Just got my Nov issue of C&D. They have a new comparision test called the Lightening Lap. They call it a new performance standard for cars and their version of the Nurburgring benchmark. The test is on the Virginia International Raceway - 4.2 mile road course. Here are some of the results:

LL1 (under 30K)
car - best lap time (min:secs), peak speed (mph), max lateral g

1) 350Z Track - 3:12.5, 124.3, 0.9
2) Evo MR - 3:13.5, 124, 0.94
3) RX-8 - 3:19.0, 116.4, 0.86
4) Cobalt SS - 3:20.6, 117.1, 0.85
5) Mustang GT - 3:20.9, 119.3, 0.88
6) GTI - 3:25.1, 112.0, 0.82
7) Civic Si - 3:26.5, 111.6, 0.80
8) MX-5 - 3:29.3, 108.6, 0.83

The 8 beat the Mustang GT, but it is a good 6.5 secs off the Z's time. Too bad they did not have the S2000 in the test.

Other categories and final order:

LL2 (30 - 60K) - Elise, Corvette, Cayman S, GT500, Charger SRT 8 (3:18.2)

LL3 (60 - 120K) - Z06, Viper SRT 10, M6 (3:10.0)

LL4 (120 - 240K) - Ford GT (3:00.7)

Read that article over while i was givin plasma today...found it to be pretty insightful. To no surprise, they comment on how even up top it doesn't have much, but it's cornering and agility makes up for it's shortcomings. I thought it was funny that they ripped on the GT500, and how it pretty much fell apart by the end of it's runs.

If anything, its worth a read.

I'm pretty shocked the Z bested the Evo, and even more shocked that the RX-8 got whooped so badly. My subscription ran out and I haven't gotten the new one yet, do they just run one lap and use that as their time?

I'm pretty shocked the Z bested the Evo, and even more shocked that the RX-8 got whooped so badly. My subscription ran out and I haven't gotten the new one yet, do they just run one lap and use that as their time?

i'm shocked about the Z besting the Evo as well, doesnt seem right.. i'll go pick up that issue, it'll be an interesting read. I'm not that suprised that the rx8 got whooped that much. Did alright for itself though.

Damn, I wish I had a scanner. Looks like a pretty good article. Still have to read it, just got the summary out here. They have all the performance breakdown by each sector - entry, avg, exit speeds etc... They ran each car multiple laps with different drivers (Csaba Csere, Mark Gillies, Robin Warner and Larry Webster) and listed out the best times each car produced that day. I am not shocked to see the 8 come in third, but the difference from the Z's time is a surprise...

da hell, the evo MR costs like 36k lol and i thought the Z costed more than 30k?

da hell, the evo MR costs like 36k lol and i thought the Z costed more than 30k?

Yeah, though maybe they're going by base model costs <shrugs>. I wonder what the temps and humidty were like, the Evo would certainly have more of a disadvantage in hot humid conditions. I'd say the RX-8 being slower has more to do with long straights and a long track than anything else.

http://www.virclub.com/vir/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=23&Itemid=106

Must have been using a modified course. Full course is 3.27 mi as opposed to the 4.2 as stated.

http://www.virclub.com/vir/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=23&Itemid=106

Must have been using a modified course. Full course is 3.27 mi as opposed to the 4.2 as stated.

This is what they say:

"The so-called Grand Course is 4.2 miles, making it one of the longest road courses in the US"

The RX-8 did pretty good considering. I'm not surprised the EVO and Z whooped the 8. The horsepower advantage magnifies on the straights. Thank goodness the 8 is great in the corners. The Mustang GT performed worse than a Cobalt SS--must be that beam rear axle. Not testing the S2000 is really a bad oversight. I wonder if they could not get one from someone. I think it most likely would have slotted in the top 3.

I just wish Mazda would work a little magic and ring a bit more HP out of this engine. Please no flaming! :)

Same as the Top Gear benchmark that puts the 8, 350z, and M3 at the same speed... it depends on so many factors, the test is almost meaningless.

Same as the Top Gear benchmark that puts the 8, 350z, and M3 at the same speed... it depends on so many factors, the test is almost meaningless.

I would think this is a better comparision. If I remember correct, the Top Gear test was done on different days. So, yeah the conditions were most probably different. This test is done on the same day - multiple laps (different sessions), same set of drivers driving, etc. And they took the best lap times from that day. Don't think it can get any better than that.

The S2000 is dead. Why test it when a new version is comming out soon?

Mazda, where's our Super Charger.

I know you have one. Just had to stop by the other day to check it out again.

Love that Scoop.

The S2000 is dead. Why test it when a new version is comming out soon?

Mazda, where's our Super Charger.

I know you have one. Just had to stop by the other day to check it out again.

Love that Scoop.

Just saw an article on leftlanenews saying that the next version of the S2000 won't be out until 2010. They say the current version will go on until then. Most probably it is just speculation. R&T says that the next one will be out in 2008. 07s are in. So, don't think it is a dead model.

Why didn't they test the Subaru?

Seems like a bias test.

They wanted the Z or EVO to win?

The guys around here say their EVO's top out at 90 some 100 some 120 max.

Are the straights long enough for the Z to gain ground due to the EVO's limitations?

Why didn't they test the Subaru?

Seems like a bias test.

They wanted the Z or EVO to win?

The guys around here say their EVO's top out at 90 some 100 some 120 max.

Are the straights long enough for the Z to gain ground due to the EVO's limitations?

Just added the peak speeds too. Not much difference between the Z and Evo when it came to peak speed. Only 0.3 mph.

Why didn't they test the Subaru?

Seems like a bias test.

They wanted the Z or EVO to win?

The guys around here say their EVO's top out at 90 some 100 some 120 max.

Are the straights long enough for the Z to gain ground due to the EVO's limitations?

What are you talking about? Tops out at 90, 100, 120, limitations??? My Evo with minor mods is only limited by how tall my final gear is, which is around 170mph... Stock for stock the Evo should pull on a Z at any speed.

Just added the peak speeds too. Not much difference between the Z and Evo when it came to peak speed. Only 0.3 mph.

Interesting, I wonder if they got a doggy Evo and a strong Z. Is there any mention of weather conditions in the article? Also, the peak speed of the Stang being so much lower than the Z is odd. I guess you can chalk that one up to exit speed.

Car and Driver has named the RX8 to their 10 Best list multiple times, I really doubt they have bias against the car.


The only thing that disappoints me is that the Charger SRT8 beat the RX8 by 0.8 seconds. Yeah, I know it has over 200 more HP and cost 15,000 more, but come on. A Charger beat the RX8?

I think it was a 350Z Track, supposedly it has some aerodynamic enhancements, lightweight wheels, better brakes,and better suspension, over the standard Z. If the 8 was similiarily equipped as the z and mr, the gap would've been much smaller.

Nothing embarrassing to me in those numbers. I bought my 8 for driving enjoyment; handling, comfort, style, speed, and value, more or less in that order. I drive on the highway, not the track. For the track I suppose I would have bought a different car.

