How to deal with "Horsepower is king" friends?
12-18-2005, 06:31 PM
#27
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by m477
Autocross is an officially sactioned competive sport. Best motoring is *entertainment*. Big difference. Trying to "prove" something with a BM video is silly.
Anyway, my claim was that the RX-8 *HANDLES* much better than a WRX. What does what gear you're in have to do with how well a car handles? AutoX is about as pure of a test of a car's handling that you can get. And since the RX-8 is much, much faster than the WRX at autox, I think it's pretty safe to say that it handles better.
Track performance is a whole other thing entirely. A track tests a car's handling AND acceleration AND braking. We could get into a discussion of RX-8 vs WRX on the track (ie not just handling), but now we're getting off the current topic of handling...
The WRX does have significant turbo lag. Nothing about the RX-8 will change that fact. Besides, if you actually read my post I was comparing it to V-8's in straight-line driving.
Anyway, my claim was that the RX-8 *HANDLES* much better than a WRX. What does what gear you're in have to do with how well a car handles? AutoX is about as pure of a test of a car's handling that you can get. And since the RX-8 is much, much faster than the WRX at autox, I think it's pretty safe to say that it handles better.
Track performance is a whole other thing entirely. A track tests a car's handling AND acceleration AND braking. We could get into a discussion of RX-8 vs WRX on the track (ie not just handling), but now we're getting off the current topic of handling...
The WRX does have significant turbo lag. Nothing about the RX-8 will change that fact. Besides, if you actually read my post I was comparing it to V-8's in straight-line driving.
Wheel size of the stock car is also a huge factor. You also seem to be forgetting that the very rarely does an RX-8 run on street tires in autox WRXs usually run in the various street tire classes. Put both cars on the same street tires and allow the WRX the same wheels as the RX-8 and on a regular racetrack it'll be a damn close race.
Since you think autox is such a good indication of a cars handling doesn't that mean you think that the Elise, GT3, Evo, STI, Z06 don't handle as well as the RX-8, because those cars often don't do as well in autox as the RX-8. All your argument proves is that the RX-8 is a damn good autox car. Have you ever even autoxed in your life? I highly doubt it...
Also if you actually read my posts I never disputed that the RX-8 handles better, my argument was that you'll never actually take the car to the limits on the streets. So I'll take the car that handles pretty damn well, can use the same set of tires no matter what the weather is like, and will be more fun when I mash the gas pedal.
12-18-2005, 06:31 PM
#28
rotary courage
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sti_eric
Sorry, m477, I've driven both my STi and my wife's RX-8 in an autocross. The biggest advantage that the RX-8 has is not its handling, but the fact that you run the whole race between 6000-8500 rpms (its power band) in 1st gear. It is very difficult to keep a turbo'd 4 banger in its power band with the turbo spooled while continually having to shift between 1st and 2nd. Plus, if you take a look at nationals, you will see WRXs winning STX and STU classes with better lap times than the best RX-8 in B-stock. You won't see any modified RX-8s leaving B-stock, because they just won't be competitive. Autocross results do nothing to determine which car handles better.
And while the powerband might help the RX-8 in autox, that alone does not explain the huge difference in times between the RX-8 and WRX.
12-18-2005, 06:43 PM
#29
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez, get over it. Enjoy your car. 
your friend. Then get a new friend. He probably masterbates monkeys for a living anyways. Go and rev his accord to 9k and see what's left of it. The WRX looks like a Dodge Shadow remake. Why waste your time talking about it?
your friend. Then get a new friend. He probably masterbates monkeys for a living anyways. Go and rev his accord to 9k and see what's left of it. The WRX looks like a Dodge Shadow remake. Why waste your time talking about it?
12-18-2005, 06:44 PM
#30
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by toca
rx8 is light pu tmy on my racing scales it cam e in with a 1/2 tank at 2977 my homies wrx came in a 3190 with 1/2 ytank and then we put a eclipse gsx it was crazy it cam ein at 3200
12-18-2005, 06:48 PM
#31
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by m477
First off, I was comparing the RX-8 to the WRX, NOT the STi. The STi costs thousands of dollars more than either of those cars, and is significantly modified from the WRX. (And honestly, why can't you Subaru guys ever argue something without completely changing the topic?)
And while the powerband might help the RX-8 in autox, that alone does not explain the huge difference in times between the RX-8 and WRX.
And while the powerband might help the RX-8 in autox, that alone does not explain the huge difference in times between the RX-8 and WRX.
