I might be in the minority of Rx8 owners seeing how I have been an avid reader of Consumer Reports for ages. April is the annual automotive issue where they publish all the capsule reviews of the cars and tons of statistics.

The RX8 was given a complete test in December and probably would have received a recomendation if it weren't first year of production. No matter how much they like a car they always hold off on recomendations until they can compile reliability stats. They also like to hold off on recomendations until after the car has been NHTSA or IHS crash tested. Mazda in general ranks as one of Consumer Reports consistantly reliable makes.

One of the stack rankings they issued was for sporty cars. The RX8 was listed third after the Focus SVT and WRX STi. The 350Z was listed at 10th, Crossfire at 12th. Now don't flame me for bringing this up. Consumer Reports is very objective and they score everything numerically and the scores speak. They do not score things like style but they do take into account comfort, quiet, ergonomics, safety and quality. Considering the the RX8 is in first year of production and couldn't rack up any points for reliability (not because it isn't reliable but because CR won't have the stats for another year) and it lost points for fuel economy or the lack thererof, it scored extremely well.

 

No flaming here - any CR concerns re: flooding in the article? John PS And no I do not want this to be become another flooding thread !

 

One of the most useful features in CR is the reliability section by year. You can get a good feel if the cars has any major issues.

 

It seems over the last few years CR has started appreciating the enthusiasts' Point of view in thier evalutions, instead of just the pure value play.

If you think about it though, they have to adopt that attitude, because even the lowliest cars produced today are more then sufficient for basic transportation.

 

The April issue states that "the new RX-8 is a sporty coupe and successor to the RX-7.... acceleration is not explosive, [but] it is exceptionally smooth and responsive provided you keep the enigne at mid-revs, which becomes natural and sounds invigorating..." Handling is "super agile" and the ride is "fairly comfortable." Criticism is that the "[f]uel economy is disappointing." No mention of the "cranks-no start" problem.

Overall rating is "Excellent," just below the Ford Focus SVT, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Honda S2000, Chevy Corvette and Porsche Boxter.

 

CR did not mention any issue with flooding.

If the car had been crash tested and received good scores, CR might have recomended it. Since Mazda overall has statistically high reliability scores, CR will often give a recomendation based on predicted reliability. They do it all the time with new model Hondas and Toyotas.

One of the things about CR vs the car mags is that their testers are all trained engineers and they read the owners manual and the quick start guides. You can bet that they warm up the cars and if they didn't they observe the short drive procedure.

CR won't have the stats tabulated until next April assuming that enough CR readers buy the 8. The stats won't call out flooding specifically, if at all, but there might be a downgrade in the fuel system score.

I will be filling out the CR survey when I get mine. I've done one every year for over 20 years.

Interestingly, when you look at the Mazda brand reliability scores, they score well as a company and would be right up with Toyota and Honda if it weren't for the Fords they rebadge and sell under their name. You would think that Mazda could sacrifice the few units they sell to stop getting their reputation dragged down by Ford built products.

BTW, I just received the JD Powers survey. Between this one, 2 from the dealer and one from Mazda, I have received more surveys on this car than any other vehicle I have ever purchased. My last purchase, a Lexus, they only sent one.

 

Whoa! Great Survey count. I received 9 surveys on my BMW some years back. I haven't seen one yet on this car.

I've written 2 e-mails to CR since July about how great the RX8 is and the finer points they may overlook.

 

Great showing for the 8.

Some highlights:

In the "sporty cars" category, the only two cars above the RX-8 are the STI and Focus SVT. That means it's above the EVO, WRX, Celica, Cooper, Civic Si, 350Z, RSX, Crossfire, Tiburon, and Eclipse (listed in order of CR's preference, best to worst).

No "model recommended" checkmark because they don't have reliability data.

Coolest mention: In the analysis of the TT, they say "not nearly as agile or enjoyable as that of the Mazda RX-8 or Porsche Boxster." Dunno what's cooler, being compared favorably to the TT or equal to the Boxster.

RX-8 analysis: "The new RX-8 is a sporty coupe and successor to the RX-7. It marks the return of teh WWankel rotary engine. While acceleration is not explosive, it is exceptionally smooth and responsive provided you keep the engine at mid-revs, which becomes natural and sounds invigorating. Handling is super agile, with quick, communicative steering, and is forgiving at the limits. Unlike some competitors, the ride is fairly comfortable. This truly fun-to-drive car doesn't beat you up and seats four. The rear-hinged rear doors with no center roof pillar make backseat access relatively easy. Fuel economy is disappointing."

 

One other interesting part of the CR car survey: predicted reliability.

They have an "average" mark at 0, and give the car a score based on how reliable they think it will perform. For instance, Honda Civic & Toyota Corolla = 40, Ford Taurus = -2, etc. Some interesting ones: VW Golf & Jetta = -104, Mini Cooper = -99, BMW 7 series=-175, Caddy CTS = -91, Jaguar X-type = -151, Volvo VC90 = -83, Land Rover Freelander = -148, Ford Expedition = -91 (all off the scale).

 

Yeah One thing we need to get them to fix is the weight front/rear. Check it out. That is not 50/50.