The previous reviews have generally raved about the Rx-8 and even mentioned it in reviews of other cars as in a reference to the Audi TT: "responsive and secure handling but is not nearly as agile or enjoyable as the Mazda RX-8 or Porsche Boxster"

Still after the latest reliability study they had this to say:
"Reliability has once again dropped to below average."

...and they only recommend cars with average or better reliability (it was recommended last year).

They give the 04's the worst rating, the 05's the mid rating, and the 06's they predict as below average but have limited data...

Problem areas they list are

"engine minor" (04 + 05)
Fuel system (04)
Electrical system (04+05)
Climate system (04)
Brakes (04 +05)

Personally I am skeptical of the validity of some of their ratings, but it just goes to show the hit a car takes when reliability concerns are raised...again, they found the car "exhilarating" in the past and now are tempering comments.

 

Its reasons like that which made me stop trusting them. They claim to be impartial and whatnot but seeing how they pick and choose only the more popular cars, odd coincidence that, seemingly regardless of how good or bad they actually perform has made me a doubter.

 

That's completely mystifying.

Just for kicks, I totaled up the "balloon scores" on the '05 model, giving one point for the "poor", two points for "below average", three points for "average", four points for "above average", and five points for "excellent".

Total points in all categories- 64. Number of categories- 17.

Average= 3.76

...which would put it between "average" and "above average", and of course closer to "above average".

The car scores "worse than average" or "poor" in only three of the 17 categories, yet scores "worse than average" OVERALL?? By the way, one of the two "poor" ratings is for the brakes... Anyone who thinks the brakes on this car are "poor" has never stood on the binders really hard. Getting new front pads for squeaking shouldn't relegate the brakes to "poor" status, now should it!?

There are seven "excellent" scores and two "above average" scores vs. three of the bottom two worst scores and still it's "worse than average!?

WTF?

Even the '04 model scores an average of 3.3, which is at least "average".

I'd love to know how they weight these scales.

 

^ The 8 has some of the best stock brakes. Period. Can't imagine why anybody would rate them as "poor"

 

The only thing I can figure is that people who answered the surveys commented on the squeaking and possible pad replacement... And that earned it a "poor" rating.

If you read the site in detail, you see that an "average" rating in any category means that 3% of respondents mentioned a problem in that category. To get "below average" or "poor" means that more than 3% responded that they had problems. All it takes is 5% of respondents to report that they needed brake pad replacement for squeaking (and the survey doesn't delineate between "squeaky" and "the brakes completely failed"), and there's your poor rating.

 

So what makes them think the '06s are less reliable than the '05s, especially considering that's one more year for Mazda to iron out issues. It's not like the '06s suddenly had this huge design change.

 

Good question. The reliability of the '05 is reported to be better than the '04, so what would lead one to believe that the third model year would be LESS reliable? Typically cars get more and more reliable as the model years roll on, especially if there are no major changes to the car...

 

ummm, they forgot to include the biggest PROBLEM AREA of all:

"mazda dealership service (04, 05, 06)"

for the cosmetic and mechanical damage they'll inflict on your 8- whether u like it or not- just for bringing your car in.

 

I think when they give the overall rating they compare it to other cars of the same year. While the individual categories may come in as above average, etc, the overall average for that particular model year is higher than the average for a "below average" reliability forecast.

And of course one of the reasons i bought the 8 was because it was recommended reliabilty wise by CR. Oh well.

I do agree that the brake problems are people thinking that the squeaking is a serious problem. I filled out one of these a couple years ago when I was a subscriber. I had an ABS computer go on my truck - about a thousand bucks to fix. Now to me that is a serious problem, not squeaky brakes.

 

I seem to recall them raving about how well the brakes performed. Now all of a sudden out of the blue because a tiny minority had brake squeal, which I might add is NOT a design factor of the car NOR the car's fault, the brakes are suddenly bad. I call BS

 

Consumer Reports is about as qualified to evaluate an RX-8, like the Christian Science Monitor can evaluate Britney Spears.

CR is no place for an enthusiast to get information on a car- unless it's a Crown Vic.

 

funny how these idiots do that the same month that a Long Term road test was finished by (crap, forgot the name. C&D maybe?) and they still love the car.

 

That may have been true 5 years ago, but CR has definitely changed. The magazine that once rated everything on how "practical" it is is a thing of the past. Read their comments on contemporary sports cars—including the RX-8, which they love—and I think you'll find their comments are pretty much on the money.

Their reliability ratings are not "subjective"—they're simply the result of counting over 800,000 responses to their annual subscriber survey, calculated from the problem rates for 14 trouble spots (engine, cooling, fuel, ignition, electrical, etc.) and comparing them with the average for the model year. Extra weight is given to the engine, cooling system, transmission, and drive-system ratings.

 

If that is the case... They STILL have some explaining to do. In the five categories that encompass what you listed, the '05 has three "excellent" ratings, one "above average" rating, and one "poor" rating (for engine minor). All of these are the same or better than the prior year, showing a trend of improvement.

