I don't care either. The car is fast enough for me and I love the way it does it. 228 hp or 238hp makes no difference to me. This car moves me like no other.

 

You've got that a little backwards, the Rx-8 and WRX have similar traps, but the WRX is quicker in the 1/4 mile.

I agrue this whole thing because it's an interesting topic. Most others on this board have an emotional stake in the debate that I don't.

 

This is why you don't let a woman choose and then buy a car without you there. That's why Peter Brady was so pissed off at Adrian when she was at the Mini Cooper dealership.

 

LOL if she dosnt care about hp and is buying it for the looks then more power to her. we all have our own reasons to buying what we buy.

 

Well, it started out that I liked it for the looks and the unique factor of a rotary engine. Then when I got my second job I was required to have a manual and a built-in navigation system. Well, all those things are available with the RX-8, and it fell more than $10K below any on my list of "recommended" cars I was provided with, so I asked if this was okay. They had no idea what the car was, looked it up, and said it was fine.

 

As one of the newer 8 owners here, I must admit that it's pretty shameful that a V6 Accord makes more horsepower.

The car handles great, but Mazda does need to add some ponies in keeping with the sports car spirit.

And - one more thing - I do wonder if there will be further hp revisions at some future point, given that there's already been two.

Mazda may already be worried about more litigation given this latest revision, even though a different dyno test produced the revised hp number.

 

I've always been under the impression that, a properly driven WRX will post consistently better ETs than a comparable RWD car, with a similar or lower trap speed. My reasoning is, the WRX is more likely to pull a better 60' / reaction time, thus thundering through the 1/4 mile sooner.

Of course....the RX-8 can't be dyno'd. Didn't ya know? And besides, you don't care about WRXs anymore.

That'd be interesting. I have a dyno of my car when it had 12,000 miles, M calibration & bone stock. Guess what? It's still bone stock, but with the latest flash on it, plus some 26,000 miles more on the clock. I should probably pay RP a visit soon to re-test. Just for the heck of it.

 

of course i do but i also know from the literature(and yes we have discussed it ad nauseum) that that was a "target hp" as stated in the small print and that the only number that mattered is the number on the window sticker when it was purchased.

 

You don't make dealer brouchures with a target horsepower, at least not if you're smart.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't believe there were any US dealer brochures stating 250 HP. When they opened up for on-line pre-order in January 2003, I believe the on-line materials did state 250 HP. Certainly that was the number published in the US automotive rags.

However, by the time the cars made it to the US in July 2003, the on-line materials, sales brochures and window sticker all showed 247 HP. And Mazda would have come off clean if the cars could really make at least 95% of the 247 number. They couldn't and the rest is history .....

 

sorry,
but wrong.

beers

 

Thanks Swoope, now I don't have to find the damn thing...

 

no problem... took me more time to figure out how to scan and shrink than to find the brochure.

btw, which wheels did you get and from whom???/

beers

 

Swoope,

I stand corrected.

You prompted me to dig into my files and yes, the brochure I saved when I bought the car also says 250 HP (several times). Of course they also stated "Its unique appeal doesn't hinge solely on its horsepower." which is an interesting comment viewing what has gone on over the past three years.

Back to the original point, the windows sticker does say 247 HP and my memory from that time (which has now been established to be not all that great) is that I was well aware (even before joining RX8club.com) that the car had been downgraded to 247 HP so the info in the brochure being off was no big deal.

 

Ok... since the 6sp is making 232HP (04-06), what is the real HP readings for the 04-05 AT? Also, did the torque figures change too with the 04-05 6sp and AT models?

 

The car claims 228 Brake horsepower in the UK.

Regarding Spain, where I live, it is quoted at 231 Hp.

I guess your new SAE rules are just like CEE or DIN rules. People in Spain thought you guys got a more powerful car, but it's just down to measuring standards.

BTW the car has been measured at 15.18 @ 94-95 Mph, 150 MPH top speed in magazines.

The mag that tested it told that they could not get an accurate dyno number as the PCM seemed to protect the engine from revving. I think they got 170 Whp and said the car felt a lot faster than that.

On the other hand, another mag presented a 226 crank Hp dyno slip, which I don't trust much.

One of my Spanish forum fellows pulled a 6.8 sec 0-62.5 MPH which I think would be kind of impossible if the car didn't live up to it's power claims.

However the car seems to be VERY sensible to heat. We can reach the high 90s-low 100s in Spain and my car actually feels a lot slower than it feels now (We're in the high 30s-low 40s)

Cheers

 

and doesnt it say somewhere in the fine print "all information correct at time of printing but all is subject to change"

thats on every product brochure in case there are still lots to give away when the new specs or new brochure comes out so they dont have to waste them by throwing them away.

 

When will we learn not to trust the big bad corporations. In the end its all about the benjamins. The only speed meter that matters is the butt meter, I remember someone posting that earlier. If it feels fast to you, then more power to you. But I guess a lot you 8 owners out there feel like you've been jipped. Also wanting assurance that you didn't pay 30K for a fairy tale pumpkin carriage.

 

an optimist would say:
wow, for so little horsepower, this car sure is quick and fun to drive


a pessimist would say: this car is slow, what a bunch of liars about the HP



its all how you look at it. If after driving my 8 for the first time, with no knowledge of its power, i'd guess around 215-220. but that guess is independent of my feeling that its really fun and reasonably quick....

Heck a Lotus Elise has less than 200hp. I don't care if its SAE came out to be 120, i'd still take it.

 

Those are AT numbers right?

 

Not atl all.

The only car on sale in Spain is the high power model 6MT

I guess you got much better figures than that according to your question.

Besides I gotta tell you that all performance figures are measured with a full tank and I believe the testers are not used to atmospheric rotaries and probably didn't use cluth drop.

 

So I resisted reading this thread for a long time, because I frankly think the entire topic of hp numbers is a crock and I couldn't be less interested. But since the thread kept generating activity, and I had a little time to kill, I finally decided to plow through the whole thing. And I confess, I did get something of value out of it:

The winner of the 2006 award for Best Use Of The Word 'SCHWANZ' In A Post goes to StewC625!

 

Whats a 'schwanz'?

 

And a realist would say: This car is a lot of fun but it sure could use some more horsepower and torque.

 

Excellent point.

(not that this has anything to do with the original reason for this thread)

I don't drive my RX-8 on the track so for me, simply increasing the HP spike at 8500 RPM from 230+ to 250+ HP doesn't buy me a whole lot. I just don't spend that much time at the high end of the RPM scale.

An increase in torque across the RPM range is what I would like to see on the stock engine. One can always hope ...