Smoke_Weed_RX-8

ya, they call ita powerplant design, everything is in a straight line. i don't know man, until i'm proven wrong through testing, i'll stick with mazda's word, they haven't steared me wrong yet.

Deca Auto

Reminds me about the dispute of RSX v. celica. Just cause a rsx has 20 more ratedhorsepower then the celica doesn't mean it will win straight line. Other factors such as weight play a major role as well.

Ike

A lot of people said the same thing when the car was rated at 247hp, and this argument is almost the same as many we had months ago.

Smoke_Weed_RX-8

we are all ignoring the fact that horsepower does not make the car. i've seen cars with hp ratings upwards of 1K, but all they have is nuts, no dick. understand the analogy?

Deca Auto

Mazda wouldn't do anything drastic as to do what they did a few months prior. I'm guessing they have sold many 8s by now, and it would be greatly detrimental to mazda if they were to announce another HP correction. I'm sure they will find a way to prove the renesis does indeed push out 238 hp by any means possible.

I think the topic is horsepower, and too many people are going off the subject. Yes we all know the car handles great, looks greats, and even feels great. But the fact still remains the current dyno reading are quite bewildering.

Ike

Here's an old thread that covers a lot of the discussions of old, and also has some of the first dyno results.

https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...light=synopsis


There is also an interesting Q&A between Rotary News and someone from Mazda where the whp is stated to be "about 204-207". Then there's this little gem...


One of Car & Driver's critisisms of the RX-8 was a lack of mid-range power. Is there any plan to address this issue?

Pre production cars were "down on power." Wait until they drive a production car.

http://rotarynews.com/view.php?id=193

Seems like Robert Davis should have stuck with "No Comment" a little more often.

Smoke_Weed_RX-8

reading that made my head hurt man

Deca Auto

Yay its like 3'oclock in the morning (pacific time), and we have nothing better to do!!

Ike

Mazda certainly has a lot more to lose this time around and they are going to ignore this issue until they just can't ignore it anymore.

Think about it, at 5% discrepancy in hp from the manufacturers rating and the auto owner is able to take legal action. I believe some people had prebought the car at 250hp. If you consider that number and possible legal ramifications what number do you think Mazda would come up with to cover their hides? 237hp? Nope, that would be 5.2%, how bout 238hp... 4.8%, that one sounds good. Do you honestly believe Mazda did some testing and came up with 238hp? This number was decided upon in a boardroom, with lawyers, and a bunch of Mazda execs.

Ike

No kidding, I'm bored and can't sleep. Going to force myself to sleep, g'night.

PhineasFellOff

Your brain seems to continue to violate simple logic. Someone complaining about HP means that person has ignored or failed to consider all the other great things about the car?

Broker73

IKE, I do respect your knowledge of some car facts, but real world experience in the vehicle has made me quite satisfied......that was the second run I had with his G35C, and both times almost neck and neck.....when it is warm, I am sure we will run them from a dead stop, and maybe he has the advantage, but so far the car seems to pull nicely. No doubt I want more torque, but I am quite happy with the first gear as it gets you in the high roms very quickly ready for the shift to second. For you to assume you know how they came up with the 238hp figure is a bit ridiculous.

Do I want more power, of course, but don't we all??

Tony_Montana

its not really the lack of horsepower, 250 is a very good amount of horsepower for a very light car like this, its the punie torque that really kills this car, i belive 150? Iam happy with the horsepower i just wish they could bump the torque up. And also the gas mileage, i mean what dose 8 average 15 mpg? Most V8s get more mileage if not the same then the 8, and they have more power, but the lack it in the options and handling. just my 2cents.

Deca Auto

You can't have everything. If it were a V8 it wouldn't rev freely. Rotaries won't have good gas mileage, forced induction will improve torque but at what cost? Only if mazda had tuned the car for more mid-range torque, but emissions and mileage are bad as it is.

TALAN7

I've had my 8 since last july. when I test drove it I fell in love with it. IMO, the 8 lacks only in midrange passing power. I have to say when on the highway cruising at 60 it's not very quick compared to many other sport sedans. Case in point, the 350Z does 0-100 in 13 seconds. The S2000, the 8s' closest competitor, does it in less than 14.5. The 8, 15.9. That's 16 seconds, 3 seconds more than the Z. Yet the 8 is comparitively as quick 0-30 and 0-60.
Mazda reigned in our midrange grunt but I'm not fretting. When the right mod comes out I'll just get it back. I do feel a little let down, I mean a 30,000 dollar "sports" car should be quicker. It just feels anemic in the midrange. When I have altimas, accords, and other econosport sedans keeping up not to mention the cars the 8 wants so bad to be accounted with like the Z, S2000 and G35 cpe leaving me behind (except in the twisties), I want more performance. Notice I didn't say more power, that pisses people off. If they can get more performance from the same power than all power to them. As for me power = performance. I still love my 8 and wouldn't have had any of the other cars I mentioned above, except for the G35 (outta my budget). I could have gotten in a Z car for the same price but then I tested the 8. Funny, I wonder what would have happened if I had tested the Z.

Apathy Curve

In my experience, (generally speaking; there are exceptions to everything), the people who harp on paper number comparisons of vehicles fall into one of two categories: very inexperienced drivers, or people who race for a living.

Those in the former category generally suffer from a lack of real-world knowledge and experience-- as compared to bean-counting every car in existence. Anyone can go to Edmunds and spreadsheet the numbers, but that has very little to do with the actual performance of a vehicle. The old saying that "statistics lie" is very true and very applicable to car stats. A good example is the claimed dry curb weights on vehicles. Manufacturers are experts at manipulating these numbers, some of them to the point that the claimed dry crub weight becomes utterly meaningless. The other thing to consider is that crank HP does not translate to the ground in a flat curve for all cars. Suspension, computerized control, gearing, and lot of other factors go into the actual RWHP figure. Just because a car produces a higher HP:weight ratio at the crank than a direct competitor does not mean it will out-perform that competitor-- in a drag race or a road race.

The other group of people who look at numbers intently are racers. To a telemetry chief for a NASCAR team, 12 HP can quite easily mean the difference between winning and losing-- or it may not, if he sacrifices that HP for another trade off. But that team is dealing with a driver who pushes the car to it's limits of adhesion every second that it's on the track. That is a huge difference factor. Going by the old "Rule of Tenths," your average NASCAR driver pushes 9/10ths; the consistent winners do 10/10ths better than 50% of their career. By comparison, the average club racer might get 8/10ths if he's a really good driver and consistent winner, and he's with a good, stable crew. The average SCCA weekender who is very familiar with his ride might be getting 7/10ths. The best steet-only driver who's never been formally trained and has limited experience, can get 6/10ths. For comparison, the average soccer mom in a landbarge SUV might get, oh... let's say .0000001/10ths skill level rating. =oP

I just moved from a Trans Am that, with bolt-on, (or cut-out, as the case may be), induction changes and a FM Series 40 crossover muffler would get about 325 to 330 crank HP. While it was capable of pushing into the mid-13's quite easily, it was very much a rough and brute force sort of affair. They're called muscle cars for a reason. By comparison, while the maxed-out 1/4-mile and 0-60 numbers on the RX-8 are inferior on paper, in practice only a 8/10's or better driver would be able to consistently produce wins over it in the T/A. The RX-8 is simply a more easily-driven and well-designed vehicle. I drove that T/A for six years, and I knew it like the back of my hand. I can tell you from only a few miles in the RX-8 that it is a far superior sports car. The overall package is smoother, cleaner, and it doesn't buck around like a *****-tied bull when you punch it. Sure it requires more concetration, since you have to rev it to get the HP, but gearing is much tighter the T/A, and the spread ratio of those gears is better aligned with the power curve. In short, the RX-8 is more forgiving. It can take a 6/10ths driver and make him a 7/10ths just by climbing into the cockpit. It's just superior engineering against brute force. Being an engineer, I'll take the former over the latter.

In summary, the loose nut behind the wheel has a lot more to do with how a car performs than the paper numbers ever will. Besides, if I want raw accleration, I'll just hop on the CBR and EVERYBODY loses to me.

Argue about HP until you're blue in the face, but in the end, it all comes down to the SCCA's informal motto: "Shut up and drive."

Deca Auto

Maybe mazda should have kept their rating at 250hp. I think that would make you RX8 owners happier.

AlanAndCharlene

TalanZ, you can relax about the Z, I drove one right after the RX and it felt horrible in comparison, bulky, loud, and not nearly as comfortable. I would say the RX is alot lighter on its feet and a hell of alot more fun if that makes sense to you.

The closest feel and fun car I drove was the S2000, which revs high but not nearly as smooth as the renesis, but definately a worthy car, although it is quite a bit more expensive.

Regarding hp.....

I doubt there are many drivers here capable of utilizing the RX to it's full capacity without killing themselves or someone else.

Think about it, start your car first thing in the morning and let it warm up. Now mash the pedal and let the clutch fly, slam through the gears as fast as you can. Now down shift and hard on the breaks for the stop sign. Rev it and wham off again, stay full throttle or full brakes till you arrive at your destination. I would bet anything that you let off before the RX even hints about complaining.

Learn the car and the limitations, once you got that mastered and you wanna add hp, then add a turbo.

FYI, I had a supercharged 66 Chevy II that would do wheel stands, going very fast in a stright line .... been there, done that.

rglbegl

back from early 2004!!!

Shini

Always gotta love it when people search and end up bumping 3 year old threads and are replying to someone in them

Ike

Nice work noob!