Just wondering. I've never bought a first year model car, and have been warned by friends to wait a year, but ordered an RX-8 because my '91 Dodge Steath crapped out. Are RX-8's problems: HP defecit, AC problems, MPG discrepencies, floor mat fitting, etc., within the "normal" range for a first year car? I'd like to hear from people who have had experience with a lot of first year cars.

Also do car manufacturers usually retroactively fix first year problems when they introduce solutions on second year models?

 

There are usually some small glitches associated with first year cars and by the looks of it the RX-8 is the same way.

You shouldn't expect the MPG to improve very much and same for the horsepower, but the other little things are usually taken care of as car model ages.

 

Im good at buying first years.When i bought my 00 celica gts that has been totally problem free which most jap cars seem be ok even in first years.I believe the new rotary is a little bit different story.I guess time will tell.

 

i believe it is mostly normal

 

QUESTION:
========
Important one for people waiting to buy next year model car:

When should we expect next model year (2005?) RX8s coming in? Is it July 2004 ???

 

there's always the price of being an early adopter... but the coolness factor makes up for it completely

Dont' worry that's what the bumper to bumper warranty is for.

 

I just sold my 6-year old 1997 Honda Prelude SH. I bought the car brand new, and 1997 was the first year model for that 5th generation prelude. However, they carried over many components (including the motor) from the 4th generation model. So, its not a perfect analog to this situation, but here's my 2 cents:

Small and/or intermittent problems are to be expected - like the oil baffle problem causing the oil light to come on. But major issues like a huge shortfall of their stated MPG (18-24stated vs 13 for me almost everytime, no matter how I drive), are not normal. I think the consensus on that is that the port campaign caused a rush job on a new ECU flash image. The image was later corrected, so only certain batches of cars are affected.

IMHO, my RX-8 has excellent build quality for a first year model. No shakes, or rattles. Very solid and competent feeling. The car feels like its been through very rigorous testing before being released. Besides the MPG issue, I am totally satisfied with this machine.

The minor issues can usually be straightened out in short order at the dealer service center & is paid in full by the manufacturer. Most stuff that is fixed in new models will be addressed for earlier editions of the car by the mfg issuing a TSB. However, some potentially embarasing, damning, or hard-to-prove issues (like the MPG one, I think) will simply be swept under the rug).

Anyways, like someone said, being the only one in your 'hood to own one (for now) - is pretty damn kool.

 

Astrlsrfr, I don't understand what you are saying about the mileage problem, which I have. What's the "port campaign" about? If the rushed flash ECU -- again, please explain what that is -- was fixed, and only applies to cars before the fix (mine; VIN 7--), why can't the fix be put on my car? I surely will follow up with the dealer, but I would like to come in armed with more knowledge than I now have.
Mitch

 

Astrlsrfr, I don't understand what you are saying about the mileage problem, which I have. What's the "port campaign" about? If the rushed flash ECU -- again, please explain what that is -- was fixed, and only applies to cars before the fix (mine; VIN 7--), why can't the fix be put on my car? I surely will follow up with the dealer, but I would like to come in armed with more knowledge than I now have.
Mitch

 

The ECU is a microprocessor & memory to manage the engine. It has software which can be "flashed" or programmed into it. By changing the program (aka firmware, or flash image), we can easily change the way the engine runs.

I'm just speculating on the cause of our poor MPG issue, unfortunately. But, from all the reading and chatting I've done, this seems like the most plausible theory:

0. RX-8s have been flashed with ECU code from the factory (say, v1.0 )
1. Boats of RX-8s start showing up in US ports.
2. EPA, US Customs, or some other government entity stops shipment due to emissions being too high
3. Mazda, in a panic, quickly puts together a new ECU flash image (say, v 1.1) which alters intake / exhaust timings, etc.
4. Those cars which get the new images are allowed to ship.
5. Shortly thereafter, Mazda realizes the new ECU code has bugs - leading to poor fuel economy
6. They then do another ECU build (say v1.2) which still meets emissions, but has improved fuel economy, etc.
7. Thereafter, all 8s get the corrected ECU code.
8. Mazda then realizes there has been a power loss associated with the latest code.
9. Mazda issues buyback program & restates power levels.