Great, I gave you many reasons that help explain it. Go read them and get back to me, and maybe stop talking about autox since it's clear you've never done it nor do you understand it very well. Maybe stick to buying bling for your car, that seems to be something you can do.
12-18-2005, 07:07 PM
#32
rotary courage
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IkeWRX
Maybe stick to buying bling for your car, that seems to be something you can do.
Is it just me, or does is seem like every single thread the Ike posts on ends up degerating into him simply hurling personal attacks at people?
12-18-2005, 07:24 PM
#33
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by m477
Huh? What are you even talking about? Show me one single post I've ever made with any reference to me ever making any sort of apperarance modification to any car I've ever owned.
Is it just me, or does is seem like every single thread the Ike posts on ends up degerating into him simply hurling personal attacks at people?
Is it just me, or does is seem like every single thread the Ike posts on ends up degerating into him simply hurling personal attacks at people?
Anyhow, the rest of my argument still stands and I'm sorry again for the unwarranted and misguided dig.
12-18-2005, 07:25 PM
#34
WWFSMD?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IkeWRX
Also calling the RX-8 light is a bit silly considering the '05 or earlier WRX and the RX-8 with a few options weigh about the same. It's also silly calling the WRX a lagmaster considering how gutless the RX-8 is in low RPMs, drive the WRX in its powerband and lag isn't noticeable just like the RX-8. The WRX also had a wider more useful powerband.
Both the WRX and RX-8 are gutless down low, the WRX has better mid-range punch, the RX8 has better top-end. Both cars are reasonably quick, though the WRX is a bit faster overall. The WRX's powerband is wider and it requires less shifting (in most situations). The RX8's throttle response is better (I'm not talking the WRX's about turbo lag).
As far as weight goes, the current RX-8 6-speed starts at 2880 pounds, about 200 pounds lighter than the pre '06 WRX sedan started at (and 300 pounds lighter than the '06 WRX). Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
So it is fair to call the RX-8 light compared to the WRX (though I disagree with m477: I would take the WRX - either with a 2.0 or 2.5L - over most V8s).
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," - Jon Stewart
12-18-2005, 07:33 PM
#35
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deslock
My experiences with the pre '06 WRX engine (since you used it for your weight comparison):
Both the WRX and RX-8 are gutless down low, the WRX has better mid-range punch, the RX8 has better top-end. Both cars are reasonably quick, though the WRX is a bit faster overall. The WRX's powerband is wider and it requires less shifting (in most situations). The RX8's throttle response is better (I'm not talking the WRX's about turbo lag).
As far as weight goes, the current RX-8 6-speed starts at 2880 pounds, about 200 pounds lighter than the pre '06 WRX sedan started at (and 300 pounds lighter than the '06 WRX). Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
So it is fair to call the RX-8 light compared to the WRX (though I disagree with m477: I would take the WRX - either with a 2.0 or 2.5L - over most V8s).
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," - Jon Stewart
Both the WRX and RX-8 are gutless down low, the WRX has better mid-range punch, the RX8 has better top-end. Both cars are reasonably quick, though the WRX is a bit faster overall. The WRX's powerband is wider and it requires less shifting (in most situations). The RX8's throttle response is better (I'm not talking the WRX's about turbo lag).
As far as weight goes, the current RX-8 6-speed starts at 2880 pounds, about 200 pounds lighter than the pre '06 WRX sedan started at (and 300 pounds lighter than the '06 WRX). Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
So it is fair to call the RX-8 light compared to the WRX (though I disagree with m477: I would take the WRX - either with a 2.0 or 2.5L - over most V8s).
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," - Jon Stewart
12-18-2005, 09:51 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deslock
My experiences with the pre '06 WRX engine (since you used it for your weight comparison):
Both the WRX and RX-8 are gutless down low, the WRX has better mid-range punch, the RX8 has better top-end. Both cars are reasonably quick, though the WRX is a bit faster overall. The WRX's powerband is wider and it requires less shifting (in most situations). The RX8's throttle response is better (I'm not talking the WRX's about turbo lag).
As far as weight goes, the current RX-8 6-speed starts at 2880 pounds, about 200 pounds lighter than the pre '06 WRX sedan started at (and 300 pounds lighter than the '06 WRX). Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
So it is fair to call the RX-8 light compared to the WRX (though I disagree with m477: I would take the WRX - either with a 2.0 or 2.5L - over most V8s).
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," - Jon Stewart
Both the WRX and RX-8 are gutless down low, the WRX has better mid-range punch, the RX8 has better top-end. Both cars are reasonably quick, though the WRX is a bit faster overall. The WRX's powerband is wider and it requires less shifting (in most situations). The RX8's throttle response is better (I'm not talking the WRX's about turbo lag).
