I think the series I RX-8's have to shift way too much. The series II are worse. A 4.10 would be perfect in a series I. The RX-7's had a 4.10 and only a 5 speed transmission and I love it. A 6 speed would be nice on them though. Too much is just too much. The RX-8 has too much.

 

Understandable as its your opinion; Which model 7 are you speaking of though?

 

Heh, your last comment reminds me of when James May drives the s2000 - "There are a few things I don't like about this car; Its got too many gears - six..."

 

My 1st and 2nd gen RX-7 both have 4.10 gears (actually the first gen has a 4.11 but close enough) and even the 3rd gens had 4.10's so I guess I'm taling about all of them! There was 2 years in the 2nd gen lineup (GTUs) where they had 4.30 rear ends. The auto models in both the 2nd and 3rd gens had 3.90 rear ends.

 

I agree with you RG only if you shorten up 6th gear... come one man, we don't need 300km/h on a car like that.
Even if it's a cruising gear, it should be shortened a bit. and then fix the rest of the gears and add the 4.10 final gear and you are good to go

 

All of these ratios serve a purpose and suit the needs/wants of the end user. I have had from 3.9 to 4.777 available for RX8s. I think I have one 2009 4.777 (The lowest easily available gear) left.

Paul.

 

ugh, yeah I almost can't believe there is also a 5.12 That would be crazy!

 

oh god. 5.12 is just being silly, It would be easy to burn first gear for a stock rx-8 and a hard core burn when you go into second

 

RG, i agree with what you are saying mostly, but RX8s are too fat and not powerful enough to have 4.10s. still, i would like to try an 8 with 4.10s just to see. i can imagine 1st gear would be way more fun and second would still be more than liveable im sure. and can u imagine the gas mileage? haha.

come to think of it, in contradicting myself, i've seen the light. that acutally makes sense...4.10s likely would be nice

 

And what is your take Paul from your own experience?

 

I've driven an s5 turboII, stock fd3s, and I own a stock vert s4. The RPM rise under load was considerably different in them - is it simply that you like less shifts? The fc tranny, as I'm sure you know, is much like the rx8's as the fifth gear is actually a hair taller than our aisin's 6th, our 5th = it's 4th, etc etc

I personally don't use 1st gear that much, I don't autocross and haven't for over a year nor do I take the car to the strip, lol. 5.12 would be pretty ridiculous but might help on higher speed tracks. I can't imagine the 3rd and 4th gears (and 5th) with a 4.1 final drive; On second thought, I can, I just prefer not to

BTW, I've somewhat concluded to myself the reasoning for the rx8's 6th gear(ing). Mazda needed to find a balance between tall and short - As it is, we have many complaining about how stepping on it in 6th won't get you anywhere. Imagine how much worse it would be if the rpms sat even lower? Downshifting is the obvious answer but many do not want to downshift to simply speed up a slight bit - this is the mass public, after all. Also, sitting the RPMs lower may cause some problems for some hill grades. Any reasoning against this idea anyone?

 

I think with this subject there is no right answer, it just comes down to personal preferences.

Personally, I would never consider going to 4.10 gearing on the 8 because I value throttle response and "snappy" acceleration too much. It's too "GT" for my taste, particularly for a rotary engine in a 3000 lb car. I also like to shift gears

I don't like the performance of the car below 4k RPM's so I want to get up into the 4k+ range asap, so 4.78 rear end is mighty attractive to me personally.

 

I love being able to do 80 mph in my RX-7 at a mere 3K rpm. I don't have a problem with shifting often to a point. I'd love to see a 6 speed in the RX-7 with the same rear end ratio. Yes I'd be shifting one more time but there's a balance.

If I wanted a 5.12 in the RX-7, I could get one!

http://www.mazdatrix.com/getprice.as...m=27-1100-1480

 

My simple thoughts are: To each his/her own. I can't see the need for anything LOWER than a 4.777 unless you're going to the drag strip highly modded. For the typical forced induction RX8 going taller like a 4.30 or a 4.10 makes much sense. The 3 rotor powered guys should hardly consider much outside of the 3.9.

Paul.

 

^ Agreed. If I was FI, I would not be motivated to go 4.777

 

Mazdamaniac , Guys what about a 4.77 in a 2002 FD RX7 5 gear manual .?

 

i agree with RG even tho i havent posted much on this forum. i own a 89 FC S4 nonturbo and the gearing on that made the car feel alive it had more of a rough push and threw you back in the seat more then what the gearing in the 6 speed tranny the rx-8 has. even tho the 7 does 132 on the top end and ive gotten the rx-8 to 138 but im sure it can do more in stock form. the gear ratio is whats holding it back. and it isnt just the final drive but the actual gear ratios of all the gears. i understand that mazda tried to build a "mature" sports car but i dont really consider the feeling you get from stepping on the gass in the rx-8 as much fun as you do in the 7 it like they kinda softened it up a bit to much....it still a good car but with 236hp and 156lb of tq on the sticker....id expect this to at least beat a civic si by more then just a fender.......still tho i love it.....that just opinion tho...they rx-7 was like a rough ***** to the wall feeling when you hit the gas...this however...isnt like sipping on a glass of cheap wine...its good and relaxing at first but then it just gets dull when you want acceleration....

 

4.10 in RX-8 would be a total disaster. We have dragged race RX-8 6MT 4.44 vs RX-8 6MT 4.77 and guess who was the winner? The 4.77 ! Yes having 4.77 the RX-8 actually accelerated faster than 4.44. We performed this test many times switching drivers and the result was the same. 4.77 the winner.

Do not confuse the RX-7 which is FI and has a lot of torque. this is totally different story.