I just picked up the new March 2004 Motortrend and the RX-8 was placed 1st overall over the S2000 and 350Z. I hope next year or the following year the relase a Mazdaspeed turbocharged RX8 it will look great in my garage next to my FD:D

Where did u get March '04 motortrend

Borders Bookstore here in New York.

Shit! It ain't even Feburary yet! WTF?

Managed to skim through the mag in the bookstore today. All three cars match fairly closely performance wise, toss up really, they gave it to the RX-8. Depends what you really like and need out of your car, that is the right choice..

"In some regards, the RX-8 is a small exoticar with marvelous engineering innovations. "

Rotary Nut, dude, that was kinda funny (lol)

Originally posted by noahprtlnd
"In some regards, the RX-8 is a small exoticar with marvelous engineering innovations. "


At least we agree on this!!!!

Yeah i read that article... GOD made RX-8 ...it is the best sports car out right now... even though its slower.. it still wins.. i drove one man i didn't want the test drive to end.

Imagine how better it would be with 50 more horses... man it would give corvette and 911's a run for its money...

RX-8 isn't faster... buts its a better sports car of the 3. PERIOD.

Also in the article ...
They compare top of the line 350Z... TRACK MODEL
Top of the line S2000
BASE RX-8 with no sport suspension and it STILL won.. "our tester wasn't even the sport suspension equipped version."

1.) RX-8 - $26,680
2.) 350Z - $34,180
3.) S2000- $32,800

The interior in the rx-8 was base-trim... and it was better then 350Z well-equipped..

"Magical Mazda".. haha hell YEAH

"sport suspension"? if it's the 6MT model the "sport" suspension is standard. they did test the manual right?

Sport Suspension?? hmmm... RX-8 only come with one kind of suspension doesn't it? S2000 too, only one suspension... 350Z in the other hand got track package and all ...

IMO, performance wise, rx8 really can't compete with S2000... but the extra two seat, suicide door, great interior, exterior design, unique rotary engine is probably what won RX-8 first place.

If it was BEST Performance Sport car... i think (IN MY OPINION) S2000 deserve that spot. but if it was BEST overall Sport Car, then RX-8 deserve the spot.

.....and if it was UGLIEST interior... 350Z definitely holds a strong first place, in that case! =)

Yeah, if the 8 is a 6sp, then it's a "standard suspension," but compared to the auto I guess it is sort of a "sport" suspension.

Yeah, I also think the 8 is slightly out of place there with 2-seaters. Kind of odd. Especially the S2k, as that is about as pure a sports car as you can get.

Either way 13-B... I'd have to agree with you on all accounts. :)

Every one is going to treat this differently. I am sure the guys on my350z are screaming bloody murder because the Z beat the 8 on the performance tests. There are so many variable, it all depends on which is more important, and everyone is different.

BTW, aren't all 6MT equipped with the "Sport Suspension" and all AT not?

I thought only the Sport and Gt models have sport suspension

The Z guys are crying but I think they should be used to it by now.

Rx-8 vs 350Z vs Monaro (Gto)

http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2003/07/10/FFXB1MMNXHD.html

a few highlights:


Fuel economy still appears to be something of a rotary bugbear, though. Our RX-8 drank 14.1 litres of premium per 100km, which was bad enough to put it behind the significantly heavier and more powerful Monaro. Not quite enough, though, to put the kiss of death on the most exhilarating and enjoyable engine here.

Sealing it for the Mazda is ride quality, which quietly soaks up most surface uglies without drawing them to the attention of the occupants, making it a good option for long journeys. It does this while maintaining a strict sense of handling discipline and control, which makes it the top choice for drivers who want the best of both worlds.

Sealing the win for the Mazda is its classy, non-conformist design, good ergonomics, impressive build quality and unmatched sense of occasion Our choice is the RX-8 because it caters to both requirements without compromise. It performs strongly and handles better than the Monaro and is more practical and comfortable to live with than the Zed, thanks to its adventurous door system.


from edmunds.com 350Z vs rx-8

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/101039/page003.html

Although most editors agreed that the RX-8 would be just as good with two less doors and a more traditional shape, no one was complaining after experiencing the car from the driver seat. With its lightweight feel, incredibly smooth power delivery and stylish cabin, the RX-8 offers a combination of performance and comfort that few sports cars can match. Its personality doesn't overwhelm you at first, but spend any amount of time behind the wheel and the value of proper balance, minimal weight and a precisely tuned suspension become immediately obvious. If the RX-8 represents the future of the sports car, we can't wait to see what's next. The Z may be faster, but the Rx-8 is the better sportscar

top gear on the 350z:

part of the reason nissans Z cars came so fat and so heavy is cause they were designed for the american market and the american car is as you know an enormous sofa. this one wasn't just designed for the americans, it was designed by the americans. to be honest it looks a bit of a mess. but it would cause its a jap car designed in america and the head of a project was an indian and the engine is french. we have had fusion food before, but its the first fusion car. Think of it as being a raw hamburger curry served in a disinterested way in a bed of garlic ajuis. If your the sort of person that likes to cruise the stsreet annoying everyone with the stereo this car is for you.

it doesnt take very long to work out that this car has many weak links and the weakest link of all is the engine. first there is the noise and its just a noise and annoying drone and it gets on yoru nerves. Then there is the perfomance. they say it will do 0 to 60 in six seconds ...but it never feels that fast. when you look at the 350Z you expect it to be light, sporty and agile, but its not. I was expecting it to be like a mx-5 fun...but its not. not even a little.

What it is is a ton and a half of iron mongry. its just a muscle car and muscle cars should be fun but its not. The noise is driving me mad. The hard ride and the effort it takes to drive this car makes it one of the most exhausting cars I have ever come across. The look of the interior is fine, but what is not so good is this (showing the flimpsy build quality) I've seen better build quality in an allotment share. There no practicality. The 350 is a 3 out of 10, it could do better.


top gear on the rx-8
while its not the torquiest engine in the world, nor is it the most economical, but God its smooth. Because it doesn't feel like its running on anything as crude as petrol, it seems more like double cream. This is one of the easiest cars to drive fast that I have ever come across. Its just so forgiving. Its like a punching bag. You can give it absolute hell and it just never fights back. Of all the cars I've driven this year, Im fairly certain this is the best one

Gosh, C & D did a comparison and the rx-8 won too. I'm seeing a trend here.

Originally posted by zerobanger
The Z guys are crying but I think they should be used to it by now.

Hardly...but you can continue to think so if it makes you feel better. when you have to put other cars down to make you or your car feel better, what do you think that means?

Why all the hate against the Z?.....I love it. I just love the rotary more. Both are great. We are all lucky that we have these choices. RWD sports cars at decent prices....it's great!

I'm not saying that anybody has in this thread really bashed the Z. But I feel it coming......I've seen how it starts in all the other threads....

Now, what I will never accept is calling a FWD car a sports car...no matter what numbers it puts up......it just ain't right.

I don't know about all this other stuff cause I like my 8 too much to worry about anything else.

BUT RX_999 THAT'S SOME FUNNY SH!T...