As far as weight goes, the current RX-8 6-speed starts at 2880 pounds, about 200 pounds lighter than the pre '06 WRX sedan started at (and 300 pounds lighter than the '06 WRX). Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
So it is fair to call the RX-8 light compared to the WRX (though I disagree with m477: I would take the WRX - either with a 2.0 or 2.5L - over most V8s).
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," - Jon Stewart
12-18-2005, 09:58 PM
#37
I love BMI...but I sure wouldn't use their races as judgements of vehicle performance.
Otherwise the NSX would be the fastest car on the planet. Half the time gan-san cheats at the start, or prevents people from passing by running a blocking line.
BMI is more about who is more crazy then which car is better. Of course sometimes its pretty obviously (like the 8 being lapped by the EVO), but some of those races are definitely a bit iffy, but still very informative.
Now BMI does do performance tests. Those are definitely a bit more valid in terms of comparison. (Like the evo 8 vs evo 9 tests in 400m etc).
Otherwise the NSX would be the fastest car on the planet. Half the time gan-san cheats at the start, or prevents people from passing by running a blocking line.
BMI is more about who is more crazy then which car is better. Of course sometimes its pretty obviously (like the 8 being lapped by the EVO), but some of those races are definitely a bit iffy, but still very informative.
Now BMI does do performance tests. Those are definitely a bit more valid in terms of comparison. (Like the evo 8 vs evo 9 tests in 400m etc).
12-18-2005, 11:20 PM
#38
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dos
Looking at Mazda's website, and Edmunds they have the RX-8 curb weight listed at 3,029. Subaru and Edmunds websites have the WRX listed at 3,192.
12-18-2005, 11:21 PM
#39
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by crossbow
I love BMI...but I sure wouldn't use their races as judgements of vehicle performance.
Otherwise the NSX would be the fastest car on the planet. Half the time gan-san cheats at the start, or prevents people from passing by running a blocking line.
BMI is more about who is more crazy then which car is better. Of course sometimes its pretty obviously (like the 8 being lapped by the EVO), but some of those races are definitely a bit iffy, but still very informative.
Now BMI does do performance tests. Those are definitely a bit more valid in terms of comparison. (Like the evo 8 vs evo 9 tests in 400m etc).
Otherwise the NSX would be the fastest car on the planet. Half the time gan-san cheats at the start, or prevents people from passing by running a blocking line.
BMI is more about who is more crazy then which car is better. Of course sometimes its pretty obviously (like the 8 being lapped by the EVO), but some of those races are definitely a bit iffy, but still very informative.
Now BMI does do performance tests. Those are definitely a bit more valid in terms of comparison. (Like the evo 8 vs evo 9 tests in 400m etc).
12-18-2005, 11:26 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, I just don't understand the point of these discussions. I bought the 8 because I like how it looks, how it drives or how much fun I have driving it. To my taste and my liking RX-8 is the perfect fit. If your friends do not like your car, who cares? Let them drive some econobox on steroids, which is faster than RX-8 and be happy with it. When I was shopping for a car, I looked at STI, 350Z, S2000, Mustangs and many other cars. I liked RX-8 the best, even if it is slower than the other cars I mention. Choose your values and do not listen to some fools trying to make you feel bad. They are just jealous of your shiny and nice-loooking car
12-18-2005, 11:29 PM
#41
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dima26
Sorry, I just don't understand the point of these discussions. I bought the 8 because I like how it looks, how it drives or how much fun I have driving it. To my taste and my liking RX-8 is the perfect fit. If your friends do not like your car, who cares? Let them drive some econobox on steroids, which is faster than RX-8 and be happy with it. When I was shopping for a car, I looked at STI, 350Z, S2000, Mustangs and many other cars. I liked RX-8 the best, even if it is slower than the other cars I mention. Choose your values and do not listen to some fools trying to make you feel bad. They are just jealous of your shiny and nice-loooking car
12-18-2005, 11:46 PM
#43
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Im_DANomite
oh...another one of these threads. 
so many of these and the "vs" threads. people really need to stop doubting the car they bought. didn't you do any research before buying? didn't you test drive the car and compare it to others?
so many of these and the "vs" threads. people really need to stop doubting the car they bought. didn't you do any research before buying? didn't you test drive the car and compare it to others?
