Farewell - Silverado replaces RX8
11-11-2006, 05:22 PM
#26
But another member was getting 10-11mpg, Mazda said it was normal and his driving style. A year later He sells the car and buys a new RX, his mileage is suddenly 17mpg driving the exact same roads with the exact same driving style but a different RX.
I'm mostly city driving and decide to see how much of a difference my driving style made. In summer I was getting about 12.5 mpg, for one tank full I drove the car keeping 98% of the revs below 3K. The end result was mileage increased to 13.5 mpg a one mpg increase and it took all the fun out of driving the car. At the least I should have hit 15 maybe even 16 mpg.
Mazda has a problem here and needs to step up and fix it before they are sitting in front of a class action legal suite.
I'm mostly city driving and decide to see how much of a difference my driving style made. In summer I was getting about 12.5 mpg, for one tank full I drove the car keeping 98% of the revs below 3K. The end result was mileage increased to 13.5 mpg a one mpg increase and it took all the fun out of driving the car. At the least I should have hit 15 maybe even 16 mpg.
Mazda has a problem here and needs to step up and fix it before they are sitting in front of a class action legal suite.
Originally Posted by Georgia8er
And you'll find a big range of fuel economy with most every type of car on the road, part of it is individual drivers and part of it is the car. Someone on here sold their 8, the person that bought it became a member, and they got significantly different fuel economy.
11-11-2006, 05:32 PM
#28
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you feel that way, get a class action suit started. I'm not disagreeing with you that there could be a problem with the cars, but on forums you hear more complaints than you do praises. Maybe someone should take two cars, one with good fuel economy and one without, test drive them, dyno them, switch drivers. At least there would be a semi-definative answer then and a possible source of the problem, plus people who were getting bad fuel economy would have something to show Mazda.
11-11-2006, 06:41 PM
#29
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you feel that there was a difference in how much power the car had, depending on the fuel economy? I know it's a stretch just using the butt dyno but I've wondered about that.
11-11-2006, 09:03 PM
#30
FULL FRONTAL ...downforce
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A class action lawsuit?
dont be silly.
You would have to prove that the reason you bought the car was entirely on mpg, and if you go before a judge and seriously say you bought a sports car for mpg, he'll laugh at you.
I'm very sorry that you and others are getting low mpg's, but if you look a bit harder, there are plenty getting the numbers exactly, or in my case, above.
dont be silly.
You would have to prove that the reason you bought the car was entirely on mpg, and if you go before a judge and seriously say you bought a sports car for mpg, he'll laugh at you.
I'm very sorry that you and others are getting low mpg's, but if you look a bit harder, there are plenty getting the numbers exactly, or in my case, above.
11-11-2006, 09:56 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Walnut Grove CA
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are y'all flamin' the dude for trading in his RX-8 to get a truck?
I'm fortunate enough to be able to have an RX-8 and a truck.
Each has its place. I like both of 'em.
I'm fortunate enough to be able to have an RX-8 and a truck.
Each has its place. I like both of 'em.
11-11-2006, 10:38 PM
#33
This is exactly what I am talking about. There is a problem, a big problem for many of us and Mazda just ignores it. I tried to get Mazda to loan me a RX to compare mileage numbers but they would not do it. I can only guess that Mazda calculated the cost to fix the problem and figured they'd just let the owners eat it. When I try to relay some of these stores to the service managers they just dismiss them as untrue Internet talk. I ask them to check the compression ratio and they just say there is no reason to.
Mazda is truly the pits for service.
Mazda is truly the pits for service.
Originally Posted by Ryan13b
There's definitely a problem with the RX-8 and their fuel economy. I've been lucky enough to own a car that gets in the 22-24 range. I too thought it was the drivers.
When I got my new engine my economy dropped into the 18-21 range. Still acceptable to me.
While my car was getting a new engine I had a loaner RX-8, that no matter what I did got 13-14 mpg. Driving like a granny, driving the **** out of it, didn't matter.
When I got my new engine my economy dropped into the 18-21 range. Still acceptable to me.
