Hi guys, been lurking on this site for a while now. I'm an S2000 owner that used to own a '93 Rx-7. I love the way the Rx-8 looks and the fact that it seats 4 comfortably, but still looks like a coupe. I'm thinking of selling my S2K for an 8, but the only problem is the lack of power. Mazda claims 238, but alot of you posted lower results....claiming around 215 at the crank....Are the aftermarket parts effective? On the S2000, you'll hardly see any gains from slapping on an intake, exhaust etc...unless you supercharge it...other words, all or nothing. 'Cause my FD was FI, ofcourse it was easy and cheap to mod. it, but what of the Rx-8? Anyone have any noticable gains? Thanks!

BTW: MPG doesn't bother me that much....especially after the FD.

Look into Canzoomer's ECU upgrades. Try a search for it, there is a ton of info on here.

Yeah, Canzoomer's forum and threads are all you need to read.

Apparently, the S2000 is already "wound up" pretty tight from the factory so there's not much room for NA improvement. This is not even close to the case for the RX8, as you'll discover if you read about Canzoomer's work and what he has found out.

After you read all about it, I'm certain it will be only a short while before you purchase your RX8.

Thanks for the info! I'll look into it.

Would these mods put the rx-8 in the same competitve level as the S2000, 350Z, G35 etc.? I'm talking about straightline here. I know its suspension is already better than the Nissan and up to par as the S2K, but would these upgrades let the Mazda pass other similar rivals out there? Or atleast make it almost equal? Thanks.

Originally posted by Saint_Spinner
Hi guys, been lurking on this site for a while now. I'm an S2000 owner that used to own a '93 Rx-7. I love the way the Rx-8 looks and the fact that it seats 4 comfortably, but still looks like a coupe. I'm thinking of selling my S2K for an 8, but the only problem is the lack of power. Mazda claims 238, but alot of you posted lower results....claiming around 215 at the crank....Are the aftermarket parts effective? On the S2000, you'll hardly see any gains from slapping on an intake, exhaust etc...unless you supercharge it...other words, all or nothing. 'Cause my FD was FI, ofcourse it was easy and cheap to mod. it, but what of the Rx-8? Anyone have any noticable gains? Thanks!

BTW: MPG doesn't bother me that much....especially after the FD.

Dyno runs and trap times seem to suggest around 225hp stock. There aren't many mods out so no one really knows for sure how it will take to mods, odds are a little better than your S2K and not as good as a FI car.

Originally posted by Saint_Spinner
Would these mods put the rx-8 in the same competitve level as the S2000, 350Z, G35 etc.? I'm talking about straightline here. I know its suspension is already better than the Nissan and up to par as the S2K, but would these upgrades let the Mazda pass other similar rivals out there? Or atleast make it almost equal? Thanks.


Canzoomer's ECU piggyback device (Stage 1, $500 US dollars) should add around 25 hp at the crank. He is in the final stages of testing, using his own car and the car of StealthTL, a guy from the forum whose car has a catback exhaust.

Canzoomer wrote that his Stage 1 should bring the power back up to JDM level, with a key difference. Canzoomer purposefully tweaked more out of the midrange starting around 5000 rpm (JDM would kick a little later in rpm). He and StealthTL have reported surprisingly strong pull starting at 5000 that's almost like a turbo, with StealthTL's pulling stronger (remember, his has a catback exhaust).

What does this mean for straightline? EVERYONE is wondering. We're all waiting for the track and road test numbers as well as dyno. I bet 0-60 time will go down .3 seconds. Who knows. I doubt it will get us quite up to the 350Z, though.

By the way, several magazines have compared the RX8 rotary to the S2000 engine. They say that one feels more torque with the rotary and it revs more easily than the S2000.

Actually...I believe Canzoomer's stage 1 will give 25 rwhp gain...