Originally posted by Dookie_Rx-8
I thought only the Sport and Gt models have sport suspension

After whipping out my RX8 brochure thats by my bed, I found the sport suspension and large brakes are standard on all 6 speeds.

:)

They should be used to it by now, or at least GET used to it. Now that the Z isn't the newest toy on the block and its true colors are showing, no one is gushing over it anymore. Personally I can't see why anyone EVER gushed over it, but that's just me.

Originally posted by 13B-MSP

and if it was UGLIEST interior... 350Z definitely holds a strong first place

If they judged cars on interior ugliness only, Nissans would ALWAYS come in first place.

Originally posted by scorp76
They should be used to it by now, or at least GET used to it. Now that the Z isn't the newest toy on the block and its true colors are showing, no one is gushing over it anymore. Personally I can't see why anyone EVER gushed over it, but that's just me.

That seems to be your personal perception, however, the Z has been out for over a year and a half, and it's still talked about frequently, in magazines, amongst peers, and forums (especially on this board). On the other hand, the RX-8 IS the newest toy on the block, and it seems like its publicity is slightly diminishing already. However, like your quote, this is merely my perception. The difference between our perceptions, is that I still consider the other car (in this case the 8) one of the best cars on the market in its class and can admit it. I would own an 8 and Z if i could. However, these cars are so unique and each has its own strongpoints that there is no way for me to declare an all-out winner.

Originally posted by zthang
Hardly...but you can continue to think so if it makes you feel better. when you have to put other cars down to make you or your car feel better, what do you think that means?

I'm not putting the Z down. Its good for what it is. I read all the threads over there and it does appear they are crying.

Didn't mean to offend you. The 350Z is a fantastic car.

Ok?

Originally posted by zthang
That seems to be your personal perception, however, the Z has been out for over a year and a half, and it's still talked about frequently, in magazines, amongst peers, and forums (especially on this board). On the other hand, the RX-8 IS the newest toy on the block, and it seems like its publicity is slightly diminishing already. However, like your quote, this is merely my perception. The difference between our perceptions, is that I still consider the other car (in this case the 8) one of the best cars on the market in its class and can admit it. I would own an 8 and Z if i could. However, these cars are so unique and each has its own strongpoints that there is no way for me to declare an all-out winner. The fact is, the only all-out winner is the car that YOU choose based on YOUR needs.

If performance is paramount and by performance, I mean power... then there are cars for you there. If it's handling, then there are cars for you there too. If it's the best of all worlds, the RX-8 has fit the bill for many of us and will continue to.

No awards or comparo tests will change that fact.

Nice as the RX8 is, I must say that the Motor Trend article would have been more legitimate were it comparing the RX8 with cars which are more like it in performace and concept, like the Infiniti G35 and the Lexus IS300. The Z is a 2 seat, 2 door hatchback and the S2000 is an all out sports car with barely enough room for two people.

According to the article, the Rx8 won not because it outperformed the other two car in ANY measure of performance but because it was "competetive" and was a good "compromise". It was quieter, had more room and was less expensive. Clearly the S2000 engineers had none of those things as their priorities when they were building the surgical scalpel that we call the S2k. Can you tell that I own the S?;)

But I love sports cars in general and have great admiration for Mazda and its cars. I would love the RX8 to succeed and then I would love for Mazda to produce the next generation RX7 so that I could buy that road rocket as well. I love my Miata.....it tells me what Mazda is all about.:)

And congrats to all you RX8 owners, you have a handsome car with good performance and practicality to boot.

Originally posted by brothervoodoo
All three cars match fairly closely performance wise, toss up really, they gave it to the RX-8.

Didnt the S2k and Z run high 13s and RX8 run mid 14s?

I think were all in agreement here that all the cars in the comparison are great cars...i wouldn't be on this forum if the rx8 wasn't a great car. no need to try and name an all out winner when there obviously is none.

Yeah, it's like each car is a steak... some people prefer a different cut and level to which it's cooked.

Are any of them wrong? No.

All up to the individual. Enjoy the steak the way "you" like it and move on... and be happy that the others at your table got one they liked too.

*group hug*

I love rotaries and always did since i was 11... im 16 now.... but i always shows repect for Z .. supra .. Skyline.. all those cars are fantasic... everycar is good for something... something specific... thats what its made...

350Z or RX-8 both are bad ass rollers... to roll out in...

Originally posted by racerdave
Yeah, it's like each car is a steak.

Yeah, and the Z is completely overdone/overcooked.

Cmon.... we all know which is the "best sports car" among the three cars; it aint the 8, and it aint the Z.

I love Mazda because of this principle: They believe in lightweight, great handling, uncompromising cars.

The 8 is a compromise car. If I needed to calculate back steats into my buying decision I'd buy one... it becomes the obvious (hell, the ONLY) choice.

If you read through the article, it's clear that the 8 wins between the three cars because of its practical nature. There are people who want a car that puts perforamance and the driving experience above anything else... these people usualy look for things called "sports cars", because, well, sports cars are just that... cars that don't compromise the experience for practical limits. I think it's a little foolish for the 8 to win in this comparo... because it clearly doesnt do anything as well as the S (from a performance aspect) save braking... which is close.

The S sticks better.

The S accelarates quicker.

The S is lighter.

The S has tighter steering.

The S is better balanced and transitions better. ( A true 50/50 weight distrubution Vs. a 48/52).

IMO The article shouldnt have taken practicality into consideration when juding sports cars.

The S should have won, and the Z should have come in last. =D

I can respect your OPINION that the S2000 should have won, but I have a few issues with that.

first, the rx-8's steering is far better than the s2000. Actually I should not say far better, but its definately more precise and has a better feel. I have driven both, I know.

The S2000 is not better balanced than the rx-8. I dont know the weight distribution, but the rx-8 is 50/50 weight and everything about the car was designed for balance in mind. Rx-8 is definately better balanced (not the the s2000 isn't amazing in that catagory).

Transitions better? the car feels like a miata or a civic until 6000 RPM then it goes nuts. Thats alot of fun, I agree..but its not "better".

As far as the S "sticking" better, I have seen .88 to .92 on various tests for skid pad on both cars. In this test the s2000 had better grip, so if thats your point, ok.

The Rx-8 also has better brakes. the best tested was 60-0 in 111 feet, the s2000 cant offer that.

the S2000 is a great choice, I dont have an issue with anything thinking the S should have won, but I still prefer the 8.

first, the rx-8's steering is far better than the s2000

What I mean by better is how tight the steering is. The steering ratio on the S is much tighter then on the 8; it might not be "better feeling" to some people (that is highly subjective) but it most deffinetly is better for performance purposes.... it simply is tighter... and that is a fact.

The S2000 is not better balanced than the rx-8. I dont know the weight distribution, but the rx-8 is 50/50 weight and everything about the car was designed for balance in mind.

Actually, no... it is not 50/50 balanced; it's ALMOST 50/50 balanced... but it is 48/52; there was a whole schpeel on how Mazda wanted to design it this way so that the driver would offset the weight (I'm not going to go into what I think of that, kind of like how Nissan WANTED to design the Z so it was 46/54 so that the weight would shift forward and be 50/50 through a turn). The S2000 is a true 50/50.

