Notices
RX-8 Media News Report the latest RX-8 related news stories here.

New Car and Driver article.. thanks to BryanH!

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:40 AM
  #1  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
New Car and Driver article.. thanks to BryanH!

Sorry bout my lateness... had a fun nite
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:41 AM
  #2  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Page 2
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:42 AM
  #3  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Page 3

Last edited by Hercules; 03-02-2003 at 01:15 PM.
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:42 AM
  #4  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Page 4 is missing so I'll leave a temp pic here...

Last edited by Hercules; 03-02-2003 at 01:14 PM.
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:43 AM
  #5  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Page 5
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:45 AM
  #6  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Page 6
Old 03-02-2003 | 01:36 AM
  #8  
zoom44's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 21,958
Likes: 115
From: portland oregon
thanks herc! i need to get this mag!

favorite line: "but the rx-8 does this at .91g's a considerable margin beyond the cornering capabilities of hte two competitors":D :D :D
Old 03-02-2003 | 03:01 AM
  #9  
m477's Avatar
rotary courage
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
From: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Also, keep in mind that the RX-8 had the pre-production interior, with parts just painted instead of really being finished, so I'm sure that the RX-8 will only improve in this area as it moves to production...
Old 03-02-2003 | 04:01 AM
  #10  
ZoomZoomH's Avatar
Mulligan User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,612
Likes: 2
From: caddyshack
holy crappers, did you guys read this line in the RENESIS blurb:

"oil consumption has fallen to one quart PER 10,000 miles"

the 13B in my 91 uses 1 quart every 2500 miles!!!
Old 03-02-2003 | 07:47 AM
  #11  
Spining Ncnratr's Avatar
Big Bad and Black.
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
From: Ohio
I'll be on the look out for this. THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!:D

Like that "From the drivers seat the 8 is the best RX ever."

Last edited by Spining Ncnratr; 03-02-2003 at 07:52 AM.
Old 03-02-2003 | 08:17 AM
  #12  
Grimace's Avatar
Certifiable car nut
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
From: Toronto, Canada
Cool beans!
Nice review!
Old 03-02-2003 | 10:30 AM
  #13  
eccles's Avatar
Prodigal Wankler
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,761
Likes: 2
From: Austin, TX
Originally posted by zoom44
favorite line: "but the rx-8 does this at .91g's a considerable margin beyond the cornering capabilities of hte two competitors":D :D :D
My favourite is From the driver's seat, the new RX-8 is the best RX ever.
Old 03-02-2003 | 11:03 AM
  #14  
wakeech's Avatar
mostly harmless
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
From: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Originally posted by eccles
the new RX-8 is the best RX ever.[/i]
...yikes... you think the RX-7 design team is gonna let that hold true for very long??? :D
Old 03-02-2003 | 11:30 AM
  #15  
SA22C's Avatar
Oversteer = Bliss
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: Sask, Canada
"From the drivers seat the 8 is the best RX ever."
Them's fightin' words!

If Car and Driver likes the lightweight RX-8 now, just think of the pools of saliva when the car loses 200 pounds thanks to the rear seats being deleted and gains another 50 horsepower. I would just like to say now that all the doubters have nothing left in their ammunition box. This is a complete turn around from Car and Driver, considering their lackluster review of the previous red pre-production model.

I liked that while they thought that the mid-range torque was lacking, they counterpointed that with the assertion that using the 9500 rpms available to the Renesis was no chore. I wouldn't be too concerned about the gas mileage either, as they were driving the pants off the car. If one were to drive it reasonably, the mileage will go way up. Case in point: day to day, my '79 RX-7 gets ~18 mpg. At the autoX track: ~11 mpg.

Basically, for Car and Driver to like the car this much, with their bias towards American Muscle, it's definately a winner. We should all see a new RX-7 now.
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:24 PM
  #16  
threeputtwash's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
From: So Cal
Am I the only one who noticed that you needed a 8k rpm clutch drop to get the 0-60 5.9sec time? 5-60 7.5 seconds? So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
Old 03-02-2003 | 12:51 PM
  #17  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Originally posted by threeputtwash
Am I the only one who noticed that you needed a 8k rpm clutch drop to get the 0-60 5.9sec time? 5-60 7.5 seconds? So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
8k drop? I doubt that. Maybe 4k where you get some more torque into the equation.

