Well, there you have it, folks. ayap's highly tuned butt dyno is absolute proof that an auto RX-8 outperforms a Z4 2.5i and has a sub-7 second 0-60 time. In the original post, it was stated that the 0-60 time felt like "mid-7s". Do you know how many countless hours you would need to spend in a variety of cars to be able to hop in one and be able to tell the difference between mid-7s and mid-8s?

As a previous Z3 owner, I can say that the speed of the car, while nothing special, is a bit deceiving. BMW engines have gobs of low-end torque, and the power distribution is very linear. So it may not feel as fast as the auto RX-8, which builds power higher in the RPM range, but I can tell you it certainly is faster.

Jerky RX8 owner hasn't responded to this thread yet, but he did respond to this thread, halfway down the page: https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-discussion-3/2004-rx-auto-specs-39717/

He sounds like someone who has actually raced his auto RX-8, though I could be wrong. So, is he qualified to talk on the subject? He thinks that a 7.6 second 0-60 is theoretically possible if you put the car in neutral, rev to 5000, then slam it into gear. A normal rolling street start, and you probably won't see faster than low 8s

 

Is that so? The RX-8 does not have any performance.... yeah, right...

Congratulations, you've confirmed you're a tool.

 

I'm a tool? That's nice to know. Do you consider the auto RX-8 with a 0-60 time in the 8s and a 1/4 mile time in the 16s or 17s to be "high performance"? Any way you shake it, the auto RX-8 is slow. My point is, everyone of this guy's posts are about the 0-60 time of the auto RX-8. If he wants to talk about performance, he should've bought something other than an auto RX-8.

 

First of all--the 6spd RX8s are not drag queens anydamnway--if anyone on this board was concerened about 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as their number 1 objective -- they wouldn't have bought ANY RX8! Yea the RX8 auto is slower than the 6spd--but guess what the 6spd isn't exactly lighting up the lights either. To get a 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds (which is no longer fast by sports car standards anyway) you need to drop the clutch at over 6 grand. This post has become as elementary as a high school Civic forum. What's so funny about this, is that the auto bashers act like folks that got autos were duped into believing the car was fast--even tho some auto owners act like that. 9 times out of 10 if acceleration was an auto owners main motivation--he/she could have gotten another vehicle for the price. This auto vs. manual bullsh@! is getting out of control.

 

ok ayap888 ill let you win your argument since it is your thread. if it makes you feel better. just curious. did you actually think you would not get feed back from others about this thread. im not bashing the auto 8. i think anyone who does have it is great. it a sweet car but does lack a little performance but then again what auto is performance fast. there is nothing wrong in owning an auto 8. not everyone gets the 8 for performance. thats why there are selections on what type of 8 to buy. the point is if you really like your auto then to you it should be the best no matter what anyone else says. so get back to your auto 8 thread only and have the discusions you want

 

if not then its just waisting what could be a good thread

 

IMO that's what threads are all about. A simple "query" and so much response....cool Perhaps the post should have been "so how fast does an automatic put a smile on your face" Oh...well far below 7 seconds :D Who can beat that??

 

"but then again what auto is performance fast"
:p E55, 911 Turbo, SL65, CL65, CL600, SL600, S600 are amongst the fast autos. They are not as fun as rowing the gears yourself though--but they'll blow the doors of 85% of the cars (production/stock) that they encounter.

 

buahaha.. this post is getting funny. Didn't know Mazda quoted a 0-60 time for the auto. Thanks for the find, Ike.

Re: the BMW Z4 controversy, I felt that STI_Eric was right on with his posts, but I guess ayap888 didn't read some posts slowly enough and then misunderstood something.

Peace now and I'm looking forward to more 0-60 times by the auto owners. Anyone 7.0?

 

Yours is the first post in this thread that makes any mention of the manual RX-8 vs. the auto RX-8. I don't see anyone in this thread bashing the auto RX-8. Stating facts != bashing. I have said it before - the auto RX-8 is a very nice car, but don't make it out to be something that it's not.