"The Mazda RX-8 turned 3:19.0, 1.9 seconds quicker than the Mustang, and the two cars were as different as steak and sushi. The rotary engine lacked punch coming out of the corners, even when we freely used its 9000-rpm capability. Its maximum straightaway speed was only 116.4 mph—2.9 mph below the Mustang's and even slower than the Cobalt SS's. On the other hand, the RX-8's taut suspension provided great body control and excellent cornering balance. Its brakes were powerful and fade-free. It turned in with sharp precision, and you could use power to rotate the car toward a corner apex. The sector times show how much the RX-8 liked the corners."

The Evo should have trashed the Z, something is odd there. A road course with any significant straights will put the 8 at a disadvantage, just the way it's made. As far as the Charger, that thing is a beast on the straights even for its 4,000lbs. It's only about 6k more than my Shinka so a big bang for your buck. I'd have considered it if it had a stick. Would have been much better for the family but real bad for my license I'm thinking.

the evo has a fairly steep learning curve to keep it quick in/out of corners...

i'd say since it's the only fi car they used they didn't know how to drive it.

The EVO is a rally car based off a economy car, it has horrible weight distribution, there is only a 85lb difference in weight to the Z, and they were on a race track not a rally course, so of course it lost. The Z was built off a sports car platform and was built for race tracks.

"The Mazda RX-8 turned 3:19.0, 1.9 seconds quicker than the Mustang, and the two cars were as different as steak and sushi. The rotary engine lacked punch coming out of the corners, even when we freely used its 9000-rpm capability. Its maximum straightaway speed was only 116.4 mph—2.9 mph below the Mustang's and even slower than the Cobalt SS's. On the other hand, the RX-8's taut suspension provided great body control and excellent cornering balance. Its brakes were powerful and fade-free. It turned in with sharp precision, and you could use power to rotate the car toward a corner apex. The sector times show how much the RX-8 liked the corners."
This is what journalists and owners have been saying since it came out.

I'd love to have a 8 with 30 more HP, but I didn't buy the car because I wanted the fastest car under $30K. There were a lot of other factors involved.

If you want a better hard core speed demon, go drive something else.

"The Mitsubishi Evo MR was another excellent-handling car. It also had the benefit of serious power, achieving 124.0 mph on the straight. These virutes were supplemented by plenty of grip and tremendous stability. The Evo managed to combine quick turn-in behavior with a nicely planted feel in the corners. Its steering was precise, and the Evo's highly supportive seat made it a driver favorite. We would like to see less fade in the brakes, but there was enough stopping power to put together at least one good lap per session, and the best of those was cloced at 3:13.5."

"In the LL1 class, only the Nissan350Z could beat that (the Evo's) time, with a best lap of 3:12.5. The 350Z was as gutsy as the Evo, and its thrust was of the naturally aspirated variety with, naturally, no turbo lag. That made it possible to feed in power much more precisely—and earlier—when exiting corners. The Z-car's handling was not quite as buttoned down as the Evo's, and the Nissan demanded a more precise driving style. But its smooth power delivery worked well with fine handling balance to allow genuine power oversteer when necessary to tighten the car's line. Long live the king of LL1!"

This test bothers me because it's using the Evo MR and 350Z Track and calling them under 30k cars. Either test base models and use base model prices or use fully loaded models and use the corresponding price.

How do I trust they did the test fairly if they can't even report on it accurately?

Looks like a good article. I wish I still had my subscription.

They used base model prices for their price placement. The Evo MR's base price is 29,774. Then they encouraged makers to add performance options.

As tested the cars priced out at:
350Z Track - 35,865
Evo MR - 36,924
RX8 - 31,505
Mustang GT - 30,345
Cobalt SS - 22,385
GTI - 27,725
Civic Si - 22,635
MX5 - 25,495

Charger - 43,505

I think not many people are paying over 30 grand for a new RX8 now, every weekend dealers around here are knocking 6000 off all in stock

And for you that need to thump your chests.... In sector 2 of the track the 8 almost kept pace with the Ford GT, and in sector 5 no other car in the test had a higher minimum MPH.

Looks like a good article. I wish I still had my subscription.
Go to the magazine rack and buy one.

If I was Mazda, I would have sent a Sport package only 6-speed manual. That would have listed for 2006 MSRP $28,295. The Touring and Grand Touring additions only add weight in a test like this, since they include no other performance enhancing mechanical additions.

And the base Sport Pkg only adds HID, DSC and fog lights. I bet the track drivers turned off the DSC for this test so even a base 6-speed 8 would have sufficed.

People estimate the GT package adds about ~50-75LBs of weight.

Looks like the Cobalt SS is the best bang for the buck. Impressive IMO.

Go to the magazine rack and buy one.

Nah, to pay $4 an issue is a waste. I had a good deal through magsforless.com where I got 12 issues of 3 different mags for @ $15. I may have to sign back up for that.

Looks like the Cobalt SS is the best bang for the buck. Impressive IMO.

I was very suprised by that one. I never expected the SS to get numbers like that.

I thought MR was an option on the Evo. Evo RS, IX and MR. RS wouldve been around 29k but they tested the Evo MR -_-. Same HP though lol.

Nah, to pay $4 an issue is a waste. I had a good deal through magsforless.com where I got 12 issues of 3 different mags for @ $15. I may have to sign back up for that.
eBay--check mag subscriptions there. I have bought 5 or 6 from there and paid like less than 5 bucks per subscription.

The base model would've been the way to go as it contains all the performance stuff (DSC might be a great safety net, but it still slows you down) with nothing else.

eBay--check mag subscriptions there. I have bought 5 or 6 from there and paid like less than 5 bucks per subscription.

Thanks for the info! I just got 2 yrs of Car and Driver for 5.95 and 1 yr of Motor Trend for 4.50. Awesome :)

I was very suprised by that one. I never expected the SS to get numbers like that.

They handle pretty well and are pretty quick. Don't quote me on this, but I think in Motortrend it had the best slalom speed of any FWD car they had ever tested, and it topped the Z51 C5 vette on the skidpad.

Neat comparison. I'm also confused as to why they would use a 350z track instead of the normal 350z. But whatever, It's still cool to see how the 8 did.

They handle pretty well and are pretty quick. Don't quote me on this, but I think in Motortrend it had the best slalom speed of any FWD car they had ever tested, and it topped the Z51 C5 vette on the skidpad.

I'm quoting you. You were close.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0502_2005_chevrolet_cobalt_ss_supercharged/steering_interior.html

“How good is it? In testing, the Cobalt SS is the fastest regular-production front-drive car through the slalom we've tested in three years, rocking through the cones even faster than the new Corvette Z51. The SS outcornered the VW R32 on the skidpad, outgunned the Mini Cooper S 0-to-60 mph, and outstopped the Subaru Impreza WRX 60-to-0 mph.”

That's pretty cool!

Didn't know the SS could pull that slalom. When I drove one, it didn't feel all that good, and I still left the drive with the MSP as the best handling FWD car. The SS just didn't feel as balanced to me and I just wanted to get out the car as soon as possible.

Thanks for the info! I just got 2 yrs of Car and Driver for 5.95 and 1 yr of Motor Trend for 4.50. Awesome :)
Always glad to be of help. :)

From the various sellers with good feedback I've bought from, I have never had a problem receiving the mags. The subscriptions are an absolute steal.

I'm quoting you. You were close.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0502_2005_chevrolet_cobalt_ss_supercharged/steering_interior.html

“How good is it? In testing, the Cobalt SS is the fastest regular-production front-drive car through the slalom we've tested in three years, rocking through the cones even faster than the new Corvette Z51. The SS outcornered the VW R32 on the skidpad, outgunned the Mini Cooper S 0-to-60 mph, and outstopped the Subaru Impreza WRX 60-to-0 mph.”
I think GM has loads of talent, it is too bad they have been been buried under bean counter directives and stifling bureaucracy. It looks like things are changing, but maybe not fast enuff. GM needs to move more like the Cobalt SS and less like the Buick Rendevous.

They handle pretty well and are pretty quick. Don't quote me on this, but I think in Motortrend it had the best slalom speed of any FWD car they had ever tested, and it topped the Z51 C5 vette on the skidpad.

As much as I hate using mags to compare stats, I did look up my latest Road&Track the ratings for the SS. It is listed as doing 66.9 in the skidpad. The RSX-S beat it by running a 67.1 and the Saturn ION Redline with a 67.6. Still, those are pretty good numbers for $20k FWD cars.

Hell, after listening to threads on this site suggesting that GTI's/Si's/SS/etc. are as fast if not faster than an 8, I'm almost surprised the 8 beat them. :rolleyes:

With the Evo pulling a 3:13.5, I would have expected;
350 3:17
Mustang 3:17.5
RX8 3:18
Cobalt 3:21
Miata 3:24
SI 3:25
GTI 3:25.5

So really, I'm stunned about the speed of the 350, and surprised how slow the new Miata was. I think it was Car and Driver that track tested a 8 vs. a G35 Coupe 'brembo" and they matched times, so a 6 second difference is really surprising. Oh, and the Charger, at 425hp and a full IRS, it should have been faster.

Otherwise, no big surprises. But where was the Eclispe, S2000, MS6, MS3, Celica, Tiburon, Crossfire, SRT4, WRX, etc.

At the end of the day I always like to know the average of the fast laps (more realistic), and difference between slowest to fastest laps (gauge difficulty of car). Otherwise, it'll be cool if they add this test to each review.

Hell, after listening to threads on this site suggesting that GTI's/Si's/SS/etc. are as fast if not faster than an 8, I'm almost surprised the 8 beat them. :rolleyes:

With the Evo pulling a 3:13.5, I would have expected;
350 3:17
Mustang 3:17.5
RX8 3:18
Cobalt 3:21
Miata 3:24
SI 3:25
GTI 3:25.5

So really, I'm stunned about the speed of the 350, and surprised how slow the new Miata was. I think it was Car and Driver that track tested a 8 vs. a G35 Coupe 'brembo" and they matched times, so a 6 second difference is really surprising. Oh, and the Charger, at 425hp and a full IRS, it should have been faster.

Otherwise, no big surprises. But where was the Eclispe, S2000, MS6, MS3, Celica, Tiburon, Crossfire, SRT4, WRX, etc.

At the end of the day I always like to know the average of the fast laps (more realistic), and difference between slowest to fastest laps (gauge difficulty of car). Otherwise, it'll be cool if they add this test to each review.

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that those cars are as fast around a track as the RX-8. Though I would have thought the SI would be a little closer to the RX-8 and would have beaten the GTI. If the SI had the standard tires rather than the upgraded tires then it would make more sense.

IIRC the G35 was quicker, not by a lot, but still turned a lower laptime. So... add some HP, put bigger and better tires on, and then shave off some weight as well as all the other little tweaks they've made to the Z in the last couple years.

From watching shows like BMI it's less shocking that the Miata placed where it did, and the RX-8 for that matter... But then consider an article like this ( I wish some US car mag would do a similar yearly comparo) where the Miata (last gen) outpaced the RX-8 by a tiny bit.

Honda puts some really awful stock tires on its cars. Usually all-season high mileage Michelins that just suck.

"The Mazda RX-8 turned 3:19.0, 1.9 seconds quicker than the Mustang, and the two cars were as different as steak and sushi. The rotary engine lacked punch coming out of the corners, even when we freely used its 9000-rpm capability. Its maximum straightaway speed was only 116.4 mph—2.9 mph below the Mustang's and even slower than the Cobalt SS's. On the other hand, the RX-8's taut suspension provided great body control and excellent cornering balance. Its brakes were powerful and fade-free. It turned in with sharp precision, and you could use power to rotate the car toward a corner apex. The sector times show how much the RX-8 liked the corners."I did the Grand Course (4.2 mi) this past summer in my GT. Their top speed of only 116 puzzles me. I did 120+, and I don't have the experience of C&D's drivers.

I did the Grand Course (4.2 mi) this past summer in my GT. Their top speed of only 116 puzzles me. I did 120+, and I don't have the experience of C&D's drivers.

Are you going by your speedo?

I was actually quite surprised that the Z beat the evo too, and surprised that the 8 beat the GT. The track edition Z actually has a great suspension setup, but still..
I wish they would've run the MSP3 in there too.

+ 1 for MSP3!

Are you going by your speedo?I never wear speedos. :Eyecrazy:

But yes, I was, and yes, I've checked its calibration. And I wasn't even the fastest 8 there that day - I can't remember exactly, but I think one nudged 130 (though I don't think he was pure stock, at least intake and catback upgrades).

hey guys...i've got this article scanned already. Would it be a copyright infringement or any other type of legal issue to post it up for public viewing for those of u that wanna read it?

Just wonderin before i do so.

I have to agree with Paul about top speed on the back straight at VIR. I obtained top speed of 125 on several laps of the grand course. I can see where the 350z and EVO can shine at VIR on the three straights runs, front, back, and climbing esses.

Are you guys talking stock?
Paul has: Mods: Tokico D-Spec shocks, Hawk Performance Ceramic pads, Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3 225/40-18,

Can't compare that to stock.

Faster out of the corners means faster straightaway times.

The only mod I have is the REVI intake and duct, no suspension mods yet.

hey guys...i've got this article scanned already. Would it be a copyright infringement or any other type of legal issue to post it up for public viewing for those of u that wanna read it?

Just wonderin before i do so.

Well, technically yes but it is also illegal to post any copywrited material such as pictures (which many many people do). No harm will come to you if you post it. Worst comes to worst they'd tell you to take it down but I extrememly doubt it (hundreds of articles are posted each day on the web)

hey guys...i've got this article scanned already. Would it be a copyright infringement or any other type of legal issue to post it up for public viewing for those of u that wanna read it?

Just wonderin before i do so.

Go for it, I don't think the admins mind and it's not like C&D is going to come after you.

Ill toss um up here as soon as I get home from work this mornin. Keep posted.

As promised...here's the article!

After you click on each thumbnail, you need to go to the top right corner and click on full size to make it readable. Sorry it's so big and blurry...best I could do!

