I sold mine because I wanted a new car with more power. I miss the handling of my RX8. I now have a Camaro SS with 440 HP exact same mpg as RX8 (18).
If Mazda would have come out with a new RX with more power I would have bought it in a heartbeat. I would love to get another one even if it got 15mpg!

 

Well, you have to admit - it does have high oil consumption.

Intentional and by design or not, the rotary consumes oil at a very high pace compared to every other healthy engine out there.
That is a big part of why it is going away.

It is not unfair to bring up the oil consumption issue because, as a passenger car, the RX-8 consumes way too much oil.

 

I actually read the title as the eight slowest cars that sell ......

 

 

I like how they talk about the fuel economy as one of the bad points but the two top selling vehicles are always pickup trucks.

 

According to this article both my car are pretty unpopular. At least it helps me find my car in the parking lot.

 

What i hope mazda don't do is the swap your ride program with the rx8... it would make my car not unique anymore...

 

I like the company it keeps more than the bunch in the bestselling list.
* TT - yeah
* Lambo - yeah
* Boxster - yeah
* Cayman - oh yeah
* Ferrari - oo lah lah
* Aston Martin - aww yeah

The sports cars are understandable, but the real losers on this list are the non-sports cars:
* Tribeca
* Land Cruiser
* Schnoz RL
* Maybach

 

It's kinda irresponsible for journalists to say it has high oil consumption without also explaining it. Yes, of course it's a true statement, but it's misleading. For 99.9% of the cars on the planet, "high oil consumption" is synonymous with trouble – poor engine design, poor quality control, leaking head gaskets, etc. Since that is not the case with the 8, I think it's misleading to just say "high oil consumption". A simple "high oil consumption, by design" would serve to remove the false connotation.

 

Mazda sold 65 RX-8s in June!

 

Me, too. I'm surprised that Porsche sells more 911s than Caymans. Isn't the point of producing a cheaper version of your product is that it's supposed to sell a lot more?

I also think it's weird that the author tries to paint the Cayman as some kind of vastly watered-down 911, barely worthy of the Porsche badge. From what I can tell, many folks feel that the Cayman gives you close to 911 performance at a fraction of the price.

Also, considering three of my favorite cars (the RX-8, the TT, and the Cayman) are on that list, I wonder what it says about my preferences compared to the rest of the auto-buying public?

 

Maybe that's what MM was saying.

 

Well, my understanding is that it eats an extra quart between oil changes at 5 quarts a pop. I do not have a lot of data, but that seems to be where I am headed at current rates. Lets run with that. Net usage then is 6 quarts between changes.

My previous car was a Ford 500 (i.e. a Taurus). It did not burn/consume oil, so it just had regular oil changes...with a 6.1 quart refill. Net usage: 6.1 quarts. This is one of the better selling cars in America.

Prior to that, I had a Jaguar XJ8L. It also did not burn oil, but it had a 7.2 quart sump. So even regular oil changes used more oil than the RX-8. Doesn't that also count as high oil consumption?

So I am really not worried about it as a "high consumption" vehicle. I DO wish it made more power and/or got better gas mileage though (averaging 21MPG here).

Either way, I do not need validation on the car that I like. It is fun, and I LOVE those half doors for my two children. If the rest of America wants to buy ugly cars that are no fun to drive, fine. Just leave me with my fun.

 

Well said.