As for only being able to get a 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds in the manual by dropping the clutch at 6K, that's probably true. But to get the top performance numbers listed in the magazines, you have to be able to launch the car correctly. To get the 4.6 out of the STi or the 5.3 out of the WRX, you have to drop the clutch at around 5500. I've done this many times. To get the 5.3 out of the SRT-4, you have to know how to feather the clutch at around 2K. To get 4.6 out of a Cobra, you have to launch it correctly. This is the same with all cars. When the magazines test auto cars, they always brake torque to launch the car correctly. When they test manual cars, they typically drop/feather the clutch at a certain RPM to get the best launch.

 

Hey - don't forget the Grand National! That is a 20 year old automatic car that will blow the doors of a lot of today's "sports cars".

 

Grand National is a beast.--Remember the GMC Typhoons and Cyclones

 

What about the Cayenne Turbo? 0-60 in 5 seconds flat. Not bad for a full size SUV.

 

Especially since for 2005 they are selling a $20,000 performance package that boost output on the Cayenne Turbo to 500 HP and like 517lb/ft of torque. That'll be a sub 5 seconf SUV.

 

Originally Posted by DreRX8
"but then again what auto is performance fast"
E55, 911 Turbo, SL65, CL65, CL600, SL600, S600 are amongst the fast autos.

ok maybe i should of put for around 30,0000...........but yeahyou are right. maybe i should of learned to word th statement correct............after all isnt this how we got to all this............but you also have to think about it........we are talking about mazda not mercedes and porsche...........and there is nothing wrong with mazda just those autos are a little high class...........but again your right

 

"Why didn't they make the CL6 with a Clutch?" -- Jadakiss from the song Why
I can't agree more.

 

ANOTHER manual troll.

First of all, of course all Manual owners will try to compare their car to a Z4 3.0 liter. THAT'S THE REASON WHY I SAID 'AUTOMATIC OWNERS ONLY' should respond to this thread. Because manual owners will always compare their car to a Z4 3.0 liters running at 5.9 sec 0-60.

It's just plain silly to compare a Z4 3.0 to an RX8 Automatic as what STI ERIC assumes (how illogical it is to compare two different cars of different class levels). Yes, you can compare an RX8 Manual to a Z4 3.0. But if you have enough brains to understand my post, you should know I'm trying to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. That said - compare a Z4 2.5 to an RX8 automatic is the intelligent assumption for this thread.

Now I know that most of you defending STI ERIC are manual users. Well, that's it.... Manual users always bash the Auto users. Gimme a break. Grow up. People buy cars for their own use.

I don't care what any manual owners say here.. I'm not asking you. I'm asking for the EXPERIENCE of Automatic owners. Can you understand my question???? Bug off manual trolls!

 

You are THE MAN .... Yes! I'm did not buy the RX8 automatic last week because of the 0-60. But being an RX8 automatic - I just wanted to know the driving experience of other automatic owners. I spent $33000 for a loaded RX8. If I wanted to beat all the manual troll owners here, I would have bought that Nissan Z for $29000 sitting at the Nissan dealer right now and smoked you manual trolls at 5.4 seconds 0-60. But as an automatic owner, my curiosity is about that car (the automatic). As many car magazine reviewers said, the RX8 automatic seems like a totally different car from the RX8 manual.

Right now, I have two cars (only I drive those two cars). The Audi Allroad ($48000) and the Mazda RX8 ($33000). I have two cars because I easily get bored driving one. Now if I even wanted to beat the **** out of you trolls and the Nissan Z drivers. I can get rid of my Audi allroad and Mazda RX8 and get an Audi RS6 ($75000) rated at 4.3-4.6 sec from 0-60. So, try and understand my thread - its got nothin to do with knowing about manual drivers. I'm asking all automatic drivers to give their feedback.

Peace out!

