cas2themoe

Thats my whole point. Everyone knows they were designed with Turbo's. I was making a statement, which I have every right to do. And yes, if you take the Turbo's out they are a lot slower. THATS IT.................NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS!

cas2themoe

You guys get all bent out of shape for little things. There are many cars that have Turbo's and Superchargers in them. They WERE designed that way. But if I make a statement saying its a hell of a lot slower if the Turbo's weren't in the engine, wouldn't I be speaking the truth? I'm basically stating if you take them out, their far from performance. You guys can jump on my case all you want. I know its true and everyone else knows its true. Its really not all the serious....................................... Its a Freakin Wagon!

BlueEyes

Yes, technically what you are saying is correct. But, I am failing to understand the point of such a statement, what is the purpose of what you're saying.

You know, if you limited the renesis to 5k rpm it would be a lot slower. I'm just saying. You know it's the truth. You're probably sitting there thinking "WTF does that have to do with anything" yes, what does it have to do with anything.

klegg

Well, My brother had a SVX, which was a boxed six. No turbo. was a sweet, fast engine.

cas2themoe

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to start a argument with you or Ike. The Rotary Engine was built for high RPMS. Taking a Turbo from a car and taking a cars Redline, is something totally different. Now if you want to talk about if Mazda had put a Turbo on the RX8 that a different story too. Please don't get the wrong impression from me, I'm not trying to start up a flame thread here. I respect the fact that Subaru designed their higher end Boxer Engines to run with Turbo's. I'm not taking that away from them. Just stating the fact the I and other people feel they would be a lot slower in the straight line without them. That's all we're saying.

BlueEyes

I'm not looking for an argument either. I know what you're saying. Of course they would be slower without a turbo. I just don't understand why you're saying it. You could say any number of things that would make a car slower. Take away their AWD and the 0-60 times would probably suffer. Fill the backseat with concrete and it would be slower. Take away on of the 8's rotors and it would be slower. Why would anyone do such things though. It just seems pretty irrelevant to the topic at hand.

DARKMAZ8

I think it is unfair to compare a car that costs almost $10,000 more than the other......the wrx sedan is better suited for comparison with an 8(although it really cant ).....I know you love your sti Ike but c'mon it's not that great....and besides it costs a lot more to maintain and looks like it was hit with an ugly stick.......I hope the ms8 will shut up all the haters but when I go turbo I'll shut them up myself.... :D

Rx8bydocabe

"...drive more than 3 hours at a stretch your first stop was at a chiropractor"
hey, thanx for the props man

Mikelikes2drive

some rx8s are in the 31k range would only make it 3 or 4 thousand dollar difference :/

performance wise sti is better all around, but practicality wise is rx8 takes home the gold.

BlueEyes

what do you mean by practicality? I would put them pretty even as far as practicality. I mean, they both have 4 seats, good sized trunks. Now, the STI has all weather advantage which is pretty practical. As well, I have yet to see a rack for the 8, someone probably makes one though.

Now if you mean comfort? then yes, the 8 takes the gold.

Audioslave8

STi has a bigger trunk, larger backseat, and its better in bad weather conditions. Id say its more practical, but the rx8 appeals to a slightly different audience obviously.

Ike

There is not a single RX-8 that will cost 10k less than an STi, at least last I checked there was not RX-8 with an MSRP of 22-23k. The STi is cheaper than a loaded RX-8 and more expensive than a base, seems like a fair comparison price wise to me.

Also I've been hearing this wait til the MS8 comes out or wait til the RX-8 gets a turbo nonsense for two years. I'll believe it when I see it, thus far the turbo applications put the RX-8 in line speed wise with these cars that the turbo renesis was going to destroy according to some. The difference is the other cars still have a warranty, and aren't going to have the problems an aftermarket FI formerly NA car will. Think about it, the Greedy kits means you just spent 4-5k and threw your warranty out the window to be able keep up with an SRT-4 with a boost controller. Spend half the money it costs for a greedy kit on an STi and you have over 100 more WHP than a turboed RX-8 and there's lots more room for more HP still.

I'm sure a turboed RX-8 is a blast and I certainly wouldn't mind owning one, but when you start talking about mods and magical cars that don't exist (suchs as a non turboed STi or MS8) the discussion will go downhill in a hurry.

Blueeyes, I don't know what exactly Cas is getting at, but I've gone round and round with him on stuff like this in the past. I think you missed the arguments back when he was talking about how much better ATs were than MTs because they shift faster, and several other wastes of time that he's posted. He's a weird dude and it seems to takes months for things to sink in with him, case in point he now drives an MT RX-8. Basicly I'm saying he's a waste of time and don't bother trying to make sense of what he says or debate anything with him. I should have learned my lesson long ago, but I clearly didn't judging from this thread.

DARKMAZ8

Okay here's the lowdown in canadian funds:

Mazda rx8 6spd--------starts from $36,995----GT $39,995
Subaru STI--------------starts from $47,995
WRX sedan-------------starts from $35,495


which is a better comparison?

If/when the ms8 comes out, I suspect it will be closer to the STI price tag.....which of course will be a better comparison...imo

I look at the STI as a mazdaspeed version of the WRX sedan.....so would you compare the WRX sedan to the STI?

BlueEyes

I just built my ideal 8 and it cost 47,461 before freight. When I built my STI there were no options, so 47,995. Pretty close. What's the deal with mazda charging for any paint that isn't black?

