G8rboy

Dude- what are you smoking? Have you driven an auto? No way in hell are they in the 6's, and from actual results on this board they are in the 8's. Please show me proof of this 6.x second automatic RX8...

laser88

Let me start by saying that I would hate for this to turn into another horsepower thread. I too bought mine in August 2003. I was disappointed initially when I got the letter from Mazda with the news, but I got over it.

I got the $500 Visa card (used it to get the amber stealth clear corners, strakes, front and rear rotary accents) and the Free Factory Maintenance for 4 years/48000 miles. Like you I never even thought of selling the car back to Mazda (they offered). The fact that you get free Oil Changes and regular maintenance for 4 years is awesome. For example, $21.50 - $25 per oil change at a mazda dealership every 3-4 months. That is approximately 4 times a year. That's almost $500 with taxes over 4 years saved just on oil changes.

The simple fact is that this car is a blast to drive, especially in Third and Fourth on those twisty, curvy roads. Plus, I love the downshift on it. I believe that 238 HP or 250 HP is not a big deal if one is a true enthusiast, as the car gives you the power when you need it. Just my opinion.

nsxpowered

I looked at the R&T Magazine and every car on there is faster then the Auto8 except for the following cars (assuming the Auto8 0-60mph is 8.0 sec):

Hyundai Elantra = 8.3 sec
Mazda 6s = 8.1 sec
Mini Cooper (non-S) = 8.5 sec
Toyota Camary XLE = 8.7 sec
Volkswagen Jetta Wagon = 8.6 sec
Volkswagen Passat GLX = 9.2 sec
Volvo XC90 AWD T6 = 8.8 sec

===========================
Cars at 8.0 sec

Chrysler 300
Mazda 3s
Saturn LW300

===========================
Cars that we should be faster then, but unfortuately not:

Chrysler PT Turbo = 7.2 sec
Honda Accord V6 = 7.3 sec
Hyundai Tiburon GT = 7.6 sec
Lexus IS300 = 7.0 sec
Mercury Cougar V6 = 7.9 sec
Saturn LW2 Wagon = 7.8 sec

What we need is a 5 or 6 speed automatic with close gear ratio!!!

PPen131

too many "magazine numbers" in this thread. i've seen a few people here get well into the 14s, but it seems that the majority out there are low 15s

nsxpowered

Well I owned a lot of NSXs in my lifetime and not one car was consistent. My 1/4 mile times were from 13.8 down to 13.3 on stock trim. The 2001 nsx which doesn't compare to the 3.0s got 12.9. Yet I remember R&T gave the NSX 14.0 sec, so yes you are correct about magazine numbers, but its a good baseline.

My point is that the Auto8 is just disappointing-ly slow! I drove a damn corrolla rental today and that thing felt close to the RX8 on the low end. Effortless accel from 0-20mph and the 60-80mph was not bad for an econobox that gives 30+ mpg. If Mazda made a stronger RX8 Auto i would definately get another one, I know its not there fault the stupid liberals in California that push for pointless emission laws. I say if the car pollutes more then put a tax on it.

G8rboy

I won't argue about stupid liberals in California making stupid emissions laws, but that has nothing to do with how slow the auto RX8 is.

nzarnow

I own an auto rx-8 and the 0-60 is 6.6 or 6.5 if you brake start. My sisters beatle does 0-60 in mid 8 seconds "dude" so I ask you, what are you smoking. 40hp difference between auto and manual.... thats not going to account for a 2 second loss.

G8rboy

Uh... yeah, sure you did. Are you mistaking the RX8 with a car that has enough torque to break the wheels loose, and crappy enough brakes in the back to allow it? Maybe an old Mustang? Or are you using a precision measuring device like "one-mississippi"?

Fanman

Then you woke up. No way an automatic RX8 runs mid 6's 0-60 mph. I would say even with exhaust & ECU piggyback you would be hardpressed to break 7 seconds.

Ike

I'm glad I didn't have to say it... :p

Nigandahu

Sorry buddy, it takes nothing short of a turbo or act of god to get the auto going that fast. I own a manual, but there is overwhelming evidence by countless RELIABLE sources that you are wrong.

PPen131

it's about time someone did

rodmeister

My experience on the AT. From a normal dead start, using the auto shifting position, the 8.0 figure feels right, maybe even longer - the AT is a dog. I can beat old Corollas and small engined Accords, that's about it. With a brake start however, mashing the accelerator, and semi-auto shifting, I think I'm getting between 6.5 and 7.0 judging from running with cars of known 0-60's like the Honda S2000.

The AT's 0-40 mph is amazing with the brake start and semi-auto shifting, snapping the neck back, then tends to peter out from 40-60. I find the excellent 0-40 runs adequate to deal with idiots trying jump starts at street lilghts and cutting into my lane, with all but the more exotic or fastest cars. I can beat the Honda S2000 because I pull so far ahead by 40mph, they usually give up, though they probably would have equaled or bettered me at the 60. I think I can keep up with a 350Z, but only up to 40mph, then he eats me for lunch. I'm helpless against other sports cars on the freeway, unless I'm on semi-auto, and even then, I'd be screwed if wasn't a fairly decent driver.

I could be wrong about the 0-60 but I don't have that much ego invested in my RX-8's speed, but would like to see some hard numbers.

Fanman

Seriously doubt you are getting 6.5 sec. with pedal mashing/brake torquing & semi shifting. The 350Z recently tested against an S2000, RX8 got a 2.9 sec. 0-40 time, the 6 sp. manual RX8 did it in 3.2 sec. & it only gets worse from there. S2000 can be driven incorrectly as easy as RX8's. If the guy starts off idle, rolling start it would kill his 0-40/0-60 time. Sorry, but the auto owner's notion of even being in the competitive ballpark with a properly driven S2000 or manual RX8 is pure fallacy. I'm in LA if you want to run sometime.

