I hope and pray that the RX-8 has good low-end Grunt.
10-09-2002, 05:51 PM
#26
Pure Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have driven Miata's...
Originally posted by Grimace
Go borrow someone's Miata for a test drive. Shift feel should be very similar (Aisin manufactures the 'box for both). Haven't been in another car that feels better to shift.
Go borrow someone's Miata for a test drive. Shift feel should be very similar (Aisin manufactures the 'box for both). Haven't been in another car that feels better to shift.
10-09-2002, 06:30 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by pelucidor
...Let's bitch about the BOSE stereo instead (I'll carry a boombox in the car to replace it)...
...Let's bitch about the BOSE stereo instead (I'll carry a boombox in the car to replace it)...
---jps
10-09-2002, 09:06 PM
#28
2009 BS Nat'l Champ
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Central CA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Quick_lude
Why? Is the 6 spd gearbox inferior to the 5spd? Just curious, since the 8 is getting a 6 speed..
Why? Is the 6 spd gearbox inferior to the 5spd? Just curious, since the 8 is getting a 6 speed..
10-09-2002, 09:19 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since everyone is always trying to compare the S2000 torque to the RX-8 torque, I decided to try to draw up a comparison graph....at least as best as I could come up with.
For the RX-8 torque curve, I used the curve that has been posted many times on this forum already. I'm sure you've seen it, and if you haven't, you are about to see it now
For the S2000, I went over to one of the S2000 forums, searched for a stock dyno graph, and calculated the drivetrain losses (and subsequently the torque at the engine) based on Honda's published specs.
I have combined these two grahps into one sheet using my admittedly crude photoshop skills. What you will notice is that the RX-8 has as much or more torque throughout the entire power band. The eight has a notable torque advantage from 2500 to 6000 RPM, and thus, should be much more driveable than the S2000.
Comments?
For the RX-8 torque curve, I used the curve that has been posted many times on this forum already. I'm sure you've seen it, and if you haven't, you are about to see it now
For the S2000, I went over to one of the S2000 forums, searched for a stock dyno graph, and calculated the drivetrain losses (and subsequently the torque at the engine) based on Honda's published specs.
I have combined these two grahps into one sheet using my admittedly crude photoshop skills. What you will notice is that the RX-8 has as much or more torque throughout the entire power band. The eight has a notable torque advantage from 2500 to 6000 RPM, and thus, should be much more driveable than the S2000.
Comments?
10-09-2002, 09:57 PM
#30
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R^3, thanks for the graph. Without the gearing, weight, and torque to about 1k it's impossible to really tell how they'll compare when you drive them. It's a cliche, but until we get to drive one it just won't be possible to really tell how the low end grunt feels.
10-09-2002, 11:21 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rich,
Don't downplay the importance of REALLY driving the car....to point that out is not cliche at all...it's realistic! You are absolutely correct to point out that all we can do is "bench race" at this moment in time. We will only know once we actually drive it...."The proof is in the pudding"....now THAT'S cliche :D
Don't downplay the importance of REALLY driving the car....to point that out is not cliche at all...it's realistic! You are absolutely correct to point out that all we can do is "bench race" at this moment in time. We will only know once we actually drive it...."The proof is in the pudding"....now THAT'S cliche :D
10-10-2002, 01:16 AM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: santa cruz
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rpm=grunt
Lets see in 1973 7000 rpm in an RX2 could
outrun the following(i did!). BMW 2002, alfa GTV.
Triumph TR6 from a stop all the way up to top end.
What did beat it? BMW 530i,240z,sunbeam tiger(ford289). RX2 Torque=102 ft/lbs.
year 1975 RX3 wagon could outdrag,outrun the Porsche 924. (HWY 50 to lake Tahoe).
RX3 Torque=100ft/lbs.
year 1986 FC RX7 Could outrun base(V6 mustangs,camaros) Could not outrun 5.0 Mustang
and IROC camaros
RX7 Torque=138 ft/lbs
year 1993 FD RX7 Outrun/outhandle most
every thing EXCEPT: Viper, new Vette and Some
late model 911,s RX7 Torque=215 ft/lbs.
outrun the following(i did!). BMW 2002, alfa GTV.
Triumph TR6 from a stop all the way up to top end.
What did beat it? BMW 530i,240z,sunbeam tiger(ford289). RX2 Torque=102 ft/lbs.
year 1975 RX3 wagon could outdrag,outrun the Porsche 924. (HWY 50 to lake Tahoe).
RX3 Torque=100ft/lbs.
year 1986 FC RX7 Could outrun base(V6 mustangs,camaros) Could not outrun 5.0 Mustang
and IROC camaros
RX7 Torque=138 ft/lbs
year 1993 FD RX7 Outrun/outhandle most
every thing EXCEPT: Viper, new Vette and Some
late model 911,s RX7 Torque=215 ft/lbs.
10-10-2002, 03:54 AM
#34
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's true that the overall performance of the cars cannot be compared, but on paper we can still see the differences/strengths+weaknesses of each engine... i mean, the S2000 engine is a friggin' marvel of technology (from what i understand from what little i've read of the hard stuff), but just take a gander at the torque curve of the RENESIS... seriously, that's freaky stuff, still blows me away...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Pelleilee
New Member Forum
6
09-29-2019 10:07 AM
UHATEIT
Series I Trouble Shooting
11
03-31-2019 05:31 PM