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/22/22/1/86/38/2217186380060328108xHOaPs_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2217186380060328108xHOaPs)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/32/33/9/3/10/2832903100060328108LEGVCD_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2832903100060328108LEGVCD)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/14/15/7/85/10/2735785100060328108KfzabL_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2735785100060328108KfzabL)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/28/28/8/88/19/2416888190060328108gCoAfZ_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2416888190060328108gCoAfZ)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/32/33/6/22/80/2588622800060328108cstPrJ_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2588622800060328108cstPrJ)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/59/559/5/59/29/2963559290060328108DGMVwb_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2963559290060328108DGMVwb)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/26/27/6/95/29/2869695290060328108vGqHEt_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2869695290060328108vGqHEt)

http://thumb8.webshots.net/t/59/759/8/0/60/2375800600060328108SpPUDo_th.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2375800600060328108SpPUDo)

Funny how some of the replies here saying "Well, I just like driving my rx8" are by some of the same people who, when talking about another car - such as a Colbalt SS - would say "Oh yeah? But on the TRACK the RX8 pwn3s!!"
:)

I think the RX8 did HORRIBLE - if the RX8 is the car people think it is, it should have done better. Course - this test was a very good example of how SOME cars aren't built for some tracks. :)

How in the hell did a Z beat the EVO!? :crazy::crazy:

The RX-8 did pretty good considering. I'm not surprised the EVO and Z whooped the 8. The horsepower advantage magnifies on the straights. Thank goodness the 8 is great in the corners. The Mustang GT performed worse than a Cobalt SS--must be that beam rear axle. Not testing the S2000 is really a bad oversight. I wonder if they could not get one from someone. I think it most likely would have slotted in the top 3.


Actually the Mustang did alright. It has decent grip and just needed a tighter suspension according to the article. That is easily solved by getting the Ford Racing Handling Package which can be ordered from the factory at the dealer. It's issues had nothing to do with the live axel (not beam rear axcel... that is in FWD cars). Issues with that have more to do with stability and ride comfort over uneven pavement. I'd like to see the Shelby GT take a lap... from the few articles I've seen... it would have shined much better than the GT or GT500.

I was also surprised at the RX-8's showing. I suppose as some mentioned that it's the long track thing... straights not being the 8's strength. I was again surprised at the Z taking the EVO... that is a total WTF!

Interesting, I wonder if they got a doggy Evo and a strong Z. Is there any mention of weather conditions in the article? Also, the peak speed of the Stang being so much lower than the Z is odd. I guess you can chalk that one up to exit speed.

I think the recently uploaded article said 95 degrees.

I think this is a great test, though in the real world most EVO's are modified. I think the RX-8 did very well with what it has. It just tells me it is a lighter (when compared to its class) car with a great chassis, street biased stock suspension, and in need of more power. Pretty much what I knew it was when I bought it. Waiting patiently for more power options. :)

Without reading the article I have to believe that this track is custom tailored for cars like the Z. Long straightaways to hurt the 8 and long turns to have the Evo fall off boost. I don't really blame them or anything, but it just goes to show you how misleading track times can be.

You need to read the article instead of making blind observations. Is it so hard to believe cars with stiffer suspensions and more power might actually perform better?

You need to read the article instead of making blind observations. Is it so hard to believe cars with stiffer suspensions and more power might actually perform better?

Amen to that! The Evo with its Hp and AWD, isn't as nimble around a race track as one might think. I love track comparisons,instead of the cookie cutter 0-60-1/4 mile runs. Tracks runs shows a car its real strengths and weaknesses, and puts to rest any assumptions on what a car could "do" or "not do".

Good find and good thread.

Thanks for the article scans!

I think the article just reinforces the characteristics of the RX-8 that we are all aware of.

The Mazda RX-8 is a fantastic handling car right out of the factory door whether one is a race car driver or average Joe. Unlike the 350Z, the 8 doesn't require scalpel precision and concentration.

The Achilles Heel is that the 8's sweet and smooth rotary powerplant is weak in the brute force category. It just gets dusted in the straights by the greater horsepower boys. Fortunately, the 9K redline lessens the need to shift as much thus saving precious time.

As the powerplant currently stands, the only way for the 8 to improve it's showing is to modify the suspension, tires, and lose weight. If Mazda imported the PZ UK version to the US and sent that instead, I think it would have cut the difference between second and third down.

Was the 8 tested, a Touring or GT?

Finally, just grabbed it off of a newsstand, ran back to the office and closed the door…great freak’n article, C&D rules! Love the 4.2-mile track, best way isolate strengths and weaknesses. I’ve done every track in Ontario and our longest is 2.5 miles, which seemed huge. But 4.2 miles is one fast long track, something that obviously wouldn’t benefit the 8’s times. Top Gear’s track is much lower in speed and distance, hence the more comparable times to M3’s and 350Z’s there.

Otherwise, I think the 8 did well, nothing new…great handling, brakes, balance. Considering the track, I’m still surprised it beast the 300hp Mustang, and nearly matched the 425hp Charger. I like the fact that out of the 2 sectors that they tracked minimum corner speeds, the 8 was fasted in one and tied for 6th in another (out of 17). This suggests the 8 is all about momentum, similar to my old 600cc sport-bikes. Not bad for a car that rides as well as my Passat.

Still surprised the new Miata was much slower than a GTI or Si, more surprised the Evo couldn’t challenge the LL2’s, and most surprised that the 350Z showed that well. And I gained a new respect for the Cobalt SS, that’s bang for the buck.

Oh. The 335i was tested….man that’s a nice car! They choose the 8, Mustang GT and C70T5 as comparisons, the 8 showing better braking and road-handling but of course, the BM showing better acceleration and fuel economy.

Still surprised the new Miata was much slower than a GTI or Si, more surprised the Evo couldn’t challenge the LL2’s, and most surprised that the 350Z showed that well. And I gained a new respect for the Cobalt SS, that’s bang for the buck.
The sweet little Miata suffers the same problem as the RX-8 on a greater scale. Great handling with even less oomph to move it along the straightaways. The GTI and Si have it beat on the acceleration important sections.

I think GM is producing some good sport versions of their cars. The Pontiac GXP, Saturn Sky Redline and the Cobalt SS are all lightyears beyond anything they were producing five years ago.

Ford seems to have taken a serious step back beyond the Mustang GT and GT. They have left the once celebrated Focus to wither and die a sad performance death.

Toyota, like Ford, seems have an even more serious sports car gap in their portfolio. No Supra, no Celica, no MR2, nothing but the Camry engined tC. We'll see if the supposed sports cars coming out change their pedestrian sports car lineup. They seem to want to rule all auto segments--so I'm sure something is brewing.

I bet C&D asked for an STi, but just didn't get one from Subaru. Perhaps they will test it in a later roundup and include the new BMW 3 coupe, 2007 Mini Cooper S, Audi TT RS, Pontiac GXP/Saturn Sky redline, etc.

You need to read the article instead of making blind observations. Is it so hard to believe cars with stiffer suspensions and more power might actually perform better?
There are no words in the English language that can be combined in any order through the use of any medium that will ever change the fact that track times in and of themselves are misleading because all tracks are shaped differently with different characteristics. My only reason for even mentioning not reading the article is because without doing so I couldn't say with 100% certainty that C&D is biased towards the 350Z as Motortrend clearly is.

My point is that the Evo, 350Z, and RX-8 all have very different characteristics in terms of how the power is delivered throughout the powerband. You can likely create a track where each of them will win or at least finish much closer together. Anyone who sees the track times as posted in the first post without seeing the layout of the track can't make any estimation about the cars whatsoever.

You need to read my post before making statements that have nothing to do with what I said.

So basically, you still have not read the article. It shows. If you did, you would understand the data given goes beyond the final lap time and makes this test both interesting and relevant in understanding both the strengths and weaknesses of various cars tested. The long track format makes complete sense to meet their goals.

The 350Z was nowhere the fastest car anyway. Mazda dropped the ball on the car they sent too if they sent a higher content (heavier) model, which it looks like they did based on price.

Also note, the high revving, underpowered, lightweight elise beat out all its competition in its class. To me, that throws your argument of favorable tracks under the bus.

So basically, you still have not read the article. It shows. If you did, you would understand the data given goes beyond the final lap time and makes this test both interesting and relevant in understanding both the strengths and weaknesses of various cars tested. The long track format makes complete sense to meet their goals.

The 350Z was nowhere the fastest car anyway. Mazda dropped the ball on the car they sent too if they sent a higher content (heavier) model, which it looks like they did based on price.
I see you still haven't read my post. It shows. This is a waste of time. I don't feel like talking to you anymore.

Rx-8 is teh rulz0rz in tha twi$ti3s!!!11!!

Looks like the brakepads and the heat are what kept the Evo from showing better. In a recent comparo the Evo topped the Cayman S around a road course so I would have expected it to be pretty close to the Cayman S. But, on this given day the Z was faster, it doesn't make sense, it just is.

I see you still haven't read my post. It shows. This is a waste of time. I don't feel like talking to you anymore.

Rx-8 is teh rulz0rz in tha twi$ti3s!!!11!!

Have you ever been to a track? Do you even own an 8?

I just read my Car and Driver, then logged onto find this thread. Great. I was pretty impressed with how the RX8 did, and of course, elated that the effin Z finally won some type of performance comparison.

There's been a lot of complaining about the track. They indicated that they wanted to find a track that exhibited as many different types of track elements as possible and that VIR seemed like the best version the US has since we don't have the Nordschleiffe. I know this might sound insane to non-racing fans, but long straights are part of any track that's worth a crap. It looks to me that they want to mimic the Top Gear test track, which is fantastic in my opinion. They say all the performance cars that come their way will be put through its paces on this same track. However, I really wish they would use the same tire for every car tested. You can't over consider tire choice. The temperature at the time of the best lap would be another great stat to peruse.

I can't believe the disrespect for the Z. All I ever hear from anyone is what a slow fat piece of shit it is, Japanese Mustang and all that. I mean ... it beat an Evo! Yay! The underdog won the fight! Surely you guys can empathize with that.

I also would've enjoyed seeing the time for a STi and S2000. Maybe one day in the future.

Price? Can you get a Track Z for under 30k? If you're a good negotiator, well, maybe 31k. And for the record, you can buy a base Z for around 26.

Oh, and the Z has gotten heavier over the years, not lighter, as someone suggested. They give a weight of 3300 or so. In '03 they weighed less than 3200.

"A modified XXXXXX would've ... "

Save it. That argument is so stupid, it always reminds me I'm having discussions with people who are probably half my age, wear a visor diagnally and upside down, and say things like, "Wait til VTEC kicks in, YO!"

I can't believe the disrespect for the Z. All I ever hear from anyone is what a slow fat piece of shit it is, Japanese Mustang and all that. I mean ... it beat an Evo! Yay! The underdog won the fight! Surely you guys can empathize with that.

Yeah, seems like the Z does get quite a bit of animosity especially on this forum. This is mostly due to the fact that most people take anything Jeremy Clarkson says as fact (especially when it makes the RX-8 look good). Unfortunately, he fails to mention that he received a prototype model and the next year Top Gear voted the 350Z car of the year.

Even so, I'm still with Ike on this one. I really don't get how the 350Z bests the Evo on any normal track on any day under any conditions. I've just seen too many comparisons that say the opposite.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go?

Yeah, seems like the Z does get quite a bit of animosity especially on this forum. This is mostly due to the fact that most people take anything Jeremy Clarkson says as fact (especially when it makes the RX-8 look good). Unfortunately, he fails to mention that he received a prototype model and the next year Top Gear voted the 350Z car of the year.

I would like some links on both above statements.

1. Most RX8forum members, of the 28,746, taking Clarkson as fact.

2. Top Gear had a prototype model.

Even so, I'm still with Ike on this one. I really don't get how the 350Z bests the Evo on any normal track on any day under any conditions. I've just seen too many comparisons that say the opposite.

Driving Dynamics. Driver. Temperature. Variations in stock cars. Alignment. Humidity. Elevation changes. Fuel.

I believe Ike said "Looks like the brakepads and the heat are what kept the Evo from showing better." Might be my first guess, since that was mentioned in the article.

So I take it you have not been to the track or read the article?

I just read my Car and Driver, then logged onto find this thread. Great. I was pretty impressed with how the RX8 did, and of course, elated that the effin Z finally won some type of performance comparison.

There's been a lot of complaining about the track. They indicated that they wanted to find a track that exhibited as many different types of track elements as possible and that VIR seemed like the best version the US has since we don't have the Nordschleiffe. I know this might sound insane to non-racing fans, but long straights are part of any track that's worth a crap. It looks to me that they want to mimic the Top Gear test track, which is fantastic in my opinion. They say all the performance cars that come their way will be put through its paces on this same track. However, I really wish they would use the same tire for every car tested. You can't over consider tire choice. The temperature at the time of the best lap would be another great stat to peruse.

I can't believe the disrespect for the Z. All I ever hear from anyone is what a slow fat piece of shit it is, Japanese Mustang and all that. I mean ... it beat an Evo! Yay! The underdog won the fight! Surely you guys can empathize with that.

I also would've enjoyed seeing the time for a STi and S2000. Maybe one day in the future.

Price? Can you get a Track Z for under 30k? If you're a good negotiator, well, maybe 31k. And for the record, you can buy a base Z for around 26.

Oh, and the Z has gotten heavier over the years, not lighter, as someone suggested. They give a weight of 3300 or so. In '03 they weighed less than 3200.

"A modified XXXXXX would've ... "

Save it. That argument is so stupid, it always reminds me I'm having discussions with people who are probably half my age, wear a visor diagnally and upside down, and say things like, "Wait til VTEC kicks in, YO!"


As an overall package and based on their target audience, I would say Nissan got it right. The next version with the latest update to the VQ35 should prove even more interesting as long as they can keep the weight in check. That is really my biggest beef with the Z and obviously more of a personal preference than a hindrance to total performance.

It doesn't surprise me that the Z beat the 8 at VIR. The longer straights are to the Z's advantage there. At the other end of the spectrum, in SCCA Autocross the 8 dominated B-Stock while the Z was one of the "also rans." I'd be interested to see how the two would compare at a track like Summit Point/Shenandoah, which is much tighter than VIR. I'd wager that the 8's better cornering would make the difference there.

