Nigandahu

Wow, did you guys see the performance page? The mustang got 5.7 0-60 and the Z 5.9. I know those cars can both do it faster then that. Also they got almost 15.5 seconds on the 1/4 on the Rex. These guys must not know how to drive whatsoever. Hell, Polak could go lay down better times then these guys. Its just sad that this has to be a publication that people read and probably believe.

Pkskull77

I don't think they are launching the cars, which in my opinion is a good thing. When you estimate the 0-60 times using launches, you create unrealistic expectations. A car can only be launched so many times before your replacing the transmission.

valpac

iTrader: (2)

Wonder how much money Ford paid for that article? (Since they took 1st AND 2nd place)

Mustang: 40 year old "styling" + 40 year old "technology" = a car for the 80's

The Muskank has every redneck in the area drooling.

They can have 'em

Shoafb

Hey c'mon man.... some of us have Mustangs too.



When it comes to flat out straight speed, for those that want that, the new Mustang is an easy choice. Performance through the curves is supposedly much improved also although I have not driven one myself.

320 hp and 330 tq has it's plus sides also. (mach1 not 05 stang)

shelleys_man_06

The Mustang sure is a fun car for what it's worth. Take a ride in a 69' Mach 1, or drive a 2003+ Cobra. Trust me, the torque produced will knock your socks off, and you'll be doing 180s and burnouts for days. I consider it more to be a street machine than a driver's car, like our RX-8.

BlueEyes

I don't know why you think it is 40 year old technology, or better yet, what technology does the 8 have that is so groundbreaking, or even advanced.

Pkskull77

I wouldn't say the technology is necessarily 40 years old, but using a V8 in mid level sports cars is becoming antiquated. Throwing a very large engine in a relatively light car sets you up for the lack of innovation attacks. Lets face it, getting 300 horsepower out of a V8 is not a big accomplishment these days. Infact there are older cars that get more out of a V8 than Ford does.

Getting 238 horses out of a 1.3-liter rotary engine is all that needs to be said. Mazda could have sold out and plopped a large displacement engine in the car like Ford did. The car would be faster, cheaper, but at the same time would have been nothing special.

BlueEyes

I know what you're saying PKskull, it just pisses me off when people say such stupid things. There is nothing special about a v8 making 300 horsepower, and there are older cars that do it, but, there emissions arent as good. I guess, i look at the rotary engine and think its neat and enjoy it, but I don't get knocked over by the technology involved in it. Let's face it, the rotary engine has been around for 30+ years, its nothing new.


Valpac's comments about rednecks and 40 year old technology only proves his ignorance.

Shoafb

[

Yes but this is only a 4.6L we are talking about, not a big block of the old day. I get 20 mpg around town ******* it and 24-25 mpg highway. If the formula works why change it? It is proven and reliable (ok so it is Ford though LOL). and you know what....... I can take it stone cold out of my garage, turn it off, wash it, crank it up again to only pull it into the garage shut it down while still cold......lo and behold it will still start in the morning. Can't say the same with a rotary engine. I don't mind the extra hastle of warming the rx-8 up, and having to check the oil every week but you have to remember a majority of other people will.

RX8_Buckeye

Here we go again... the horsepower per liter argument . An I-4, V6, or rotary engine that makes use of expensive technology to get its horsepower is not any "better" than a big V-8 with the same output. I don't understand why people have this opinion. What's innovative about the new Mustang's V-8 is that it is the MOST AFFORDABLE 300 hp on the planet. If it were so easy to put 300 hp in a $25k car, everyone would be doing it. Keep your retarded comments to yourself.

PS: The new 4.6L has 3 valves per cylinder and variable cam timing, neither of which the previous Mustangs had. I know that's not enough to appease those of you who insist that a "good" engine must have rotors, DOHC, or FI . What a joke...

BlueEyes

Damn straight!

Pkskull77

You can get 300 horsepower for less, just not in a sports car. The reason that no one else does it is due to the limited audience a Muscle Car appeals to. Take a look around, how many Muscle Cars are left? The Mustang, and the GTO. All the others are gone, because no one was buying them. However, I will admit that the Mustang continues to sell, but it is the exception and not the rule. If Ford continues to redesign the Mustang with a large displacement formula it will eventually catch up with them, the same way it caught up with the other companies.

