RX-8 Video - Page 2
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 64

This is a discussion on RX-8 Video within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally posted by Mr. Fancypants Mazda RX-8 stats from Automobile magazine: Horsepower 250@8500 Torque 159@5500 0-60 in 6.2 sec 1/4 ...

  1. #16
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Originally posted by Mr. Fancypants
    Mazda RX-8 stats from Automobile magazine:

    Horsepower 250@8500
    Torque 159@5500
    0-60 in 6.2 sec
    1/4 14.8 @ 95 mph
    Top speed 150

    Aside from the looks, the performance seems pretty mediocre for the price. The entry level $25,700 has 210 horsepower with the fully optioned being $33,100 with 250 horsepower. I mean look at the torque for shiit sake!
    Yep that's the problem with the RX-8. Not enough torque. It's a shame. Not enough beef! Could have been a REAL contender.
    2010 SSM STI

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845
    I am interested as to whether you guys think the S2000 is a REAL contender. Much like the S2000, the RX8 is a high rpm beast. It redlines at 9000 RPMs. When you get that rotary spinning up that high, it will surely go.

  4. #18
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    It doesn't really matter how many RPM's it goes up to. The RX-8 just doesn't have the torque to match. The S2000 would stomp all over it.
    2010 SSM STI

  5. #19
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845
    Originally posted by WilliamG
    It doesn't really matter how many RPM's it goes up to. The RX-8 just doesn't have the torque to match. The S2000 would stomp all over it.
    Thank you, you have helped me prove my point.

    Honda S2000:

    HP 240 hp@8300 rpms
    153 lb/ft @7500 rpms

    redline is 9000 rpms

    The RX8 is 250 HP with 153 lb/ft of torque with a 9000 rpm redline. Not much different.
    Last edited by 2001S4; 03-09-2003 at 09:03 PM.

  6. #20
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Originally posted by 2001S4
    Thank you, you have helped me prove my point.

    Honda S2000:

    HP 240 hp@8300 rpms
    153 lb/ft @7500 rpms

    redline is 9000 rpms

    The RX8 is 250 HP with 153 lb/ft of torque with a 9000 rpm redline. Not much different.
    Don't forget you're comparing a 1.3litre to a 2 litre. The S2000 enjoys more displacement.
    2010 SSM STI

  7. #21
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845
    Originally posted by WilliamG
    Don't forget you're comparing a 1.3litre to a 2 litre. The S2000 enjoys more displacement.
    Yes you are also comparing two COMPLETELY different types of engines. The RX8 is putting out about the same power as the RX7 did, without the use of forced induction. And that car had a small engine as well. The fact of the matter is that this car will be impressive, it WILL be comparable in performance to the S2000, and it will certainly outperform a lot of cars on the road, especially in the handling department.

  8. #22
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Originally posted by 2001S4
    Yes you are also comparing two COMPLETELY different types of engines. The RX8 is putting out about the same power as the RX7 did, without the use of forced induction. And that car had a small engine as well. The fact of the matter is that this car will be impressive, it WILL be comparable in performance to the S2000, and it will certainly outperform a lot of cars on the road, especially in the handling department.
    It's not going to be as fast as an S2000. However, it certainly will outperform a lot of cars on the road. I think the main problem is the car isn't cheap. For instance a WRX outperforms it.....for less money....

    I say WRX because heck it's a WRX forum, but for the money I feel you can do better, don't you?
    2010 SSM STI

  9. #23
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845
    Originally posted by WilliamG
    It's not going to be as fast as an S2000. However, it certainly will outperform a lot of cars on the road. I think the main problem is the car isn't cheap. For instance a WRX outperforms it.....for less money....

    I say WRX because heck it's a WRX forum, but for the money I feel you can do better, don't you?
    Yeah, for the money spent on a WRX, I can get a SRT-4. Man those WRX's are just too much and not enough performance.

  10. #24
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    I purposefully didn't mention the SRT-4 since I've seen no numbers for how good it is on a track. I've heard a few 'unstable' shouts from various board members who've tracked it, but I'll wait for some full reviews. The RX-8, as shown by the video on this board, is rather good on the track. I hear so much about the acceleration and 1/4 slip times of the SRT-4, but not so much on the handling round a track... We shall see...

