Didn't Car And Driver list the RX-8 as weighing 2900+ ? I remember it being just a bit under 3,000lb. It had cloth seats and was probably missing a lot of the options you can add on. And remember, most car magazines take cars to local weigh stations to get an accurate weight, because most manufacturers fib a bit when listing curb weights.

Personally, I don't want all those options. I just want the 6-speed, 250hp, sport suspension and the big breaks and wheels. I'm VERY happy about the 30mpg highway figures, as are all of you.

 

I wasn't directing that comment toward anyone in particular, and the comments about the EVO/STi are interesting to note. I think the fact that all these cars have pretty much the same weight shows the difficulty in shaving weight without dramatically changing construction methods (aluminum body/chassis, composites, etc, or like in the RX, an entirely different type of engine).

I am sure if an Mazda quoted the weight of a base build at 2990 lbs., there would be no one complaining. But a 3000 lb ceiling is a totally arbitrary figure. I would hate to think the engineers worked expressly to reach that weight, especially since for the rest of the world, 1363 kgs is not a magic number marketing can toss around and boast about.

I was just pointing out that these comparatively small differences in weight and front/rear loads (another neverending discussing) don't make any real world difference. There are plenty of other factors that will more greatly contribute to the overall performance of the vehicle. And even then, the bottom line is single most important factor when generating performance scores will be the person behind the wheel. And even then, the guy's skills are going to matter more than his cheeseburger and fries quotient.

I do think interior materials/insulation do weigh more than most would expect. There's about a 200 lb difference between the G35C and the 350Z, and I don't think it's all in that rear bench and extra wheelbase length.

Given current reviews, I think Mazda engineers have done a bang up job at balancing weight versus interior build quality, seat comfort, and noise level at highway speeds.

 

7 QUARTS of oil......

for comparison, my 91 NA holds 6 qts of oil (though only 5 qts are replaced every oil change, 1qt remains in the engine somewhere...)

 

Looks like the weight of the RX8 is pretty much on projection. Mazda wanted a sub-3000lb and 3029 is very close to what they had in mind. I guess everyone kind of expected lighweight from Mazda, but Lancer Evolution 8 and Subaru Sti came in much lighter than I thought. Those two WRC rally cars are going to be monsters on the street, with close to 280hp and RX-8 weight.

On the other hand, the WRX and Evo8 probably has much heavier engine and AWD system than the RX-8, you'd think they would be at least 100lbs heavier than the RX8. (Doesn't the RX8 use extensive aluminum body parts, too?)

Anyhow, the RX-8 looks better than either of those two performance 4 door monsters. Now the true test for the 8 is the 'fun to drive' factor compared to the WRX and Evolution VIII. Come one, auto magazines, give us a RX-8, Evolution 8, WRX Sti comparison. :D

 

Don't know what kind of comparison that would be... That's why the G35 was never compared to the WRX, or 330 to the WRX. Would be hard to put into a comparison I think. Pretty different cars.

But I'd read it either way.

 

Same price range, same advertisement slogan 'sport cars!', all three have 4 doors, seats 4 people, all of them are from Japan, and all of them are brand spanking new Japanese import cars. I can't think of a better comparison~

The comparison between the 350Z, RX8 and 330ci was strange. One 2 seater, one luxury sport coupe, and the RX8. The C&D comparison didn't make any sense either, a American super muscle car, a luxury sport coupe, and the RX8. Again, mismatch. It's hard to match up the RX8 to other cars because it's a cross over - between a 4 door sport sedan and 2 door coupe. That doesn't mean we should start comparing luxury cars, muscle cars and lightweight rotary cars in the same category though.

I'd think the WRX vs Evolution 8 vs RX8 would be more interesting and more worthwhile. Heck, the RX8 might just be the most luxurious one out of the three. A RSX-S, RX8 and Dodge Neon SRT4 would probably provide an entertaining read as well.

For reference only, most Japanese Magazines compare the RX-8 to the 350Z and the S2000. The RX8 has the 4 seats, the 350Z has monster torque, and the S2000 has the lightweight quick handling characteristics. A S2000, 350Z and RX8 comparison would probably make sense, too. We'll probably see those comparisons once the car is actually released.