Originally posted by canzoomer

25HP is a rear wheel gain, based on runs we did around Red Deer Alberta. Altitude: 2,800 feet. Ambient temp 16C ( 61F). Fuel Shell 91 Octane. 1 driver, 180 lbs, 1/4 tank of fuel.
We also verified with 94 octane certified reference fuel.
Lastly we did runs at night at 2C (36F) and saw around 28HP.
Best cold air intake ibn the world is really cold ambient air!

I know what FI means, but what does FD mean?

An FD us a third gen Rx7, FC is a second gen, and surprisingly an FB is a first gen.

Originally posted by Senseny
An FD us a third gen Rx7, FC is a second gen, and surprisingly an FB is a first gen.

I can't wait until they get to F U. :)

Originally posted by shift_zoom8


By the way, several magazines have compared the RX8 rotary to the S2000 engine. They say that one feels more torque with the rotary and it revs more easily than the S2000.

Yep. Thats what I read to...the extra torque would certainly be nice. I hope stage II can bring the 8 to a competetive level....It just sucks that no turbo has been released yet....I believe thats the only way. Seems true to the S2K and Z cars as well.....alot of us S2K owners are supercharging the cars giving them an extra 100 horses....and the Z even more I heard. Is the MazdaSpeed one really turbo charged?

If your looking for a super fast strait line car than the RX8 may not be the way to go. If your looking for pure speed than the 350Z or even WRX may be the way to go. The RX8 is more about handling and killing the twisties than strait up speed.

I'd say take a test drive of everything and see what you think and keep in mind that Canzoomer's ECU upgrade will up the HP by 25.:)

Originally posted by matt
I can't wait until they get to F U. :)
Yup, had to be said. You beat me to it.

Originally posted by cueball1029
If your looking for a super fast strait line car than the RX8 may not be the way to go. If your looking for pure speed than the 350Z or even WRX may be the way to go. The RX8 is more about handling and killing the twisties than strait up speed.

I'd say take a test drive of everything and see what you think and keep in mind that Canzoomer's ECU upgrade will up the HP by 25.:)

I know its not about straightline performance only...if that was the case, I wouldn't have bought my S2K.....thats what I liked about my FD....it was a good balance of everything but reliability. My S2000 is similar, except compared to my previous FD, its quite a bit slower, and although I know more about the B13 motor than my F20 Motor, I don't know that much about the Renesis. I really want an Rx-8, but not if its slower than the other cars out there......, what I'm trying to figure out is this: How does the renesis handle mods? As mentioned before, the S2000's motor is already so well tuned, that the only noticeable difference is FI.....Canzoomer's ECU adds 25 hp. That's alot, but somehow it doesn't seem enough yet to compete against the others out there....I know its comparing apples and oranges, but in reality I don't think it is...I think the Rx-8, although a different class, is out there to compete against the 330i, 350Z, G35, S2000 for the market....The Rx-7 was always compared with the Supra, Skyline GT-R, NSX and etc......they were all different classes too. Supra was a 2+2 as well as the Skyline.....Does the Renesis have higher potential to make up those missing horsepower? If so, would the answer be FI?

Tell me did you experience the overheating problems in your RX-7? My understanding is that if we were to slap a turbo on the RX-8 we would experience the same problems. I know that there were 7's out there (and still are) with high-end upgrades producing hella' power. So can it be done isn't really the question it would be more like how much would it cost. I wonder if UPRD has an answer for us here? Turbonetics would have something to say I'm sure. Now we come to compression. Canzoomer can we have some help here?

Originally posted by strong bad
Actually...I believe Canzoomer's stage 1 will give 25 rwhp gain...

My mistake. So it's even better than I had thought!

I seem to remember a few members, maybe including Canzoomer, who suggested that the lower compression of the RX8 automatic trans engine (lower power engine) would be better for FI. I don't remember if they mentioned other factors besides compresson that would make the AT engine a better candidate.

with canzoomers mod I think it is safe to say the 8 will easily compete with the G35. After the mod I believe it will be faster as stock both cars are close with the torque advantage to the G35 of course, better 5-60 time. But with 25 more HP, I think you can run with the 330i, and the S2K. I think there has been so much hype on here that make people think the 8 is slower than it really is. In stock form, it would still keep pace with a G35, but the stage one kit will give it what is was missing !
As far as the 350Z, it will be closer........tough to say (advantage 350). I think people underestimate the 8 as far as speed, and then there is the whole hp theory that has been circulating for mths. But if all you want is pure straight line pop, then the 8 may not be your car. But take one for a spin and you might be surprised! And for a small price for the FC up-grade, I am sure it will put a smile on your face.

Thanks for the input...I really should go out and test drive one....I just hope that the mod. possibility doesn't end with the ECU upgrade.....

It won't, the aftermarket for this car will be insane.

Seeing that the best 1/4 mile time is at 14.5x right now by a very experienced driver on race fuel (whether or not it helped), I am willing to bet you will not be happy with the performance as is.

But even without any mods, it will probably be much more satisfying in traffic than the S2000.

However, the good news is, I doubt it will be long before you will be able to make the car as fast as your wallet will allow. Not to mention, it is much more satisfying to drive a car that you made fast, and beat cars you are not supposed to beat.

Keep in mind a NA 350Z or G35 with a $500 plenum will also boost it (dyno proven) around 20-25hp, this is before messing around with the ECU. Perhaps there is something the rotary can benefit from better air intake path as well.

The new 'S2200' seems to be putting down some mad whp on dynojets in stock form. Supercharged 350Z's are over well over 400hp at crank except I'd watch out for blown engines since some cases have been reported. Overall, if you want power, the RX-8 is not the car to get, a FD, Supra, or even SR20DETT 240SX would be faster and cheaper to own.

I agree. For the most part.

Out of the box, the RX-8 is not the car to get if you want serious power. I am interested to test out the new S2200 (I agree with your terminology), but even 2.2 liters is pretty maxed out at 240hp NA, and it still will be a whore to drive in traffic.

Yes, there are SC kits available for both the 350 and S2000, but with 10.3 and over 11:1 CRs respectively, blown motors are highly likely. They must be tuned to perfection, there is no room for error.

More importantly, the potential of the Renesis has yet to be explored. And from the reputation the 13B FD's have, I'd imagine it is well beyond anything you could reasonably do to the 350 or S2000.

The other cars you mentioned can be much faster, but cheaper to own? A decent Supra will run well over an RX-8 plus a few substantial mods. A decent FD is getting up there, and I honestly don't know too much about the 240sx/Silvia.

I think this guy wants a new car, and wants it to be fast, but I don't think he is racing for pinks.

I honestly believe that all the RX-8 needs is the correct fueling, and it will run with 350 or S2000. That may only be a $500 chip.

Not to mention, the RX-8 seats four.

Give it some time to see how the ECU deal pans out. That's what I am doing. However, by then the C6 will be unveiled with a ~400hp stock 6.0L motor. But don't get me started on that car.

Originally posted by shift_zoom8
I seem to remember a few members, maybe including Canzoomer, who suggested that the lower compression of the RX8 automatic trans engine (lower power engine) would be better for FI. I don't remember if they mentioned other factors besides compresson that would make the AT engine a better candidate.

yep...they were talking about the 4 port vs 6 port...the 4 port (which happens to be in the automatic here in the states) supposedly allows more air in because they stay open longer than the 6...but they also said that it's close, because while the 6 port doesn't stay open as long...it has more ports to allow air also...i think the point was something to that effect..

Thanks again for the inputs....I'll have to wait and see. I guess its still to early to unlock to full potentail of the renesis....I have a feeling there is alot more to it. Call it a hunch, but there has go to be a way to make the renesis produce 320 HP safely and easily.....only time will tell. I'll keep my fingers crossed!

RX-8 is the car to OWN.
Alot of magazines say, while your driving it.. the numbers.. dyno charts... just vanish away.

