, hopefully in the next couple of weeks here. I am trying to decide whether to buy or lease. Do you guys really believe the residuals posted here on Edmunds? It seems with all the continuous rebates being posted that the resale would suffer terribly. Buying seems like a great deal now because of these deals, but if you get killed on the way out then it wouldn't be so hot anymore...you guys have any thoughts on this?
So close... tried to get one today, but I couldn't drag these guys under 32K for a fully loaded GT... so how are you guys doing it?! I want to know! I'm going on Friday, so please give me tips if you can!
Wait a few weeks until the 2006 models are out. This will give you huge leverage. Also, just go to carsdirect or a simmilar site - let them negotiate for you. Sure, it's $200 or more than you ould probably haggle them down to, but there's no having to go through that(and get lucky by finding the rare ethical dealership)
Yes, it's literally days or weeks until the 2006 models come out.
No, seriously. We're talking a few days or a couple of weeks at most. A 2005 for 4-5K off, just like you want it - that's worth waiting. I'd rent a car to make the trip back.
Are you close to LA? Galpin Mazda here has been very aggressive about their pricing scheme for people who contact them through carsdirect.com; you really should be patient since you are talking about $5k easily in difference in price, plus taxes on the difference, plus interest on the difference in financing! That makes the difference easily $7k when everything is included, which generally is worth a bit of hassle and time...
I've had my 8 for quite a while and am in need of some new tires. The Potenza RE040s that came with the car were very nice (on dry) until about 8k. Then the noise started. Kept them rotated and balanced... no alignment issues, but by 12k the noise was irritating as hell. Due to this and the excessive quickness of tread wear, I don't think I'll be replacing these tires with potenzas. I was wondering if any of you had any +/- advice on tires you've used.
I like the Michellins. Get some good all-seasons on it - the stock tires are mediocre at best for wet or slightly slippery roads(inch of snow will just about make them worthless).
Tirerack.com has an Avon all seasons for $136. These tires have nice ratings technically. Customers seem to like them too. Tread pattern is aggressive looking.
What's the practical tread wear on 225/45 18" wheels? I don't see anyone getting more than 20K.
The Bridgestones (RE050 in the test) ranked 9th. Michelin Pilot Sport ranked 4th (with decent tread-wear but a bit pricy). The top ranked tire was the Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3 with very good dry performance, outstanding wet performance, good tread wear and a decent price.
Thanks for the input guys. The C and D article was very interesting (tks rorr). I was leaning towards the Kumho ECSTA SPT... will probably pass since the ECSTA MX tested near the back.
Yea, I've been all over tirerack.com for the past week... (also tks trispec). The Avons are a definite option... although I didn't see any 225/45/18 in the Tech M500 line. For what it's worth trispec, I've got 27k on my potenzas at the moment... of course, when it rains now, I'm pretty much riding around with the grim reaper. Should have replaced them at 15-17k... and I hear these tires are bad for wear.
Ok guys, same topic, different question. You think there would be any problems using lower profile tires... say 225/35 or 40 vs. 45s?... (speedometer calibration and tire pressure sensor issues?). Also, is it possible/safe/reasonable to put wider tires on the stock rim... say 255s?
The problem, though, is that the RX-8 isn't a sportscar - it's a couple-looking sports sedan at best. You'd be better with good all-seasons on it unless you are really flogging it on a racetrack or something.
OK, I've had this NOT a sports car thing thrown at me my whole life. It's COMPLETELY in the eyes of the beholder.
To some, sports car means strictly, a balls to wall racer. To others it's any coupe no matter how big. It means two seater only or it means huge engine displacement in a compact car.
Professional car critics in many of the major car magazines compared the RX-8 favorably to the Boxer and the Vet. That's enough for me.
Yeah, I've used Kumho tires in the past; thought they were decent tires. That C&D article opened my eyes a bit. Problem I had with the article was that there was no discussion regarding noise levels or tire comfort. But I thought they did a decent job of grading the tires based on wet/dry performance, tire wear ratings, and price. I also liked the fact that the driver used was a tire test driver for a tire manufacturer (someone familiar with and sensitive to tire test issues) who tested/rated the tires without knowing the brand (blind test).
