'09 RX-8 R3 Short Take Road Test - Car and Driver
11-06-2008, 02:04 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'09 RX-8 R3 Short Take Road Test - Car and Driver
Sounds like they still appreciate it for what it is; but with so many high-horsepower cars I'm sure they wouldn't mind a twin-turbo in the next RX!
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
2009 Mazda RX-8 R3 - Short Take Road Test
New sports coupes arrive like summer lightning and depart like uneaten guacamole: ignored, slowly fading to brown, awaiting the inevitable flush. The six-year-old Mazda RX-8 languishes through 2008 with sales the Hubble telescope wouldn’t register: just 2591 units through the end of August.
Mazda isn’t giving up, however. The Hiroshima headquarters considers rotary engines integral to its identity, so the RX-8 stays, a place keeper for a future all-new rotary engine currently code-named “16X” and due perhaps by 2012.
Meanwhile, the RX-8 gets a little stir to keep it green. Most obvious is the new front bumper that flares the grille and brake-duct openings for a more dangerous, grinning-cobra menace. Four glassy robot eyes now fill the taillight teardrops, the exhaust tips are bigger, and fresh wheel designs adorn the various trim levels.
New sports coupes arrive like summer lightning and depart like uneaten guacamole: ignored, slowly fading to brown, awaiting the inevitable flush. The six-year-old Mazda RX-8 languishes through 2008 with sales the Hubble telescope wouldn’t register: just 2591 units through the end of August.
Mazda isn’t giving up, however. The Hiroshima headquarters considers rotary engines integral to its identity, so the RX-8 stays, a place keeper for a future all-new rotary engine currently code-named “16X” and due perhaps by 2012.
Meanwhile, the RX-8 gets a little stir to keep it green. Most obvious is the new front bumper that flares the grille and brake-duct openings for a more dangerous, grinning-cobra menace. Four glassy robot eyes now fill the taillight teardrops, the exhaust tips are bigger, and fresh wheel designs adorn the various trim levels.
11-06-2008, 08:41 PM
#6
is adjusting valve lash
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: hollywooood!
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ i read 3060... so which is it?
either way, the new one is more flubby. but that extra 20lbs and lower #s hardly does the R3 any justice... the looks on that car is awesome. its growing on me.
the higher mouth entrance on the front end looks easier to modify assuming the vfad is in the same place...
either way, the new one is more flubby. but that extra 20lbs and lower #s hardly does the R3 any justice... the looks on that car is awesome. its growing on me.
the higher mouth entrance on the front end looks easier to modify assuming the vfad is in the same place...
Last edited by TrochoidMagic; 11-06-2008 at 08:44 PM.
11-07-2008, 09:24 AM
#10
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-07-2008, 09:34 AM
#11
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's likely they're testing a very green engine. Car & Driver had times nearly as bad with their long term 8 when new, and at 30000 miles they did the usual 5.9/14.5 times.
Surprised the new gear ratios didn't help, particularly with the trap speeds.
Surprised the new gear ratios didn't help, particularly with the trap speeds.
road and track or car and driver
11-07-2008, 02:29 PM
#13
Registered 407 Abuser
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Markham/Mississauga
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-07-2008, 02:58 PM
#14
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to a couple of tests I've read on the '09, an additional shift is required before 60 mph is hit with the different gear ratios so this explains a slower 0-60. Anyone with an '09 verify this?
11-07-2008, 04:44 PM
#18
Drive it like u stole it!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: mobile, al
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bc of diff gearing....4.77 vs 4.44...but i was thinking it would hit 61 or 62 at least......but thats only on the r3...not the touring, gt,or sport.....so someone with an r3 needs to chime in...or make a vid or somethin
11-07-2008, 05:23 PM
#19
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I was gonna say like 67-68 for mine.
C and D just says this which I guess depends on how long you hold the rev - I'm sure they take it to redline but probably not to fuel cut as they are doing a full acceleration run - not just to 60 and quit.
The low-torque RX-8 was always tricky to get rolling without a stall. A shorter rear-end ratio in all 2009s—4.78:1 versus 4.44—means less revving and clutch slip in everyday driving. However, the second-to-third shift is now perilously close to 60 mph, which likely slowed the acceleration runs (6.7 seconds to 60 mph versus 6.5).
11-07-2008, 07:32 PM
#22
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW, years ago when Best Motoring released the Factory Fighters dvd, they tested the Mazdaspeed RX-8 against the standard model. The MS came with the full coilover suspension, body kit and 4.77 rear end.
In their 0-60mph and 1/4 mile testing they found the standard model (w/ 4.44 gears) to be faster -- I think they said the 4.77 geared RX-8 wasn't in the strongest part of its powerband for very long, before an upshift was needed.
In their 0-60mph and 1/4 mile testing they found the standard model (w/ 4.44 gears) to be faster -- I think they said the 4.77 geared RX-8 wasn't in the strongest part of its powerband for very long, before an upshift was needed.
11-07-2008, 07:40 PM
#23
Future Rotary User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it sounds like the new gen has a better engine setup in terms of reliability, but with the 4.78 rear end doesn't help things any. Someone refresh my memory, what was the ratio with the FEED gear?
