My impressions on the Rx-8

I already posted this in the lounge, but thought id post it here so you guys could read.

I was at the dealership today because they have a body shop which I took my Z to be repaired in. There were a few problems I had with the car so I took it back to be touched up. While waiting for my dad to come pick me up, I walked over to Mazda to look at the 6's and when I glanced into the showroom I saw the nose of the 8.

I have to say, I'm fairly impressed with that car. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAY better in person than it does in the magazines and sales brochure. When I tried to show my dad a pick of the car on the way home, the car just looked ugly again. Trust me, pictures do the car no justice at all.

The dimensions were small, a lot smaller than a F-body. The size was like somewhere inbetween a Rx-7 and a Supra I guess... if that makes any sense. The car is low to the ground and has a very slick appearnce. You can sort of see the old FD lines in it, but it is definately a evolutionary design.

The exterior was very sharp, the headlights and tail lights had a very slick, sophisticated design to them. The black slit on teh side, behind the front wheels isnt very pronounced at all. In pictures it looks as if it goes in a bit, but in reality its just a piece of trim. The front in which looks "fishy" in pictures doesnt really look fishy in real life. Pictures make the grill look like the car is puckering... as if its going to kiss something. In reality the nose doesnt quite stick out that far at all. The wheels also look very nice.

The interior was simply awsome. The seats were slick, the dash slick, the radio controls slick, and even the parking brake had a neat little touch to the handle. The shifter is very short, like on a 350Z and looked like it was in a good position. Now standing from teh outside, it didnt look like there was much room in the back, but when i looked into the windows I was impressed. There was plenty seat room in teh back for 2 adults.

Overall I would say I was very impressed with the car. I liked the overall impression a lot better than the 350Z. The dealer had $33,000 on the tag. If I had the money, I think I would defiantely choose this car over a 350Z and possibly a GTO (we'll see when the GTO comes out). The car just has a slick, sophsiticated persona about it. If only it had more torque... but I'm sure I could live with a rotary motor.

I left thinking, I would definately trade a F-body in for one of these. The car is just on another level. F-bodies are more rough around the edges and "young." In my opinion this car was slick and sophisticated. When GM builds its new cars, they really need to step quality up a few notches if they plan on competing with these new cars from Japan.

Originally posted by bigsteve7
I already posted this in the lounge, but thought id post it here so you guys could read.

I was at the dealership today because they have a body shop which I took my Z to be repaired in. There were a few problems I had with the car so I took it back to be touched up. While waiting for my dad to come pick me up, I walked over to Mazda to look at the 6's and when I glanced into the showroom I saw the nose of the 8.

I have to say, I'm fairly impressed with that car. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAY better in person than it does in the magazines and sales brochure. When I tried to show my dad a pick of the car on the way home, the car just looked ugly again. Trust me, pictures do the car no justice at all.

The dimensions were small, a lot smaller than a F-body. The size was like somewhere inbetween a Rx-7 and a Supra I guess... if that makes any sense. The car is low to the ground and has a very slick appearnce. You can sort of see the old FD lines in it, but it is definately a evolutionary design.

The exterior was very sharp, the headlights and tail lights had a very slick, sophisticated design to them. The black slit on teh side, behind the front wheels isnt very pronounced at all. In pictures it looks as if it goes in a bit, but in reality its just a piece of trim. The front in which looks "fishy" in pictures doesnt really look fishy in real life. Pictures make the grill look like the car is puckering... as if its going to kiss something. In reality the nose doesnt quite stick out that far at all. The wheels also look very nice.

The interior was simply awsome. The seats were slick, the dash slick, the radio controls slick, and even the parking brake had a neat little touch to the handle. The shifter is very short, like on a 350Z and looked like it was in a good position. Now standing from teh outside, it didnt look like there was much room in the back, but when i looked into the windows I was impressed. There was plenty seat room in teh back for 2 adults.

Overall I would say I was very impressed with the car. I liked the overall impression a lot better than the 350Z. The dealer had $33,000 on the tag. If I had the money, I think I would defiantely choose this car over a 350Z and possibly a GTO (we'll see when the GTO comes out). The car just has a slick, sophsiticated persona about it. If only it had more torque... but I'm sure I could live with a rotary motor.

I left thinking, I would definately trade a F-body in for one of these. The car is just on another level. F-bodies are more rough around the edges and "young." In my opinion this car was slick and sophisticated. When GM builds its new cars, they really need to step quality up a few notches if they plan on competing with these new cars from Japan.

I have heard the car is pretty gutless and it's strong suit is handling...

Either way the RX8 really isn't on my radar screen, so I haven;t researched it. I like teh 350Z, but it is overpriced. If the GTO can come in at $33K it will easily give you the best performance/quality for your money.

I just can't get past the quirky roofline and B/C pillar area of the RX-8...

Its definately going to be cool seeing those things on the road :)

Yeah, the RX-8 does nothing for me. I wouldn't even consider it. The car looks so odd with the strange profile and rear-end. Those extra doors break up the lines of the car and make it look worse.

Needs more HP, especially with those relatively low mpg numbers..