If you look under your hood, you should see the port campaign number where the ECU code was altered. Because of the randomness of the places to which the cars shipped, the VIN ranges would not necessarily have to be in order. ie, some earlier VINs may have arrived after some later VINS. So, we can't really use VIN ranges to know whose car has what code. What we really need is a way read the version straight out of the ECU. This prolly requires a special tool of some sort.

 

or how about the theory that the power has NEVER been there in the first place..

and that the whole 250/247 specs are simply marketing ploys... 250 to start, and 247 reissue to give initial impressions to prospetive buys that mazda is "staying on top of things" and issuing the most accurate numbers possible....


blech... Honestly, the car feels no faster in acceleration than a BMW 330.

In fact it feels like a regular car 90% of the time.

...Just venting since the car is pretty weak for a "238hp" hp.. feels well below 200, honestly. Maybe 160-180 at best.

 

Knock on wood, I have experienced no "problems" with my RX-8 after about a month. I really don't notice any HP trouble either. Like rodmeister, I traded my 91 Dodge Stealth (twin turbo, 300 HP) and for the driving I do (mostly city) the 8 has plenty of punch. On the Stealth there was considerable turbo lag so that off the line it jumped some, then when the turbos kicked in, it really throws your head back (no burnt rubber because of the all-wheel drive).

The 8 has a more steady power curve and right off the line it blasts up to 70 before I know it. I suppose the clock would show the Stealth being faster, but the 8 is more fun.

My AC is fine (recycle air selection helps), I notice no extra heat inside, my floormats are hooked, and it has all the power I need. My mpg has improved about a mile-per-gallon each fill-up.

I have no regrets about passing over the Z, TT, G35 and Crossfire that I studied before selecting the 8.

 

I could not disagree with you more.

I traded in an Acura RSX Type S, which has 200hp. And, I had a Lexus IS300 (215 hp) prior to the Acura. All I can say is that my RX-8 blows away both the RSX and the IS300 - no comparison!

This is one quick, fun car to drive!

 

I agree. A 160-180 hp car can not pull a 14.5 in the 1/4 if it weighs 3100 pounds (and I thought I saw 14.2 time slip a while back). I drove my MX-6 (intake/exhaust/48k miles) back to back with the RX-8, and the 8 was ridiculously faster, and my six weighs 2650 lbs. The 8 even felt torquier across the whole rev range and supposedly has two pounds less.
Don't worry about the numbers. Drive a car for what it is, not for what it's spec sheet says. The numbers should only matter if you are dragging the car, and if you are drag racing it, you aren't going to leave it stock anyway.
Just my two cents.

 

I own a new 2004 RX-8. Like all cars first year, last year, and everything in in the middle, first generation or last. It does have its corks. The left arm rest for the driver could be closer, the engine cover at the drivers right foot could be further to the right, the sun viser could be longer, but then what car doesn't have corks like these. And I've seen meany other cars with a lot bigger problem then these. When's the last time a friend has had to work on the engine of his mustang or firebird?
The MPG issue may be a little different than anybody expects, at least with me it seems I get better gas mileage at 90 MPH then 75 MPH. I'm in the Army and just took time off and went back to Washington state from Texas and back. What I have noticed is I get about 3 1/2 hours of run time per tank full, on the engine whether I drive in town or on the highway. I would venture to say some of your MPG depends if you drive in the 3-4 thousand RPM range or if your always above the 5 thousand RPM range. Normal driving I'm between 3-4 thousand range, and red line once and a while.
As for power the 03 Firebird, 03 Mustang GT have a little more horses and a lot more torque but neither felt as powerful, have the punch, or the thrill when you stomp on the gas.
Just for some back ground on the car I bought the car a month ago at 8 miles and now have over 7100 miles, rides better then a Bonneville and handles better then any sports car I've driven.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by astrlsrfr


If you look under your hood, you should see the port campaign number where the ECU code was altered.
[/QUOTE

Where under the hood? If that's the case, before I buy an RX-8, can't I look to see if the ECU code was altered or not? (And then not buy one that was altered at port, but buy one that was done at factory.)

 

I would also like to know how to locate and decode this "port sticker" We have a pretty large community here... it would be possible to do a poll or start a thread where each person gives their port sticker ECU info and average gas mileage. Its a stretch, but maybe we can figure out which version of software gives better gas mileage!

