viggen

Next week I'll take delivery of a new Z4 3.0si roadster -- looking forward to torque again!

Part of my motivation to get a different car was my desire to have a 2-seat roadster again (pre-RX-8 I had a previous generation M Roadster).

I have to admit though tha I am more than a little turned off that Mazda hasn't done a single thing to the car in the 4 years I've had mine -- no convertible version, no 2-door coupe version, and most ridiculous of all, no Mazdaspeed version. You would think that after 4 years of owners complaining about a lack of power andthe RX-8 getting its clock cleaned in sales by 350z and G35, Mazda would have done something about it. Pretty lame way to teat your halo car, Mazda. Probably because a d-bag Fod guy i running the company (gotta have more trucks/crossovers!). Even the very few new colors are boring (although RX-8 looks great in pearl white).

Still love the style, the handling, the packaging -- and the suicide doors that originally turned me off (initially they made the car seem like less of a sports car and more of a sporty car) are a feature I've grown to really appreciate. Not sure I'd ever buy another 4-seat coupe again unless it doors like the RX-8.

Anyway, I loved my RX-8, this board was mostly great and I hope you all continue to have fun with your cars!

Huskyfan23

Mazdaspeed RX8 would most likely = less reliability. Anyone remember the reliability issues with the old RX-7 twin turbos? One of the main reasons that the 7 failed to sell reasonably into the mid 90's (that, and the cost).

Happy with the NA rotary. It may not be for everyone, but at least it has the potential to last a very long time. The NA 13B renesis may not be the quickest in the world, but 238 hp out of a 1.3 liter engine is amazing.

Sorry to lose ya, gotta do what's best for you. Enjoy the Z4.

NoRotorNoMotor

Good luck. You'll be back.

Razz1

I don't like the lines on the roadster. Nice car otherwise.

champi0n

iTrader: (1)

i willingly passed up torque mostly for rotary and secondly for the unmatched handling, and 3rdly for 9,000rpms

torque is only good for spinning your tires while your car sits still anyways

chickenwafer

iTrader: (9)

The reliabiltly issues stemmed from it's overly complicated twin sequential turbos and inadequate cooling system, mainly, not just the fact it was turbo'ed. Look at TII FC's, those things are pretty damn reliable.

New Yorker

Hey speak for yourself! Many 8 owners here and around the world think the 8's balance of power, feel, handling, utility and cost is right on target. Mazda got this one right right outta the box, and many of us are quite happy with the car the way it is. The 8 is Mazda's halo car because it represents the company's dedication to innovative engineering, design and just plain thinking "outside the box"—not because it was the fastest car in their lineup! Knowing that the original Ford Thunderbird, VW GTI and Nissan 240Z—to name just a few—were made worse with each "new and improved" (i.e. heavier and more powerful) model, I for one, am glad the 8 hasn't been messed up.

I'm not saying the car can't be improved—obviously it can. I'm just saying the car is really good now, and that making it faster won't automatically make it better—and might make it worse. I certainly wouldn't want it to be faster if it meant making the car feel less nimble, less agile, less light on its feet.

New2u

so basically your leaving the rx-8 for something that merely about 20 more horsepower and bout 60 more torque? and sells for about 10k more in price. If you want to feel torque i would advise something much more powerful then the z4.

another thing is who cares too much about the sales figures? a car is a car, whether it be a car that only sold 10 cars to match someone else's 500, i'd much rather have a car i really wanted that only sold 10 cars to a car i really didn't want that sold 500.

Huskyfan23

Oh, I'm aware that it's not just due to the fact it was turbo'd. I was just saying that the amount of excessive heat created by the turbos/ inadequate cooling system made the rotary in the FD unreliable. If Mazda was able to cool the system better, it would probably work better in the renesis. That's a big "if", though.

CosmosMpower

Spoken like someone who's obviously never actually raced cars in any capacity. Torque is king in all forms of racing from drag racing to road racing to autocross. Horsepower sells cars and appeals to fanboys who like to rev their engines to 9000 rpms when they stop making power at 8500.


Z4 3.0si is a great choice, my neighbor recently picked one up and it's a quality car. The torque is very nice, well made interior and the handling/brakes are on par with other BMW's. I still miss my E36 M3 sometimes.

tajabaho1

z4? cmon, at least a z8.

delhi

Constant updates of a car model does not denote a better car. It means that the initial car was crap. And to keep up sales, hp is injected. If you see the early g35 resale values,they are pretty bad. Imagine if Mazda keeps updating the rx8 with power this or that, the early 8 will have a worse resale value than now. If u think about even the 3-series do not have drastic updates over the course of the model lifecycle. Power remained mostly the same with small changes here and there.

New2u

It's not that so and so hasn't raced this or that anywhere. I'm pretty sure that if the street were a race track that he's think differently about giving up torque.

sosonic

Supercharger should mean less heat issues and passing emissions.

mysql101

Please elaborate how a SC means less heat, and especially how a SC would pass emissions better than a TC.

For someone who calls me a turbo fanboy with a baseless and easily refutable claim in post 231 ( https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-major-horsepower-upgrades-93/dyno-comparison-rx-8-turbo-supercharger-etc-115447/ ) of the dyno comparison, you sure seem to be posting a lot of baseless pro SC comments.