DARKMAZ8

Black is the easiest color to paint a car.......I built my 8 and it only cost $36,995...I bought the GS cause I don't need any extra weight slowing me down and I do notice a difference in the base and GT when accelerating...the base feels faster and having no sunroof makes the car much more rigid up top...... :D

BlueEyes

I didn't even ad the moonroof or the navi. That would have pushed her into the 50's!!

DARKMAZ8

let me guess...you opted for the $3000 polished wheels......

cas2themoe

I'll have to back track on my threads. And I'll stick by that point with the Manual Modes in Automatics. Maybe I should have said they "feel" like they shift faster. You go round and round because your stubborn and always think your right. I bring up an discussion about the Boxer Engine being slow if Subaru took the Turbo's out of them. But your so freakin stubborn and caught up on Subaru's you wont even admit to it. Everyone knows including yourself they would be considerably slower. Unlike you, When I'm wrong at least I'm man enough to admit to it. People make mistakes all the time. But I'll only listen and then call it quits if proven wrong. Otherwise I'll debate!

BlueEyes

haha, yeah. I like the 8's stock wheels. I couldn't remember if it comes with stock 18's or 17's, so I picked the 18's.

BlueEyes

Listen, your entire argument makes no sense at all. Yes, you are right. The STI would be considerably slower if you took the turbo off the car. Similarily with any turbo car. Ike knows they would be slower, you know it, I know it, but the problem is, who cares!! It is meaningless, the car has a turbo. It's silly, silly silly silly.

Ike

The original poster hasn'ty posted on this thread in over a week. He probably realized we're all insane and went and bought a G35 :p

jaguargod

Take it to the dealer. I have taken mine in twice for rattles, and I am going to have to take it in again because they did some work on the driver side window, and now there is a rattle in the door. It's covered under warranty, and I plan to squeeze every bit of value from my warranty that I have to. Maybe next time they will just insulate it in the first place.

jaguargod

If the overrated horsepower was such a problem for Mazda, why haven't there been any issues with the overrated fuel economy? It seems to me that there are an overwhelming number of people who are getting considerably less miles from a tank than was promised on the sticker. I have learned to keep mine under 3k rpms in gears 1-4 and I have managed to get as much as 17 mpg city, but when I was driving it like it was made to be driven, I was getting about 13.

cas2themoe

Now I will agree with you on that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :p

Deslock

It's a lop-sided comparison, price-wise; a brand new '05 6-speed RX8 can be had for $24-25k, about $8k less than the STI (unless the STI is discounted significantly from its MSRP). I have a base 6-speed; it's very well equipped.

Soulless shifters? The S2k, Miata SE 6-speed, and RX8 are some of best shifters I've had the pleasure to use... they have plenty of feel to let you know when you've engaged and their smooth, short action allows quick shifts. There is no advantage to having a notchy, mechanical-feeling shifter in a sports car.

The boxer's weight is low, however, so is the RENESIS'. The RX8 has lower ground clearance and the STI is a significantly taller vehicle with a larger, heavier frame and a lot more glass up high.

The Impreza chassis is OK, but ultimately its an economy platform tweaked for performance as opposed to a pure sports car platform (I touch on the advantages of that below).The STI steering is loose compared to the RX8's (and the EVO's, which is even more responsive than the 8's). Weight distribution doesn't automatically mean better handling, and there are some situations where bias is desirable, but all other attributes being equal, 50/50 distribition will give an all-around handling advantage (in addition to the Miatas and S2k, many of the BMWs I've driven support this). It's true that there are several excellent handling cars with some bias, but most of them that have a bias have a rear-ward one (and their bias isn't a positive contributor to their handling for most situations).

As far as understeer goes, what tires do you have on your WRX? I've driven the WRX with a couple different types, and while the RE92s were horrible and the other tires reduced understeer, it was still substantial. Anyway, as far as the RX8 understeering at autocross, almost every car will do it if pushed hard enough, but there is a huge difference between the WRX, STI and RX8.

I reject your suggestion that the STI's understeer is evened out by the RX8's body roll. Understeer is an important handling attribute; body roll itself is not (but is instead a vehicle attribute that negatively affects handling). In other words, a car handles worse because of body roll, but if you're comparing two cars and the one that has more body roll handles better, the fact that it has more body roll doesn't change it being a better handler. However, if one car understeers more than another, that itself is a handling difference.

In the case of the RX8, it has superb handling and tossability *despite* having a soft ride and some body roll. Additionally, because it gets its handling from it low yaw-moment, balance, chassis, light weight, weight distribution, etc, there is room for improvement via sway bars, suspension upgrades, etc. But a car can only reduce yaw moment and improve weight distribution so much. This illustrates the advantage of using a sports car platform instead of an economy platform. Note that I'm not dismissing the STI as an econobox... I like the STI which, as I posted previously, outperforms the RX8.Subaru's ABS on my WRX was absolutely awful, but with my limited experience with the STI, I can't tell if it inherited the same problems (so I didn't mention it). Perhaps you've driven the STI more than me and can provide more details about that... in any case, my beef was with your claim that the STI's brakes were better than the RX8's.
Here's my take on it: sports cars used to be very raw with no amenities (and only one seat, originally). As technology improved, sports cars added second seats, climate control, radios, etc. Now we the RX8. It's got 4-doors, 4-seats and a comfortable ride, but is still a sports car because of its driving dynamics. It also still has a "drive-it-like-ya-stole-it" personality, even though it's not as rough or loud as the STI.

If you want a purist car with singular purpose, the Elise is obviously a better example than both the RX8 and STI.
LOL... yeah, I imagine a seeing a bunch of RX8, rotary, and scooby fanatics yelling at each other would cause most sensible people to run and never look back :D