I'm sure it would be fun to drive though.

Already saw one on the road in Austin.

http://www.machined.net/modules/gallery/album02/dscn1409

There's a thread over at ls1.com's et al forum that said the RX-8 spun the dyno to the tune of 173 HP!!! :lol:

Guess I'll wait to see it on the street before passing judgement. I haven't been impressed with the pictures either.

I've seen 'em on the street. FOOOOGGLLLLYYY!

I agree that it definately needs more power. If Mazda had like the same package with a +250hp V6 I think theyd have much more of a winner on their hands. The overall package was still impressive though, espeically when you consider the cars base price of $27k.

Compared to what else is on the market for that price right now and is relatively sporty (350Z, Mach 1, Evo) Id say that this car definately held its ground. Each one of those cars has its advantage and disadvantages may they be inteior, power etc. With styling being subjective, this car just lacks power.

Hopefully the GTO will up the notch a bit when it comes out and redefine how much automobile $30k shoudl get you.

actually, reading up, the 200 hp ver is the auto.. the manual is 247 hp with a 9000 rpm redline.

ah, now it sounds better.

Originally posted by Magnum Force
There's a thread over at ls1.com's et al forum that said the RX-8 spun the dyno to the tune of 173 HP!!! :lol:

If that is the case then there is something wrong, assuming it's not an auto.

I haven't seen one on the street...but I had a chance to check out the RX8 at the Chicago Auto Show.

I agree with bigsteve...it is one slick piece with an awesome interior.

I know I'm gonna catch some flak here....but the production RX8, impressed me more than the similarly styled Chevy SS concept.

Originally posted by Ken S
actually, reading up, the 200 hp ver is the auto.. the manual is 247 hp with a 9000 rpm redline.

ah, now it sounds better.

No, a rotary at 5k rpm sounds terrible, I cant imagine what it sounds like at 9k lol.

Originally posted by Chuck!
No, a rotary at 5k rpm sounds terrible, I cant imagine what it sounds like at 9k lol.

And with no muffler it is truly the most gawd-awful, painful noise I've ever heard.:cry:

That engine is awful, the auto and maual both have the same engine but the auto only revs up to 7,500 RPM+/- thus only puts out a peak HP of 207HP, this is due to the auto transmission not reving that high. This engine is so weak it only puts out like 159tq. you probably can't even spin the tires on this thing!!!

THey would have been better off using the Ford V6 that is in the Mazda 6

Plus the fuel economy sucks for a call that light, Camaro got better highway milage and put out about 100HP more and 200tq more. Plus those RX8 engine are dirter than most engine and they consume oil, I read it almost didn't meet US emissions requirements

Sure ithe Rx-8 is down on torque, but from an engineering standpoint it is a step forward. The engine is smaller, lighter, more efficient and makes more horsepower than the turbo engine in the Rx-7. It may not be perfect, but I'm sure it satisfies rotary enthusiest.

The Rx-8 has a power output similar to a S2000 in both numbers and the power curve itself. It runs mid 14s and will appeal to the kind of customer would also consider the Porsche Boxter and S2000. All of those cars kind of have the same mission. Decent power, high revs and excellent handling. Each just has its own flair, whether it be a high revving 4, mid mounted flat 6 or in Mazdas case the rotary. These cars all focus more on the driving experience as a whole than quartermile times.

I think most of the people on this sight are going to be a bit biased seeing that we perfer power over most other performance attributes. I think when the Rx-7 comes, assuming it does we'll see more power due to larger displacement. Mazda knows Americans love torque, its just hard to get it out of a rotary motor.

I read that chances of us seeing a turbo version are slim due to the fact that this motor is a lot cleaner than the previous designs. The exhaust isnt quite as hot and putting a turbo in the exhaust stream woudl make it hard to spark the cats quickly. I'm sure engineers could work a way around this, but time will tell.

I wonder if this car wil have some of the same pitfalls as the RX7 did such as really expensive, specialized parts, shops that don't know how to work on the car and most likely have to be done by the dealer. There is still the reliability issue which is not proven yet.

I have to agree about a no-muffler rotary putting out thwe most awful sound ever..................it sounds like a tractor that is on its last leg.

Originally posted by bigsteve7
Sure ithe Rx-8 is down on torque, but from an engineering standpoint it is a step forward. The engine is smaller, lighter, more efficient and makes more horsepower than the turbo engine in the Rx-7. It may not be perfect, but I'm sure it satisfies rotary enthusiest.

The Rx-8 has a power output similar to a S2000 in both numbers and the power curve itself. It runs mid 14s and will appeal to the kind of customer would also consider the Porsche Boxter and S2000. All of those cars kind of have the same mission. Decent power, high revs and excellent handling. Each just has its own flair, whether it be a high revving 4, mid mounted flat 6 or in Mazdas case the rotary. These cars all focus more on the driving experience as a whole than quartermile times.


I think you hit the nail on the head :thumb: with your post, especially when you spoke of driving experience. And I agree with you that this Mazda delivers a unique driving experience that does not have to be dictated by torque. Overall it is a very appealing package.