Stavesacre21

maybe the inserted picture didn't show through your firewall, but this is what the magazine posting reads:

I was rather surprised to find the Mazda RX-8 excluded from the 12 best under $30K. One can only wonder why the perfectly balanced, smooth-revving RX-8 was so quickly forgotten. Torque issues aside, how can Mazda's flagship sports car, teamed with an impressive $26K price tag, not appeal to the sports-car crowd? Whne it comes to enthusiasts, the rotary engine as one of the most devoted followings i've ever seen.

and no, if you can't tell from others responses yet, they didn't reply to it. Others are right though, they very rarely do.

a gripe? I'd say it was a legitimate question, worded purposly without arrogance. You'd be surprised how much more people are willing to listen to someone who's not crying or shouting.

congrats on that as well bro! I found most of these thoughts pretty insightful. Very well written too!

otherside

So to sum it up; The public has lost interest, R&T has lost interest and Mazda has lost interest in the RX8. Dont put any money down on a 2008 order, you will never see it. Too bad really because it is really a nice car. Mazda just blew it on promotion and allowing bad press.

Ike

Allowing bad press? Mazda was the reason for the bad press...

User24

iTrader: (1)

That would be great news.

corvus13

iTrader: (2)

... to think that I thought it was a good thing that the RX didn't make the list. And WOW I didn't know that the Evo was so fast. Oh wait if I all I wanted was to go fast, I would've put a V8 in my Spitfire and spanked the pants off of any Evo on the road. How many times are we going to have this circuitous discussion of RX8 vs whatever? And it seems that many times people offer opinions without even owning an RX. I don't make it a habit of going to the Evo boards and making statements like "how about we both rev our cars to 9000 rpm and hold it there until someone breaks" I think we all know how that would turn out. My point is that Evo drivers want a certain experience and RX drivers want a certain experience. Each car is going to be better than the other with respect to certain criteria. I do want to ask one question of all the AWD crowd out there. What is the point to having a spoiler on an AWD? I only ask because every (and I mean EVERY) Evo and WRX I see here in Washington seems to have one that you could sit on. And I don't buy the downforce argument. It would defeat the purpose of AWD.

Later
Corvus13

Winfree

Truely a shame - especially for a car that people come up just to look at and touch it...
But then again, rarity will add value over time...

Glad you posted and if there are enough letters to the editor they may think there is still a group that buys their rag that wants to read more about 8s! When you sell yours don't sell it cheap!

Ike

Yes, all the Evo can do is go fast... Why does a wing defeat the purpose of AWD? Ever heard of the WRC, ever seen the cars that run in it? Yep, AWD and with wings, every last one of em. Those wings are actually used as a basis for the wings on the Evo and STI. If you don't think they provide downforce and better handling/stability at higher speeds then you're wrong.

Aipex8

iTrader: (1)

Bottom line is, the RX-8, even though a great car for under $30, hasn't had a refresh or power increase of any kind since it's inception (not to mention poor sales and recall fiascos). If the same was true for the 350Z, it may not have made the list either. Obviously R&T likes Mazda as 2 others made the list. If the RX-8 had a face lift or more HP this year it may have knocked either the 3 or the MX-5 off the list. As it is, it's a great car, but old news and R&T isn't going to print old news. Doesn't make me love my car any less.

Stavesacre21

I don't argue with the power and restyling, unchanged design argument. I'll admit that some changes woudl definetely yield some more press. Hopefully Mazda'll consider some of this input and put it into play before signing off with the 8 permanently.