    But I digress - let's not turn this into an SRT-4 thread! We're talking RX-8.
    2010 SSM STI

  11. #25
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845
    Originally posted by WilliamG
    I purposefully didn't mention the SRT-4 since I've seen no numbers for how good it is on a track. I've heard a few 'unstable' shouts from various board members who've tracked it, but I'll wait for some full reviews. The RX-8, as shown by the video on this board, is rather good on the track. I hear so much about the acceleration and 1/4 slip times of the SRT-4, but not so much on the handling round a track... We shall see...
    But all those numbers don't matter. You stated that the RX8 is a disappointment because it is not fast enough (which I believe is untrue). You then compared it to the S2000 (well I compared it), saying that the S2000 is faster, therefore better. You continued on to the RX8 is too expensive for the performance you get. So basically, looking back at those posts, you have said that all the really matters is how fast the car is. With that said, the SRT-4 WILL smoke all three of those cars. I believe that the RX8 will be an excellent car, a well rounded car, and a popular car.

  12. #26
    Moderator WilliamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Originally posted by 2001S4
    But all those numbers don't matter. You stated that the RX8 is a disappointment because it is not fast enough (which I believe is untrue). You then compared it to the S2000 (well I compared it), saying that the S2000 is faster, therefore better. You continued on to the RX8 is too expensive for the performance you get. So basically, looking back at those posts, you have said that all the really matters is how fast the car is. With that said, the SRT-4 WILL smoke all three of those cars. I believe that the RX8 will be an excellent car, a well rounded car, and a popular car.
    I feel like I'm repeating myself. I agree that the RX-8 is a fine car. Watch the RX-8 video. A professional comments on the RX-8 performance and how it's not torquey enough which is a shame. I'm not denying the car is good. I just feel that it's not 'quite' good enough for the money. Don't forget this is my opinion only. Others, even yourself, may disagree. I never said the RX-8 wasn't fast enough. (Speed limits in the USA are 65mph in most cases. )
    2010 SSM STI

  13. #27
    Registered User Mr. Fancypants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    SFV, CA
    Posts
    582
    2001S4, you are so vague in your posts it is unclear exactly what your find appealing regarding the RX-8. 33k for the 250 hp version of the RX-8? Its not suprising the lack of torque was criticized in the article, and it is apparent during daily driving. I would spend a couple more grand and buy the STI which will "probably" be superior or get an EVO, or 350Z. Where is the justification in the price? Handling alone just as 1/4 times arent everything..there needs to be an equilibrium between the two. I am not saying this isnt going to be a competitor, infact, I think the contrary. But with truly great cars coming at competitive prices, I see the only ones picking up this car are the enthusiats who dont want to let go.
    04 SVT Lightning

  14. #28
    Moderator Integra96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    16,989
    I Support ClubWRX
    Just to clarify, I believe the RX-8 and S2000 1/4 mile and 0-60 times are roughly the same. In R&T, the RX-8 netted a 5.9 0-60 and a 14.5 1/4 mile. Most S2000 numbers I've seen are around that, or even a bit slower.

    Mr. Fancypants: I agree that hardcore Mazda sports car enthusiasts will probably favor the RX-8 over more wild cars like the STi. I'd prefer an STi over the Mazda. But there's no comparison between the two in terms of finesse and style, IMO. The RX-8 is a nimble, artistic classic sports car (except for the 4 door part), while the STi or EVO are somewhat crude-looking in comparison and much more aggressive in performance.

    Again, a turbo RX-8 would be
    "Did you sleep well?"
    "No, I made a couple of mistakes."
    -- Steven Wright

  15. #29
    Moderator fengshui's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,816
    I am considering trading in the WRX for an RX-8. I would keep it naturally aspirated, and any modifications would keep it that way. Nothing would beat a more powerful naturally aspirated rotary engine for power delivery and reliability. We will see what the test drive results are, and how well the DSC works, since itll be my only driver. I would be giving up the WRX's grip and power for a more nimble handling, long lasting engine (less moving parts), and uniqueness and technology. I'd say right now that there is something so cool about the RX cars, but I'm still 50/50 on what I'll do. Time will tell.

    chris
    Moderator: Retired
    2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan 5MT - Road Rally - Best 1/4mi: 13.954 @ 97.36mph (3448 lbs)
    2001 Mazda Miata 5MT - AutoX #99 (NNJ Region SCCA 2005 CStock Champion)
    1988 BMW 325 (2.7L "i" conversion) Sedan 5MT - Daily Driver (AutoX soon!)
    "If you can't drive this car fast you can't drive fast." --British Magazine, CAR, on the WRX

  16. #30
    Registered User RLsChMiDt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    3,891
    I can't download any of them!
    -Ryan |Dub-Yuh Our Ex Ess Tee Eye| My Car

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •