I thought the holes on the visor were an excellent idea too. I too was surprised about the petty BS they brought up in the article. Not enough to cancel my subscription though. Let's get the letters sent, Im sure one will get published.

 

Hawgwild,

Search with the terms AC or A/C and you'll find the thread about it. I think its in the DIY. Pretty easy fix that has stirred up a lot of conversation and theories of thermodynamics.

 

These articles are great and will scare people away from the RX-8 and how great it is will continue to be our little secret. :D

Kind of like when people from Portland Oregon don't tell everyone what a great city they have because they don't want people moving there and messing it up.

 

The 8 does have it's short commings, but all I have to say is go drive it in the mountains then find me a car that is equally enjoyable for the same price. Oh yah and when you find that car, then think how can I fit 3 people and food for a day at the campgrounds.

 

I think that the article felt negative. I was at a friends house last weekend. When I was there, I ran into her brother, who I don't see very often. He mentioned the C&D article and said that it doesn't make the car sound too good. Then he asked if I had any of the problems that they mentioned.

I haven't had a chance to take him out in the car yet, but I can tell that he thinks that I made a bad choice from the article.

 

They praised the car with a highly negative tone. It's like they wanted to hate the car from the get-go, but they couldn't find anything huge to fault it on, so they were just all pissed off.

 

^ What he said

 

I read it.....it's what the rest of the non-rotary purist society would think about it.....it is what it is. It's quirky, it's a fuel guzzler, it requires a bit of extra thought and care...but damn if I will ever give up the keys to it.....I'm rotary till I die...

 

Interesting... then what's the deal with this?
https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...13&postcount=1

You change your mind pretty quickly :p

 

^well he said he's getting a first gen 7 after he sells the 8, so he's still in the rotary fold :o

 

oh yeah i actually bought that issue from the stands just so I can keep it archived with all the OTHER RX-8 related mags that I have collected (earliest one being the April 2002 Road and Track issue, when Sam Mitani test drove the prototype :D )

should be a good read a few years down the road :o

 

I said I'd get a 1st gen RX7 for my rotary fix... :D

EDIT:haha Zoom Zoom got it.... :p

 

I thought the article was 100% realistic, except that they got BETTER gas mileage than I get. I'm still trying to figure that out, and I drive very moderate.

Someone else said this and its true, they generally nit pick on these long term tests, very few sound positive, but the long term test, well, its kind of like this... Does anything (or anyone) turn out as good as they seem on the "showroom floor?" Not in my miserable life!

I've been reading all the car mags since I was 9 (that was 33 years ago) and Car and Driver was and still is the best. They'll diss any car no matter how much ad revenue they get from it. No so with Motor Trend.

Finally, the GTO/Mustang thing. Sure, the GTO has the performance numbers, but it looks like what you find in the toilet when the Aztec gets up from a dump. The Mustang is a very handsome design, a very American look, almost a Brooks-Brother suit classic. I thing they were saying that most people don't want to be seen driving something that looks like a bloated Cavalier, even if it corners and accelerates well.

 

The new Mustang's no looker either. It was cool for the first two weeks they were out until 90% of the population owned one, now they're just boring.

Anyway, you seem to think a car should win a comparo just because it looks better, despite losing in nearly EVERY category? I'd be proud to be seen driving around in my bloated Cavalier, especially knowing that it would blow that crappy new Mustang out of the water in every way.

 

Looks are subjective, performance is not. I don't want to read a performance comparison between two vehicles that declares a winner based on what the author thinks about something. I don't need the writer to score the looks for me; I can decide which looks better to me on my own. Declaring a winner in a performance comparison soley on the merits of looks is stupid.

Maybe for their next article they can pit an RX-8 up against a Corolla and pick the Corolla because it doesn't looks so 'weird' in their opinion.

 

No, the Corolla would win out because it gets better gas mileage. I like C&D, I usually agree with their choices, but damnit, why does EVERYONE harp on the gas mileage of THIS car? No one ever says anything about how the Mustang GT gets very similar mileage, or how horrible the mileage is on their MB or BMW. It's a freakin' sports car, get over it already. Do people just HAVE to have something to complain about in a car? It's not like we're getting the mileage of a 550 or 575 Maranello (for those of you keeping track, that's around 9/15). Fuel efficiency and emmissions control have increased tremendously in the rotary with the RENESIS and side exhaust ports, praise that, don't knock the "mediocre" fuel consumption.

My '94 V6 Mercury Cougar got 1-2 mpg better than my RX-8, that's right, I got 17-18 mpg in the city and 24-25 on the highway with a 145 hp 3.0L V6. Compare that to the 15-16 city and 22-23 highway with a 238 hp rotary and it doesn't seem so bad. The mileage is NOT that bad. This isn't a freakin' Prius. Fun always comes with a price tag, now shut up and enjoy the drive.