All of the new gadgets on the Mustang engine are great; the problem is that Ford didn't invent any of them. Ford took someone else’s idea and reverse engineered it. For once I would like to see ford do something original with the Mustang. Before they even put the next Mustang on paper you can telegraph their design. Why can't they make a six fast? Why can’t Ford play around with something no one else has? They just keep coupling a huge engine to a light car.

People get down on the V-8 because large displacement engines carry terrible connotations. Generally they are associated with gas guzzling, and high insurance rates. While both may be appropriate, I understand that V-8’s are far more efficient than they used to be. Yes, I know the Rotary is bad on gas, just pointing out gas because you ask why people have issues with the 8-cylinder car.

Why is using FI a joke? Fi is a more efficient system than pure displacement. You get better gas mileage, and a lighter, smaller engine. All of these elements transfer directly to a better car.

I’m not the type who thinks the rotor is the best engine on the planet, I realize it’s shortcomings, and I have proudly owned several piston engines. At the same time I applaud Mazda for being the only manufacturer to run with the idea; having a variety of ways to accomplish the same task generally leads to efficiency and improvement, which is good for all of us. Mazda’s work is innovative because every time they make the rotary more efficient, it is the first time someone has accomplished the task.

And please avoid using statements like "retarded comments," makes you sound like a 5 year old. Although you don’t agree with my opinions, they aren’t wrong.

RX8_Buckeye

Oh really? Please tell me where. The only other cars I know of that offer 300+ hp are high end or luxury sedans... certainly nothing you can buy for $25k.

Ford is a relatively conservative company. This applies to the styling of their cars, as well as implementing new technology. This doesn't make them a subpar car company. For the most part, they wait to see if a new technology catches on and offers significant benefits before using it, rather than pioneering a brand new technology which carries significant risk. Generally, this has worked for them over the years. If you choose to dislike the company because they aren't on the cutting edge of engine technology, that's fine. I think you're in the minority on that one. I think most people would take a 300hp/320lb-ft V-8 over a much more expensive V-6 with all the bells and whistles.

Sorry for the confusion. I'm not saying FI is a joke. I'm speaking generally about people with the mindset that engines without the latest technologies are junk. You know the type, the "VTEC pwnz!" crowd who assume that anyone who drives a SOHC V-8 is a redneck. That mindset is a joke to me.

I should have been more specific. Retarded comment:
I don't think my choice of words was inappropriate.

Pkskull77

Give me some time on the engine, I am at work and don't have the time to look for one right now.

valpac

iTrader: (2)

Lighten up.

I live in an area of Atlanta where the Mustang is king. Thus my comment.

Do you want me to be politically correct? It's not going to happen.

rx8wannahave

What? With all respect, are you nuts? A V8 is sweeeeeettttt!!!

LOL, OK…like anyone cares you were innovating while getting your butt handed to you in a race.


I just don’t agree…I love cars for everything that they are, one engine might be better than another but the HP per liter thing just does not impress me too much. I can understand the great work it takes to get a lot of power out of a small engine, but at the same time I love what a V8 can do with all it’s lack of innovation and dated tech, it is still a great engine.



That’s just crazy talk…the V8 is the “muscle” in “MUSCLE CAR” As long as they can build them relatively affordable...alot of power for a good price will never be a bad formula.

Finally…

I think the RX8 is hell of a sports car, hence that is why I got one. I love everything about it and I picked it over a 2005 Mustang GT mainly based on looks, handling, and the rear seats. I am learning more and more about the rotary and I wish more companies spent money on them but it seems that you are hateing on the V8 or Mustang.

The mustang is not the best looking, but it’s front half does look VERY taugh and I’ll bet they will make it look better and better with time. I agree the rear overhang, rear lights, front lights, and rear headroom and seat comfort stinks but it does exactly what it was built to do…and it does it VERY WELL.

