I think everytime I turn on my car now the gas meter drops a notch or almost that much. Im not talking about parking at a store for 10 minutes then turning the car back on. Im talking about not driving it for atleast 5 hours then getting back into it. Ive been watching the gas meter a lot these days so I can figure out how to keep my gas from going down so fast since I had to fill up again after I filled itup 5 days ago so maybe I am looking at it too hard now. I dont know. I think the last fewtimes I turned on the car in the morning before I leave the gas nozzle only went up to the notch below the one I remember I left the car at. Can it really be that the car uses enough gas to make the meter drop a whole notch everytime you start it up after not driving it for a long time? I dont know maybe I am just seeing things. What do you guys think? Is it possible that it eats more gas than other cars do at startup? Also someone please giveme an idea of how much gas each notch represents.

 

Maybe it gets hungry at night , and it takes a midnight snack :D :D . I'll try to look ,at mine and let u know

Madjoker

 

I can't say abouyt the startup issue, but in driving around the city, even after a few miles it seems my guage is visibly lower. I think even with traction/DSC off I will be getting poor milage.

as per Mazda's reps suggestion I'll try 91 octane next time. (and try traction off) Any thoughts as to whether 10 MPG or so (I am getting) qualifies under lemon law (after 3 tries to fix it) since it would alter the usablility of the car and resale value?

I hate to bitch since Mazda did such a great job on the car, but I need at least 15 MPG in the city.

 

Yup, every morning mine drops a notch. I tried not to stop and start it too often.

 

I'd say if you're not using the recommended fuel, it's not a lemon law. Plus, you haven't brought it in for them to fix unsuccessfully multiple times, which is almost always a pre-requisite.

10MPG? LOL you're still spending more on gas than I am using premium, I'm getting 18-21 MPG. Try using the right type of gas for a few hundred miles, you should see it back where you expect.

Out of curiosity, what were your "3 times to fix it"? Besides calling to complain and them telling you to use the right type of gas...

 

Here's a thought...if you can bare to do it... fillerup good....loan your car to someone you trust (wives are good and usually have a vastly different driving style than husbands most usually) and have them take it for a little drive say 50 miles out, 50 miles back. now fillerup again, and compute your mileage. 20 mpg would fill with 5 gals, 10 mpg would fill with 10 gal and that certainly would be plain enough to see any difference!

10mpg just seems so damn awful, the only explaination has to be the car or you. And so you don't embarrass yourself, I'd want to eliminate myself first!

If it ain't your driving, I'd send the car back immediately!

I know this doesn't make you feel better, but try as I may, and I do :D , I haven't been able to get mileage down below 17.5 mpg (one tank only, normally 18-20 mpg).

 

Ehhh...excuse my impertinence. But, isn't the fuel gauge supposed to have some sort of buffer and retardation (yeah, yeah no jokes on me, alright?) so that it wont jump from full to empty, to half a tank under acceleration, downhill and uphill driving?

My guess is as follows:

1. You fill up your tank. The needle goes to FULL (1)

2. You drive around and consume 1/17th of the tank. The needle moves down to the 1/16th position because of acceleration, or the car position in itself.

3. You park your car, and let it rest overnight or for a couple hours.

4. You get back to your car, start the electrical system...and bam! you see the needle repositioning from the 1/16th down to 1/17th position. Simply because that was the accurate reading altogether.



Am I making any sense here??...or should I go take a nap?

Edit: Hey, and I also remember seeing somewhere deep within threads on this board, that the rotary doesn't like to idle too much. So...it might or it might not refute my statement above.

 

I don't know about lemon. But I wonder how are you driving...I got 15.8mpg as my worst record so far. And I do a lot of stop n go trhoughout the day. As a reference my best one so far has been 17.7mpg with mostly highway driving (65-70mph) and some stop n go at downtown Dallas...

 

uh why arent u using 91 in the first place?

 

Yo, tribal. How ya doing? Just a comment on your comment, there are many other threads on this. Lower octane will not impair mileage nor will it harm the engine by means of the knock sensor. You will give up a little power with lower octane, but many of us don't care. I've posted email I got from Mazda about this (yes, they actually put the above in writing to me.) I know there are purists that will say "Why would you buy an 8 and not use the highest octane gas?" Well, you're looking at one! There are many on this forum (and a thread to this effect) that believe lower octane is actually better for the Renesis. I am not learned enough to address this, but any claims that high octane is better or worse than low octane falls squarely into the realm of opinion, to which we are all entitled. Please just don't present it as fact unless/until it is proven (i.e., not a theoretical discussion of compression/flashpoints/knock sensors/etc.)