Transitions better? the car feels like a miata or a civic until 6000 RPM then it goes nuts. Thats alot of fun, I agree..but its not "better".

You don't atuoX do you? I don't mean hit vtec by transition better. It's clear you've never driven an S2000 either; I'm starting to wonder if you actually own an 8.

The Rx-8 also has better brakes. the best tested was 60-0 in 111 feet, the s2000 cant offer that.

They brake very similarly. Kutos to Mazda.

the S2000 is a great choice, I dont have an issue with anything thinking the S should have won, but I still prefer the 8.

The S is a better sports/performance car period. The 8 is a better compromise car period... which is apparently what MT was looking for.

Now if Mazda released a 2600lb two door with a rotary.... we can all dream I guess.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
What I mean by better is how tight the steering is. The steering ratio on the S is much tighter then on the 8; it might not be "better feeling" to some people (that is highly subjective) but it most deffinetly is better for performance purposes.... it simply is tighter... and that is a fact.



Actually, no... it is not 50/50 balanced; it's ALMOST 50/50 balanced... but it is 48/52; there was a whole schpeel on how Mazda wanted to design it this way so that the driver would offset the weight (I'm not going to go into what I think of that, kind of like how Nissan WANTED to design the Z so it was 46/54 so that the weight would shift forward and be 50/50 through a turn). The S2000 is a true 50/50.



You don't atuoX do you? I don't mean hit vtec by transition better. It's clear you've never driven an S2000 either; I'm starting to wonder if you actually own an 8.



They brake very similarly. Kutos to Mazda.



The S is a better sports/performance car period. The 8 is a better compromise car period... which is apparently what MT was looking for.

Now if Mazda released a 2600lb two door with a rotary.... we can all dream I guess.

who the hell are you to tell me I never drove an S2000? And who the hell are you to tell me I dont have an rx-8? I have an rx-8 and an rx-7. I dont need lectured by you. You are entitled to your opinion, but you cross the line when you accuse me of lying.

I dont agree with your analysis, btw.

First off here is my link where I posted my review of the s2000 on 11/25/2002

http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135939&highlight=s2000

here is the original post
my friend and me drove each others Rx7 and S2000
I have wanted to drive a s2000 for what seems like forever. My friend Kevin and me decided to trade cars and have some fun on the street....Anyway after driving the two cars I can put things in perspective. Looks are subjective and in my opinion both cars are stunning. The S2000 had more of a refind modern feel while driving, while my car had more of a brutal raw feel to it. I was really impressed with the power the S2000 has, but I think the fun with the s2000 is the revving of the engine and how happy the car seems to want to climb to 9000 rpm. I shift at 8100 in mine, although my car loves to rev, it seems the S2000 climbs revs even faster than My car does. It was funny, I forget how loud my car is with my MP. Sitting in the car I never notice it. When I was in his S2000 and he flew by me in my RX7 I can hear the exhaust on the RX7 and its LOUD. LOL.

My car is not stock and I forgot what a stock rx7 feels like so I cant compare power. I can tell you that the S2000 has a much softer ride, bumps are not as brutal. The shifting is perfect and the steering is exact. The Rx7's shifter is ok. My chasis has 152,000 miles, I have alot of play in my steering and I have worn bushings. His car had better steering response as a result of that.

He was really, really, really, really impressed with the torque of my car. He was really having alot of fun driving it.

So in the end my opinion is the S2000 is far more civilized and refined than the RX7. In the RX7 you can feel the engine and the road more and in the S2000 you feel the car more. You can have the top down in the s2000 and not mess your hair up, LOL.

I would Love to have an S2000.

are you still calling me a liar? you still dont think I own an rx-8?

according to hondacars.com

http://www.hondacars.com/models/specifications.asp?ModelName=S2000

the weight distribution is 49/51

according to mazdausa

Don't be fooled by its power: the RENESIS engine is uncommonly compact. (In fact, it's about the same height as the transmission). This facilitates an advanced front-midship layout, which provides an ideal mounting position for the entire powertrain - low and behind the front axle. That positioning is a key factor in the Mazda RX-8's approximate 50-50 weight distribution, which helps to provide exceptional stability and handling.

My garage 2...(from 1st post)

I actually just read the article, and think it is a waste of ink. There is pretty much the same heated discussion at the S2ki board as well. I don't think it is a fair comparo, and certainly proves nothing.

I think we are VICTIMS of clever manipulation by Motor Trend's attempt to sell more magazines. Surely they KNEW a comparo like this would set off a ruckus, and people (I am guilty) would go out and actually buy their rag.

If you want pure muscle sport car performance - get the Z
If you want pure balanced sport car performance - get theS2K
If you want balanced performance with two extra seats get the 8

approximate 50-50 weight distribution

The key word is approximate. The rx-8 is 48/52, the 2000-2003 S2000 is 50/50*.

Anybody can write testimony about a car on a message board; it doesnt mean that they are telling the truth, or know what they're talking about. I've based my position on your experiences by your comments, specificly:

Transitions better? the car feels like a miata or a civic until 6000 RPM then it goes nuts. Thats alot of fun, I agree..but its not "better".

Which is just an uneducated sort of position. If you compare the dynos for an 8 and an S, you'd see that both cars have a similar power delivery, until 6K, where the F20C walks completely away from the renesis.

The only thing I currently like about the renesis is its potential; in my mind it clearly has more room to grow then the F20C (or the F22C for that matter). Time will tell.

*I'll be upfront and say I don't know much about the '04 models save the fact that the F20C has been replaced with the F22C and it weighs more.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
The key word is approximate. The rx-8 is 48/52, the 2000-2003 S2000 is 50/50*.




the honda web site said 49/51 who cares.



Anybody can write testimony about a car on a message board; it doesnt mean that they are telling the truth, or know what they're talking about. I've based my position on your experiences by your comments, specificly:



Oh ok, I must have lied. I guess I gave a flattering review of the S2000 on the rx-7 board for the fun of it.





Which is just an uneducated sort of position. If you compare the dynos for an 8 and an S, you'd see that both cars have a similar power delivery, until 6K, where the F20C walks completely away from the renesis.

The only thing I currently like about the renesis is its potential; in my mind it clearly has more room to grow then the F20C (or the F22C for that matter). Time will tell.

*I'll be upfront and say I don't know much about the '04 models save the fact that the F20C has been replaced with the F22C and it weighs more.

oh ok, i'm so glad. You are entitled to your opinion, but you cant respect someone elses without calling them a liar. You are a punk.

You are entitled to your opinion, but you cant respect someone elses without calling them a liar. You are a punk.

The dyno comments are facts, not opinions. You come out and comment about the S being equal to a civic or a miata and you're calling me the punk? LOL

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
The dyno comments are facts, not opinions. You come out and comment about the S being equal to a civic or a miata and you're calling me the punk? LOL

R & T did a test shifing at 6000 RPM in the s2000 and 0-60 was 11 seconds. UNDER 6000 RPM yes, it accelates similar to a miata or civic. its a fact.