"The problem, though, is that the RX-8 isn't a sportscar..."
What the RX-8 "is" or "isn't" is completely immaterial. What matters is how the car owner intends to treat his car and the tire selection should go by his criteria.
Ah, a tangent. "Sports car" seems a vague title to me. I know it has four seats and could maybe use another 30-50hp, but that doesn't mean I'm going to slap tires on it that would be more suitable for a sedan. It's certainly no Lotus or anything, but it handles a bit better than the 350Z (at least the one I've driven)... if you consider that a sports car.
Anyway, the potenzas that came with the potentially quasipseudosemi-sports car were supposedly "high performance" summer tires and I'd like to at least stay in that category. Weather isn't much of an issue where I live, so I don't think I'll be shopping for all seasons. Tks though plekto.
Thanks for the validations folks on what a sports car is.
I'm of the age, near 50, where fun, comfort and practical mean heaps more than attempting to to push the performance features of my RX-8 AT. I got no reaction time left anyway.
The stock summer tires failed on me while up in Maine over Thanksgiving. Maybe failed is to strong, because the Edmunds forums had warned of the Potenzas issues on even the slightest of slushy snow covered roads.
Traveling 35mph on route 1 north just out side of Portland, my RX-8 rear end let go while in fourth gear. I got control of it after swerving back and forth three times. I probably over compensated in steering at first, but NO DSC lights flashed and the LSD did not do it's vibration thing.
It was 32 degrees F and plenty of traffic to keep things slushy. There just is literally no place for the slush to go on those Potenzas so the tires are lifted up. Then because the rubber is so hard it shears through the compacted slush rather than bend over and around it.
The Avons I'm getting are a softer compound with flow through treads. They rate better than most all seasons in the slush and wet stuff. Bad snow will still keep my RX-8 in the drive way I think, but mostly it's the slush on the hills that I'm worried about.
My point was that it's not really a true sprotscar. That is competes even somewhat well against them is a testiment to what a fine car it is. Afterall, for $24K after a bit of haggling, you can drive one home - and get 90% of the performance of a 350Z or BMW. From a car not really intended to be a direct competitor. It's why I love the car. It reminds me of my old Volvo 240 turbo I had in college. Not a BMW - but man it was close for a lot less money.
That said, most people can sacrifice a little performance for all-seasons (or get the top 3-4 choices in the review). Better rubber made the car handle quicker and faster. But $160-$180 a tire every year is a bit steep.
Yea, calling it a "true" sports car may be arguable. Personally, I'm not bothered by it either way. My point is that I feel the handling characteristics of this car is its strongest attribute and I don't want to lose any of it to tires. I need new tires that will at least match the handling/traction performance of the factory potenzas, at lower cost, better wear and lower noise. Hell, I think I'd even settle for bad wear if they would just be quieter than the potenzas. You know how it is... I just don't want to cough up 500-800 bucks for tires I'll end up hating. Tks for the help guys, and keep the ideas coming.
Comments
In the RX-8, the biggest waster of fuel is idling - it uses almost as much fuel idling as it does at 100 km/hr (about 60 mph).
Because the combustion chamber is an inefficient design, the engine becomes more efficient when boosted. For example, my third gen RX-7 burns between 9.5 and 10 l/100 km on the highway, which translates to about 10-20% better than an RX-8. However, because you have to take measures to protect the engine in throttle transitions, the "city" mileage is terrible!
This was not lost on Mazda engineers, which is one reason they boosted the RX-7s (the other being they wanted much more power). The downside was cost and complexity. With the RX-8 they have taken a different path. Power with less cost and more engineering. They raised the engine rev. limit by reducing mass in some components and design tweaks in others. They moved the exhaust ports from the rotor housing to the side housing - this helps in high RPM operation because when the apex seals moved over the exhaust port they "bounced" and this limited their life and the speed they could reliably run at.
Is there a dealer here who knows ??????????
The 04 are still on the lot because they are a tough sell at this point. They got a reputation for unreliability, and the 05 are discounted heavily, so people tend not to see the point of buying a "new" 04.
Elian
Is the new copper red color going to be available on the 'regular' models or is this going to be a 'Shika Edition-only' color?
The new colors will be Phantom blue and galaxy gray
You can still wait to see what the new manuals are like, as I suspect there will still be discounted 05s on the lot. Your choise.
One of the dealers in St Louis (2 hours away) has some 05 GT's if that is the route to go. How much off of a discount from MSRP should I expect to take home an 05? The 04's are about $7000 off...are people getting 05's for this kind of discount?
The 2004? Offer them $20K - the second the 2006s come out, you're looking at a three year old, still on the lot car. At best, it is worth only a little more than what it would go for used.
Used '04s are being advertised in the newspaper from private owners for around $23K. Probably buy one for about $22K....maybe $21.5K. Haven't seen any used '05s crop up.
Oh - here in Los Angeles, base automatic 2004s are selling for about 18K - or at least that's the *asking* price which nobody pays.
There is now a picture posted on the RX-8 Club site of the 2006 six speed automatic shown at Sevenstock. It's the new grey colour. You can just see the 6 port engine in the pic.
Now if we can just get them (Mazda) to develop a 9000 RPM torque converter...
That said, it seems dumb to pay $24k for an 04 when 05's can be had for $2k more and the 05's don't have the issues the 04's do.
I'll try to stop by the dealer soon and I'll let you know what happens.
Thanks for the replies!!
Between the small rear seat room and the low roof with the moonroof (must have), I've pretty much scratched the RX-8 off my list.
Just out of curiousity, what else is on your list? The reason I ask is because the only vehicle I could compare to the RX-8 which offers more rear seat room would be a Subie WRX (marginally more rear leg room) or a Pontiac GTO.
For example, one at the top of my list would be an Accord Coupe. Decent backseat, much less than $30k, and 0-60 in ~6 secs (5.9 according to one test i have in mind). Again, not a direct competitor, necessarily, but fits the bill stated above.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Give me the double bubble head room instead. I don't need the Sun on my bald spot either.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Be that as it may, I'm 6'-0" (most of my height is in my legs), slim, and fit fine in the 8 (both sunroof and plain versions). Also, I think the clamshell door design works well for letting kids in/out of the back seat. Mine seem to like climbing in/out of the 8 better than every other coupe my wife and I looked at during the last car show. When I test drove the 8, I thought it handled/braked quite well; but I thought it needed more oomph. It was pretty quick, just not as powerful as 238hp had led me to expect.
When I was looking, I wasn't concerned with the backseat (hence I wound up buying a 350Z at that time).
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Most of these cars have limited back seat space according to the spec sheet but the RX8 seemed to have less than the 32" figure here on Edmunds. The IS300 shows 30". The WRX isn't much better, but seemed to be more than the RX8. The 3, 6 and the Protege all have the most...but it's due in part to being FWD.
I may try to get back to the dealer with the rear-facing car seat to see if it will fit at all. If not, the RX8 will have to be off the list. Anyone out there have any luck putting one back there?
Thanks again for the input!
Also, consider the difficulty in actually placing/removing the infant seat rather than just front seat comfort with the car seat in place.
1st I drove the WRX, I have to say - initaily climbing behind the wheel I was unimpressed (the best feature of the interoir is ironicaly, the wheel!) The gearshifter felt sloppy and cheap.. it was all very plasticly. After a few stoplights though very fun but as others have said: unrefined.
2nd was the RX-8. Now this is what a sports car cockpit should be like
(interesting side note, the sales man showing me the WRX and the RX-8 was clearly a subaru guy. For some reason he made me sit in the seat of the RX-8 while he crouched outside the passenger side mirror and kept asking "can you see me?!" not sure what this was supposed to prove to me, I could still see him, and this was the 2nd subaru salesman to give me this 'demo')
On to the drive
If the subaru is a wolverine, the RX-8 is a fox. The gearshifter was smooth and precise, bliping the throttle sent chills down my spine... oh and the wonderfull sound of those little rotors screaming their way up to 9,500 RPM. When the WRX dug its way out of corners, the RX-8 simply sliced through effortlessly.
Unfortuantly the dealership was about to close before I could drive the WRX STi, or the 350z. But the RX-8 is now at the top of my list.
I am close to getting my RX-8, hopefully in the next couple of weeks here. I am trying to decide whether to buy or lease. Do you guys really believe the residuals posted here on Edmunds? It seems with all the continuous rebates being posted that the resale would suffer terribly. Buying seems like a great deal now because of these deals, but if you get killed on the way out then it wouldn't be so hot anymore...you guys have any thoughts on this?
Elian
Yes, it's literally days or weeks until the 2006 models come out.
I've had my 8 for quite a while and am in need of some new tires. The Potenza RE040s that came with the car were very nice (on dry) until about 8k. Then the noise started. Kept them rotated and balanced... no alignment issues, but by 12k the noise was irritating as hell. Due to this and the excessive quickness of tread wear, I don't think I'll be replacing these tires with potenzas. I was wondering if any of you had any +/- advice on tires you've used.
What's the practical tread wear on 225/45 18" wheels? I don't see anyone getting more than 20K.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=10252&page_number=1
The Bridgestones (RE050 in the test) ranked 9th. Michelin Pilot Sport ranked 4th (with decent tread-wear but a bit pricy). The top ranked tire was the Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3 with very good dry performance, outstanding wet performance, good tread wear and a decent price.
Yea, I've been all over tirerack.com for the past week... (also tks trispec). The Avons are a definite option... although I didn't see any 225/45/18 in the Tech M500 line. For what it's worth trispec, I've got 27k on my potenzas at the moment... of course, when it rains now, I'm pretty much riding around with the grim reaper. Should have replaced them at 15-17k... and I hear these tires are bad for wear.
Ok guys, same topic, different question. You think there would be any problems using lower profile tires... say 225/35 or 40 vs. 45s?... (speedometer calibration and tire pressure sensor issues?). Also, is it possible/safe/reasonable to put wider tires on the stock rim... say 255s?
To some, sports car means strictly, a balls to wall racer. To others it's any coupe no matter how big. It means two seater only or it means huge engine displacement in a compact car.
Professional car critics in many of the major car magazines compared the RX-8 favorably to the Boxer and the Vet. That's enough for me.
What the RX-8 "is" or "isn't" is completely immaterial. What matters is how the car owner intends to treat his car and the tire selection should go by his criteria.
Anyway, the potenzas that came with the potentially quasipseudosemi-sports car were supposedly "high performance" summer tires and I'd like to at least stay in that category. Weather isn't much of an issue where I live, so I don't think I'll be shopping for all seasons. Tks though plekto.
I'm of the age, near 50, where fun, comfort and practical mean heaps more than attempting to to push the performance features of my RX-8 AT. I got no reaction time left anyway.
The stock summer tires failed on me while up in Maine over Thanksgiving. Maybe failed is to strong, because the Edmunds forums had warned of the Potenzas issues on even the slightest of slushy snow covered roads.
Traveling 35mph on route 1 north just out side of Portland, my RX-8 rear end let go while in fourth gear. I got control of it after swerving back and forth three times. I probably over compensated in steering at first, but NO DSC lights flashed and the LSD did not do it's vibration thing.
It was 32 degrees F and plenty of traffic to keep things slushy. There just is literally no place for the slush to go on those Potenzas so the tires are lifted up. Then because the rubber is so hard it shears through the compacted slush rather than bend over and around it.
The Avons I'm getting are a softer compound with flow through treads. They rate better than most all seasons in the slush and wet stuff. Bad snow will still keep my RX-8 in the drive way I think, but mostly it's the slush on the hills that I'm worried about.
That said, most people can sacrifice a little performance for all-seasons (or get the top 3-4 choices in the review). Better rubber made the car handle quicker and faster. But $160-$180 a tire every year is a bit steep.