 

i think the RX-8 is more luxurious than you're thinking... although i know very little about the Evo and STi, given that they're speed-only machines based on econo-box compacts, i'd really count on the RX-8 being a nicer daily car than either of those. IMO, the comparisons with the G35C, BMW 3, and S2000 are very warranted, far moreso than the AWD monster 4bangers.

btw, as nice as the S2000 is, i think the 8 has got its number in nearly every performance metric, even down to the practical every-day ones

ah HA!! and yet another sees my very early comparison of the RX-8 (base model, high power motor) to similarly prices RSX Type-Ses and Celica GTSes, which the RX-8 will have for appies. :D

 

What about the suicide doors and the extra bracing required for the lack of the B pillar? I would think that would be a bigger weight adder than a few goodies in the interior?

 

I think that this would be a great comparison. I agree all of the other comparisons so far have been a little strange (Mustang Cobra?) The RX-8 will beat them hands down for interior and exterior looks(unless you like the boy racer look) but what about fun to drive? how about a new catagory...fun to drive when seating 4?

 

Where are you guys getting those numbers? According to the Specification Deck (rev 1/30/03), it's 6.3 quarts, which is a shade under 6 liters.

 

The STi amd Evolution weights mentioned earlier are not accurate. Edmunds is full of crap.

I checked the official Mitsu spec sheet at www.evolutionm.net, and it lists the curb weight of the Evolution (with sunroof) as 3298 pounds. No sunroof = 3263 pounds. So, there is a ~250 pound weight advantage for the RX-8.

As for the Sti, neither the weight nor the price have been announced by Subaru.

 

You beat me to it nostatic!.....

The mileage does sound right where it should be though! Definitely happy with that!

 

According to Mazda Canada's February 17, 2003 "2004 RX-8" announcements on page 4; "Engine Oil Capacity 4 Speed Automatic Transmission = 6.0 liters & 6 Speed Manual Transmission = 6.7 liters".

 

And in the USA, since we yanks refuse to change, it is: 4-Speed Auto = 6.3 Quarts, and the 6-Speed Manual = 7.1 Quarts :D

 

FWIW - those "strange" comparisons are really very calculated.

Consider that the market that the 8 is aming at is the "sports" sector, where you have big dogs with every marque throwing cars of every type at the consumer. The RX-8 being a "crossover" as it is, the comparos make more sense... because the placement of the RX-8 in each of these test still puts it first nearly all of the time...... not quite as fast, yet a lil more comfy than a 2 seater, or a brutish pony-car. Not quite as comfortable or as plush as the luxo-marques, but with more road-capability ...yadda yadda... the list goes on..

While the comparisons are not real true-to-life comparions of apples to apples "sports cars", they are essentially choices at a buffet, with several tasty main courses avalible. Make mine a hot RX-8, hold the rice!

:D

 

I second that!

:D

 

Holy Crap, 95 Octane (I have to assume it's Octaine since the other two figures are Quarts not Litres and MPG not KPL)? Here in San Diego they only have 87/89/91! Is there a fuel additive I can buy to increase the octane, or will I be driving with increased likelyhood of knocks, etc?

 

95 RON (Research Octane Number) is 91 PON (Pump Octane Number). See http://www.btinternet.com/~madmole/R...RONMONPON.html for a good explanation and comparison table.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

When will you Yanks learn.. :p Metric is where it's at! :D

Interesting about the 1L remaining in the engine.. Is this true for every rotary engine? Kinda odd if true to keep that dirty oil in there..

 

So I take it most of you guys are pissed about the weight?

 

I, for one, am not pissed at all. Actually I am impressed with the weight savings they were able to accomplish by the use of aluminum hood & back doors, and rotor redesign.

I think the engineers did a great job, considering how feature-rich the RX-8 is.

 

I think some people where disappointed, but these people were also hopeing for 2700-2800 lb. Personally, I'm satisfied with the weight. Now if mazda made it 3500 lb then I really would be pissed :p

 

Well, it's going to be close to 3500 with 4 adults sitting in it. But that's removable weight.

 

Maybe four Ethiopians. With four Americans we are looking at 3,900 lbs, with 800 lbs of it being cholesterol.