Sigma

No ******* way in hell.

That's faster than my 220hp Mazda6s with a MTX will run. No way in hell you're going to pull a full quarter-second faster in the 0-60 with an ATX with 30 less horsepower and more drivetrain loss. I don't care if you do have RWD. That's almost a full second and a half faster than the 220hp Mazda6s with ATXs pull even with the superior 6-speed Jatco tranny.

I'd wager that most MTX RX-8 owners can't even pull a 6.5s 0-60 time without dumping the clutch well over 4K RPMs.

You're right, 40hp won't account for a 2 second loss. It's the inability to clutch dump and the significantly greater drivetrain loss that attributes to the loss of time. Most cars even if rated the same horsepower, will lose well over 1 second off the 0-60 time between the ATX and MTX (6.8 vs 7.9 in the Mazda6s both rated at 220hp). The loss of 40hp (and about 2000RPMs of power) just adds on to the above losses, for at least an extra additional second (making the total at least 2 seconds slower) rather easily.

On a slightly different note, something that I've wondered about for a while.... I don't see how the RX-8 runs a 5.9s 0-60 but only a 14.8 (to take the averages) 1/4-mile. That'd make it a full second faster in the 0-60 than my Mazda6s did stock but exactly the same in the 1/4-mile. For a really torquey car I could see that occuring, but it seems opposite from what I would expect of an RX-8. I would expect it to beat a FWD car off the line but I wouldn't expect it to fall behind towards the end. It looks like 0-100 my Mazda6s stock would have beat the RX-8.

G8rboy

Agreed- it's just not possible to launch the auto RX8 that fast. And you're right, it takes a decent 4k launch to get into the mid to low 6's with the 6MT. How an auto is supposed to do that with less HP and a torque converter is beyond me.

Fanman

I've seen 14.49@95.47mph with the RX8 (MT March 04'). I see mostly low 15's for the Mazda 6s in most reviews. could be a few factors such as initial traction, weight transfer, shorter gearing in lower gears, etc.

Sigma

Yeah but most MTX drivers can put a Mazda6s into the high 14s pretty easy. On the other hand, R&Ts 0-60 time for the Mazda6s is damn near impossible hit. They had an incredibly low 0-60 time of 6.7s but their 1/4-mile ET was an easily-hit 15.2s

rodmeister

You guys might be right about the auto going 8.0 or longer with a brake start, though my experience says otherwise. Maybe I got a random "lucky car" or have exceptional skill with the automatic :D. But an engineer once said, " An experiment is worth a thousand expert opinions." So I'm going to test my 0-60 with a new GPS program, and against a stop watch next week. Win or lose I'll publish my results here, I won't let my ego stop me from learning the truth.

Tips on how to properly measure a 0-60 run would be appreciated.

JeRKy 8 Owner

The automatic has been out for almost 2 years and no one on here has posted a dyno. Oh well. I can also confirm that these people who say theyre making 60 in less than 7.5 seconds w/brake launch are on something.

By the way ...

... that's news to me. So a decent launch in the manual requires unwanted clutch and tire wear. Personally I don't think it's worth the payoff to me. I'd be interested in maximum performance with minimal sacrifice.

So does this mean when you make a normal launch in the 6speed w/the least amount of wear on the clutch (2k or less) you guys end up in the high 6's - low 7's? That's disappointing. I thought it was at least mid 6s from a regular start.

My automatic makes 60 in 8 - 8.5 seconds w/o any sacrifices other than gasoline. And from what you're saying here - basically the manual does accomplishes the same in 1 - 1.5 seconds faster. Oh well. You've just killed off any further considerations I had left for trading my automatic back for a manual.

That makes my long term plans a little easier. Either F/I or a completely new car.

G8rboy

There's a lot more to the quickness of the MT than just that... and 4k isn't that harsh of a launch... a normal, barely agressive launch is at 3k with no tire spinning and minimal clutch wear (My Miata clutch would have gone 150k miles if I hadn't swapped it out at 90k, so I'm far from concerned about a Mazda clutch wearing out). The auto's sloppy torque converter and looong gearing just as big of an impact on the 0-60 as the launch technique.

JeRKy 8 Owner

Youre probably right about that as well - but all Im saying is the upgrade definitely isnt worth the 6 - 10 grand Id lose - especially since I can always sell mine privately, buy a nice 3rd gen, pocket the rest of my cash and eradicate my performance woes.

G8rboy

Of course not... unless you're into drag racing people, it certainly isn't worth taking hit like that. And hell yes, the FD would a lot more fun than the 8... I just need the back seats : ). If not for that reqmt, my shopping list would have included the C6 Vette, Lotus Elise, or FD with lots of mod/repair $$ .

nzarnow

okay so obviously i was wrong lol. what could you possibly do then to take the auto 0-60 times from eight seconds down to 6.0 seconds? it has to be possible. supercharger, intake, pullies, exhaust, anything or all added should do it?

Fanman

Only way you get an 8 sec. 0-60 car to a 6 sec. car is probably a massive hp gain. No SC or Turbo for the auto RX8 yet, so nitrous might be the best/only way to go to get it down that far. Even if you did an intake (RB unit is only for the manual right now), exhaust & CZ piggyback ECU you are only talking about .5-.6 sec. at most. Pullies are useless (& I have them).