Another thought.. my Infiniti had a way to display diagnostics on the dash info panel. RX8's panel can display way more info than my 90' M30. Does anyone know if there's a magic key sequence (like the 5 second DSC button turning off the TSC) to display ECU or other info on the dash panel?

cc

 

You are saying that US customs or EPA randomly intercept cars coming into the country and put them through a full emissions test. Does anyone have any evidence that this is what happens?

Surely Mazda submit each new model of car to some sort of US emissions approval procedure to get permission to sell the cars in the US in the first place, and this happens well before they arrive in port.

Even if the cars were tested in port, it is highly unlikely there would be any surprises. Emissions regulations are not secret. Mazda will test their cars against them during development and could not "accidentally" design a car that didn't meet them.
Even if Mazda did do some last minute changes to the ECU, for whatever reason, there is no way that they wouldn't know what the power and fuel economy implications of their changes were. What are they going to do, change the variables in the ECU code at random until it passed emissions testing and then just assume nothing else was affected?

Any new code would have to be tested and effects on power and fuel consumption would be some of the main things they would test for. In fact I bet they could simulate their new code and have an excellent idea how it would perform before they got the engine anywhere near a dyno.

It astonishes me that people actually buy this idea that Mazda didn't know what the true power output of their car was when it first shipped. This is just not possible.

 

ChrisW -- Your faith in Mazda is touching, and very logically presented. The only problem is that it doesn't deal with the facts.
Sure, Mazda had tons of development knowledge, and should have known that the cars they were shipping to the U.S. could do what they were supposed to. And for sure Mazda would have been better off to fix them up to that standard before letting them into the hands of customers. So, you reason, because that was the only sensible thing for Mazda to do, they must have done it.
But they didn't. That has cost them a lot of money and embarassment. The question that remains -- which Mazda has been stonewalling -- is WHAT they did wrong (not whether), and what they are going to do to fix it.
It is scary not to know what happened. After all, development is done on pre-production vehicles, and that came up with power -- and, I am quite sure, based on forum experience -- economy better than what production engines are achieving. How can that be? Are tolerances less accurate? Are bearing surfaces generating more resistance? Those may be absurd guesses, but the point is that somehow production engines are different. And if that can hurt power, it might hurt durability as well. Mazda owes us an honest explanation!
Mitch

 

if you really want to wait for an 'honest explanation' my friend, then may i suggest you please go to lazboy and get a very confi couch to sit on and wait, because it may never happen. they flat out said that they would not release their dyno or what ever they use info's about the power loss. That would be one of the first thigs they should have done to those who bought the car under false impresions, but instead they slap us in the back of our heads..

 

Car companies are under tremendous pressure these days to bring new models to market. They design cars and then get them produced as fast as possible. That's why BMW will let Magna Steyr manufacture the new X3 in Austria, and why Porsche has the Boxster manufactured by Valmet in Finland. No need to retool the assembly line--just outsource and go!

I'm sure Mazda was feeling the pressure to get the RX-8 out, especially with the 350Z having been out for a year as well as other competing models like the S2000.

The ECU re-mapping sounds like a classic last-minute rush solution. We can only hope that they will develop a "hardware" solution on future models, instead of a "software" one.

 

What does 160hp feel like? What does 300hp feel like?

I drove a 3000GT VR-4 once..and it was rated at 320hp. I drove an Impreza WRX with 227hp which felt a bit faster in a straight line. That must mean that the WRX had maybe 330hp..maybe 340. LAF.

 

That's not quite what I was saying. I was only saying that the scenario of Mazda suddenly realising that their cars don't meet emissions regulations when they arrive in the US does not make any sense. And that Mazda knew what horsepower their cars were making from day one (i.e. the mis-stating of horsepower was a lie not a mistake).

I think Mazda Engineering are professional and basically know what they are doing (i.e. I don't believe that the cars got programmed with the "wrong" maps or that US emissions requirements were a surprise to them). But I think they just found it impossible to squeeze the necessary power out of the Renesis while meeting other requirements such as emissions, long term reliablility and acceptable fuel consumption.

So, to get back to the thread title, I don't think the power issue is just a typical "first year" problem and I don't expect there to be any quick fix for this.

 

I believe Mazda knew the power of the engine. It is stated as being 247 horsepower. Some time ago it was stated as 250 horsepower but that seems to have been based upon the Japanese 250ps - not the same. Correct figures to 247 were posted before the car was sold.

LATER the correction more recently was altered to 238 and the buyback. that's all. I also believe that the emmision JUNK has all to do with it.