And EVERY car loses time when going from a rolling start of 5-60mph. The RX-8 loses more since it has lower torque. It needs to peel wheels to get that grip off the line.
Old 03-02-2003 | 01:00 PM
  #18  
laferle's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Michigan
It said in the article that the 0-60 of 5.9 was recorded with an 8000-rpm clutch drop...
Old 03-02-2003 | 01:11 PM
  #19  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Originally posted by laferle
It said in the article that the 0-60 of 5.9 was recorded with an 8000-rpm clutch drop...
Okay so I can't read :p

Wow I don't think I'll be trying to replicate that one!
Old 03-02-2003 | 01:30 PM
  #20  
RXhusker's Avatar
Int-X 293WHP 242TQ :)
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, NE
Originally posted by threeputtwash
So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
No -- you will notice that all cars are slower 5-60 than 0-60. The article mentioned that the gap was somewhat larger for the RX than the other cars (due to its need to rev higher and how the 5-60 test is measured).
Old 03-02-2003 | 03:17 PM
  #21  
wakeech's Avatar
mostly harmless
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
From: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Originally posted by SA22C


Them's fightin' words!

If Car and Driver likes the lightweight RX-8 now, just think of the pools of saliva when the car loses 200 pounds thanks to the rear seats being deleted and gains another 50 horsepower.
...*ahem* try about 600-700... pounds, that is...
Old 03-02-2003 | 04:09 PM
  #22  
chenpin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: LA, CA
Originally posted by threeputtwash
Am I the only one who noticed that you needed a 8k rpm clutch drop to get the 0-60 5.9sec time? 5-60 7.5 seconds? So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
Will you be stop light racing or launching? If not then this line says it all "the RX-8 ultimately delivered the greatest driving satisfaction combined with the best four-person usability."
Old 03-02-2003 | 06:26 PM
  #23  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
Oh by the way..... Road and Track already reported the G35 Coupe as being more fun to drive and responsive than the 350Z due to its longer wheelbase...

So the RX-8 vs 350Z comparisions need not happen eh
Old 03-02-2003 | 06:31 PM
  #24  
Hercules's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 1
I have a quick question for you guys...

Why would features and amenities be a 10 on the G35 Coupe, and only a 5 on the RX-8? What's the RX-8 missing?

If that's an erroneous number (as I think it might be... just too far off!), then the RX-8's gap to win the 1st place award would be even higher.

But in 4 out of the 5 important categories to me the RX-8 placed a 10.

Transmission
Brakes
Handling
Fun to Drive
... all 10s!

And the only 8 that I was mentioning was the engine. But the straight line performance is on the money for me, and everything else recieves 10s! So I am not complaining.

Just curious as to what the G35 Coupe has as far as features that the RX-8 doesn't!
Old 03-02-2003 | 07:23 PM
  #25  
ZoomZoom's Avatar
Drive it like U stole it!
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
From: Woodbridge, Ontario
Originally posted by Hercules
I have a quick question for you guys...

Why would features and amenities be a 10 on the G35 Coupe, and only a 5 on the RX-8? What's the RX-8 missing?

If that's an erroneous number (as I think it might be... just too far off!), then the RX-8's gap to win the 1st place award would be even higher.

But in 4 out of the 5 important categories to me the RX-8 placed a 10.

Transmission
Brakes
Handling
Fun to Drive
... all 10s!

And the only 8 that I was mentioning was the engine. But the straight line performance is on the money for me, and everything else recieves 10s! So I am not complaining.

Just curious as to what the G35 Coupe has as far as features that the RX-8 doesn't!
I'm defiantly with Herc on this one... what is it that the GS35c deserves a 10 and the RX-8 gets a 5? I am at a total loss here!


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.

Quick Reply: New Car and Driver article.. thanks to BryanH!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 AM.