18 is > 17. Mazda specifically said mileage would improve 20% to 40% UNDER CERTIAN DRIVING CONDITIONS. They never said IN EVERY SITUATION.

 

brx8 do you have a vr-4? I have a 93 3000gt SL and get ~ 24mpg in mixed driving putting around 400 miles/week on the car.

definitley not looking forward to less economy than my 3kgt

 

Dammit! Well, let's see: 20% better under what driving conditions? I would hope to attain 22 mpg in my normal commute; high 20's during a road trip. It doesn't look like that's gonna happen, whether I'm trying to utilize the performance the car is capable of, or not.

I'm not too happy about that. My ratty old FB does the above. (yes, I know there's a performance defecit) I thought the Renesis would be the answer to the fuel economy situation. If the engine isn't being pushed hard, I'd like to see a measurable improvement!

 

Sorry, I did state this before: Mileage WILL be the CRUCIAL factor for the RX-8. Even if it not soooo bad, many people will refrain to get one if they consider it too high, me included...

Personally I don't care too much about pollutions, it just has to be o.k. (Euro4). But with the ridicoulous gas prices here in Europe and ever increasing, this is one main factor of not getting an RX-8. Mazda's promise to have lowered consumption MUST be kept under ALL, not only CERTAIN conditions!

 

Unfortunately, hybrids just around corner combine performance
and much improved gas mileage. How do you sell this down the road when new gets over 40 mpg?
Alternatively, if you are combining Sports Car & 4-seater, and eliminating one car, then you can rationalize anything. If you get
v8 performance at a gas mileage slightly better, why not?????.

 

Actually this does concern me a bit as well. Having owned a 99+ Mustang GT with a "gas guzzling" 4.6L V8, I used to average anywhere from 18-20 mpg depending on the amount of city and "spirited" driving I did between tanks.

According to East Moon, his standard power RX-8 is getting only 14 mpg which is very surprising and not very encouraging in my book. With the high power engine, this could be even more of a problem since I'm sure most of us don't buy a sports car to have to make an effort to NOT drive it too hard as to not use too much fuel.

This definitely might be an issue for me. I mean 18-20mpg I can understand, but 14mpg or possibly less???

Just imagine what it would be like with forced induction!

 

My GSL-SE '84 RX-7 use to get as low as 8, or as high as 20, or possibly more on highway driving. It all depends on how you drive it. I remind everyone that it is a sports car. Plus, there is nothing like driving a rotary. You can enjoy it while driving it hard, or just cruising down a city street listening to it's hum.

But if you really are worried about the MPG, then buy a hybrid Civic.

 

My1985 RX-8 GSL-SE...14mpg in town...but fun to drive!

 

I had a pair of soft rubber Generals one time that I got down to 8 MPG with. I only got about 12000 miles on them.

 

This is a pretty silly comment considering we all know this is a sports car. You can be concerned about mpg without it having to be the end all and be all of a decision, but it does become a cost factor when you have to pay at the pump more frequently. It's the RELATIVE mpg among various sports car/sporty car alternatives that I'm looking at. I don't expect it to average 30mpg, but when Mazda makes a big deal about having improved the fuel economy by 30% or more, 14mpg(or possibly worse with the high power engine) is not very encouraging when you use it as a daily driver and you have to put premium in it. It also makes you wonder a little about what else Mazda may have possibly "exaggerated" about. You see, it's part of evaluating the RX-8 as a whole.

As previously mentioned, my 4.6L V8 Mustang GT 5 speed used to average between 18 and 20mpg on 87 octane fuel which is what it was designed to run. I would expect the RX-8 to at least be able to match that without having to be thinking about how I'm driving to get optimum economy.

Let's try and keep the comments and discussion in perspective here, not "go buy X economy vehicle if you are so worried about mpg". Comments like that are just plain rediculous.

 

I don't know how many people are going to buy the RX-8 as a daily commuter?

As far as your Mustang getting 18 and 20 on 87 octane, comparing a rotary to a V8 is like apples and oranges. I do not know if you've ever owned a rotary, but a rotary has a truly unique feel and sound (not to mention the upkeep). Perhaps half of the people that buy a RX-8 once owned a RX-7.

I plan on buying one as a weekend car, but not until next Spring (providing it does not have the problems that the 3rd generation RX-7 had). I won't buy it because of MPG, or because of it's horsepower. There is always something better in both categories. But there is only one car with a rotary. Is that keeping things in perspective?

 

Me for one. It'll be a weekend toy too, but it'll see most use as my everyday commmuter.

 

Did they even test the car for fuel economy before they put those first numbers up? I dont see how they could of if they had to change them. Weird.

 

There was a rumor that Mazda made some changes to the engine management code right before they went into production. That could explain why the fuel economy numbers were revised.

 

The folk over on priusonline.com are bragging double the torque,
double the gas mileage, an extra passenger, a new generator
at 10,000 rpm capability, 4 cylinder camry performance, and using the Toyota Design Objective of:

"FUN TO DRIVE"!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Much better grogie....

I'm aware of the differences of the rotary and the fact that I've never owned one is part of the reason I'm interested in the RX-8. I've been looking around and checked out the Asian board and I did see the additional fuel efficiency reports which look much more reasonable with an average of about 22mpg for the type of driving I'm primarily going to be doing.

EAST MOON must have been sitting in some gridlock traffic for a while to get only 14mpg.