New Car and Driver article.. thanks to BryanH!
03-02-2003 | 03:01 AM
#9
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...
03-02-2003 | 10:30 AM
#13
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
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
03-02-2003 | 11:30 AM
#15
Oversteer = Bliss
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: Sask, Canada
"From the drivers seat the 8 is the best RX ever."
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.
03-02-2003 | 12:24 PM
#16
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...
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
03-02-2003 | 12:51 PM
#17
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...
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...
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.
03-02-2003 | 01:30 PM
#20
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?
So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
03-02-2003 | 03:17 PM
#21
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.
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.
03-02-2003 | 04:09 PM
#22
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...
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...
03-02-2003 | 06:26 PM
#23
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
So the RX-8 vs 350Z comparisions need not happen eh
03-02-2003 | 06:31 PM
#24
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!
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!
03-02-2003 | 07:23 PM
#25
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 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!