I never said the s2000 doesn't have a better power to weight, but as you probably know the rx8 cant be dynoed without going into limp mode. those 170 RWHP figures you have seen are not accurate.

lets put it this way, car +driver=3200 lbs. trap speed=95. No way in hell it only has 170 rwhp.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
The only thing I currently like about the renesis is its potential; in my mind it clearly has more room to grow then the F20C (or the F22C for that matter). Time will tell.


I'm not so sure this is true. My co-worker has an s2k with a Vortech Supercharger, and it lays down 298 - 302 hp at the rear wheels. A well tuned F20C with stock internals can bump that up to almost 350hp. I doubt the Renesis will approach 350 rwhp any time soon, but as you stay, only time will tell.

R & T did a test shifing at 6000 RPM in the s2000 and 0-60 was 11 seconds. UNDER 6000 RPM yes, it accelates similar to a miata or civic. its a fact.

I'll call BS on that; how about substantiating it?

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
I'll call BS on that; how about substantiating it?

you can call BS on it, i'm not about to scour the net for some test that I am sure was done.

You called BS on the fact that I own an Rx-8, you called BS on the fact that I drove a S2000. So it doesn't suprise me.

How bout I get you a nice tall glass of STFU?

I'm not so sure this is true. My co-worker has an s2k with a Vortech Supercharger, and it lays down 298 - 302 hp at the rear wheels. A well tuned F20C with stock internals can bump that up to almost 350hp. I doubt the Renesis will approach 350 rwhp any time soon, but as you stay, only time will tell.

I'm personaly thinking of going with a comptech supercharger. I've heard the comptechs are more reliable and if you get it installed at a dealership it won't void the factory warranty.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
I'll call BS on that; how about substantiating it?

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_9911_hondas20/index1.html


The S2000 numbers came after launching at 8000 rpm (producing little tire spin) and shifting at 8300. On one run, we launched and shifted at 5500; the 0-60 time rose to more than 11 seconds. Herein lies the car's biggest problem: Most people will never drive in the best rpm range (7000 to 8500), shifting too early. Our advice is to treat the S2000 like you hate it and you'll get the most out of it. We did and loved every minute of it.

Well, considering a well tuned RX-7 can hit 350 without THAT much work (certainly much less work than adding a supercharger since it's already turbo'ed, but I digress), once boosted work gets done on the 8's they will be well within the area. Of course, boosting the 8 is looking to be more of a challenge, but it's certainly do-able.



Originally posted by dcroteau
I'm not so sure this is true. My co-worker has an s2k with a Vortech Supercharger, and it lays down 298 - 302 hp at the rear wheels. A well tuned F20C with stock internals can bump that up to almost 350hp. I doubt the Renesis will approach 350 rwhp any time soon, but as you stay, only time will tell.

Originally posted by scorp76
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_9911_hondas20/index1.html

Man that was cool. thanks!!!

The S2000 numbers came after launching at 8000 rpm (producing little tire spin) and shifting at 8300. On one run, we launched and shifted at 5500; the 0-60 time rose to more than 11 seconds.

Cool. Makes no Sense though. I don't need to launch or go over 6k on any shift to outrun a civic Si to 60.

Sounds fishy, but at least its documented... kinda like the 8's 5-60 of 9 seconds.

Where's the 8's 5-60 time of 9 seconds documented?

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=4346&page_number=1

Theres one article disucssing the odd dropoff, I'll find the exact article I'm speaking of when I get home; its a Euro mag.

The C&D number is 7.5 seconds. Yes, the dropoff does indicate what is known about the 8... it's a torqueless wonder.

But the S2k has a similar drop... 5.4 0-60 to 6.9 5-60.

Either way, they're both fun cars.

Just wondering where the 9 second number came from.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
The S sticks better.

The S has tighter steering.

The S is better balanced and transitions better

1. It's debatable, magazine skidpad numbers for both cars are very similar. It may have a harder suspension setting and a little less body roll but still gets .88-.93 g which the RX-8 gets too while having a better ride.

2. Yes, the steering gear ratio is tighter...

3. But the RX-8 still transitions better according to the steering response test in the magazine. The RX-8 needs a little more turn of the steering wheel but reacts quicker.

Originally posted by zerobanger
R & T did a test shifing at 6000 RPM in the s2000 and 0-60 was 11 seconds. UNDER 6000 RPM yes, it accelates similar to a miata or civic. its a fact.

I never said the s2000 doesn't have a better power to weight, but as you probably know the rx8 cant be dynoed without going into limp mode. those 170 RWHP figures you have seen are not accurate.

lets put it this way, car +driver=3200 lbs. trap speed=95. No way in hell it only has 170 rwhp.

Hey Banger,
Just out of curiousity, what's the RX-8's 0-60 time without a clutch drop, and shifting at no higher than 6000 rpms?
I'm guessing that it's going to be pretty slow too....It's not exactly rocket now is it?

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
I'm personaly thinking of going with a comptech supercharger. I've heard the comptechs are more reliable and if you get it installed at a dealership it won't void the factory warranty.

<thread hijack>
Yes, I've heard that the Comptechs are more reliable too, but they make less hp. The real reason he got a Vortech is because we carry their product line. I set up an install article with SuperStreet, so he got the install for free as well (should be out in 2 - 3 months).

His car is hella quick now, and it sounds real mean. He put an Apexi N1 exaust on it too. You can hear the car coming from a mile away - literally!

If S2ks could accomodate a 6'4" frame, that would definitely be the car for me, but as it is there's just no way.
</thread hijack>

By the way, there's something wacked with this web site. It logs me in as dcroteau from new hampshire. That's not who I am.

log out, clear your cookies then comeback and log back in.

I should be home at 9pm PT; I'll post that Euro Mag article when I get there.


I love my car, and I do think it's clear that it's a better sports car, don't get me wrong... but I still think that the Renesis will have more potential down the road.

I REALLY REALLY want to see Mazda fight the current trends and bring out a 2600lb 290hp RX-7 that runs to 60 in like 4.9... I know they can do it.

3. But the RX-8 still transitions better according to the steering response test in the magazine. The RX-8 needs a little more turn of the steering wheel but reacts quicker.

Remember they are comparing the '04 with the 8; Honda softened the steering and suspension up quiet a bit to make the car more comfortable for the daily driver as well as offset the larger wheels. The 00-'03 models have MUCH more precise steering; the change is one of the biggest complaints about the '04 over on S2ki (along with the engine/suspension changes).

S2000 VS Rx-8, who really cares? The FD will rape them both. We know the FD is the real king of performance in the import world.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
I should be home at 9pm PT; I'll post that Euro Mag article when I get there.


I love my car, and I do think it's clear that it's a better sports car, don't get me wrong... but I still think that the Renesis will have more potential down the road.

I REALLY REALLY want to see Mazda fight the current trends and bring out a 2600lb 290hp RX-7 that runs to 60 in like 4.9... I know they can do it.
I fail to see the obsession with 0-60 times like they are actually some measurement of performance.

If you are looking at 0-60 times then there are lots of other cars to buy. The RX cars have always been meant to deliver a 'package' that includes modest acceleration, and amazing handling. If you want great acceleration and modest handling, you get the 350Z. I'm quite happy with my 5.9-6.3 second 0-60 because frankly... I like my clutch just the way it is, and when the boy racers in my town rev their engine and tear up their clutch... I just smile and drive out nice and slow.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
I should be home at 9pm PT; I'll post that Euro Mag article when I get there.


I love my car, and I do think it's clear that it's a better sports car, don't get me wrong... but I still think that the Renesis will have more potential down the road.

I REALLY REALLY want to see Mazda fight the current trends and bring out a 2600lb 290hp RX-7 that runs to 60 in like 4.9... I know they can do it.

considering the 93-95 rx-7 did 0 to 60 in 4.9 to 5.2 (as tested in MT/RT) , weighed 2800 lbs and had only 255 HP, Im sure if it had 290 HP and weighed 2600 lbs it would be just a "little" faster than that.

I fail to see the obsession with 0-60 times like they are actually some measurement of performance.

Ugh... I KNOW. I realize that 0-60 times arent everything, but they ARE a measure of performance.

Herc, after all the debates we've had on this forum so long ago... you should know better. I mean... come on... I spent 30k on an S2000, runner up for me was the 8; if I was just concerned with 0-60 times I'd of bought a used Vette or a Mach 1.

With that said, 0-60 times ARE important to a performance car....just not as important as other things.

considering the 93-95 rx-7 did 0 to 60 in 4.9 to 5.2 (as tested in MT/RT) , weighed 2800 lbs and had only 255 HP, Im sure if it had 290 HP and weighed 2600 lbs it would be just a "little" faster than that.

Yeah, but we're talking about todays Mazda; they'll say it has 290, but.....

Sorry, couldnt resist.

Gotta find that Mag...

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
Yeah, but we're talking about todays Mazda; they'll say it has 290, but.....

Sorry, couldnt resist.

Gotta find that Mag...

My magazine is faster than your magazine.

S2000 VS Rx-8, who really cares? The FD will rape them both. We know the FD is the real king of performance in the import world.

Well, you are comparing a car with forced induction to two that are naturaly aspirated. Apples and oranges.

Throw a Supercharger on an S and it rapes a stock RX-7; I think if Mazda came through with a supercharger for a Mazdaspeed 8, itd be faster then a stock FD as well (a quality aftermarket FI setup should most definetly be).

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
Well, you are comparing a car with forced induction to two that are naturaly aspirated. Apples and oranges.

Throw a Supercharger on an S and it rapes a stock RX-7; I think if Mazda came through with a supercharger for a Mazdaspeed 8, itd be faster then a stock FD as well (a quality aftermarket FI setup should most definetly be).

upgrade the exhaust on the rx-7 and it will rape a SC S2000.

that doesn't even consider what will happen with a single turbo. And this is just straight line speed. Forget about that. In every single performance test the rx-7 out performs the s2000, bar none.

Ok 13B-MSP,
I haven't read the article yet...but what in your opinion puts the s2000 out over the 8 in performance. I've sat in a 2002 s2000 and it was cramped as all hell...talk about claustrophia!!
Suicide doors!!LOL........

Man, chill out everyone. The only reason why the 8 won was because of the objective of this little competition. We all know deep inside that the S2000 is the performance king of the 3 cars. We also know that the Z is very muscle car-like and has a distinction of its own (although I really can't think of one right now and no... I'm not against the Z car). Finally the 8, it has 4 seats and somewhat 4 doors in a sport car package. A compromise of a coupe and saloon, yet with near S2000 performance.

If this competition was about performance, then the 8 would lose, plain and simple ( as much as I don't like to read on paper about that). We can't have it all and it is also very objective between person to person. And like somebody said earlier in this thread, if there was a car that offered both roadster performance and saloon comfort and at the same price, we'd all be buying the same car. But of course, life is not like that so we have to decide what our priorities are and go from there.

.....sorry about that, I feel better now that I let that out :)

The only problem I have is with this S2K dude saying it is a better sports car like that's a fact and gospel. That's an opinion, just like when I say the Z is uglier than a baboon's @ss. I may believe that, but that doesn't make it true.

I personally think the 8 is the better sports car simply because it can do everything the S2K can do, while being more practical at it. But that's just me.

I personally think the 8 is the better sports car simply because it can do everything the S2K can do, while being more practical at it. But that's just me.

Right. We all know how practicality is important around the track.

The S2K is a better sports car from a performance standpoint, even the MT article didnt say the 8 actually outperformed the S... it didnt... in ANY category (save braking, which can easily be rectified with aftermarket or mugen stuff).

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
Right. We all know how practicality is important around the track.

The S2K is a better sports car from a performance standpoint, even the MT article didnt say the 8 actually outperformed the S... it didnt... in ANY category (save braking, which can easily be rectified with aftermarket or mugen stuff).

if you are going to bring the aftermarket in play I will say that the rx-8 can be modded to be faster than an S2000, hows that? How bout a stage I chip for 25 hp To the wheels?

Lets keep it stock, ok?

if you are going to bring the aftermarket in play I will say that the rx-8 can be modded to be faster than an S2000, hows that? How bout a stage I chip for 25 hp To the wheels?

Ummmmm yeah. I don't see any turbos or SCers out for the 8 YET...at least none that seem worthwhile.

I can get 370 to the crank with a comptech SC.

You're right though... lets keep it stock.

The S outperforms the 8 in EVERY category save braking. Case closed; I don't know why you can't admit it.

The S = more performance oriented.

The 8 = more practicality oriented.

The Z = one tubby feeling bXXXX.

And that's the order I think most sports car enthusiasts would rate the cars from a performance standpoint.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
Ummmmm yeah. I don't see any turbos or SCers out for the 8 YET...at least none that seem worthwhile.

I can get 370 to the crank with a comptech SC.

You're right though... lets keep it stock.

The S outperforms the 8 in EVERY category save braking. Case closed; I don't know why you can't admit it.




You are not following me, Im not dis-agreeing about the performance of the S2000, its great. The rx-8 is a great sportscar and in my opinion deserved to be first place in that test, period.

BTW A stock FD will rape a stock S2000 in any catagory, modding the two cars the gap gets even worse. Do you really think that makes the S2000 less of a sportscar?



The S = more performance oriented.

The 8 = more practicality oriented.

The Z = one tubby feeling bXXXX.

And that's the order I think most sports car enthusiasts would rate the cars from a performance standpoint. [/B]

The rx-8 has everything a sportscar needs, 50/50 weight, limit slip diff, exceptional suspesion and great engine. I can care less what cars out perform it out of the box, the sky is limited only by my wallet, ok?

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ
Right. We all know how practicality is important around the track.


That's why ended it with, "that's just me," because I don't give a fuck about a track since I don't LIVE on one like the avg Honda lover. And anyway, away from the track, the S doesn't shine as bright....once more, TO ME.

Originally posted by rx-7~rx-8
Also in the article ...
They compare top of the line 350Z... TRACK MODEL
Top of the line S2000
BASE RX-8 with no sport suspension and it STILL won.. "our tester wasn't even the sport suspension equipped version."

1.) RX-8 - $26,680
2.) 350Z - $34,180
3.) S2000- $32,800

The interior in the rx-8 was base-trim... and it was better then 350Z well-equipped..

"Magical Mazda".. haha hell YEAH

There isn't any option for the S2k other than a hard top so it is not really "top of the line".

BTW they picked the RX8 base on the overall car, including space, backseat. Not base on the sportyness of the car.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ


Actually, no... it is not 50/50 balanced; it's ALMOST 50/50 balanced... but it is 48/52; there was a whole schpeel on how Mazda wanted to design it this way so that the driver would offset the weight (I'm not going to go into what I think of that, kind of like how Nissan WANTED to design the Z so it was 46/54 so that the weight would shift forward and be 50/50 through a turn). The S2000 is a true 50/50.


Actually no... Nissan wanted to make the car heavier in the front so as the car power out of the corner it will shift the weight "back" and become closer to 50/50. This will reduce pushunder exiting a corner, which reduces understeer. So it is more like 54/46 for the Z.

Originally posted by Hanzo
Actually no... Nissan wanted to make the car heavier in the front so as the car power out of the corner it will shift the weight "back" and become closer to 50/50. This will reduce pushunder exiting a corner, which reduces understeer. So it is more like 54/46 for the Z.

I agree with Hanzo, I remember reading that statement on the website when I was researching the car (right before I purchased the 8).

Originally posted by Hanzo
Actually no... Nissan wanted to make the car heavier in the front so as the car power out of the corner it will shift the weight "back" and become closer to 50/50. This will reduce pushunder exiting a corner, which reduces understeer. So it is more like 54/46 for the Z. Understeer though, seems to be the Z's biggest handling problem. At least it was when I drove it.

Originally posted by Hercules
Understeer though, seems to be the Z's biggest handling problem. At least it was when I drove it.

Well, there is the problem with Nissans' logic, the car will not understeer on corner exit however, it might understeer on corner entry depending on the spring rate and dampening in the front.

Since understeer in corner entry means loss of traction in the front wheels the front spring and damper must be stiff enough to reduce amount of weight shift to the front.

Since the car is heavier in the front more weight is pushed down on the front wheels overloading the front tyres causing understeer. I believe Nissan need to fit a higher spring rate in the front and maybe turn up the dampening a notch as well.

Most people will encounter understeer on corner entry instead of exit anyway so I think nissan is just using that logic to cover up the fact that they can't make the Z 50/50.

I've got an idea for nissan, if your gonna build a 2 seater sportscar build a sub 2800 lb one like honda and mazda did, instead of building a 2-door 2-seater that weighs more than a 4 door 4 seater. Then maybe the handling will be more neutral.

Weight is bound to be an issue when Nissan decided to build this chassis for multiple platforms. Mainly for the up and coming GTR which will utilize the basic chassis from the Z/G35 coupe.

Reinforcement adds weight especially when you try to keep the cost down. I believe the Z chassis is very strong and rigid so the GTR can share its chassis.

Reviewers have notice that the Z has extra suspension components to reduce torque steer however the Z is a rear wheel drive car which means it doesn't have torque steer. Reason being is because of the next GTR. That might also contribute to the extra weight in the front even though it has a midship layout.

What a bunch of sour grapes. Excuses and whining and hints at conspiracies to sell more mags.....LMAO.

Scoreboard!

BTW, the 8's two back seats weren't the only interior styling features that put the 8 on top, compare the interior cabin shots of all three. Overwhelming excellence in styling, while having very comparable performance numbers, hmmmm.

And when did Honda start using the red/black two toned seat and door inserts? Mazda called.....

Originally posted by JaxFL_RX8
And when did Honda start using the red/black two toned seat and door inserts? Mazda called.....



I do believe that Honda had that all along with their 1st gen Silver S2000s

Or was that all red? I can't remember. :o

That article had alot of mis-information regarding the 350Z. 1st, you don't need the track model to get the "sport" suspension. All 350Z models (base, enthusiast, performance, touring, and track) have the same suspension. 2nd, you don't need the track model to get the LSD, all models, aside from the base model come with the LSD. And all models, aside from the base and enthusiast come with the traction control. A better comparison would have been an enthusiast model 350Z and the test car they had. They would have been closer in price and in features, Never the less, all three are awesome cars and I would be very happy to own any of them.

From test driving all three, my personal rankings would be:

1) Honda S2000
2) Nissan 350Z
3) Mazda RX-8

To add to that Track model only gets:

Tire pressure monitoring sensor
18 Volk Racing wheels
Brembo Brakes

the 350Z is over priced and under-equiped.

Originally posted by zerobanger
the 350Z is over priced and under-equiped.

I agree to a certain extent. For the best "bang for your buck", I wouldn't buy anything over the performance model 350Z. Still can't go wrong with 287hp with the capability of running high 13 sec 1/4 miles bone stock.

I'll give the Z credit for being N/A and being a low 14 second car, but its slower than the car it replaced and slower than all the Japanese "supercars" of the early 90's (Rx-7, Supra, 300ZX, VR4, etc) with the exception of the NSX (the early 90's NSX).

Atleast Mazda had the good sense to publicly say the rx-8 is not a replacement for the rx-7.

Originally posted by zerobanger
I'll give the Z credit for being N/A and being a low 14 second car, but its slower than the car it replaced and slower than all the Japanese "supercars" of the early 90's (Rx-7, Supra, 300ZX, VR4, etc) with the exception of the NSX (the early 90's NSX).

Atleast Mazda had the good sense to publicly say the rx-8 is not a replacement for the rx-7.

It is not a supercar. And it is supposed to pickup where the old 240Z left off not replacing the 300ZX.

The 350Z is quite expensive but so is the RX8.

Originally posted by Hanzo
It is not a supercar. And it is supposed to pickup where the old 240Z left off not replacing the 300ZX.

The 350Z is quite expensive but so is the RX8.

Its a 2 seat rwd sportscar just like the 300Z. While it started out as a "tribute" to the 240Z, the car became just another model in the Z lineup. The 350Z is a replacement for the 300Z, the same way the 300Z replaced the 280Z, the 280Z replaced the 260Z and the 260Z replaced the 240Z.

The rx-8 is an absolute bargain, imho.

Originally posted by zerobanger
Its a 2 seat rwd sportscar just like the 300Z. While it started out as a "tribute" to the 240Z, the car became just another model in the Z lineup. The 350Z is a replacement for the 300Z, the same way the 300Z replaced the 280Z, the 280Z replaced the 260Z and the 260Z replaced the 240Z.

The rx-8 is an absolute bargain, imho.

The idea is to build an "affordable" sports car which wasn't for the 300ZX, it was way over price especially for the twin turbo.

Even with the 350Z Track model, it is still cheaper than the 300ZX back in the 90s.

The ZX was also a MUCH nicer car than the current model.

Originally posted by Hanzo
The idea is to build an "affordable" sports car which wasn't for the 300ZX, it was way over price especially for the twin turbo.

Even with the 350Z Track model, it is still cheaper than the 300ZX back in the 90s.

I dont exactly see how the 350Z is "afordable". I mean, sure if you get a stripped down base the price is ok, but look at one with any equipment in it. Take a 350Z "Roadster" (I put roadster in quotes cause I dont think a 3500lb car should be called roadster), anyway, compare the price to an S2000. The S2000 is a better car all around is way, way less.

I still don't get how Motor Trend was able to pull off a 13.77 1/4 with the Z. The quickest time I've seen with a bone stock Z is 13.98.

Originally posted by zerobanger
I dont exactly see how the 350Z is "afordable". I mean, sure if you get a stripped down base the price is ok, but look at one with any equipment in it. Take a 350Z "Roadster" (I put roadster in quotes cause I dont think a 3500lb car should be called roadster), anyway, compare the price to an S2000. The S2000 is a better car all around is way, way less.

No argument there, if you are talking about the "roadster" version the S2000 is definitely a lot better and on the price. But as a base car it is in modern times fairly priced consider the horse power and torque.

Originally posted by EXA4DRIVER
I still don't get how Motor Trend was able to pull off a 13.77 1/4 with the Z. The quickest time I've seen with a bone stock Z is 13.98.

Do you have a link to the 13.77?

Originally posted by zerobanger
Do you have a link to the 13.77?

Just check out the current issue of Motor Trend.

Loved the article...confirmed everything I was hoping to hear.

Unfortunately, I've never been an S2K fan (derivative styling, dated interior from the date it was released, no torque engine) or the 350Z (TT wannabe, plasticky interior bits) so the 8 was a winner in my book before I even turned a page.

-Eric

Originally posted by zerobanger
Do you have a link to the 13.77?

I was pretty surprised about that too.

Originally posted by zthang
I was pretty surprised about that too.

there are factory freaks and there are great drivers. Kevini T. Wyum on the rx7 forum got a 13.3 from his bone stock 1993 rx-7 shortly after he purchased it. He documented all the timeslips, etc. I know there is no way in hell I could do that. So looking at the best time a car does is not as accurate as looking at the average.

Originally posted by zerobanger
there are factory freaks and there are great drivers. Kevini T. Wyum on the rx7 forum got a 13.3 from his bone stock 1993 rx-7 shortly after he purchased it. He documented all the timeslips, etc. I know there is no way in hell I could do that. So looking at the best time a car does is not as accurate as looking at the average.

I realized that this time was not the average, that's why I was....surprised

well.. i have to say... the rx-8 has most potential... you can modify it quite a bit so.. i think it wins in that matter

Originally posted by bcRX-8*TRI
well.. i have to say... the rx-8 has most potential... you can modify it quite a bit so.. i think it wins in that matter

In what way does it have more "potential" tuning wise than the other 2? With the technology available, every car has pretty the same "potential" tuning wise.

Originally posted by bcRX-8*TRI
well.. i have to say... the rx-8 has most potential... you can modify it quite a bit so.. i think it wins in that matter

Most potential? I guess you haven't heard of the Top Secret 350Z:

http://www.urbanracer.com/gallery/gallery/event_coverage/Tokyo_Auto_Salon/Tokyo_Auto_Salon_2004/Day_2/img_9330.jpg

"More Nissan goodness ends our Part II report on the 2004 TAS. Courtesy of Top Secret, the Top Secret GT Z33 Wide pounds the pavement with 700ps (690 hp) from one very busy HKS GT RS turbo. The stunner also wears Top Secret’s wide body kit and plenty of graphics to make sure you’re looking when it breaks through the sound barrier. Its cousin, the V35 Skyline coupe (G35 coupe) also gets the Top Secret turbo treatment, but at a less frenetic pace from a HKSGT30 turbo. Now, the secret is out.

Look for continued TAS2004 coverage"

Originally posted by Hanzo
Most potential? I guess you haven't heard of the Top Secret 350Z:

http://www.urbanracer.com/gallery/gallery/event_coverage/Tokyo_Auto_Salon/Tokyo_Auto_Salon_2004/Day_2/img_9330.jpg

"More Nissan goodness ends our Part II report on the 2004 TAS. Courtesy of Top Secret, the Top Secret GT Z33 Wide pounds the pavement with 700ps (690 hp) from one very busy HKS GT RS turbo. The stunner also wears Top Secret’s wide body kit and plenty of graphics to make sure you’re looking when it breaks through the sound barrier. Its cousin, the V35 Skyline coupe (G35 coupe) also gets the Top Secret turbo treatment, but at a less frenetic pace from a HKSGT30 turbo. Now, the secret is out.

Look for continued TAS2004 coverage"

Wow, I actually hadn't seen that yet. The graphics and hood are a bit too much. But the wide body kit is very nice.

That's Top Secret for ya, they paint all their cars gold once it is to the standard. I think their prototype cars are white.

If you never heard of them look them up, they make some of the fastest GTR and Supras in Japan.

Originally posted by zthang
Hardly...but you can continue to think so if it makes you feel better. when you have to put other cars down to make you or your car feel better, what do you think that means?

I absolutely loved the Z it wasn't practical enough for my use.

read this (http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21121)

Anyway I think the point of the M.T. comparo is that the 8 is comparable to the other sports cars in performance yet has a great ride, is comfortable and civil and has the practicality of a sedan, how many other cars out there are like the 8? Answer: None! So the focus isn't that the RX8 is a better performance car than the Z or S2000 and maybe shouldn't be be compared with them, but then again what are you going to compare the 8 with! The fact is it's a really great sports car with excellent ride, comfort, handling,balance,braking,weight distribution,quietness,smoothness,interior, and build quality characteristics when compared to other sedans and other n/a coupes. So it is exciting for Motor Trend to write about. I dont need to read about it or have car of the year award to be happy with my 8, I just have to drive and that's what reminds me on a daily basis what a truely wonderful sport car like sedan car something or another I have!

Originally posted by JimW
Anyway I think the point of the M.T. comparo is that the 8 is comparable to the other sports cars in performance yet has a great ride, is comfortable and civil and has the practicality of a sedan, how many other cars out there are like the 8? Answer: None! So the focus isn't that the RX8 is a better performance car than the Z or S2000 and maybe shouldn't be be compared with them, but then again what are you going to compare the 8 with! The fact is it's a really great sports car with excellent ride, comfort, handling,balance,braking,weight distribution,quietness,smoothness,interior, and build quality characteristics when compared to other sedans and other n/a coupes. So it is exciting for Motor Trend to write about. I dont need to read about it or have car of the year award to be happy with my 8, I just have to drive and that's what reminds me on a daily basis what a truely wonderful sport car like sedan car something or another I have!
Exactly, I don't see why there's so much comparison of the 8 with the Z and s2000 when they're completely different species. If there was any car that I would compare the 8 to, it would be the g35 coupe. It has a lot more in common with the 8 than the Z does, and its in essence a 2+2 Z. I give acceleration and straight line performance to the G there, and handling and weight characteristics to the 8.

i may be completely wrong on this, but i thought the Z & the G35 were similar? both are even built on the same (FM) platform (granted with variance in engine placement & body design). i just seem to remember that they only weighed ~200lbs different & they were really close on torque & hp? anyway, assuming that i remembered any of that correctly, i can see why the 8 gets compared to the Z, but i agree with you that the G35 might not be a bad comparison if your gonna try to make one at all. but remember, although Mazda engineers did compromise a little on the 8's performance to give it other unique benefits for its class, they are marketing the 8 as a sports car. as such, i'm sure they'd much rather the comparisons be made with cars like the Z & the S2000. the 35 is very sporty, but is often classed with sedans as a more family oriented car.

i think the real problem is what several of you have already said--each of these cars is unique, it's just hard to compare them at all, especially the RX-8 (Z & 2000 folks don't take this the wrong way). with the rotary engine, the unique exterior body shape, and the kick ass reverse doors, the 8 is simply something new & different. i looked at the Z, the 35, the 2000, and the 8 when i was shopping around. they are ALL great cars! be nice to have one of each! i picked the 8 because of the unique look, innovative engineering, & the simple fact that it had a rotary engine in a package with more than descent performance.

btw, really nice to have some folks on the forum that own or have owned some of the other cars (Z, S2000, RX-7, etc.). it's great to hear the different viewpoints!!!

-Lynx

I think everyone should just be happy that Japan is able to produce affordable and fun rwd sports cars again. Not only that, they were a lot smarter about it.

It was looking pretty bleak in the late 90's. In the end I would have been happy with just about any one of them. I do not think there is a bad one in the lot.

Originally posted by JimW
Anyway I think the point of the M.T. comparo is that the 8 is comparable to the other sports cars in performance yet has a great ride, is comfortable and civil and has the practicality of a sedan, how many other cars out there are like the 8? Answer: None! So the focus isn't that the RX8 is a better performance car than the Z or S2000 and maybe shouldn't be be compared with them, but then again what are you going to compare the 8 with! The fact is it's a really great sports car with excellent ride, comfort, handling,balance,braking,weight distribution,quietness,smoothness,interior, and build quality characteristics when compared to other sedans and other n/a coupes. So it is exciting for Motor Trend to write about. I dont need to read about it or have car of the year award to be happy with my 8, I just have to drive and that's what reminds me on a daily basis what a truely wonderful sport car like sedan car something or another I have!

Agreed re the competition. What's kind of surprising to me is that no magazine has yet attempted to compare the 8 with the OTHER end of the scale - the sport sedans like 325i/330i and IS300. I reckon the 8 significantly diminishes the case for some of these cars, if your priority is towards the side of pure driving enjoyment, but you still need some practicality. I should know - I traded my 325i for one! Here in Australia anecdotal evidence from dealers suggests that this is one of the more common sales routes...

From RotaryNews.com:

"Rumors: Supercharged MazdaSpeed RX-8 in MotorTrend
Motor Trend
Posted: Feb 13, 2004







Motor Trend is exactly a year behind the times. But thanks to all those who wrote in about the article. In MT's March 2004 issue, they report that there will be a supercharged RENESIS in the Mazdaspeed version of the RX-8. We, at RotaryNews.com first speculated about a boosted version of the RX-8 a year ago... exactly, In our popular "Predictions and Speculation" story!

We also revisited the issue again just before the Tokyo Autoshow... Giving the idea of a Supercharged Mazdaspeed RX-8 a 3 out of 5 star chance of appearing at the show. We wonder if Motor Trend reads this site?

But, what it means when it is printed in Motor Trend is that the program is fairly far along, far enough along that they allowed them to print it... Given past history as a guide, I'd say we are looking for it a debut in 8-12 months (SEMA?), and 14-18 months from now before it is available at your local Mazdaspeed dealer."

I'm assuming this didn't end up being in the March '04 MotorTrend?

I agree with zthang and murix on this page... and especially with Nick from Oz.

I was considering the 325i *very* strongly. But the 8 is far more fun, and if you look at the numbers, the interior volume is almost identical. The only place the 8 is deficient is in trunk space.

But the 8 is keeping me out of the 325i/IS300 because it's really the most creative packaging of a sports car perhaps ever. To use the 90's buzz-phrase and cliches, it's a paradigm shift. They broke the mold.

For me, it's not competing with the S2k and Z... it's competing with, and beating, the IS300 and 325.

Exactly Racerdave.

I ran out and bought the magazine and crtically read the article. It seems that they were hesitant to say anything negative about the Z. Yet each of the cars were so different. Their goal, as stated, was to define the modern sports car. They also addressed the level of compromise each test car exhibited. Actually it was like reading about 3 sporting choices rather than competitiors.

I wrote them to correct a few statements made on the RX8:

-All 6 spd models come standard with
limited slip differential (they were correct on this regarding stability control but failed to mention that electronic DSC on the RX8 is available for $1100 more from base car in the sports pkg.-still under both other cars' prices.)

-ALL RX8 models come standard with:
ABS brakes with Electronic Brakeforce Distribution
(they said only Z had this in test group)

- All 6 spd models come standard with sport suspension

And you are right, the RX8 is actually more like a 4 seat coupe - G35, BMW 3 series, IS300. Yet note how the RX is competitive with even the all-out sports cars as the article shows. It is one cool car.

The rx-7 actually had less horsepower... it wasn't 255 mazda overrated it, but back then not alot of people cared... it actually had 238 HP... and it still tied SUPRA TT 320 HP... 300ZX TT 300 HP... damn imagine if RX-7 had 300 HP... man viper and corvette killer ....stock...

Originally posted by NickG
Agreed re the competition. What's kind of surprising to me is that no magazine has yet attempted to compare the 8 with the OTHER end of the scale - the sport sedans like 325i/330i and IS300.

Automobile Magazine tested/compared the 8 against the 330i and that Z thing last year.

Originally posted by rx-7~rx-8
The rx-7 actually had less horsepower... it wasn't 255 mazda overrated it, but back then not alot of people cared... it actually had 238 HP... and it still tied SUPRA TT 320 HP... 300ZX TT 300 HP... damn imagine if RX-7 had 300 HP... man viper and corvette killer ....stock...

excuse me, mazda did NOT overrate the rx-7's HP. The rx7 had 255 HP. They dyno in stock form from 217-220 rwhp which is around 255. The only ones that had 238 were the European versions which had around 237 for emissions reason.

Originally posted by scorp76
Automobile Magazine tested/compared the 8 against the 330i and that Z thing last year.

Interesting. What was the result? I've never seen Automobile mag down here in Oz...

there was no real result. They basically concluded that the rx8 was part BMW and part 350Z, the best of both worlds.

now, let me tell you, my lada would eat an RX 8 for breakfast..... lol just kidding.... it would eat it anytime of the day........ lmao still kidding.

Just sold my s2k, needed 4 seats, flying down to melbourne monday to pick up a new rx8 and drive it back to brisbane 1700kms, let you know which one is better soon......