Spoonie

So you're saying that the only way that you get decent acceleration out of a Ferrari is to rev it to redline? Not true, those cars have more than enough power and torque at even 3000 rpm to pin you back in your seat. The Lamborghini has a six liter V-12 which is a serious torque monster. You wouldn't even need to redline the lambo to beat (hypothetical )99.9 percent of the cars out there today. The only way the RX8 can hang is to redline the car, which is not a big deal. The RX8 and Lamborghini engines both burn gasoline. You can end all the comparisons after that.

m477

Liar.

Gord96BRG

Sure, the torque could be better - but it is extremely easy to work around, just run 2K rpm higher than you normally would. It's still less "gutless" than the S2000! How are you going to overcome the shortcomings (excessive weight) of something like the G35, 350Z, Cobra - can you easily strip off 200 or 300 (or 700) lbs of weight? It's quite amazing that someone can absolutely eliminate a car from consideration without ever having driven it, when the validation of their concern can only come from driving it! All hail the almighty maximum rated torque on the spec sheet!

Regards,
Gordon

jonalan

Thank you, Elara! I was dying to respond to that one myself.

As zoom44 stated, you "nutshelled" it!!!

melvincat03

If you happen to know any street racers, you would know what the FD's biggest problem is...Overheating. They said the RX7s always overheat after continuous high revving. This is why we talk about the torque issue. Can we really rev the hell out of the engine all the time? What about fuel consumption, durability, mechanic failures due to frequent high revving? If the Renesis solved the overheating problem, fine!

By the way, no one has answered can the RX8 still get decent performance when seated 4, even revved into its powerband?

And somebody said Ferraris, Lambs, etc need to rev high to get into their powerband. I don't think so. Lambs have 6.0L V12 engine, and how are you going to rev this car? Those are performance cars, and they have enough torque that can burn tires even in third gear.

However, I do agree with some of your points. The rotary engines need to be revved just like the S2K, NSX, and other "sports cars". The reason why we bring up the torque issue is because the RX8 is so so so nice, we don't want people to "laugh" at the RX8 because it's unable to catch up others. Driving excitment is important, but I really don't want to see the RX8 being beaten.

chenpin

Correct me if I'm wrong but I do not think RX-7's overheat b/c of constant revving. Older 1st gen and 2nd gen do not overheat like the FD and are also revved. The FD overheated because of the turbo setup which is not in the RX-8.

Also, I do not see any S2000 owners complaining about lack of torque. They enjoy the car for what it is.

gazita123

According to the Mazda tech rep that was at the Rev It Up event in SF today, MazdaSpeed is developing a hydraulic supercharger for the RX-8. I'd imagine that this will be warranty supported.

m477

Wrong. Overheating was caused by the twin turbo system. Educate yourself: http://www.rx7club.com.

Quote:

By the way, no one has answered can the RX8 still get decent performance when seated 4, even revved into its powerband?

You can use any highschool physics textbook for this one...

melvincat03

What? Common sense would say it's not enough.

chenpin

Yes it was the turbo. It wasn't just any ordinary turbo. It was one of the first sequential turbo (meant to deal with lag). Very complicated and restrictive + bad cooling system = heat.

wakeech

no, it was the first ever sequential turbo system ever in a production car, and i've not really heard of any other production cars trying a sequential system either.

melvincat03, you're really just arguing for arguing's sake: either add something to it, like reason, fact, or information, or shut up.... god, we really do have enough of these kinds of threads already.

Spoonie

The Last generation Supra Turbo had the sequential turbo setup.

I promise this is my last post. Or if I do post again, I will not bring up the torque issue. Sorry is I ruffled a few feathers. I said earlier that the RX-8 is far from perfect for me. That isn't exactly true. The only thing that is stopping me is the torque issue. And the only way to find out if the car is for me is to drive the thing. Everything else is almost pure speculation.

melvincat03

Nobody is absolutely right or absolutely wrong about the torque issue. It's really a personal opinion. Why somebody like wakeech so serious about it???

Besides, the title of this thread is Demand. There are so many things to talk about (see the 1st page 1st message). The purpose of this thread is to seek the RX8's goods and bads. If nobody criticizes anything, then how can the Mazda people know our thoughts??? It's all for the betterman of the RX8. Please don't have only YOUR way! We want the RX8 to be a winner!