While my car was getting a new engine I had a loaner RX-8, that no matter what I did got 13-14 mpg. Driving like a granny, driving the **** out of it, didn't matter.
Last edited by Raptor75; 11-11-2006 at 10:40 PM.
11-12-2006, 01:13 AM
#34
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I do seem to have a knack for spawning controversial threads 
.
One clarification on my original post. I didn't realize that there had apparently been some test driving on my Silverado prior to my buying it. In fact, I had driven about 65 miles when I noted that my needle was STILL above F. I now have driven about 250 miles and my needle is STILL closer to 3/4 than 1/2. Every gauge has nuances and I don't know mine yet, but I can assure you that this 8 cylinder 5.3L truck gets WAY better gas mileage than my 8 did. And it's wonderful to have the larger gas tank too. You may remember that in an earlier thread about mileage, my main objection was not the few extra dollars that I was paying for the gas, it was actually the fact that I was having to stop at tje gas station every 2 days to fill up! Who the heck has time for that; not me! The sad truth is that I spent more time looking at the dang fuel gauge in the car than actually enjoying the driving experience.
Oh, and for those of you who took my comments personally, I want to add one more "grudge" that I had about the RX8. The car was slower than a turtle off the line. Any dang Kia could outrun the 8 when you come right down to it. So go ahead and take that personally too (kidding).
Look, I give Mazda huge credit for taking risks and being cutting edge. But I have to agree with the earlier poster who suggested that Mazda seems to have calcuated its cost to acknowledge the problem and has obviously decided that it would be too costly. In fact, I'll go a step further. Mazda is enjoying a very successful line of cars right now. This Mazda3 looks like a Toyotal/Honda killer in my view. The CX7 seems to be a fantastic machine as well. I personally believe that Mazda has to be figuring that acknowledging the problems with RX8 is risking more than just the RX8 line; it is risking the Mazda reputation and that would impact demand for its s entire range of cars.
Hypothetical Question: If Mazda could turn back the clock .. would it decide again to put out a rotary based RX8? My guess is .... no, it would not. It would avoid the rotary model. Again, just my personal view.
Dan
. One clarification on my original post. I didn't realize that there had apparently been some test driving on my Silverado prior to my buying it. In fact, I had driven about 65 miles when I noted that my needle was STILL above F. I now have driven about 250 miles and my needle is STILL closer to 3/4 than 1/2. Every gauge has nuances and I don't know mine yet, but I can assure you that this 8 cylinder 5.3L truck gets WAY better gas mileage than my 8 did. And it's wonderful to have the larger gas tank too. You may remember that in an earlier thread about mileage, my main objection was not the few extra dollars that I was paying for the gas, it was actually the fact that I was having to stop at tje gas station every 2 days to fill up! Who the heck has time for that; not me! The sad truth is that I spent more time looking at the dang fuel gauge in the car than actually enjoying the driving experience.
Oh, and for those of you who took my comments personally, I want to add one more "grudge" that I had about the RX8. The car was slower than a turtle off the line. Any dang Kia could outrun the 8 when you come right down to it. So go ahead and take that personally too
(kidding).Look, I give Mazda huge credit for taking risks and being cutting edge. But I have to agree with the earlier poster who suggested that Mazda seems to have calcuated its cost to acknowledge the problem and has obviously decided that it would be too costly. In fact, I'll go a step further. Mazda is enjoying a very successful line of cars right now. This Mazda3 looks like a Toyotal/Honda killer in my view. The CX7 seems to be a fantastic machine as well. I personally believe that Mazda has to be figuring that acknowledging the problems with RX8 is risking more than just the RX8 line; it is risking the Mazda reputation and that would impact demand for its s entire range of cars.
Hypothetical Question: If Mazda could turn back the clock .. would it decide again to put out a rotary based RX8? My guess is .... no, it would not. It would avoid the rotary model. Again, just my personal view.