Thanks for the scans. Nice article, though its credibility is in question given Paul_in_DC's comments about the RX8's top speed being so low.
The EVO is a rally car based off a economy car, it has horrible weight distribution, there is only a 85lb difference in weight to the Z, and they were on a race track not a rally course, so of course it lost. The Z was built off a sports car platform and was built for race tracks.While its true that the EVO is based on an economy platform and with that comes inherent disadvantages, it's also true that every production car has compromises. The EVO has proven itself to be an excellent track car and you shouldn't dismiss it (I'm surprised it didn't win its class).

Nice to see the RX8 do so well in the corners, especially in the uphill "Sector Two".

Nice article. I'm glad to see that they will start including these types of track comparisions more often. I think it's a much better way to look at a car's overall capabilities rather than just skidpad, dyno, 0-60 tests.

Hey guys I also drive a 350Z and i understand the surprise at it's beating the evo.

I think the surprise is due to the fact that nissan upgraded the cars for the 06 model year, the biggest improvement being the tires. In past magazine comparisons the Z was always trailing the evo, due to the fact that it was massively undertired. I think in the original car and driver review it only pulled something like .87 lateral G's on the skidpad vs .90 and above for the evo and rx-8. With better tires and about 15 more horsepower than previous models, the Z is now faster around this particular track.

Back to the RX-8 though, i think it's awsome that it beat the mustang with something like 1/2 the lb/ft of torque, even on a track that features long straightaways.

Just to clear up a few things about the Z (I have a TT350)

1. There really is no diffence in the car from Base to the "Track" in terms of suspension or engine at this point. In the past years the track was the first to get the 300hp engine (less TQ) but all the 6MTs now have that.
2. Suspension is the same in every car
3. Tranny the same
4. The "Track" model is just a options package. It's main difference is that it comes with Brembo brakes and forged wheels. It also has the "aero" package which is available on every Z and really only is a chin spoiler that helps create "zero" lift.

The Z is a really nice car, and shown that it really shines on a big track. I test drove an RX8 and liked it's nimble handling, but it reallly lacks in the power department, and most will trade a little light footedness for power...which shows why you'd want it on a track–makes you go fast.

It is nice to see that the RX8 handles corners well can has high corner speed, but in reality when it comes to an overall time, that's still not the most desirable characteristic and sort of like getting a 11th place ribbon in horseshoes.

I think there were some key cars missing and some odd choices in the group, with the EVO/Z/X8 being the only ones in the same class. The S2000, Solstice GXP (and Saturn) and maybe a few others should have been there.

Just to clear up a few things about the Z (I have a TT350)

1. There really is no diffence in the car from Base to the "Track" in terms of suspension or engine at this point. In the past years the track was the first to get the 300hp engine (less TQ) but all the 6MTs now have that.


The base Z has no LSD.

Okay enough hijacking of this RX-8 thread.

I think there were some key cars missing and some odd choices in the group, with the EVO/Z/X8 being the only ones in the same class. The S2000, Solstice GXP (and Saturn) and maybe a few others should have been there.

I totally agree with that. Be intersting to see the S2K, the STi, the Mazdaspeed 6, and the Mitsu Eclipse in the comparo too. I have to admit though that I thought the LL1 would've gone: Evo, 350Z, RX-8. I thought it would've been the Evo as a clear winner, the 350Z as the clear second, and the RX-8 as the clear third. Rather than The Z winning, the Evo coming in second, and the RX-8 as a distant third but barely beating out the Cobalt SS.

The Z does get a lot of hate here though, which I think is kinda dumb because it's a very nice car.

i always try to get Z drivers to play with me on the highway, pretty unsuccessfully, i might add.

as for the article. i didnt buy this car to take it to the track or because of its XX stat. So i am pretty psyched to see that I own a car that did so well?

i always try to get Z drivers to play with me on the highway, pretty unsuccessfully, i might add.


Why, so you can get your ass beat?

Wonder why they didn't throw in the mazdaspeed version of the 8?

Why, so you can get your ass beat?

Very ouch.

Why, so you can get your ass beat?

No, so I can get someone who I think would have a similar mentality towards spirited driving. But they usually just sit there and ignore me, probably too high and mighty to acknowledge a measly RX-8 as I zoom by them on 95. meh

To each his own..but, as everyone knows, a TRACK Z MSRP is roughly 36K!! We are talking about 5-8K difference on the price. The track version of the Z has loads of upgrades, from brakes to suspension, etc. Granted, it has more power than the 8 without these upgrades, but if the 8 had these similar upgrades (mazdaspeed suspension, brakes, etc.), it would pull a little closer than the distant 3rd. Not saying it will beat the Z, but it should make it more interesting. So, the race to begin with is flawed in that respect. Nevertheless, it is a good view of the performance of these cars...suprised it beat the EVO, but...who cares? I ride the 8 because it is less punishing and I feel more atuned to the road than if I was in the Z..

Wonder why they didn't throw in the mazdaspeed version of the 8?Because there isn't one.

I don't get the hate for the 350z either, seems like a fine car for the money if you only need a 2 seater. Overall I think the 8 performed well for the power it delivers.

No, so I can get someone who I think would have a similar mentality towards spirited driving. But they usually just sit there and ignore me, probably too high and mighty to acknowledge a measly RX-8 as I zoom by them on 95. meh

I would ignore you too. Sounds like street racing. Go to the track and I am sure you will find plenty of people who want to race.

JW, doesn't an evo cost more than 30k? Sumwhere along the lines of like 33-35kish?

JW, doesn't an evo cost more than 30k? Sumwhere along the lines of like 33-35kish?

You can get an RS for under 30k and it might just be faster than an MR around a track.

I think it was Ike who said that a yearly comparison like this would be good... and I agree!
One year the Z might win due to conditions, the next year the EVO could win because it was a little cooler. But we would see consistency.
They need more cars, all the cars!!! I really don't care for the price groupings. Just put the price (MSRP) and use the times. Then we can see best bang for the buck! and maybe car of the year! lol.

^^^
Basically, you want a version of the Top Gear test for North America.

Ya that's what I was thinking when I wrote that, the only exception is that it is on the same day. I see that can be difficult to do if you have a lot of cars, so maybe drive the first run on day 1, the second runs on day 2, etc etc... Just so there would be consistency.

The more I read this thread the more I want FI :dammit:

Hmmm...new roof and siding for the house or FI for the 8 :all_cohol

Road and Track used to do a yearly Bang for the Buck test. I remember in '93 when the 3rd gen 7 came out it killed everyone else in performance and only lost on price.

After looking at the mag article in person, the RX-8 acquitted itself quite well when it came to anything involving chassis dynamics.

It was one of the better cars at losing the least speed (percentage wise) in corner situations and was only hampered in acceleration out of corners by a weaker engine than a lot of the competition.

I love my 8, but it really could have used the 250HP that Mazda originally stated it had.

Are you guys talking stock?
Paul has: Mods: Tokico D-Spec shocks, Hawk Performance Ceramic pads, Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3 225/40-18,

Can't compare that to stock.

Faster out of the corners means faster straightaway times.

Yeah but 10+ MPH???