12-19-2005, 12:03 AM
#44
XYELLR8
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Maple Grove, Minnesota
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whatever you do.. do not race your friend with the accord off the line/drag racing
that V6 auto accord will beat the auto rx-8.
i know. i own both cars except my rx8 is a 6sp.
on a cool day at Rock Falls Raceway my accord with I/H/E ran a 14.9 @ 91 while my Rx-8 the following week ran a 15.1@94... higher trap..but my launch sucked.
let your friend drive the car and see what he thinks. it's completely different feeling when you're in the passenger seat....
that V6 auto accord will beat the auto rx-8.
i know. i own both cars
except my rx8 is a 6sp.on a cool day at Rock Falls Raceway my accord with I/H/E ran a 14.9 @ 91 while my Rx-8 the following week ran a 15.1@94... higher trap..but my launch sucked.
let your friend drive the car and see what he thinks. it's completely different feeling when you're in the passenger seat....
12-19-2005, 12:08 AM
#45
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Crazy Rx-8 Driver
let your friend drive the car and see what he thinks. it's completely different feeling when you're in the passenger seat....
"Got myself a nice lil' RX-8, and offer one of my best friends (who has quite a bit of racing experience) to have a drive in it. His impressions:"
12-19-2005, 12:52 AM
#46
the giant tastetickles
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: in the basement
Posts: 2,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just tell him you don have to go thru a R34 skyline, NSX, etc to realise that its sufficient to drive an Accord on the street. Then tell him how you would prefer the 8 over an Accord. If you really wanna **** him off, just act stupid and tell him stuff like "The suicide doors are awesome", "My car has only 1.3 displacement" or better yet "My car comes with white light".
12-19-2005, 08:20 AM
#48
WWFSMD?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dos
Looking at Mazda's website, and Edmunds they have the RX-8 curb weight listed at 3,029. Subaru and Edmunds websites have the WRX listed at 3,192.
12-19-2005, 08:27 AM
#49
WWFSMD?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IkeWRX
Is 2880 curb weight Des, and do you have any proof? I just haven't seen a number that low except when guys go to weigh their cars on scales...
You're a smart guy, so you must realize how disingenuous it is to continually frame the discussion as base WRX vs loaded RX8 in order to claim that their weights are closer. It's just like when you've compared a loaded RX8 to the STI for price when the base RX-8 6-speed street price is close to the WRX's (and has been for two years).
Back to the handling thing, even if we were to accept that their weight difference was just north of 100 pounds (or 200 pounds for the 2006), are you seriously going to discount this?:
Originally Posted by Deslock
Perhaps more important is the RX-8's 50:50, low yaw moment, and lower COG. Yes, yes, I love the boxer as much as the next guy, but the WRX is a taller car (taller hood, roof, etc) with a larger greenhouse (more weight up high).
{snip}
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
{snip}
Comparing the STI to the RX-8, handling-wise: The STI has stiff suspension, reinforced chassis, superior tires, and AWD. The RX-8 has soft suspension, inferior tires, and lacks chassis reinforcements (but has the advantages listed above). Both handle well, but the RX-8 is more comfortable and neutral.
Ike, you often make good points but what use is a knowledgeable post that's misleading and contains half-truths?
12-19-2005, 09:16 AM
#50
Totally confuzzled...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's complaining about speed from his lofty vantage point of Honda Powah? Hmm... Sounds like someone needs a little perspective. There are guys on my car board (and elsewhere, I'm sure) with vehicles like a 400+ hp RX-7, 500+ hp mustangs, and I think one guy has somewhere over 700hp in his Supra (or will very soon). What does an accord have nowadays? 250hp? He can hit Vtec all day long and not touch any of those cars. There's always someone faster.
But, on the other hand (and with the very possible exception of the RX-7), we could actually stand a chance of keeping up with some of these cars either at an auto-X, or on the right track. Yeah, the 8 lacks power, but what it has is potential. The car is only "slow" because Mazda was so conservative with it. They could have turned it into a 270hp beast, but decided to play it safe, I guess, and focus more on reliability and driveability; which they more than succeded at.
Either when Mazda releases an actual performance package for the 8 (instead of another color/interior set), or when some more serious tuning companies begin releasing powerful turbos and superchargers, he'll see what these cars can really do.
But, on the other hand (and with the very possible exception of the RX-7), we could actually stand a chance of keeping up with some of these cars either at an auto-X, or on the right track. Yeah, the 8 lacks power, but what it has is potential. The car is only "slow" because Mazda was so conservative with it. They could have turned it into a 270hp beast, but decided to play it safe, I guess, and focus more on reliability and driveability; which they more than succeded at.
Either when Mazda releases an actual performance package for the 8 (instead of another color/interior set), or when some more serious tuning companies begin releasing powerful turbos and superchargers, he'll see what these cars can really do.