It's all right Spoonie. You're not wrong. It's just that somebody is way too stubborn. Please continue to post!

ggreen29

I posted this elsewhere:

The following info comes from CarTest2000, an interesting program available at cartest2000.com that calculates and predicts car performance. I plugged in the info that I could find & from MazdaUSA.com and ran the performance tests. As these are software projections they should be considered theoretical rather than factual.

Test.....RX8-MT.....RX8-w/4
0-30.....2.14.........2.45 sec
0-40.....2.91.........3.34 sec
0-60.....6.11.........6.78 sec
0-70.....7.35.........8.41 sec
0-100..14.44.......16.65 sec

¼ mile..14.4..........15.1 sec
.......@100mph...@96mph

Top
Speed...156mph.....155mph

Fuel Economy
City......20.4mpg.....19.3mpg
Hiway...28.6mpg.....28.6mpg

wakeech

my problem isn't that you don't think the engine's strong enough, it's that this is a completely redundant discussion that's been held for months, and continues to roll on on both sides... i'm very sorry to pick on you melvincat03, it was late that night, and i had a rough day... but there isn't anything new coming to the table on both sides: it's just annoying to continue to see it pop up in nearly every thread.

...all that aside, it's a good thing to voice opinions certainly when they're clearly thought out, and bring a new perspective (even on an old subject).

btw, i didn't know the JZE had sequential turbos: i figured they were parallel just like in the Nissan 6cyl engines (the V in the Z, and the I in the Sky hee hee) of the 1990's... neato. ummm... k. i'm gonna have to learn about Toyota's system now!! :D

Donny Boy

How about:
1. A larger fuel tank, say 20 gal
2. Struts to hold the hood up

chenpin

I would say that but I've seen people get in flame wars over production dates (mostly with the Supra) so I avoided that with my "one of the first" line. :D And plz dont nitpick so much! :p

TheSaCK

All this rev talking is kinda futile no? Its like which came first, the egg or the chicken.

I still havent seen or drove a rx8 yet (at the dealers), but i have driven the 2004 maxima, and i would have to say, for all those wanting more Torque, get the maxima. 1 exciting peice of a$$.

Maxima and the 8 are in diff class, but they both have 4 doors, and do about 6 sec in 0-60. Maxima's torque is crazy, I didnt have to down shift at all to pass by cars, the8 might be a more engaging experience on the race track, but on a daily drive and occasional FWY race, i think the maxima might be the car for you.

I am in the minority, so i wont bug you guys too much, although i am a big RX-8 Fan. Has anyone actually seen and driven a RX 8 in so cali?

Elara

How was the Maxima otherwise? I was designated driver for a batchelorette party last night, driving a 2000 Maxima...the steering drove me nuts, because it was squishy, imprecise, and I couldn't feel the road. I was also disappointed in the torque- I had to really step on it to get it to do anything(and this was with anything from 2-5 of us in the car- it didn't seem to make a difference). It also felt like I was driving a really big, heavy sedan (which I guess it is). I know they were fixing the torque issue, and from what you stated, TheSack, they did- but how was the rest of it?

Sorry guys, I realize this is off topic, but I've heard so much about the Maxima that the minute I heard that someone had driven a new one I was curious about their impression.

TheSaCK

The torque steer is maddening. I dont know if you driven the Altima yet, but its like that, cept more crazy. Even with the Limited Slip Differential (only comes in Manual) Its like riding a mule. Automatic (5 psd on the SE models) were kinda fun toodrive, just step on the gas and let it romp.

The manual is totally awesome, all that torque makes u pass anything with out down shifting. Going up hill? no problem, all the way through 1-6.

I was about to get the 8 but now i dont know. After test driving and seeing what the maxima goes for fully loaded. ($31k .. msrp is 34 fully loaded) I m not sure if i want the Rx8, but im still waiting to drive the 8 in hopes that it will be more of a engaging ride.

RotaryXTypeSH

until the Rx8 comes out.....

wakeech

production dates be damned!! which one was PATENTED first??? that's easy to see... unargueable.

anyhoo, it's my business to nitpick: keeping the facts straight is half the battle... but if it was that close (i didn't know that the 5th gen (it was the 5th, right?) supra was built in 1992) then you were definitely more correct.

m477

Actually, Mazda is credited with the first sequential twin turbo production car not due to the FD, but the JC Cosmo (3-rotor twin turbo), which came out in '88 or '89 IIRC.

wakeech

ahhhhhhh...