Update, according to the last few lateral test…the GT is right on the heels of the RX8…I know it wont beat it in the corners but it does it better than any other Mustang ever, or at least almost all of them.

You want to know my vote for the best engine in the world? The good old Chevy V8!!! Hands down!

Why, because it makes 400HP and get’s 18/28 mpg…and according to other cars I’ve seen…NOTHING comes close to achieving that. The Mustang’s V8 get’s a good 300HP and 18/25 but the Chevy gives you another 100HP and 3 more mpg in the highway.

Don’t nock the V8 or big engines based on old tech or lack of innovation type excuses. Any engine making 400HP and getting that fuel economy deserves an award. Meanwhile they ignore it and ignore it, that Chevy V8 is the best engine in the world in my opinion.

HANDS DOWN!

I love the rotary don’t forget, and don’t take this too harsh…I’m just saying that’s all. We are just having a good discussion… :D

TALAN7

In the end I think the mpg issue will hurt the RX8 more than the power issue. I mean there are 400 hp v8s getting much better gas mileage and making much more power. The efficiency of the rotary engine is only its size per amount of horsepower. 238 hp is not an impressive amount of power. 238 hp out of a 1.3 liter engine is. The problm people have is the perception that the smaller the engine the better the fuel economy. It seems to be going the opposite way these days. It used to be that the v8s of yore receive terrible gas mileage, but these days with blown 4 cylinder engines and new tech for the v8s, things are evening out. It's more about how you want your power. Some like big displacement, some FI, soon with hybrid tech we'll see electric motors acting as turbos powering the 2 remaining wheels. Perhaps Mazda should look into that technology aka Honda. If it could be packaged neatly and not too heavy that would be cool.

jsh1120

I"d agree. The RX-8 rotary's advantages in terms of weight, size, (resulting) placement, and relative power are balanced, unfortunately, by the engine's thirst for fuel. Oil will never be cheaper (except for short-term fluctuations) than it is today. A sports car that delivers gas mileage equivalent to a mid-sized SUV (with a much smaller tank) is, at best, a niche vehicle with limited long-term prospects.

As far as the Mustang is concerned, I'd be surprised if the GT with a V8 makes up more than 1/4 of all the model's sales. The GT is a "halo" vehicle. Even with the relatively good mileage the V8 produces, the bulk of Mustang sales will be the more fuel efficient V6.

Sorry, kids. There's a reason that Muscle Cars have largely disappeared. The Mustang GT generates ink for Ford and the existence of the V6 version enables Ford to sell lots of copies. In the long run, however, Ford's (and Mazda's) bread and butter are more fuel efficient cars.

rx8wannahave

Talan7, all true. I love sports cars and I like that they put their power down differently and get their HP differently too.

Poor Mazda has no one else to help push them to find the "holy grail" of the Rotary. The V8 or Piston engines in general have ALOT more money and time spent in research then the rotary might ever have. Unless Mazda or someone else can find a breakthrough in the Rotary, I think it might forever be a special but rarely used engine.

As long as the V8's make more HP and keep getting better with fuel economy, why change the formula? A rotary takes alot of work for both of thoes (HP/Fuel economy) and after so many years, decades, etc...the V8 is hitting it's stride.

I wonder what would happen if they would take out 2 pistons from the Chevy V8 to make a V6? Maybe 325HP and 21/31....LOL

rx8wannahave

Yup, also true. Again I say it...someone (the other auto companies) needs to talk to Chevy, Toyota, and Honda to learn what the heck they are doing to get another 2-4mpg out of their V6's or V8's.

If I ever was to keep my 8 forever, and with each drive it seems more and more likely, and the little rotary died on me after about 200,000 miles...LOL, I would stick the Vette's 6L V8 in it...now that is a MEAN MACHINE!!!

Deslock

Sheesh... what's with all the hate? The RX8 used to be on Ford's website (and is still linked to from it).

Each approach has its pros and cons. A larger, heavier piston engine can be tweaked for decent fuel economy and lots of power (especially low-end), but you can not build a lightweight, balanced, inexpensive 4-door using a V8. You can build a well-priced, heavy car with lots of torque/power that still handles decently.

shelleys_man_06

I think people are getting angry because for once the RX-8 didn't win a comparison test. Get over it dudes. A car is a car, and if you're in it for the bragging rights, then get out.