K&N Intake adds 12 hp(some on forum has on, and has dyno charts)
Borla Exhaust adde 8 hp(some on forum has, and has dyno charts)
ECU upgrade adds 20-30 hp(canzoomer's ecu upgrade stage I)

Mod will come, and aftermarket support is on its way... Greedy and HKS said they will donw the future build turbo for the rx-8.. wait 6-12 months.

What's the deal here? Did Mazda change the ECU to comply with emissions requirements? If so, is the ECU mod legal?

I can't wait to get my 8 and I strongly suggest a test drive. I warn you though, it wasn't till I drove one for the 3rd time that I actually took the RPM's up there. The first two times I was very dissappointed but once I let it rev up the thing can move.

On the other hand, if you want extreme acceleration on a budget find a used late model Z28 or Trans AM. You can pick one up with low miles for low $20k's(Coupe). We bought one new for $26k and have put about $1200 into the intake and exhaust. The car has responded extremely well and we're up above 375hp. Also, you should know some of the '01 and '02 F-Bodies have an LS-6 block and they all have the LS-6 intake manifold. (LS-6 is the Corvette Z06 engine, stock 405hp) We're going to put about another $3-4.5k into ported, polished LS-6 racing heads and cams which will give us a complete LS-6. Others with a similar setup have gotten over 500hp. Wanna spend another few grand? Turbo that thing and you can churn out as much as 650hp.

Also, with only a few mods to the intake we ran the car and it broke 13 seconds in the 1/4.

But since this is an RX-8 forum I will continue to push for the 8... it's a fantastic car... :D

wow...I didn't know those simple mods add so much for the 8...crap...that means I'm gonna have to sell the S......:(

Originally posted by shift_zoom8
I seem to remember a few members, maybe including Canzoomer, who suggested that the lower compression of the RX8 automatic trans engine (lower power engine) would be better for FI. I don't remember if they mentioned other factors besides compresson that would make the AT engine a better candidate.

The A/T shares the same compression ratio as the M/T. The difference is that it has 4 ports instead of 6 ports.

Various people were commenting that the ports flow a little smoother in the A/T as opposed to the M/T, which should be more effective for Forced Induction.

I'm going by this principal as to why the A/T would respond better to forced induction as opposed to the M/T...IT NEEDS IT MORE :p

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac
Keep in mind a NA 350Z or G35 with a $500 plenum will also boost it (dyno proven) around 20-25hp, this is before messing around with the ECU. Perhaps there is something the rotary can benefit from better air intake path as well.

The new 'S2200' seems to be putting down some mad whp on dynojets in stock form. Supercharged 350Z's are over well over 400hp at crank except I'd watch out for blown engines since some cases have been reported. Overall, if you want power, the RX-8 is not the car to get, a FD, Supra, or even SR20DETT 240SX would be faster and cheaper to own.

The G35's respond damn well to nitrous as well. Seen figures of something around 310 WHP on a mildly jetted setup on 91 Octane fuel.

Originally posted by cueball1029
If your looking for a super fast strait line car than the RX8 may not be the way to go. If your looking for pure speed than the 350Z or even WRX may be the way to go. The RX8 is more about handling and killing the twisties than strait up speed.

I'd say take a test drive of everything and see what you think and keep in mind that Canzoomer's ECU upgrade will up the HP by 25.:)

Hes interested in stage II this adds 45 to 55 hp and its been tested with testpipe so far adding I think it was 52 whp.

That brings us to 232 whp with just ecu and midpipe. We also have a very huge weight advantage on the Z. This is just awsome imho. Then wait for a good intake system to come out and some headers and exhaust. That is just the surface of what can be done with the RX8 and your already at a minimum of 252 whp (our cars really love to breathe so I MIGHT be a little conservative here).

Im sure you will suprise more than a few Z and G35 owners hehe and wont that be fun!

Originally posted by -=Zeqs=-
The A/T shares the same compression ratio as the M/T. The difference is that it has 4 ports instead of 6 ports.

Various people were commenting that the ports flow a little smoother in the A/T as opposed to the M/T, which should be more effective for Forced Induction.

I'm going by this principal as to why the A/T would respond better to forced induction as opposed to the M/T...IT NEEDS IT MORE :p

Ok, thanks for clarifying.

Does anyone have any idea why Mazda detuned this engine so much? It is obviously capable of so much more.

I read in Car and Driver it was because they needed to meet US fuel efficiency requirements. That makes no sense, because the car is getting much lower gas mileage than the sticker says.

It also can't be emissions because running rich and wasting gas will not decrease emissions.

WTF? Did Mazda just want to see if they could sell a detuned version with piss poor gas mileage in the states? Well, they obviously can.

It seems like some kind of joke. As if the Japanese are laughing at all the silly Americans in their 15 second RX-8's and filling up every couple of days. Well, the joke's over.

Give us our hp and mpg back, you bastards!

Originally posted by jdwk
Does anyone have any idea why Mazda detuned this engine so much? It is obviously capable of so much more.

I read in Car and Driver it was because they needed to meet US fuel efficiency requirements. That makes no sense, because the car is getting much lower gas mileage than the sticker says.

It also can't be emissions because running rich and wasting gas will not decrease emissions.

WTF? Did Mazda just want to see if they could sell a detuned version with piss poor gas mileage in the states? Well, they obviously can.

It seems like some kind of joke. As if the Japanese are laughing at all the silly Americans in their 15 second RX-8's and filling up every couple of days. Well, the joke's over.

Give us our hp and mpg back, you bastards!


Running rich will increase the life of the cat however, which is an emissions issue.

It will increase the life, but isn't that because it won't be doing it's job as well, which puts more pullutants into the air.

Originally posted by jdwk
Does anyone have any idea why Mazda detuned this engine so much? It is obviously capable of so much more.

It also can't be emissions because running rich and wasting gas will not decrease emissions.



This has been well and thoroughly documented on this forum - we know exactly why Mazda detuned this engine.

It is for emissions related reasons - not that the output of pollutants from the tailpipe needed amending, but that new for 2004 US regulations require emissions control equipment to survive a life of 120K miles without requiring replacement (previous was something like 50K or 70K miles). Mazda, late in the testing routines, found that their initial tune would make it doubtful that the required catalytic converter life would be met - they had to cobble together a revised ECU map with richer mixture at high load and high RPM, which lowers the exhaust temperature, which directly results in longer catalytic converter life. Note that the high rpm high load condition isn't even part of any emissions testing program.

End result - you can't have it back from Mazda. They can't meet cat converter durability requirements with a leaner mixture.

Regards,
Gordon

OK, thanks. I have searched through here plenty of times, and asked a few times as well, and this is the first straight answer I have found or received.

That actually makes sense. It is an insanely stupid regulation though. A difference of 4mpg (I am using 16 vs 20) over 120k miles, would be about 1500 gallons of gasoline wasted. How many cats can you replace with the cost of 1500 gallons of gasoline?

Can you point me to the original post? It's probably one of those things right in front of your face that you never see.

Couldn't Mazda just run two cats? I read somewhere that the WRX has three.

Originally posted by jdwk
Couldn't Mazda just run two cats? I read somewhere that the WRX has three.

I thought the RX-8 did have 2 cats, and adding another cat will further decrease HP.

Does anyone know? Adding another cat in series would decrease HP, and it probably wouldn't help that much in terms of the life of the first one anyway.

However, I am talking about adding one in parallel, which would increase HP. It would require a dual exhaust pre-cat, which is why Mazda would need another production year to make that kind of a change.

But even so, the increase in HP from a more free flowing exhaust is not the point. The increase would be from the fuel maps that Mazda would now be able to run without worrying about cat life.

I searched and there are two.

I am still almost willing to bet money that this is exactly what Mazda does.

The 2004 models will have 247hp, and Mazda will claim it is because they've add a true dual exhaust, when actually just allowed them to legally run better fuel maps.

Unfortunately, it will cost more.

Originally posted by jdwk
I searched and there are two.

I am still almost willing to bet money that this is exactly what Mazda does.

The 2004 models will have 247hp, and Mazda will claim it is because they've add a true dual exhaust, when actually just allowed them to legally run better fuel maps.

Unfortunately, it will cost more.

Current models are 2004, and don't hold your breath.

I took my '91 MR2 Turbo's stock tubing and cat out. I plumbed it with 3" diameter tubing and a stock Mustang V8 cat (with some interesting engineering) and wallah... If the cats were larger and the tubing expanded the car would breath better ie., more hp! Keeping a cars cat cooler by dumping more fuel into the mixture is not the way to save the enviroment. High temps kill cats no matter how you look at it and for the government to insist that we waste fuel, if that is what it takes, to keep a cat alive for 120k that is assinign. Bigger headers, cat backs, and cats to offer less backflow pressure is the answer especially for those of us who intend to turbo our babies once Mazdaspeed has it to offer. I wonder if there is an enviromental group out there willing to argue this case and actually do some good for the planet (and our beautiful cars as well).

Originally posted by 93rdcurrent
I took my '91 MR2 Turbo's stock tubing and cat out. I plumbed it with 3" diameter tubing and a stock Mustang V8 cat (with some interesting engineering) and wallah... If the cats were larger and the tubing expanded the car would breath better ie., more hp! Keeping a cars cat cooler by dumping more fuel into the mixture is not the way to save the enviroment. High temps kill cats no matter how you look at it and for the government to insist that we waste fuel, if that is what it takes, to keep a cat alive for 120k that is assinign. Bigger headers, cat backs, and cats to offer less backflow pressure is the answer especially for those of us who intend to turbo our babies once Mazdaspeed has it to offer. I wonder if there is an enviromental group out there willing to argue this case and actually do some good for the planet (and our beautiful cars as well).

Don't blame the government, blame Mazda, they're the ones that came up with the quick fix, they should have seen the problem before the car went into production.

To the EPA:
OK let's say that I am an EPA officer and it is my job to overlook car manufacturers to see that they are being "earth friendly" should I not pay attention to the fact that a particular company is wasting resources and causing more problems to save a $300 part? (price was a guess any dealer can step in and fill in the correct price). 120k is aproximately 8 years and their are many more expensive parts that will be left along the roadside long before then.

To the manufacturer:
Wasting fuel to save a $300 part, ie. the catalytic converter, that could be saved with better engineering is not acceptable. Customers who will be buying autos for years to come are evaluating you everyday based on how you solve your engineering problems. MPG are important to many of the people out there and the enviroment is also an important issue. Cutting corners to deal with lower octane in the North American market is absolutely unacceptable. It doesn't matter whether it is lower octane or higher cat. converter standards it all amounts to your customers lowered mpg and hp. Fix it.

I am one of the biggest Mazda fans out there. But this is my point exactly, and I am pretty pissed about it.

I really wanted an RX-8, and even though I was disappointed by the performance and horrified of the gas mileage, I was still considering buying one until I found out the real reason Mazda "fixed" the car.

I wrote a letter to Car and Driver about it. We'll see if they put it in March's issue. Probably not, but I figured I would give it a shot.

Write to your congressman...

;)

To the EPA:
OK let's say that I am an EPA officer and it is my job to overlook car manufacturers to see that they are being "earth friendly" should I not pay attention to the fact that a particular company is wasting resources and causing more problems to save a $300 part? (price was a guess any dealer can step in and fill in the correct price). 120k is aproximately 8 years and their are many more expensive parts that will be left along the roadside long before then.


I doubt that being "earth friendly" is a part of EPA bureaucrats job description.