 

ic thx

 

DID YOU USE 92 or 93 OCTANE BEFORE? (BEFORE YOU TRY, OR TRIED, THE 91 OCTANE?

 

Guys ithappened to me again today and this time I only parked the car for 30 minutes!! I was right on the 3/4 notch when I parkedthe car and stopped for lunch. When I got back in and turned the car on the nozzle went below the 3/4 notch to the one right underneath it! It didnt go back up to the 3/4 notch at all when I started driving too. What the **** is wrong with my car????

 

Regarding the questions as to my post about getting 10 mpg.

I only started testing a few tankfuls ago, once I started to hit around 1000 miles. I had used a variety of gas before thAT, then started using 94 FOR testing (WITH TRACTION ON/OFF). On my next tank I will use 91 (with traction/DSC off)

I am doing city driving mostly and 20% highway.

My question about the lemon law is because I don't necessarly want to do the buyback. I have not yet brought it into the dealer- I need to do some more testing so I can be 100% sure of my findings. I am intertested in the lemon law so I know if things don't improve, and they are not able to fix the situation, what will be my recourse, rather than simply give back the car now without trying all other options. I love this car otherwise, and have also put in almost $800 in 3M material, which I would loose if I did the buyback.

Maybe my issue is the same as Jerky8's- I will look and see if I am loosing a notch at startup- but something is definitley going on- I even drove the car super easy last night- and after less than 10 miles I noticed the tank looked lower.

 

Under a month is not enought time for most people to decide, but that is what you are getting.

However the buyback is not about gas mileage, it is about power.
For most people now receiving their cars the issue is not the power. You have heard about it, and have been warned.
So, if the lower power rating is unacceptable, you can choose not to buy it.
What the buy back is for is people like me, who put deposits in much earlier ( I did in the spring) and when the car was rated at 250HP in their literature.

Many of us were expecting a 250 HP car, and when we found it was significantly less, felt we had been cheated.

For some it is a non-issue. Many are buying it mainly for looks and comfort, many do not drive it hard enough to notice the difference.
A lot of new RX-8 owners have never driven a comparable car, so have no basis for reference to tell what it should feel like.
If you come from driving a Toyota Corolla, this will feel like a rocket ship!

If you always drive it on highly regulated roads, and generally within the speed limit, and in traffic, you probably would never know the difference..

The gas mileage is a whole new issue.
This is something that can be legitimately addressed by enough owners making the point with the dealers and Mazda. If they try and tie it to the horspower offer, do not let them get away with it.
They are two different things.

Perhaps the cause may be the same, as it is quite possible the ECU settings is the culprit in both cases.
But that is a good thing, as you then have two legitimate reasons to pressure them to address that ECU matter.

It is quite possible that a new ECU map might solve both problems.
It is also possible that fixing the MPG issue might have no effect or even worsen the power problem.
We simply do not know.

Cross your fingers, complain to the dealers, and maybe good things will happen.

If you just sit back and wait, then they have no reason to fix it.

 

Even though you shouldn't have to do this, have you tried keeping just half a tank in? I know it seems like a hassle, but I grew up being taught that by only having half a tank, you have half the weight, thus better mileage. Dunno if it really works though?...........

 

I just called Mazda. They are faxing the buy-back form to me. I still don't know what I am going to do, but have been splitting my surfing time between this forum and looking for slightly used BMW 330's.

To me, the gas mileage is a big deal. I put over 13,000 miles on my car a year. At the 16 MPG I have been getting, that starts to be expensive. My best mileage was 19 on a half tank of highway-only driving--half of that with no AC. Now comparing this to a 330 that averages 23, and at $2.30 per gallon here in SoCal, it's a difference of nearly $600 per year.

The whole equation is what troubles me: I paid MSRP, have less-then-advertised HP* and am only getting 16 MPG.

*On the HP issue, numbers are numbers and it's not necessarily the best way to judge. Is the car quick? Absolutely. Is it painful to not be able to gain ground on BMW 325's (rated at 185HP) or other apparently less-powerful cars? Absolutely. But, is it nice to drive a car that draws looks and attention (something BMW's stopped doing here in SoCal 15 years ago)? Yes.

It just sucks that I spent a year picking a car and it turns out to be less than I had hoped for. Buyer's remorse is to be expected with any large purchase (and hence the defensive attitudes shown by many of the forum). Buyer's remorse with hard facts on the car's deficits AND an option of selling back...pretty compelling.