Pkskull77

DISCLAIMER: THE MUSTANG IS FASTER THAN THE RX-8, I ACCEPT AND RESPECT THIS FACT!

The discussion in this thread got heated when I questioned the logic of comparing an RX-8 to a Mustang. I think most of us can live with the fact that Edmonds liked the Mustang more than the 8. I just don't see why you would compare the two cars? An article comparing the Z, S2000, and the 8 makes sense. All similar sized engines targeted at the same market. Be my guest and compare the EVO, and the STI, or the new Mustang to the GTO. These showdowns are much more appropriate than the subject of the Edmonds article.

Without reading the article I could have told you that the RX-8 would lose to the Mustang, the formula is quite simple. Give a bunch of American Sports Car writers the keys to a very powerful car, and they will write a story about how fast it goes. Then throw them into a car with significantly less power, and they will write a story about how slow it is. That’s exactly what happened here. Apples to Oranges!

The RX-8 is a Sports Coupe and the Mustang is a Muscle Car. If you are a professional and are going to compare two dissimilar things, then accommodations must be made to level out the strengths and weaknesses. They should evaluate the RX-8 and the Mustang as if both cars lost their greatest attributes. The RX-8 should accelerate like the Mustang, and the Mustang should handle like the RX-8. This process never occurs. If you read the article the overwhelming theme is torque and horsepower. The Mustang won because it has more juice, that fact can’t be argued. If this is the case why even bother writing the article, the decision was made on the stat sheets? The comparison is no more plausible than a Mini v Hummer off road challenge.

If you think I’m off base step back and look at if from a marketing and developmental perspective, ignoring the obvious flaw that Mazda is owned by Ford. When Mazda was designing and eventually producing the RX-8 do you think they were concerned with Mustangs? Visa Versa, do you think Ford designers were considering the RX-8 when working on the Mustang? No. Mazda was aiming at the S2000 and the Z. Ford was aiming at the Firebird, Camero, and the GTO. Taking this into consideration, both cars are successful in their own right. Both cars should be appreciated for what they are, and most importantly how well the meet the needs of their targeted audience.

To me the article reeks of “Let’s throw the new Mustang a bone.” If they were really in the mood for Apples to Oranges why didn’t they role with EVO, STI v Mustang? The Mustang would have been handed it’s lunch, and as such they couldn’t Brown nose the Mustang. It just seems odd that they chose the RX-8 and the 350z, like they were not going to pick a fight with something they couldn't beat.

TheColonel

I don't really care what Edmund's says. They have a different perspective on cars than I think most 8 owners would agree with. For example, I know people who swear BMW's are the "Ultimate Driving Machine". I just don't like them all that much, at least at thier price. They just don't drive how I like my car to drive. Edmunds seeks to please a different audience than those of us who love our 8's. They just want different things out of a car.

Yeah, it's 1:00 A.M. That was pretty incoherent, so I'll post it. LOL, enjoy.

All That Was Once

...comparing the mustang to the 8 isn't the best comparison one could think of - but if they can compare a lamborghini murc. to an Evo 8 on topgear (that british car review team) I'm sure they could compare the new mustang against the 8 in a review that included a road course where the handling plays a major role - where Im SURE the 8 would blow away the mustang all day.

If an 8 can finish as fast as an m3 and the 350z around a test course... somehow I dont see the mustang finishing as fast.

A straightaway? Obviously a different story.

But at the end of the day, the fit and finish, the looks, the feel and handling, the options, the saftey, gas mileage, AND the reliability are all factors (some being much more important than others without question) that would contribute to the fact that in my personal opinion, and the opinion of anyone who has real taste in design - and the driving experience, would all say that the 8 would win a shootout between the new mustang. Give these two cars to a different magazine, and I'm sure you'd have a much different review.

It's like going to a yankees game with a red sox hat and jersey on and being suprised about being unfairly treated or steriotyped.