 

I see your point, but I think the numbers were close enough and the people at C/D so strongly dislike the GTO's looks (as I do) AND, I think they were thinking (As I was) that this car's look is so poorly suited to the image that GM had in mind, how could they be that dumb and blind? It was just a bad move to not invest more in that car and the sales numbers have borne that out.

But again, not to say that you're wrong, they just went with the subjective on that one, and most of the time their comparisons are about 90% objectrive.

 

The GTO sales are meeting expectations and it's selling so well at near-sticker pricing that it, along with the Corvette, are the only cars not included in the "Employee Discount" Program.

 

Actually, that doesn't even take a GT. I just had a rental V6 Mustang (the new one) for 4 days. I was not driving like a maniac, didn't push it and got about 20 mpg in mixed driving (50-50 % city / highway). That's maybe 1-1.5 mpg better than my RX-8, and it's just a friggin' V6 Mustang - not even comparable to the 8 in any way.
I'm all for getting the best mileage possible - but we have to be realistic. The RX-8 gets decent fuel mileage for it's league (not the best, but not nearly as bad as people make it look like). Unfortunately, there are some folks who are experiencing way worse numbers than the norm - and they are obviously vocal about it. If there were no such extreme examples, this issue would be non-existent.

 

Perhaps there is something wrong with the A/C in C & D's test example. The A/C in my 8 will run you right out of the car if the fan is turned past 2. Not only that, it produces cold air within seconds of hitting the button. Without a doubt, it's the best A/C system I've ever owned. That's saying something because my '02 Explorer has the optional dual A/C system. That system works good, but unlike my 8, it does take it a few minutes to start producing really cold air.

1.3L

 

You are definetely in the minority.....

 

I am surprised nobody caught this:

"L.A. to Phoenix, all freeway, and this thing is getting only 19 mpg. It's a six-speed, for Pete's sake!

Then in the actual article it says that the guy took it on its only trip from CA to AZ (aka LA to Phoenix) at triple digit speeds most of the way . . . Um and still got 19mpg and is complaining?

Maybe the trick to better gas mileage with the 8 is drive 100+ everywhere you go!

 

Actually, that doesn't even take a GT. I just had a rental V6 Mustang (the new one) for 4 days. I was not driving like a maniac, didn't push it and got about 20 mpg in mixed driving (50-50 % city / highway). That's maybe 1-1.5 mpg better than my RX-8, and it's just a friggin' V6 Mustang - not even comparable to the 8 in any way.
(Tamas)

I haven't posted in a long while, you know life.. I just came back from a test drive, and oh
yes, I want this car!! But back to point... This was a good comment, and I have a few theories why people freak out on the gas mileage:

1. Many people understand a V6/V8, but don't understand a rotary.
To most average people, they know that a V6/V8 Mustang would haul butt, and drink a lot
of gas, to some people its simple, more cylinders, more power, more thirst. Thats why no
one fusses with gas mileage of the run of the mill sports car, low gas mileage is expected.
(And yours is unique, and I'm jealous! HA HA) How often owners of this beautiful vehicle
someone asks you what's under the hood, you say Rotary engine, and they look at
you crazy? Again, part of the uniqueness of the RX8 is the engine, and part of the problem,
they are not everywhere, and not known to the general public.

2. Believe it or not, many people either dont consider the RX8 a sports car or think its a
econobox.

I kid you not. I work for Ford Credit, and I get to talk to potential customers for the RX8.
(Even though it is handled by Mazda USA, I know) and many ask me about it, and ask me
"Wow, thats a cool small car.. must get great gas mileage!" or "It seats four? I don't want a 2 door sedan!" I do properly educate our customers, even better I refer them to this site,
and always close "Go take it for a test drive, you will be pleasantly surprised!" The 2 doors
help, but the shape and size throws people off on what this car is supposed to be.

So I suggest don't let the gas thing bother any of you. They just really don't know, haven't
researched, and I sure we all have been there once that we believed something a friend or
family member said.

Ooops... realized I just hijacked the thread.. sorry, its been a while!
Back to thread!

 

I used to be a big C&D fan years ago(have been a reader since '75, Lotus Esprit test issue). Seems to me Mr.Bedard has become so jaded to sports cars the last few years. his focus being the comfort/practical qualities of a car. No surprise then- the not so subtle dislike for the 8. All of us on this forum recognize the brilliance of this car and, like you, I am disappointed with C&D's appraisal of this remarkable machine. Sports cars are supposed to be fun, and surely the 8 is the best in it's class. You know it, I know it, Bedard and Co. just don't get it... Doesn't change a thing.. the 8 is an icon for us rotary enthusiasts.

 

Did anybody note that their 0-60 and 1/4 mile times went down after 40K miles? Not just down...but down enough to match the R&T's 5.9sec 0-60 times and the 14.6 1/4 mile times????

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=4