Last year I did VIR totally stock. It was my first track event and by the second morning, I was hitting 116 to 120 at the end of the main straight on the Grand East.

This year with Azenis and Racing Beat sway bars, Intake and duct, I was hitting mid 120's. Others were shifting into 5th and approaching 130 with MS suspension and other tid-bits.

Yes, mods help but still seems the CND driver was leaving something out there. But then again, he was probaly doing it with all the cars equally - right?

Right? Who cares anyway? Horsepower MATTERS on the Grand East.

Yeah but 10+ MPH???

Last year I did VIR totally stock. It was my first track event and by the second morning, I was hitting 116 to 120 at the end of the main straight on the Grand East.

This year with Azenis and Racing Beat sway bars, Intake and duct, I was hitting mid 120's. Others were shifting into 5th and approaching 130 with MS suspension and other tid-bits.

Yes, mods help but still seems the CND driver was leaving something out there. But then again, he was probaly doing it with all the cars equally - right?

Right? Who cares anyway? Horsepower MATTERS on the Grand East.

If you guys would look at the article you'd realize that it's peak speed for one sector of the track, not necessarily the peak speed they hit on the entire track.

^ yeah it is the peak speed in sector one, but they did mention that all the cars hit the peak in sector one...

Last year I did VIR totally stock. It was my first track event and by the second morning, I was hitting 116 to 120 at the end of the main straight on the Grand East.Paul_in_DC also hit more than 116, but he stated that his speedo was calibrated; are you certain that yours' was also? Over at caranddriver.com, it was speculated that higher top speeds on other days could've been due to factors such as tail-wind vs head-wind.

i always try to get Z drivers to play with me on the highway, pretty unsuccessfully, i might add.

I got my ass handed to me by a honda civic once.

I realized it was all over when I heard the Blow off valve ventilate and the front tires spin as he shifted into second.

Paul_in_DC also hit more than 116, but he stated that his speedo was calibrated; are you certain that yours' was also? Over at caranddriver.com, it was speculated that higher top speeds on other days could've been due to factors such as tail-wind vs head-wind.

No, i have never calibrated my Speedo. It is not really important to me if I am going X versus X * .98 or 1.01 etc. For purposes of this discussion, I wasn't claiming my speedo is right nor suggesting that CNDs was wrong.

In the end, as I look back over my vids, I never did better than a 3:25 lap on the Grand East. So, no matter what speed was hit at the end of the main straight, the CND driver and car were faster than me. That makes me feel better about their overall test. :)

I'm pretty shocked the Z bested the Evo, and even more shocked that the RX-8 got whooped so badly. My subscription ran out and I haven't gotten the new one yet, do they just run one lap and use that as their time?
Time to trade the Evo Ike... :)

both s2k and sti's base msrp starts above 30k, so even if they were to have them, im not sure if they could run them in the same class.

im surpsed evo lost too, but ohh well. we all know in general EVO tend to have better track time than the Z. its like the top gear video where rx8 run the same time as the Z and M3 albit on different days and diff track conditions. fluke happens and thats what makes it fun. every car has a different chance at winning, but they are never zero. The rx8 can take home the trophy too. the EVO obviously had a bad day. I think the rx8 ended up where it should, and did very well for it self considering the track the competition.

next year i expect the evo to have a much stronger showing, and the Z too with the much more potent VQ35HR engine.

The RX-8 carries narrower, and significantly harder tires than the Evo or the 350Z Track.... FYI. Tires and suspension are worth alot of time on the track. Two 30k cars against a 25k car is hardly a fair comparison.

It seems that as long as your vase car was under 30k you could equip it with whatever options you sold on the car. Does the RX8 sell the MS as options for the 8 when buying? If they do they should have equipped the car the best they could and if they don't, then they should sell the MS stuff as factory covered warrantied options just like the EVO and the Z. I think I remember the mag not wondering why they didn't send the Charger with the best rubber they sold for their car. All in all the 8 did quite well. On the other hand if they repeated the test for 07 the test would again finish very close to the same order. The first two might exchange places as both cars have upped the ante on power but kept the same prices (guessing as far as the EVO X) and the rest of the group have pretty much stayed where they are.

Oh maybe not the MS3 and the MS6 could be added into the fray and could definitely be in the top 5. Also I believe the Soltice/Skyy could also jump into the battle as well.

The RX-8 did pretty good considering. I'm not surprised the EVO and Z whooped the 8. The horsepower advantage magnifies on the straights. Thank goodness the 8 is great in the corners. The Mustang GT performed worse than a Cobalt SS--must be that beam rear axle. Not testing the S2000 is really a bad oversight. I wonder if they could not get one from someone. I think it most likely would have slotted in the top 3.

I just wish Mazda would work a little magic and ring a bit more HP out of this engine. Please no flaming! :)

I agree the RX-8 did really well, put the 3 on a circuit like Laguna, or one with actual braking and corners (sorry,,, I forgot the US don't have roads with twisties...(tounge in cheek)).
Put them all on a 24Hour non stop (fuel only) endurance test would also be interesting....anyone with a link!

I agree the RX-8 did really well,


I bet your mom told you that you did really well when you finished a distant third as a child. What she really meant is, you got WTF pwned! Beer me!

I bet your mom told you that you did really well when you finished a distant third as a child. What she really meant is, you got WTF pwned! Beer me!

Very Jocular!

If my child ran third in anything (whatever that has to do with a lump of metal on 4 wheels in a speed comparison got to do with a parents praise) I would be very proud and happy with an effort that is praiseworthy.

But then again this goes to show the psyche of some American (with respect) views that winning at ALL cost's has to be the scenario, my how history shows your society littered with sometime tragic results of winning at all cost.
But that is another subject matter.

We all know that the RX-8 in it's present form will never win in a straight line in this comparo, however, as an example of say a track used in UK's Top Gear (one with corners and braking) the RX-8 achieved the same lap time of a BMW M3, 2004 350Z, etc, and was even faster than the 5.7 litre Holden Monaro, (Pontiac GTO) at the time.

I know of NO other 1300cc Motor that will give you performance results like the NA RENESIS RX-8.

Very Jocular!

If my child ran third in anything (whatever that has to do with a lump of metal on 4 wheels in a speed comparison got to do with a parents praise) I would be very proud and happy with an effort that is praiseworthy.

But then again this goes to show the psyche of some American (with respect) views that winning at ALL cost's has to be the scenario, my how history shows your society littered with sometime tragic results of winning at all cost.
But that is another subject matter.

We all know that the RX-8 in it's present form will never win in a straight line in this comparo, however, as an example of say a track used in UK's Top Gear (one with corners and braking) the RX-8 achieved the same lap time of a BMW M3, 2004 350Z, etc, and was even faster than the 5.7 litre Holden Monaro, (Pontiac GTO) at the time.

I know of NO other 1300cc Motor that will give you performance results like the NA RENESIS RX-8.

I'm sorry to hear about your mediocre children. I'm going to go put the "My kid WTF pwned your kid" bumper sticker on my car now.

I'm sorry to hear about your mediocre children. I'm going to go put the "My kid WTF pwned your kid" bumper sticker on my car now. How about this for a sticker: I spend all of my free time baiting RX-8 owners about their quarter mile times, even though they could care less, since nothing else in my intellectual make up means anything to me.

