... Just go look on youtube when the RS version of the rx-8 (which is r3 over here) and you can see that Best Motoring hit 60-61mph in second gear.

 

Do you have a link? I couldn't find the video you're talking about.

 

You arent a very good finder First thing I put was Rx-8 RS and here is the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVAMqRfAikA
We loose but still kept up pretty well. The older version that had the Mazdaspeed parts can do 1.08.xx minutes around the tsukuba lap time.
Also there is no difference (from what they said) about the laptimes, but Im guesssing it's because of the 19inch rims on the R3.

 

Well whatever not 60mph, but 99km/h. It's 61.7mph

 

Fuel cut-off gets me to 64 actually (GPS tracked)

 

Well, I was searching for something you called a "Best Motoring" video and I don't speak Japanese. Are you just relying on the speedometer in the video to say that the R3 does 60 mph in 2nd gear? That might explain the discrepencies in what people have reported. Regardless, at least a couple of formal, published tests have measured slower 0-60 times for the R3 (and some faster lap times). That was my point. Has anyone published faster 0-60 times for the R3?

 

Thanks.

 

yeah i saw 61 maybe 62 i think, but i never went to 9.5k, close to it. and there ya go dark lord has it at 64!

(just looking at the speedo btw)

 

Anthony, are you still saying the '09 is faster from 0-60?

 

Seriously if you just slap on some light 17inch rims on the R3 version it would be sooo much faster to 60. Well it would atleast give it a .4 difference and super fast shifting

 

yes, for me though.

i mentioned somewhere that i could launch better somehow.

all i know is that i got better 0-60's in the 09 than in the 04-08.

maybe the 09's are faster, maybe not, but my personal 0-60 times have been best in the 09. and i'm not giving all the credit to all the launch, it kind of just "feels" faster too. could be the placebo taking in though, me thinking it is faster with mazda's advertising.

idk, just got drive both back to back and tell me. i quit. i trust you though robrecht. i'd be happier if 04-08 was faster just fyi

 

That's what I said. Put 18" wheels on it.

17" look a little small, but you get use to it.

You won't get .4 from the wheels.

 

With the RB flash, Intake, High flow cat, and exhaust I can pull middle to low 5's in my 04.

 

seriously?

 

...and 13s in the 1/4, right? Does your mom know you're using the computer without supervision?

 

^ lol

 

ok so i'm not crazy

 

Well, we all want you to be happier, Anthony:

"The new RX-8 launched in Australia this week with both an inferior 0-100km/h sprint time (6.4 v 6.2sec) and fuel consumption figure (12.9 v 12.6L/100km) to the original sports car that debuted in 2003."
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...Puff&pg=1&vf=0

"A shorter rear-end ratio in all 2009s—4.78:1 versus 4.44—means less revving and clutch slip in everyday driving. However, the second-to-third shift is now perilously close to 60 mph, which likely slowed the acceleration runs (6.7 seconds to 60 mph versus 6.5)."
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

Other published reviews have noted the same thing, eg, R&T (6.0 v 6.3), but I haven't seen anyone, other than you, claiming faster times for the 2009. How did you measure your times and what were they, BTW? Notice, however, that the 2009 R3 does sometimes get better lap times.

 

Why can't the just redline it and bounce it off the rev limiter in order to get 62mph. I know C&D did that with the Mazda 6 back in 04 and it got a 6.4 second 0-60.

 

Don't know why they didn't redline, but the fuel cut-off will definitely get you past 60mph

 

Interesting stuff. Sounds like a mixed bag. May feel better, but may not be faster and may be slower with the rev limiter so close to 60. Then again "it feels better" is half the battle.

 

very, very weird.

have you tried the new rx8's yet. i really do find them faster. and i found them getting WAY more gas mileage than what we do. 100 miles spirited, using less than a half a tank, more than a 1/4.

100 miles, 115, spirited is a half tank for me.

 

I haven't driven one yet, but I don't think it's that weird. You're just moving up the usable torque curve sooner instead of later. You may be able to hit 60 just before fuel cut-off but after your power has peaked and started to decline. If you want to stay in your peak power band, you would need to shift into third and that's where you lose a little bit of time. So what are your times and how did you measure them? Do you ever have misfires at the top-end? Wondering about your mileage. Worst I've ever gotten was 15, but I can also get 26-28 mpg with very conservative highway driving.

 

Enough with the deragatory and obstinate comments. Im probably almost old enough to be your Dad. I was timed at the track. I have been driving rotaries for the last 12 years nothing else. So next time you want to make stupid quirk just think it and let it go. Do you have the Flash and my set up? Can you drive like me? If the response is no just keep it to yourself next time.



DMAZDA

 

It's pretty straight forward, any additional shift is a time lag. So despite a shorter gearing in 1-2-3 for mkII, the car just needs that shift to 3rd for 60mph. That means slower times than mkI. Is 0.3s make a difference in real life situations?