NewCelica.org Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,595 Posts
did u read the part where they linked to the g35 forums?

i swear, those g35 guys have their heads stuck so far up their ***es.

soemthing to the tune of "i swear mazda builds cars to break down so people buy new ones"

and "i pity all who drive mazdas, save them from hell..... blah blahb lah"

soemtimes people really should really be more open. stubbornness is quite unbecoming.

rx-8 is a great car tho. for 30 grand you get top of the line technology (rotary), convenience and a fun factor of 10, i dont see how you can get much better.

:fawk: u haters
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,319 Posts
The G35 is ass, I'd take an RX-8 over it any day of the week. Of course, I'd probably take that 03 Cobra of either of those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,619 Posts
Yeah, when I got to check out the RX-8 last summer for some market research survey, the engineers at Mazda headquarters were VERY confident that it would be competitive with ANY performance-based production car near its price range. Great info, Archangel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
GOD DAMMIT MIKE STOP POSTING THIS STUFF!!!!!

i'm going to the dealer next week to get my deposit back :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
After reading many posts on the RX-8 forum, I noticed many "non-believers" complaining about the lack of torque. Sound familiar?

I love focused lightweight performance cars like the Celica, S2000, and RX-8, and I have to laugh when I read the word "torqueless". These narrow-minded people obviously skip over the skidpad, slalom, and braking numbers, and do not appreciate the nimble feel of lightweight performance. Cars like these are NOT dragsters, but instead are designed to connect the driver to the road. The engines in these cars are remarkable in their ability to produce enormous power, with a minimal weight penalty.

Sure, a V8 car may lose us at the strip, but I've been there, and it is no longer my forte. Bring on the lightweights!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Yeah, I read the article too. If you read the fine print though, you will discover that they got the 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds by doing a clutch dump at 8000rpms!!! Yes, that is not a typo either. It's doubtful ANY production transmission could take too much of that. Now, in their 5-60 run, driving the car like a sane person, it was more like 7.5 seconds, which is probably what the typical driver would expect. Meaning, RSX Type S, Celica GT-S, and RX-8 are going to be drivers races, for the most part.

I like the RX-8. The RX-8 won the comparison on it's handling abilities. I happen to like high revving low torque engines, call me crazy, but cars that develop most of their power up top, appeal to me. The RX-8 is not going to be for everyone though, because just like the Celica GT-S, RSX Type S, or S2000, you have to rev the daylights out of it to get it to go anywhere. Especially with only 159 lbs of torque, not realized until 5500rpm's and a 3000lbs curb weight. For the same money (but with a lot less utility), I could still see people being happier in the 350Z, or EVO 8.

The veridict is out on the new rotary engine. I know plenty will jump on the bandwagon and buy this car immediately, but I would wait at least a year, if not two, to see what problems if any develop with such a new, untested engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,607 Posts
Didn't Ford buy out Mazda though? Or do they own a bunch of there stocks, I forget... But anyways, now i want an RX-8... Or 350z, I dunno... Ehh, I'm still in college... Stop posting these cause it makes me feel depressed :( j/k
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,032 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Actually...the engine isn't that new or untested. It's been used in the RX-Evolv for quite some time...with the only major differences being in the location of the ports.

The N/A Rotary is an amazingly reliable engine..even more reliable and durable than piston engines. I'd be more worried about the rest of the car....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
daSchtick said:
After reading many posts on the RX-8 forum, I noticed many "non-believers" complaining about the lack of torque. Sound familiar?

I love focused lightweight performance cars like the Celica, S2000, and RX-8, and I have to laugh when I read the word "torqueless". These narrow-minded people obviously skip over the skidpad, slalom, and braking numbers, and do not appreciate the nimble feel of lightweight performance. Cars like these are NOT dragsters, but instead are designed to connect the driver to the road. The engines in these cars are remarkable in their ability to produce enormous power, with a minimal weight penalty.

Sure, a V8 car may lose us at the strip, but I've been there, and it is no longer my forte. Bring on the lightweights!
I like this car and Mazda's philosophy, but I don't consider 3000lbs "lightweight". That whole 4 door, 4 seat scports car is a snazzy idea, but who cares? The people buying this car will almost never have someone in the back seats. Imagine driving this 3000lbs car + 4 passengers = 3700lbs with 159lb-ft of torque. It ain't gonna be zoom-zoomin'.
I think all the strucural bracing for those suicide doors, plus the rear seats is adding a good amount of weight. Hopefully they will make a 2 seater that can really kick some ass. Of course, they could solve that problem and put this engine where it really belongs - in a Miata. I bet if they put this engine in a Miata, and offered both convertable and hardtop - it would outsell the RX-8 - and the development costs would've been a lot less.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top