Some might consider you calling the kettle black.

mysql101

Torque is less meaningful than a hp number. You can get a 600 lb-ft truck with 150 hp, that doesn't make it fast. And you're not going to be able to hit 150 mph with it. I could also setup the gear ratios on a 10 speed bike so that I have a bazillion tq, but my hp rating can't be so easily manipulated.

Peak hp is also not too useful a number, but when looking at strictly numbers, I'd rather see hp than tq.

Huskyfan23

I was wondering the same thing....what the hell is this guy talking about? how in the world can an SC reduce heat?

#1Stunna

great choice man, im loving my new 328i...

RWatters

iTrader: (5)

Uhh what?

Torque IS horsepower. Horsepower is just a calculation derived from the torque figure. Torque delivery is what is important, though, but then you go into how the engine is set up (low RPM torque, high RPM torque, smoothe torque band, etc.), gearing multiplication, etc. I understand what you're saying, though, I think.

An extra 60ft/lbs of torque is going to be pretty noticible, and everything I've read on the Z4 praised the car for the typical BMW traits. I do believe that the RX-8 will be a quicker car around the track, but that tends to be irrelevant since the Z4 will undoubtedly be the easier car to drive around day-to-day.

It sounds to me like you were burned out of the RX-8, and from the sounds if it I can't blame you. Some are happy with the way a car is, others want improvements. Regardless, congrats on the new purchase and enjoy the car! Those Z4's are a great-looking car!

mysql101

Yes, it's torque over TIME!

You don't need a lot of torque to go fast. What you need is a acceleration over time.

Naturally, given two cars with the same peak hp, with one that has a lot more torque than the other, the higher torque engine will be faster since it can accelerate better. But if you're given either hp OR torque to look at, I'll take hp every single time, as it contains more information than the torque number.

RWatters

iTrader: (5)

I suppose it depends on what type of application you're looking for. A truck, for example, give me torque over horsepower every time. A top speed car, give me horsepower with a nice, long, and flat torque curve. For something like an autocross or road course, though, I guess it depends on your type of driving skill and how hard you are going to drive the car. Frankly I think the RX-8 has more than enough torque to suffice given that it's a flat torque curve that keeps going as the RPM's keep going, but if a person just wants a car to fart around in then I could understand why they'd choose one with more torque. Gearing is a nice way to make up for a lack of low end power since you can multiply the existing torque you have, but then you suffer top-speed a bit.

What I'm lost at is when you say the horsepower number contains more information than the torque number. Technically the torque one contains more information, especially at various RPM points, since the horsepower number is derived from it. That's just a battle of opinion, though, I suppose.

Regardless, I think you and I are on the same exact page. I just wasn't picking up on what you said at first. My bad!

Raptor75

From the stand point of the torque helping in traffic yes but the RX-8 is a better riding car then the Z-4 on a day to day bases. One of my companies owners has one and I've driven it, the torque is great but the ride is far choppier then the RX-8. I'm not a big fan of the looks of the Z, I'm one who thinks Chris Bangle is a butcher but that is subjective. The interior of the 8 is far better from a style perspective, the Z is a little bland. 4 seat in the 8 is a big plus. The gas mileage of the Z put the RX to shame, much better. Reliability is about the same both cars and nothing to brag about.

I agree with another poster that it is disappointing that Mazda has done nothing with this car. My bet is that they can't do it and still have a car that will sell. When you look at the engine issues, high fuel consumption and emissions issues turboing or supercharging this car would just make these areas worst possibly to the point that Mazda knows they would not sell or meet government standards. It would seem that Mazda is just going to riding out the design and switching paint from year to year....Oh boy!

RWatters

iTrader: (5)

Here's my standpoint on it:

Take a back and look at how bad piston engines were at the start. High displacement, low power, terrible reliability engines just like the Rotary. At the same time, however, everyone adopted the piston engine and have worked hard to develop it. Outside of some weak outside efforts, the design and development of the Rotary has basically been left to Mazda. Considering the piston had one heck of a head start, I don't think Mazda has done all that bad considering how much time they've had. They've improved the engine quite a bit since the first ones, and I look forward to seeing what the future has in store for it (as Mazda has stated that they want to keep the Rotary).

I agree that a facelift, more standard options, or things of that nature would have been nice instead of offering that brochure with everything in it, but the RX-8 isn't that high of a seller to begin with so I think Mazda is just milking the car along until a new design comes out.

I find the RX-8 to be a fantastic car, and magazines STILL agree with that. The ride is fantastic, and the performance that comes out of this chassis is incredible. It's sad that it's major flaw, the Rotary, is also one of the things that makes the car so unique and fun to drive. The car would be even more fun if it TRULEY had the power that Mazda claimed it had, IMO, and maybe then people wouldn't complain about power issues as much.

Jedi54

iTrader: (7)

ashwins

Not necessary. What you need is an engine that can sustain its torque more than one that has a high peak torque. Yes, Torque alone doesnt say anything.

Torque ~ Mass * acceleration

Power = Torque * RPMS.


But, if you were to make any kind of a judgement on the speed of the car, its better to pass a judgement on the basis of Power (HP) over torque.

Some people say, that a good judgement would be a power to weight ratio(which should be high).