 

Sliver8- I would kill for you gas milage. Don't forget- that the governemnt determines the MPG rating, and the manufacturers are required to advertise that. WHen I see a MPG listed, I fully expect to get a few MPG less than rated- since they may have driven the car lightly when tested- who knows?

For me the HP is a non issue- especially when I know we should be able to get it back, and since I am happy with the performance.

That being said, if things dont improve on my next few tankfuls- putting in 91 instad of 94 (which is what I have in now) I may be sending the car back also.

WHat I noticed last night after driving around the city for an hour- and completely babying it- trying to drive as ecomonically as possible, the gas guage hardly moved. After a few minutes of driving normally - higer rpms, going faster than other cars, quick accel, but by no means racing- the gauge started dropping.

 

silver8, I don't get it....WHY are you (maybe) returning the car - your two statements seem to contradict ...

...$600 /365 days= $1.64/day (and that ONLY IF gas stays at $2.30 for you)

if you drive 13,000 miles a year (36 miles a day) compared to BMW (or any car) that gets maybe 23 mpg???

You just paid maybe $30K for an RX-8, got it registered ($$), got insurance ($$)... and now you are thinking about giving it back because it MAY cost you that extra $$?

Two questions: If, before you bought, you had made this decision first, that is: "OK now here are two cars, BUT one will cost $600/yr extra for gas, so hummmm, I'd NEVER take the thirsty one." ... does that make any sense to you?

Or, why did you even want to spend that money anyway, if you are now so impoverished at purchase time that $600 is either so important to you/going to break you for the year?

I just don't undertsand the logic you're using, unless the " have less-then-advertised HP*" IS the REAL reason! (just about everyone paid MSRP)

Now on that point I can see getting upset (pissed me off to and still does, because Mazda was BLATANTLY way less than thorough in engineering the car's engine performance & specs).

Still, all things considered, that alone (9 hp or whatever) is not enough of a reason to return a car that you like otherwise IMO.

 

on a full tank, i get 60 miles for the first quarter on the tank with all highway driving. but that goes down drastically with city driving involved.

 

Spin9:

Quote: (and that ONLY IF gas stays at $2.30 for you).

California is messed up if you haven't noticed. I used $2.30 assuming the cost of 91 would drop from the current $2.40+ range. With Cali's taxes, regulations, lack of energy-production-independence and other issues, I forsee us continuing to pay large premiums for our petrol. I gasp when I see the nationwide costs of gasoline and notice we're paying between 30 and 50% premiums versus other states. I doubt any one of this board's Texans is paying over $2.00 for 91.

Is $600 in extra gas costs gonna' break the bank? No. I could buy five RX-8's for what my house has appreciated in the last 18 months (that's one of the appeals of living on the coast of this wacky state). But, $600 is $600--it's just one contributor to the overall cost of the car. Also, what about the time consumed to make 65 trips to the gas station for my 13,000 per year?

As to my logic that you are questioning, frankly I am questioning it myself. I haven't made a decision, so throwing ideas into the open forum is one way I find useful to sort through this thing. As such, I genuinely appreciate your response. There's probably more emotion than logic...in mine and most other posts here.

I wanted a unique car. I have one. I like the uniqueness. You won't get that in any other new car for under $70K, and I refuse to pay that kind of money for a depreciating liability (Rich Dad, Poor Dad, anyone?). I was hoping for a unique, powerful, somewhat economical (20 MPG??) car for under $35K. Instead I have a unique, somewhat powerful, uneconomical car. The question remains whether that's a trade-off I am willing to live with.

 

Hey, if you don't like the car you don't like the car period. I agree with you about the mpg and the overall performance. I live in Las Vegas and at 2000+ pressure altitude sometimes the engine is less than stellar. I use 91 octane and when I head out to Red Rock (4000 + altitude) I am right in the 7-8K rpm band to get some grunt out of the engine. The other day I was passed by a Ford p/u, obviously lots more torque. I see that Borla is offering an exhaust system that will increase both hp and torque. Hopefully Mazdaspeed will offer the rumored supercharger and I can use that to get some more oomph. Am I going to give mine back, naaah, but I will keep pressure on Mazda about the possibility of an ECU remap to solve some of my concerns with the car. On a scale of 1-10, I give the car a 7.

 

hee hee, now silver8, now that first excuse is very creative!! But you got a point even though I kinda enjoy the experience for some crazy reason .

Glad you saw it for what it is, and to be truefull, while leaning towards keeping mine, I notice that I am not ready to send that letter back just yet... just want to experience the car to the fullest for the longest I can.. thanks to Mazda's "extended test-drive offer' one might say!

Decisions, decisions, will they ever let us rest