Dan
11-12-2006, 06:23 AM
#35
Without Rotary, Mazda wouldnt even exist, it probably died 40 years ago (guess u dont know much about history of Mazda anyway)
Its pretty funny that people comparing a *Truck* with at least 26 up to 34 gallon tank to a 15.9 gallon tank and said that oh after 200 something miles of driving is still more like 3/4 than 1/2, Hello, if u have the 34 gallon tank its more than double what 8 has. What do u even expect ? Of course its going to last longer.
obviously u dont know how to drive a stick. if you get beaten by a KIA, its your own personal problem.
Go back in time ? Rotary is Mazda's image. I think my car is good.
Its pretty funny that people comparing a *Truck* with at least 26 up to 34 gallon tank to a 15.9 gallon tank and said that oh after 200 something miles of driving is still more like 3/4 than 1/2, Hello, if u have the 34 gallon tank its more than double what 8 has. What do u even expect ? Of course its going to last longer.
obviously u dont know how to drive a stick. if you get beaten by a KIA, its your own personal problem.
Go back in time ? Rotary is Mazda's image. I think my car is good.
Last edited by nycgps; 11-12-2006 at 06:30 AM.
11-12-2006, 08:10 AM
#36
Originally Posted by danhilde
Hypothetical Question: If Mazda could turn back the clock .. would it decide again to put out a rotary based RX8? My guess is .... no, it would not. It would avoid the rotary model. Again, just my personal view.
Dan
Dan
11-12-2006, 09:25 AM
#37
Listen to Zoom44
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Overland Park
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember that one time where Mazda messed up the heads on the Miata. I think 99 model year? I guess they were suppose to just give up making piston engines huh?
I honestly don't get it. Mazda produces a rotary engine and it has 1 or 2 issues. Other manufacturers produce a piston engine that has the same 1 or 2 issues, yet, the rotary needs to go out of production because it is not yet reliable? Someone explain this to me. After 100+ years development and billions in investment, I still don't find piston engines to be leetOMG reliable. Just shows that people like to pick on the one thats different.
I honestly don't get it. Mazda produces a rotary engine and it has 1 or 2 issues. Other manufacturers produce a piston engine that has the same 1 or 2 issues, yet, the rotary needs to go out of production because it is not yet reliable? Someone explain this to me. After 100+ years development and billions in investment, I still don't find piston engines to be leetOMG reliable. Just shows that people like to pick on the one thats different.
11-12-2006, 10:36 AM
#38
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pembroke, MA
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess I'm the only one thats gonna believe you on the gas meter on a silverado...I had a 1995 Silverado 6.0L Diesel. That thing would make 80 miles no problem at all highway driving and the needle would still be on or above F. But thats also because I'd fill it to the brim, topping it off to the last inch everytime. Cause once the guage got past F it started to drop faster...but not as fast as the RX8. 
Anyway, enjoy your new truck.
Anyway, enjoy your new truck.
11-12-2006, 10:51 AM
#39
93.5 octane
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nycgps
Its pretty funny that people comparing a *Truck* with at least 26 up to 34 gallon tank to a 15.9 gallon tank and said that oh after 200 something miles of driving is still more like 3/4 than 1/2, Hello, if u have the 34 gallon tank its more than double what 8 has. What do u even expect ? Of course its going to last longer.
11-12-2006, 10:59 AM
#40
I must be missing something, let me get this straight—you're comparing an RX-8 to… a truck. And you're replacing your RX-8 with… a truck. And now you're telling everyone that you're replacing your RX-8 with… a truck.
11-12-2006, 11:58 AM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vash137
I guess I'm the only one thats gonna believe you on the gas meter on a silverado...I had a 1995 Silverado 6.0L Diesel. That thing would make 80 miles no problem at all highway driving and the needle would still be on or above F. But thats also because I'd fill it to the brim, topping it off to the last inch everytime. Cause once the guage got past F it started to drop faster...but not as fast as the RX8. Anyway, enjoy your new truck.
Anyway, enjoy your new truck.Dudes .. I never intended to upset you. Have fun with your RX8s. To each his/her own.
Dan
11-12-2006, 03:42 PM
#42
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Milwaukee Wi.