I'm sure that i'd speak for a lot of people when i say that the outcome of a more powerful and completely worked over RX-8 would be exciting to see. I wonder if it would actaully turn any heads if the 8 rolled out of the factory with about 300 horse. Im not saying that power solves everything, or that i'm not content with my car now...just wonder exactly what kinda response the 8 would get in respect to press and sales if major changes like so were made.

dmc27

IMO - the 8 is the bastard child now. It will stay that way - no upgrades, no changes. But I hope that Mazda proves me wrong in 2 days . . .

musclecarconvrt

Way to go!
The key phase in your letter was "Torque issues aside". But for a little more power our car would be very hard to ignore. We just got a MazdaSpeed 6 for my wife. Really stinks that my wife's sedan is more powerful than my sports car... from the same company! I truly love my RX8 but the power issue is what got us "so quickly forgotten".

corvus13

iTrader: (2)

My point on the argument of the wings on AWD cars is this. If you are increasing down force on the REAR of the car, then by the laws of physics, you are decreasing the downforce on the FRONT of the car. If it is an AWD vehicle then you just negated the whole point of AWD...having all four wheels in as much contact as possible with the ground. But I will buy the stability at speeds argument. It is just that you are the first Evo person I've dealt with that understands that. And don't get your panties in a bunch over the fast comment. As I stated that is what the Evo does well. And that is what most Evo owners bought it for. Most RX owners buy their car for the overall experience.

Later
Corvus13

9291150

This is exactly why so many here think you're an ***. So you lump the 8 together with everyone else who had a gripe, namely RSX, Tiburon and TSX owners. Actually the RSX should have been on the list - if it was still in production. And we all know the Tiburon has no business being on any list. And the TSX? At best a nice almost sporty family car. Hardly a group that the 8 derserves to be in.

The title of the article isn't the newest or most improved car under 30, it's "12 best cars under 30" right? Even you should admit that the 8 at the very freak'n least should be a top 12 car. They choose the 350 as the overall winner, even though in a previous test they clearly chose an 8 over the mechanically identical G35 coupe. So why are you defending the inexcusable...unless you really are the permanent troll that you've been labeled as.

My view? Road and Track always had the least cred of all publications, and this just confirms that. As they admitted on their site, they dropped the 8 because its sales figures have dropped off, and because two newer Mazda's are included in the test. How does this make them a publication for enthusiasts?

9291150

And wings are gay on a streetcar.

Rootski

iTrader: (1)

And why not? Each is a sporty car under $30K. You'd be hard pressed to convince me the Tiburon and the TSX are any less deserving than the Civic Si and Scion tC. Even though it's fallen in with the boi-racers, the Tiburon is built much along the same lines as the 8 and the Miata-- a lightweight car designed to give excellent road feel, not neck-snapping power. And the TSX, that "nice almost sporty family car," is the car that Mid-Ohio Raceway maintains a whole fleet of to use as instructor cars in their courses... so I assume the professional racing instructors who use them seem to think they can get around the track rather well. Stop with the elitist nonsense and realize that other cars can be just as good as yours.

9291150

An elitist? For thinking my car is better than a Tiburon? Ok Rootski, why do you drive an 8 if it’s no better than a Tiburon? Or any of the 12 cars that were mentioned?

It’s not an opinion when I say the Tiburon weighs about the same as the 8, yet has 60 less horsepower from a minivan sourced V6 on a FWD platform, doesn’t even have a limited slip front diff. Yeah, that rips! Maybe I’m missing something. Oh, and your TSX argument, I said it’s a nice and somewhat sporty family sedan, that’s no insult and I bet that 95% of enthusiasts wouldn’t disagree with that assessment. And Mid-Ohio instructors would drive nearly anything that gets manufacturer support.

Jeez, this site is becoming laughable when you can’t say anything positive about your own car without being called an elitist or a fanboi. Ok, let me join in…my car sucks, I was a retard for buying it, should have bought a Hyundai!!!

dmc27

Settle down. The simple fact is that those cars DO belong on a list of under 30k sports cars, simply b/c the target market is "sports car" consumers - albeit a very loose definition. To argue that they don't belong there is nonsense, since each of the cars in that category has strengths and weaknesses.

Owners of any of those cars should be a little annoyed when omitted from a "comparison list" of under 30k. Period.