I wonder if "engine minor" includes oil consumption and/or is a result of the recall(s) for engine flashes? Other than that, I am aware of no consistent minor engine problems. I filled out one of these surveys last year and don't remember the questions...

I'd also like to know how the "climate system" went from "poor" to "excellent" in a single year, even though I am glad to see that it improved..
Obviously I think the rating is BS, but a "tiny minority"? There are quite a number of people on this site who've gotten new pads because of squeaking, myself included. How do you reckon it's not a design factor of the car? Mazda equipped the car with brakes that squeal, and they designed it that way... Not with the intent "hey, let's make loud brakes!", of course, but it was their design. Of course that doesn't mean that they're "poor"...

 

I don't understand the hate for CR.

CR isn't biased. I've said this many times before, but CR LIKES the car, they just can't recommend it because people report a lot of problems with it. Sheesh. You look at CR for quick blurbs about the car, then you look to see if people have been having a lot of issues with the car or not. Apparently people HAVE been having issues with the RX-8. You're kidding yourself if you think the RX-8 will be as reliable as a Camry or an Accord.

As for the enthusiast thing, read the blurbs. They think the 8 is a great driver. In some of the other blurbs, CR says the RX-8 is better than the car they're discussing. In blurbs for OTHER CARS! I think they mention the 8 being more nimble in their little blurb about the 350Z.

 

The trend from 04 to 05 would indicate that the 06 would be more reliable,
BUT the (partial) data indicates otherwise. That does indicate a problem!

Many complex products suffer moving from the "new product intro" phase into the "just crank out one more" phase of the product life cycle. In the NEW product everyone including engineering is very intent on fixing problems quickly. In the PRODUCTION phase much of the attention is focused elsewhere as in the CX7.

Note also that as NewYorker states that CR is not evaluating the reliability. CR is only reporting the reliability results reported by the owners. For example if the 04 and 06 have the same repair records, then the data indicates a larger percentage of the 06 owners taking the time to return the survey were complainers.

 

Well... I don't know how often they do these surveys, but I think they're usually in the spring. Partial data is probably available mostly because the '06 models weren't even on the dealer lots when the last survey was done. I've had my '8 since February, and I think the last CR survey I completed was around that time, maybe March or April.

 

keep complainging more everyone... it only hurts us more

 

For those that aren't aware of the fact that the majority of performance brakes squeal, they could have an option that buyers are offered. Would you like brakes that stop you in a shorter amount of distance with the side affect that they may make noise if babied or a set of brakes that take a performance hit but will be less likely to make any noise.

Wait don't they already offer replacement pads if a customer complains about squealing brakes? Oh yeah they do, problem solved. Except the customer is made to believe that the brakes are defective because they squeak...

 

But the very fact that they get replaced is indicative of a "problem area" when they survey owners.

BTW, I never babied my brakes, pounded the hell out of them from high speed to make 'em stop squealing, and eventually gave up on fixing the problem... which was, in fact, a problem, as they squealed full-time, no matter how hard or soft the pedal application was apart from braking so hard that the occupant(s) of the car nearly got a mouthful of dashboard. Got 'em replaced. I've had "performance brake"-equipped cars before, and have known people who had very serious performance cars, and I've never seen (or heard) anything like it before. Don't pretend that people who tire of hearing screeching every time they hit the fat pedal are pussies who don't understand automobile brakes.

 

Could bedding the brakes help fix this problem?

 

The problem didn't come up until after there were 5000mi on the brakes, so it seems unlikely that bedding was the issue. I've done what I can to bed the new ones properly, though since they're a different specification of pad, I doubt that the outcome of this will adequately diagnose what happened with the original pads to make them so noisy.

Note that this thread is the first time I ever mentioned getting new pads, as I am not worked up about needing new ones. I just casually mentioned it to my service guy when the car went in for the engine recall, and he said he'd get new pads for me. Far be it from me to turn down new pads when the originals have over 9000mi on them, the pads are free, and it would get rid of the VERY annoying squealing. I was out an hour of my time standing at the dealer waiting for them to be replaced, I figure that's a decent tradeoff for fresh pads.

 

Very true the service departments have been very good since the TSB has come out and those of us that know don't make a deal about it like handing them the TSBs (a big stack) and saying "fix these...." We are more informed and that does help. We know how to communicate the problem that we find. Sometime it is something little that not everyone would notice like the parking brake tab that tends to snap off (can be seen if the brake is engaged, tab breaks by the base of the handle) if you can see the metal for the lever then the tab is broken and they will replace the entire lever for free.

Props to those that make these available for us.

 

Funny how everyone was on Consumer Reports nuts when the RX-8 was a recommended buy, now that it is not, Consumer Reports is biased crap. When buying a car, I might take a look at what Consumer Reports has to say, but you get the best information from the owners themselves, and automotive forums.

 

The owners are the ones who are reporting the issues that go into the reliability reports, dos. The poor feedback from owners concerning reliability is why CR rescinded their "recommended" rating.

If they were truly biased against the RX8, why would they have recommended it in the first place?