It's a bit long, but then again, your car is so much bigger than ours.

Sheesh..........

But then again this goes to show the psyche of some American (with respect) views that winning at ALL cost's has to be the scenario, my how history shows your society littered with sometime tragic results of winning at all cost.

And your entire society is founded by criminals.

Making stupid assumptions is fun!

How about this for a sticker: I spend all of my free time baiting RX-8 owners about their quarter mile times, even though they could care less, since nothing else in my intellectual make up means anything to me.

It's a bit long, but then again, your car is so much bigger than ours.

Sheesh..........

Clearly you don't care about 1/4 mile times. Especially since this thread isn't about 1/4 miles and you brought it up. :Freak_ani

Well, if you ever auto-x with an Evo or Z and put up a better time, they can't say they are at a mechanical disadvantage. And if they beat you? Well, they have a faster car anyway.

Stock car lap times for pissing contests is kind of dumb. There is no need to track a 100% stock car anyway. As soon as you put some decent tires on there, the times go right out the window.

Besides, if this is a base model comparison, why are they using a 36k 350z Track edition and not a 26k base model?

Well, if you ever auto-x with an Evo or Z and put up a better time, they can't say they are at a mechanical disadvantage. And if they beat you? Well, they have a faster car anyway.

Stock car lap times for pissing contests is kind of dumb. There is no need to track a 100% stock car anyway. As soon as you put some decent tires on there, the times go right out the window.

Besides, if this is a base model comparison, why are they using a 36k 350z Track edition and not a 26k base model?

If SCCA classing is a good indicator with autocrossing stock cars, the Evo should be a bit quicker than the Z or RX8. The RX8 and Z should put up similar times with all other things equal - tires, driver, etc.

On the track, it is just a known fact that both the Z and Evo are significantly quicker than the RX8 .... with all other things equal - tires, driver, etc. See NASA classing for reference. And yes, it's 100% because they both have a much better HP : Weight ratio, but I guess that's obvious.

I totally agree with your comment on tires. The Z in this comparison had decent tires - Bridgestone RE050. This is the first review of a Z I've ever seen in which the Z had decent tires. I guess Nissan finally stopped being so cheap.

I don't think this comparison includes all base models, just base model prices. But even if it did, the base Z is no slouch, and probably wouldn't be but more than a second or two off.

If SCCA classing is a good indicator with autocrossing stock cars, the Evo should be a bit quicker than the Z or RX8. The RX8 and Z should put up similar times with all other things equal - tires, driver, etc.


I agree with you mostly, but 1 thing i want to point out is that autox and real track racing is very different. compared to track racing autox is more 1 dimensional focusing on handling, sort of like how 1/4 mile drag races focus on straight line. while race track racing test every facet of a car's abilities. but yeah most of the time the Evo is quite a bit faster than the Z on the track.

i'm shocked about the Z besting the Evo as well, doesnt seem right.. i'll go pick up that issue, it'll be an interesting read. I'm not that suprised that the rx8 got whooped that much. Did alright for itself though.
didn't the new Z get a horsepower upgrade? I think I heard that it did.
07 350 382 hp (http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2006/07/nissan_improvin.html) is this what they tested?

didn't the new Z get a horsepower upgrade? I think I heard that it did.
07 350 382 hp (http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2006/07/nissan_improvin.html) is this what they tested?

Are you playing a trick on us??? That would be a negative. The NEW Z that is not out yet will have an increase to about 330, but NO WHERE near 382. That sounds like that supercharged Z that company did in the UK... I think the 07's are still rated at 306... someone keep me honest...

it was a 06 300hp Z used in the article in question

the new 07 Z uses the vq35hr motor making 306hp in the US rating system and 315hp in most other countries outside of US. it should run sub 5 second 0-60 based on that the new heavier G35 sedan with the same engine, did 5.1s by C&D. but time will tell

382hp Z is probably the super charged one, if it ever comes out.

I'm pretty shocked the Z bested the Evo, and even more shocked that the RX-8 got whooped so badly. My subscription ran out and I haven't gotten the new one yet, do they just run one lap and use that as their time?


ditto, something fishy bout this. hmmmm

Have you guys ever been to VIR? There are plenty of straights at the course that the RX-8 will get eaten alive by the Z or EVO. The Z is not as tossable as the 8, but it can corner just as fast. Before you go do paper racing, try driving both cars first.

As far as the EVO being slower than the Z, here is the reason. The EVO are geared better for lower speeds. The Z can rocket down the two straights faster than the EVO. The EVO might get better runs off the corner, but the Z can keep up as they hit the next braking zone.

Also for the dude who is bitching about the model. The real difference between the track and the base is the brakes and wheels. The brakes won't make a difference if you do a one lap run, the tires will help a little. It's not going to be a full 7 seconds....

Car and Driver has named the RX8 to their 10 Best list multiple times, I really doubt they have bias against the car.

The only thing that disappoints me is that the Charger SRT8 beat the RX8 by 0.8 seconds. Yeah, I know it has over 200 more HP and cost 15,000 more, but come on. A Charger beat the RX8?

What the heck! that is not possible. I've driven a Dodge Charger, while I was racing around in Las Vegas, and I noticed they are painfully slow!

It moves in straight lines, and I wondered what the point of the steering wheel was, since I kept going forward in those turns. Not to mention it gets angry and barks at all the cars that pass it while it's still sitting on the line.

The whole time I was there, I was yelling back a the car "JUST shutup and go!"

It is by far the poorest example of a sports car I have ever had the "privilege" of driving. I rate all my cars between the RX8 and that Charger.

Utterly rediculous!
Every race I won or loss there, was a celebration of mediocrity! I couldn't wait to get home to snowy Canada! where the sling shot RX8 waited for me.

dodge charger != dodge charger r/t != dodge charger srt-8

Have you guys ever been to VIR? There are plenty of straights at the course that the RX-8 will get eaten alive by the Z or EVO. The Z is not as tossable as the 8, but it can corner just as fast. Before you go do paper racing, try driving both cars first.

You're 100% correct. I've driven at VIR and if you drive the full course, there are specifically two really long straightaways that the Z's hp adavantage would really have a impact on. I've driven both cars. The Z is a fun car, but you just can't throw it through the curvey sections of the course the way you can the 8. I'd be willing to bet that the lower the experience level of the driver, the closer the times would be. Anyone can stomp the gas, but it takes a driver to use the extra power in the corners.

while probably the better handling car, the rx8 cant easily out corner the z, the z is a very capable car in the corners too. unless its an autox course, the z is faster even a tight road course with short straights

I've driven HPDE's at RA http://www.roadamerica.com an awesome 4.1 mile track with 14 corners :ylsuper: . Last time I was there (Apr. 14&15) I was right behind an EVO during one of my sessions. In the turn I was right up with him but in the straights he just blew me away. Eventually he disappeared due to the 3 fairly long straights. The following Friday at http://www.blackhawkfarms.com The same thing with a different EVO. This time I stayed with him the whole time, mainly due to the lack of straights. It has two but there short. When all is said and done, I love this car :rock: