Hey, I just went to MazdaUsa.com and got an error trying to view the site. A couple of minutes later it was back, so I checked the RX-8 section. The curb weight no longer says 3,011lbs! ! ! Now it says TBD.

Yeah! Woo-Hoo!. Hope everybody at Mazda has to find a place to drop .5 lbs.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

I am guessing Mazda has more than 6022 employees. At 0.5 lbs each that means the RX-8 will weigh nothing. I sure hope the engineers created a shape that produces downforce instead of the normal lift. Otherwise this car is gonna fly.

Even at 3,011 lbs this car is 10% lighter than all of the other small RWD sedan competition. Quite a feat. Yes, I consider the RX-8 competitors to be the BMW 330 & IS300. On paper it seems they are not competiting very well.

Congratulations Mazda on being the only mass market manufacturer that still understands light = fun!

Originally posted by babylou
I am guessing Mazda has more than 6022 employees. At 0.5 lbs each that means the RX-8 will weigh nothing. I sure hope the engineers created a shape that produces downforce instead of the normal lift. Otherwise this car is gonna fly.

Even at 3,011 lbs this car is 10% lighter than all of the other small RWD sedan competition. Quite a feat. Yes, I consider the RX-8 competitors to be the BMW 330 & IS300. On paper it seems they are not competiting very well.

Congratulations Mazda on being the only mass market manufacturer that still understands light = fun!

Yes, but you didn't take the driver's weight into account. I weigh 180lbs. Hopefully that is enough to keep the tires in contact with the road. :D

Uh oh, I hope "TBD" doesn't mean "we goofed on the weight, now it's 3600 lbs..." ;)

Originally posted by Fëakhelek
Hey, I just went to MazdaUsa.com and got an error trying to view the site. A couple of minutes later it was back, so I checked the RX-8 section. The curb weight no longer says 3,011lbs! ! ! Now it says TBD.

Yeah! Woo-Hoo!. Hope everybody at Mazda has to find a place to drop .5 lbs.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

it could also mean that they added weight lol

Originally posted by tribal azn


it could also mean that they added weight lol

Blasphemy!

Originally posted by babylou
Even at 3,011 lbs this car is 10% lighter than all of the other small RWD sedan competition.
WOW...I didn't know the 8 was that light. Excellent for a sports sedan! And they are to lighten it even more?

Originally posted by babylou
Quite a feat. Yes, I consider the RX-8 competitors to be the BMW 330 & IS300. On paper it seems they are not competiting very well.
What's fun is watching the Bimmers sliding off into the dirt everytime they race in the British Touring Car Championship...:D

Originally posted by tribal azn
it could also mean that they added weight lol

Originally posted by Fëakhelek


Blasphemy!

LOL! true though....:eek:

Originally posted by Mazdaspeedgirl

WOW...I didn't know the 8 was that light.
Over 3,000 lbs is pretty heavy IMHO. Compare it to the (Japan only) Nissan Silvia Spec-R, both are basically 2+2 RWD coupes, about the same size, and have 250hp. The silvia though weighs about 2750 lbs. And while the rear doors of the RX-8 will add some weight, there's still nothing to explain the 250lb+ difference, so the RX-8 definitely needs to go on a diet...

just as a question, for comparison's sake, does Nissan outfit the Spec-R Silvia to the same level of plushiness that Mazda has the RX-8?? i'm just wonderin'... i mean, of course 250lb is a LOT to make up for, but still, the 8 is still pretty respectable if it comes in under three grand, eh??

Less weight is always better but let's get a grip on life here! Look at what cars are weighing now (curb weight) due to safety features etc.:

2003 VW Beetle Convertible - 3,153 lbs
2003 Honda V6 - 3,289 lbs
2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe - 3,420

If you want Mazda to produce a 2,700 pound RX-8 I am sure they can, but who is going to pay the additional $$$ for that type of weight reduction. Remember ladies that Mazda's intention was to bring the rx-8 in for under $30,000 for which they have delivered on!!!

I suspect that not one of you cry babies would be willing to pay what it would take to bring an RX-8 in at 2,700 pounds. Take a look at the 350Z God sake; it's 3,200 - 3,300 POUNDS... GET A LIFE!!! :mad:

Flame suit on.

Originally posted by ZoomZoom
Take a look at the 350Z God sake; it's 3,200 - 3,300 POUNDS... GET A LIFE!!! :mad:

Flame suit on.

its also got 260 goot pounds of torque

From what I have read the decision to add the suicide doors and remove the B pillars required a lot of extra bracing of the chassis, that made it more stiff, but also added a lot of weight. How much, i don't know..but if it was significant, i think it was a mistake given the limited practical benefits of suicide doors.

I also think the US has more stringent safety standards, which would make a US model heavier than a comparable Japanese model, at least in theory. A few examples were given in another thread that showed a difference of something like 50 - 150 lbs between japanese and US versions of certain cars. Perhaps, thats why we saw a 2,860 lb. figure for europe and the 3,011 lb. amount for the US?

I will say a weight of ~ 3,000 lbs. is not that impressive for a rotary sports car. The mass-produced, turbo charged, AWD WRX is only slightly heavier (and perhaps not at all compared to the touring and grand touring models?). In addition, I don't consider Nissan the benchmark for light cars, so the weight seems that much less unimpressive.

However, the latest reviews seem to say very good things about the handling. But then again, weren't they driving the European/Japanese right-side driving models that are supposedly 150 lbs lighter?? Now, i certainly got the impression it was very stable, but will it feel tossable at ~3,000 lbs? Some people prefer a stable, somewhat heavier car than a lighter more tossable vehicle. I think this was one of the primary distinguishing things between the preludes and integras. Both, were good FWD handling cars, but each had a different feel.

Personally, I prefer a lighter and more tossable car, but I think Mazda will come through, for the most part on the RX8's handling. The FWD MP3 Protege is 2,865 lbs. and is a fabulous handler, so there is a precedent for Mazda producing an excellent handling car, despite having a slightly heavy weight for a good handling car in its class.

Of course, if I came into some $ next year, maybe I can buy an Elise and have the ultimate light and tossable street legal car in the world!:D

Originally posted by revhappy
From what I have read the decision to add the suicide doors and remove the B pillars required a lot of extra bracing of the chassis, that made it more stiff, but also added a lot of weight. How much, i don't know..but if it was significant, i think it was a mistake given the limited practical benefits of suicide doors.

well, the mission statement of the car was to have a sports car that can seat four... so really, the traditional four-door was out right away, and would have added something in the order of 5" (or more) to the wheelbase for a useable rear-ward opening rear door option. thus, they opted to use the "freestyle" setup instead of two longer front doors, rather than suicides over rear-ward opening doors. from this perspective, the solution seems to be a sensible one, especially considering that the longer wheel base would (possibly) need less bracing, but would add a lot more car, with the huge difference in the chassis dynamics.

Why not just make it 2 doors then? The G35, 3 Series, Acura CL, etc. all have two doors and can sit four people? Granted, entry and exit is a bit more difficult, but sitting in the back of an RX8 isn't exacly like being in a Lincoln Town Car anyway.

If, the front passengers have to get out first to let the rear passengers out, I see few benefits for the extra-weight. However, I don't know how much weight it added, so I can't say for sure if the suicide doors were a significant compromise or not.

The silvia I mentioned also seats four...

Well, at SevenStock5 some Mazda VP reportedly promised that the RX-8 would be under 3,000lbs... hopefully they'll follow through on that...

Originally posted by tribal azn


its also got 260 goot pounds of torque
Yea... the car does not handle as well, the horsepower and torque die at around 5,500 RPM, and the car cost a couple of thousand $$$ more - no thank you!

Originally posted by ZoomZoom
Less weight is always better but let's get a grip on life here! Look at what cars are weighing now (curb weight) due to safety features etc.:

2003 VW Beetle Convertible - 3,153 lbs
2003 Honda V6 - 3,289 lbs
2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe - 3,420

If you want Mazda to produce a 2,700 pound RX-8 I am sure they can, but who is going to pay the additional $$$ for that type of weight reduction. Remember ladies that Mazda's intention was to bring the rx-8 in for under $30,000 for which they have delivered on!!!

I suspect that not one of you cry babies would be willing to pay what it would take to bring an RX-8 in at 2,700 pounds. Take a look at the 350Z God sake; it's 3,200 - 3,300 POUNDS... GET A LIFE!!! :mad:

Flame suit on.


On the other hand:

Ford Focus SVT: FWD, 2.0 liter 170 HP, 145 lb.-ft. torque, 2,593 lbs.
Acura Integra GS-R (2001): FWD, 1.8 liter 170 HP, 128 lb.-ft. torque 2,572 lbs.
Toyota Celica GTS: FWD, 1.8 liter, 180 HP, 130 lb.-ft. torque, 2,500 lbs.
Subaru WRX AWD, 2.0 Liter Turbo 227 HP, 217 lb.-ft. torque, 3,085 lbs.


Obviously, a RWD car will be heavier than an otherwise identical FWD car (but lighter than an AWD version), but I'm sure a renesis in a RWD version of any of these models would be significantly lighter than the RX8.

IMHO, the RX8 put on weight to accomodate 4 passengers comfortably. If it was designed to be a 2X2 coupe, I think it would have been much lighter, which I think they should have done. In its current form, yes..you'd have to use some super expensive lightweight materials to make it as light as you suggest (though I don't think many people expected that). Still, I'm sure there is room for some good weight savings.

Call me a cry baby, but when I wait 2 years for a car, all the while being told (directly or inidirectly though the car mags) its going to weigh in the 2800-2900 lb. neighborhood, I'm going to complain when they tell me its like 3,000 + lbs. $30K or so is alot of money to spend, and if you demand less that's what you will get (supply = demand, right?). Still, I'm probobly going to end up buying the RX8 because I will actually really need a vehicle and I think Mazda will make this a good handling car. However, the S2K and the Lancer Evolution are in the wings if I end up dissapointed.

Just trying to stimulate a little lively conversation... :p

Originally posted by tribal azn


its also got 260 goot pounds of torque

Is this some German measurement of torque? "Und ist having 260 goot pounds of der torque, yah." :D :eek: :D

Originally posted by revhappy
Why not just make it 2 doors then? The G35, 3 Series, Acura CL, etc. all have two doors and can sit four people?
Mazda's still trying to appease a greater market. Not everyone who has $35K for a car is single w/o kids. :D

Originally posted by revhappy

Ford Focus SVT: FWD, 2.0 liter 170 HP, 145 lb.-ft. torque, 2,593 lbs.
Acura Integra GS-R (2001): FWD, 1.8 liter 170 HP, 128 lb.-ft. torque 2,572 lbs.
Toyota Celica GTS: FWD, 1.8 liter, 180 HP, 130 lb.-ft. torque, 2,500 lbs.
Subaru WRX AWD, 2.0 Liter Turbo 227 HP, 217 lb.-ft. torque, 3,085 lbs.
But, the top three cars are much smaller then the 8 and let's not even talk about the comfort/space in the rear seats. I've sat in all three of these and there is no comparison of rear seat space between these cars and the 8. Even my Prelude which has very similar dimensions and weighs 2950lbs gets put to shame when comparing rear seat space.
While I agree that I am a little dissapointed myself because of all the hype around the 2900lbs mark and now it seems like we're looking at 3000+.. :( but this car is still the only RWD offering in the below $40K Cnd class with very good power/weight ratio and sports car handling... Yes the WRX is there too but I can't get past the interior/exterior styling.. it's just plain fugly to me.. shrug.

Originally posted by revhappy
he RX8 put on weight to accomodate 4 passengers comfortably. If it was designed to be a 2X2 coupe, I think it would have been much lighter,

I agree with this. A 2+2 is more a sports car that had 2 more seats squuuzed into it for insurance purposes. :D

Originally posted by revhappy
which I think they should have done.

Don't agree with this. How can the Renesis get any word of mouth publicity if Mazda makes a sports car first? It only makes sense to release a rotary car that can demonstrate the performance potential AND practicality of the rotary.

Patience, young Skywalker....the RX-7 will return. :D

Originally posted by Fëakhelek


Is this some German measurement of torque? "Und ist having 260 goot pounds of der torque, yah." :D :eek: :D
:D lmAo!!!

I like Mazdaspeedgirl. She laughs at my stupid jokes. :D

dude, you should hear me when I get going...hardly anyone laughs at my stupid jokes, then I say "okay. well, I thought it was funny. :D " or "ALLLLLrighty then!"

I can imagine hearing you say it...:D

I usually say, "I guess you had to be there." :D

Originally posted by Quick_lude

But, the top three cars are much smaller then the 8 and let's not even talk about the comfort/space in the rear seats. I've sat in all three of these and there is no comparison of rear seat space between these cars and the 8. Even my Prelude which has very similar dimensions and weighs 2950lbs gets put to shame when comparing rear seat space.
While I agree that I am a little dissapointed myself because of all the hype around the 2900lbs mark and now it seems like we're looking at 3000+.. :( but this car is still the only RWD offering in the below $40K Cnd class with very good power/weight ratio and sports car handling... Yes the WRX is there too but I can't get past the interior/exterior styling.. it's just plain fugly to me.. shrug.


I wouldn't say MUCH smaller.

RX8: GSR Celica GTS SVT WRX

Height 52.8 in. 52.6 in. 51.4 in. 56.3 in. 56.7 in.
Width: 69.7 in. 67.3 in. 68.3 in. 66.9 in. 68.1 in.
Lth.: 174.3 in. 172.4 in 170.5 in. 168.1 in. 173.4 in.
WB: 106.4 in. 101.2 in. 102.4 in. 103.0 in. 99.4 in.
Rear 53.3 in. 48.8 in. 50.6 in. 53.5 in. 52.9 in.
Shoulder
Room
Rear Leg 32.3 in. 28.1 in. 27.0 in. 37.6 in. 33.0 in.
Room
Rear Head 36.2 in. 35.0 in. 35.0 in. 38.1 in. 36.7 in.
Room

For me, my only use for rear seats, is to store a few things every now and then, and perhaps to take my family's dog somewhere occasionally (with seat covers!) when i go home to visit. I don't care about rear passenger comfort, if they want to ride back there, then they better not complain is my attitude! Besides, a small back seat allows me to only date smaller, more flexible women :p j/k.

Still, I can probobly live with the approximate 3,000 lb RX8 provided its near tops in its class in handling. So far the preliminary reviews seem to indicate this, but we'll see soon hopefully.

Originally posted by revhappy
...provided its near tops in its class in handling. So far the preliminary reviews seem to indicate this...There are *NO* other cars in this class!;)

Originally posted by revhappy



I wouldn't say MUCH smaller.



I drive a 2000 Celica GTS now, and I sat in RSX in car show not long ago. GTS inside is a little smaller than RSX, especially the +2 seat. But 2500 lbs GTS is amazing light for a FF coupe. Cannot tell how small the GTS compare to RX-8 until a test drive. But I would bet it is closer to RSX.

I dunno.. I test drove the Celica, put the front seat where I needed it to be and the seatback was almost touching the rear seat. Very cramped compared to the RX-8.

Here is a recent test drive of the Rx-8 by motortrend...

it says the curb weight is 2933

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0301_rx8/

Let's hope they are right about the weight. :D

"Ford Focus SVT: FWD, 2.0 liter 170 HP, 145 lb.-ft. torque, 2,593 lbs."

Every published figure I have seen for the SVT Focus puts it at between 2700 and 2800 lbs. Where'd you get this number?

Originally posted by ZoomZoom
Let's hope they are right about the weight. :D

as mentioned in the thread abotu the AutoBild article, which i'm pretty sure is far more recent that this one is (they talked about driving the Corkscrew at Laguna Seca), they quoted the mass at 1330kg, which is 2930lb.-and-change... so, maybe it's true?? :eek:??

Originally posted by SmokingClutch
"Ford Focus SVT: FWD, 2.0 liter 170 HP, 145 lb.-ft. torque, 2,593 lbs."

Every published figure I have seen for the SVT Focus puts it at between 2700 and 2800 lbs. Where'd you get this number?

I got it from Edmunds for the 2 door hatchback, I think the four door version was in the range you suggest. Then again, Edmunds could have the wrong figures.