Posts: 997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Average car gets 3-6 mpg until they warm up to operating temperature. Usually takes 1 to 5 miles depending on the outside temperature. This is true for hybrids as well. Sure I get lousy mileage if I do alot of short trips during the winter. On road trips I alway get 20+mpg with the 8. I'm satisfied with that. Insurance is low, I have a 5 year warranty and have no other costs or repair bills. The car is fun, recreational, reliable and payed for. What more could I want. Surlely not a Chevy Silverado. They ride like a truck.
11-12-2006, 08:15 PM
#44
Originally Posted by danhilde
Hypothetical Question: If Mazda could turn back the clock .. would it decide again to put out a rotary based RX8? My guess is .... no, it would not. It would avoid the rotary model. Again, just my personal view.
Dan
Dan
Q: The rotary engine, which you use in the RX-8 sports car, has helped set Mazda apart in the U.S. But it is harder with a rotary to achieve both low emissions and good fuel economy. Is that engine done for?
A: Oh, no. We do not intend to withdraw from the rotary. In fact, were are now developing the next generation of that engine."
Hmmm, who to believe??? Dan… or the president and chief executive of Mazda Motor Corp???
Tough call… Dan really seems to know his stuff. All I can say is thank god for this forum—I've learned so much here from people with a computer, an internet connection, and half a brain. (Well… at least, people with a computer and an internet connection.)
11-12-2006, 09:04 PM
#45
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Yorker ... as a born and bread New Yorker myself, I can tell you that you are a typical NY nitwit; a simpleton; probably not even from the itself. You wouldn't beat a 6th grader in a moderated debate. I've clearly pressed your buttons and didn't even intend to do it; I can imagine that you'd be doubled up on your high blood pressure medicine by now if I had.
Have fun paying off your RX8 over the next 60-72 months; I'm sure you probably paid the price on the sticker and probably took a 14 1/8% loan for the privilege. See, I pay for all my toys in cash. I've made shitloads of it with my "half a brain".
Dan
Have fun paying off your RX8 over the next 60-72 months; I'm sure you probably paid the price on the sticker and probably took a 14 1/8% loan for the privilege. See, I pay for all my toys in cash. I've made shitloads of it with my "half a brain".
Dan
11-12-2006, 09:23 PM
#47
road warrior
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oakland and Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,861
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
From an engineering prespective, the rotary basically allowed the RX-8 to happen. Without the rotary the RX-8 would be longer, heavier, more nose heavy, and quite simply not the car it is right now. It would be something like the G35 with less equipment, just not the same driving experience.
Quite simply, the rotary engine is a wonderful sports car engine. Not just because it's butter smooth and can rev so high, but (more importantly) because it's so compact it allows packaging options that are unavailable to conventional piston engined cars. Also, it's already one of the lighter engines out there; if Mazda gets the aluminum side plates right it would be one of the lightest engines. There is a lot more to an engine than horsepower, torque, and EPA MPG numbers.
Then again I guess I'm different from you. I buy cars for the driving experience, not for style. I also could never drive a truck; trucks are devices made for carrying stuff that American somehow believes is a good alternative to cars for daily transportation. With a sports car, it might be inefficient, but at least I'm having fun while driving; I can't see driving a truck as fun. Then again, I guess it's the image people want to project.
(By the way, if you have legitimate transport reasons to warrant owning a truck, then I understand. However, if you drive it basically to work and back then my rant applies to you.)
Quite simply, the rotary engine is a wonderful sports car engine. Not just because it's butter smooth and can rev so high, but (more importantly) because it's so compact it allows packaging options that are unavailable to conventional piston engined cars. Also, it's already one of the lighter engines out there; if Mazda gets the aluminum side plates right it would be one of the lightest engines. There is a lot more to an engine than horsepower, torque, and EPA MPG numbers.
Then again I guess I'm different from you. I buy cars for the driving experience, not for style. I also could never drive a truck; trucks are devices made for carrying stuff that American somehow believes is a good alternative to cars for daily transportation. With a sports car, it might be inefficient, but at least I'm having fun while driving; I can't see driving a truck as fun. Then again, I guess it's the image people want to project.
(By the way, if you have legitimate transport reasons to warrant owning a truck, then I understand. However, if you drive it basically to work and back then my rant applies to you.)
11-12-2006, 09:37 PM
#49
I would agree with you on the Rotary making the car. The limitations it brings can be off set with its advantages. With out the rotary you'd never get a 3000lbs sports car that seats 4 with such balance. It's not the rotary design which is flawed as much as it is Mazda's implementation of it. There is a obvious mileage problem with a certain percentage of the RXs and Mazda has made the decision to stick to the owner rather then fixing it. Other car manufacturers have problems with their car and the good ones fix them. I just wish Mazda was one of the good manufacturers.
Also if the guy wants a truck, let him enjoy it.
Also if the guy wants a truck, let him enjoy it.
Originally Posted by LionZoo
From an engineering prespective, the rotary basically allowed the RX-8 to happen. Without the rotary the RX-8 would be longer, heavier, more nose heavy, and quite simply not the car it is right now. It would be something like the G35 with less equipment, just not the same driving experience.
Quite simply, the rotary engine is a wonderful sports car engine. Not just because it's butter smooth and can rev so high, but (more importantly) because it's so compact it allows packaging options that are unavailable to conventional piston engined cars. Also, it's already one of the lighter engines out there; if Mazda gets the aluminum side plates right it would be one of the lightest engines. There is a lot more to an engine than horsepower, torque, and EPA MPG numbers.
Then again I guess I'm different from you. I buy cars for the driving experience, not for style. I also could never drive a truck; trucks are devices made for carrying stuff that American somehow believes is a good alternative to cars for daily transportation. With a sports car, it might be inefficient, but at least I'm having fun while driving; I can't see driving a truck as fun. Then again, I guess it's the image people want to project.
(By the way, if you have legitimate transport reasons to warrant owning a truck, then I understand. However, if you drive it basically to work and back then my rant applies to you.)
Quite simply, the rotary engine is a wonderful sports car engine. Not just because it's butter smooth and can rev so high, but (more importantly) because it's so compact it allows packaging options that are unavailable to conventional piston engined cars. Also, it's already one of the lighter engines out there; if Mazda gets the aluminum side plates right it would be one of the lightest engines. There is a lot more to an engine than horsepower, torque, and EPA MPG numbers.
Then again I guess I'm different from you. I buy cars for the driving experience, not for style. I also could never drive a truck; trucks are devices made for carrying stuff that American somehow believes is a good alternative to cars for daily transportation. With a sports car, it might be inefficient, but at least I'm having fun while driving; I can't see driving a truck as fun. Then again, I guess it's the image people want to project.
(By the way, if you have legitimate transport reasons to warrant owning a truck, then I understand. However, if you drive it basically to work and back then my rant applies to you.)
Last edited by Raptor75; 11-14-2006 at 11:13 AM.
11-12-2006, 09:59 PM
#50
road warrior
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oakland and Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,861
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
As stated in my post, I'm different and I was just stating my views on trucks. I'm not going to take away Dan's keys, but I certainly don't understand America's obsession with trucks.
By the way Raptor, what are the driving conditions that your RX-8 lives in? I get around 20 mpg in normal driving, but if I'm forced into a situation where there is heavy stop and go (something like being forced to stop, accelerate to 15 mph, and stop again in 10 seconds) my mileage will often drop something like 1-2 mpg. This is if the stop and go is only something like 5% of the mileage on a tank of gas. I can see how you can get 11-12 mpg in that kind of traffic, especially if they're comprised of short trips. The rotary hates stop and go.
By the way Raptor, what are the driving conditions that your RX-8 lives in? I get around 20 mpg in normal driving, but if I'm forced into a situation where there is heavy stop and go (something like being forced to stop, accelerate to 15 mph, and stop again in 10 seconds) my mileage will often drop something like 1-2 mpg. This is if the stop and go is only something like 5% of the mileage on a tank of gas. I can see how you can get 11-12 mpg in that kind of traffic, especially if they're comprised of short trips. The rotary hates stop and go.