 

:D I have no idea what the official 0-60 is for the AT. I'd guess mid-7s, which is no drag racer by today's standards. But it's plenty quick for any normal driving, especially with the extra low-end torque, and it's plenty quick if I decide to go fast on a country road. I test drove both the MT and AT before finally settling on the AT, mainly just for the everyday convenience. And I like both the paddle shifters and the cool little auto "stick shift." But at least with the sports package, which I have, I don't think there is that much difference between the two cars. Both handle unbelievably.

 

As an owner of both an MT and AT.. I can honestly say that in the 'real world' the MT is not *that* much faster through 0-60 than the AT especially if you 'manually' shift the AT.... Sure, you can drop the clutch on an MT and get that extra little burst of starting speed but again, in the 'real world' not many people are going to do that too often so therefore the differences are fairly minor.

Personally I cannot tell much difference between 6.8secs and 7.5 secs... so really, does it matter to me? Nope.. not one jot!

I suspect people want to have bragging rights on how fast their car is compared to someone elses... bit childish to me.. All I know that when I drive both the MT and the AT.. there is little real difference between the two.. overall.. in normal driving situations... except I don't like the long 2nd gear of the AT if I am letting the car shift itself in fully auto mode. As I tend to 'manually' shift in the AT almost all the time.. it really isn't that much of an issue however.. but it would have been better to have had a 5 speed Auto and shorten the gears a bit to give it a more balanced shift pattern.. Just my opinion though.. others may disagree..

So, as I said at the beginning.. there is not that much difference in real world usage between the MT and the AT.. There is a difference in performance of course.. but personally it's not enough to make be feel I am driving a *much* faster or *much* better performing car when I drive my MT.

'nuff said...'

 

Anytime I read all of this my MT AT bulls**t it just doesnt have a point. I have to fully agree with Mag66 on this because he owns both. There is different driving conditions and preferance for everyone. My AT I feel has all the performance I could every need for bumper to bumper traffic

 

Still trying to defend your dishonest posts? Let me reiterate your earlier post:

"It's really not that bad compared to the BMW Z4's manual of 7.1 seconds."

Nowhere in that statement does it say that you are talking about the Z4 2.5i. I know it, you know it, everyone reading this thread knows it. You were intentionally trying to be misleading. You were trying to insinuate that the auto RX-8 is faster than a BMW Z4 (ANY BMW Z4), when it is certainly not the case. I called you out on your misleading statement, and you start to bash and call names. I also like how when someone calls you out on something (me calling you misleading, nosubstitudec4s calling you a troll), you immediately call the person the same thing (refer to previous threads - you call me a fraud for posting facts, you call nosubstituec4s a troll). That just shows your childish "I'm not, you are" mentality.

How many times do I have to say it? The auto RX-8 is a nice car! I am only interested in the truth. You are only interested in twisting the truth to fit your own wishful thinking about what the auto RX-8 should be.

Please show me in this thread where anyone bashed the auto RX-8. There is not one single case of a manual RX-8 owner mentioning the differences between the auto and manual. It is all the AUTO owners who talk about manual and auto differences. I don't know what it is with you. Inferiority complex?

Instead of posting pointless threads about the performance of the auto RX-8, how about you:

1) Do a search on the bazillion threads already on the subject
2) Follow this simple 5-step process to find out for yourself:
a) Give a stop watch to a friend
b) Both get in the car
c) Start the engine
d) Press the gas pedal
e) Have your friend time how long it takes you to go from 0-60.

Pretty easy. Better yet, since who really cares about 0-60 times anyway (I have never heard of anyone racing to 60 then stopping) why don't you take your car to a drag strip and see how it performs? 1/4 mile times and trap speeds are a much better indicator of the overall performance of a car than 0-60 times.

 

Guys, stop with the name calling, please.

edit: on Second thought, never mind. I just read through this entire thread, which I should have done yesterday, and it's full of pointless arguing and namecalling. Closed.