R&T sux. The article should say - "cars we decided were worthy of our testing, b/c we're either too high falootin to include [insert omitted vehicle here] in the testing, or we're just too f8ckin lazy to actually drive a 1/2 dozen or so more vehicles."

rotary crazy

that article is a piece of sh%^

saturn

Does that even make sense? Just because you're increasing downforce in the rear doesn't mean you're lowering it in the front. It's not a see-saw. And even if it were true you still want as much power to the rear wheels as you can to avoid understeer. Even though it's AWD, the goal is still to provide as much traction on the rear wheels as possible.

And in terms of the article -- who gives a crap? Do you guys go out and buy whatever car every magazine rates the highest? Comparisons are difficult to make on many of these cars because they're all very different. Figure out what you want, how much you want to spend, and go for it. The only reason whatsoever to care about what others say about your car is ego.

Rootski

iTrader: (1)

Cool it, sister. Made up statistics ("95% of enthusiasts"... did you take a poll?) and gross generalizations (of the Mid-Ohio instructors, who have forgotten more about racing than you'll ever know) aside, you cannot seriously argue these cars do not deserve a spot on the list alongside the RX-8. My original letter to them also said they needed the RX-8 as well, but they cut that out, probably because they already had another letter about it. I should have made that clear before. I never called you a fanboi. I think it's a bit of a dumbass term because you should stand behind your own automotive purchase, as I do, but you need to stop talking like other cars carry the plague or something. That's elitism. Just because it's a Hyundai doesn't mean it can't be a good car... it looks sharp, it handles well, and it's well-priced. So what if the engine's from a minivan? Keep in mind the Ford GT uses a pickup truck engine, and the 350Z uses a Renault engine used in everything from sedans to SUVs. That argument won't get you anywhere.

And for the record, I never said you should have bought a Tiburon. Go ahead and find anywhere in my last post where I said it's better than an 8. Can't find it, can you? And telling me I should have bought one sounds a lot like the "If you love it so much why don't you marry it!?" line we all used when we were about kindergarten age.

Anyway, the article is inherently flawed in its title... "The 12 Best Cars for Under $30k" implies they tested a LOT of cars and picked the twelve best... rather than picking the single best from a field of 12. Either the title or the testing method should be different.

corvus13

iTrader: (2)

Hey Saturn,

I understand your point but go out and push down on the back of your car and tell me happens to the front. Or for that matter put a board on two blocks and push down on one end and tell me what happens to the other end. The result might surprise you...

later
Corvus13

playdoh43

90210 rootski is refering to that you sound elitist when you made it sound like the rsx and tsx owners 'complaints are not as valid but the rx8 owners have every right to complain. there are plenty of things that those cars does better than the rx8 and vice versa.

saturn

That's not exactly correct though. If you have a perfect see-saw, adding 10 lbs of downforce on one end causes the other end to have 10 lbs of upforce because you have one fulcrum that is equal distances from both ends. But in a car you have two axles so pushing down on the back of the car with 10 lbs rotates the car around the rear axle which does NOT cause 10 lbs of upforce all the way up at the front wheel. It's an issue of torque.

I'm not saying it doesn't cause the front wheels to lift up a bit. It's just not equal to the amount of downforce on the rear wheels is all.

Ike

I didn't say whether they were legitimate gripes or not. I'm sure they got letters from just about every pseudo performance car owner wondering why their car didn't make the list. They were just showing all the people that were whining about cars that didn't get on the list, just like all the people whining in these threads. Yes, the RX-8 based on its merits alone probably should have been on the list, at the same time I understand why they left it off.

I agree with you about the RSX, it would have and should have made the list. I also agree on the Tiburon, Hyundai has made great strides in making better cars but the Tiburon as far as driver feel and bang for the buck goes is a turd.

The Z has been improved in a lot of ways over the years, I haven't seen a direct RX-8/G35/Z comparison in a long time. The one time I saw it beating the G35 it was only by a point or two and it would have taken very little to make the votes swing in favor of the G35 or 350Z. I was never defending R&T as much as I was understanding their reason for not including it.

Ike

The Evo and STI have plenty of downforce in the front as well, which magically increases as speeds increase just like the rear downforce... The best time attack cars in the world are Evos, Evos with huge freaking wings. I suppose they're just putting them on there to look cool.