New Motor Magazine is out, PCOTY edition

And the winners is :

the Lambourghini Gallardo (duh!)

2 M3 CSL (duh!)
3 Audi RS6 Avant (Wagons shouldn't go that fast)
4 Nissan 350Z Track (slower than the Rx8 to 100kph)
5 HSV Clubsport R8 (missing an "X")
6 BMW Z4 3.0i (high marks on driveability)
7 Audi S4 (boring)
8 RX8

0-100 6.58
0-400 14.58 @ 156 kph
0-1000 26.5 @ 199.8
Top speed 235 kph
Lap time 1.44.62

Apparently the big downfall was the engine.

The lambo had a track time of 1.37.51, slower than the M3 CSL.

Where did they test it... i should go and buy a Mag today

I just wish MOTOR would learn to turn off the DSC/TCS properly (hold that DSC button down) before getting on the track - this will help lower those lap times! ... and beat those 350Z turtles!

RX8 on the track: "and there the DSC (even deactivated) rams on the brakes if there's too much yaw."

Lemons.... Still, if Mazda provided the car, they SHOULD have told them how to fully turn DCS/TCS off.

That is of course if MA know how to do it.... :confused: :confused: :confused:

When I picked my car up from the dealer and the salesman sat me inside my car to show me how everything works, turning the DSC fully off was only one of a number of things that I SHOWED HIM how to do.

Originally posted by Wildcard
Lemons.... Still, if Mazda provided the car, they SHOULD have told them how to fully turn DCS/TCS off.

That is of course if MA know how to do it.... :confused: :confused: :confused:

When I picked my car up from the dealer and the salesman sat me inside my car to show me how everything works, turning the DSC fully off was only one of a number of things that I SHOWED HIM how to do.

ABSOLUTELY... Before I get my car I went to dealer and told him everything I knew about the car... he does not even know about the DSC and the Headlight washer ... he is the "RX-8" specialist for god sake .. just pay attention to this forum will do. Or empoly me. I charge $95/hour

Well they had a special little feature (with picture) for the BMW Z4 on how to turn DSC off completely and the RX8 has the same system.

While we are on the subject (6kph top speed difference aside) the RX8 (8th) beat the Z4 (6th) in every performance area. So was it the Z4 brake fade feature on the track or the badge that impressed them more?

THESE GUYS ARE clearly not lovers of the rotary engine , and the first 3 places went to cars worth between $200,000---$400,000

You could buy 6 rotaries for the price of one Lamborghini 3 rotaries for a M3C BMW .


CHEERS
michael

ohhh..... M3 CSL is good though... I love a GT3 as well mate

But I am waiting to see what the SLK 55 AMG like. Sure it will be special

It is only a dream, who does not want a Lambo here... L&L mind you Lambo colour is YELLOW

friend of mine has an AMG SL500, awsome machine,but no kick in the guts power fiend, not like his 360 modena.

Dont be concerned as far as i and many others are concerned the car and realestate bubble is starting to deflate .

The people who borowed large amounts of money purchasing realestate and other toys , are still dancing but one thing they have overlooked is that the music has already stooped .

There is going to be some good buying of second hand cars and realestate soon , be patient Grasshoppers .

The public has forgotten , the lesson from previous economies .

FERRARIES , PORCHES AND OTHER TOYS WILL BE PLENTIFULL SOON.

cheers
michael

I was going to buy this mag but put it back down when I saw comments along the lines of "Great car but let down by the rotary motor" These guys are obviously not rotary fans. There was then some mention that the car would be better if they put in a turbo Mazda 6 motor - Duh! DO they not realise that the only way to squeeze this motor in they would have to move it further forward in the car and it would weigh more which would destroy the graet thing about our car - balance!
Never mind - I think I am still going to have to buy it I want to read all the performance stats!

L&L,

Your comments about the economy and the expensive car market is very perceptive.

Yes the real estate market has slowed down...since November actually. It looks like it will remain slow sor at least another couple of months before turning around.

The broader economy would need to turn around significantly before people start selling out of expensive toys...like a recession.

This may happen if Labour gets in and and spend money like crazy and sends the economy out of whack...as they usually do.



SKC

SKC,
I think we should keep politics out of this. I am pretty sure
Howard is about to open up the pre-election warchest in the
hope of spending his way to the next election. This is before
labor even gets a chance to play with the federal coffers.

Originally posted by rx8 - smooth!
I was going to buy this mag but put it back down when I saw comments along the lines of "Great car but let down by the rotary motor" These guys are obviously not rotary fans. There was then some mention that the car would be better if they put in a turbo Mazda 6 motor - Duh! DO they not realise that the only way to squeeze this motor in they would have to move it further forward in the car and it would weigh more which would destroy the graet thing about our car - balance!
Never mind - I think I am still going to have to buy it I want to read all the performance stats!

PRECISELY! I was just about to post on the same issue. Motor completely misses the point that a major reason the 8 is so agile is the size, weight and location of the darn engine!

IMHO, basically a crap magazine!

Just read the article... they have good driver there but they have no knowledge of the cars... just look at that they can't switch off the DSC on the 8. yes you can't switch off the 350Z unless you kill the switch at the electric end. But they have no idea about the 7 sec trick.

They have no idea of the 50:50 distribution due to the small size of the rotary engine. If they suggested the turbo Mazda 6 ( what a f#$#ing stupid idea) this will upset the car. Even putting tubro in the 8 will need balancing at the rear...

They probably did not take out the spare tyre at the back as well... If they did not , then they are a bunch of f*%^&ing idiot, as the car is develop without the rear spare

I am going to write to them and ask those question. If they don't have any idea about this ... then I will write to the WHEELS to get their butt kick.

MOTOR have no knowledge of cars :(

I am not buying any of their mag ever now

Hi guys,

glad to see there are so many people out there passionate about the RX-8. The car is good enough to deserve a huge following.
The brakes are fantastic, the chassis is brilliant (though it's a bit tail-happy on a track) and the steering's superb.
But some of you haven't read the PCOTY issue and, therefore, seem to be operating on only a small slice of the information.
The reason the RX-8 didn't do better was down to the engine, yes, but nothing to do with us being or not being rotary fans.
in fact, there are more rotary fans here than not.
the fact remains, and the only reason the mention of a turbo four pot engine was thrown up, was that it doesn't have any torque and it absolutely has to be in the right gear to get proper performance out of it.
We reckon it's a beaut engine at the top 2500-3000 revs of its range, but it doesn't do enough beneath that.
The problem - in this company - isn't that the engine's a rotary, but there's just not enough engine, regardless of the style of engine.
The 350Zed, on the other hand, has a much broader spread of useable engine performance and is faster around the track not because of traction control issues (it refused to fully switch off), but because it had terrific torque from mid-rpm on a racetrack that demands just that.
It also had a far higher top speed than the Mazda.
The Z4 excelled because of a brilliant chassis and an ability to make its power output seem higher than it is.
Hope that helps. We love the car. It's just that, on the criteria, it just wasn't fast enough if you're not in precisely the right gear or the right frame of mind. Around town, the lack of torque is frustrating. On your chosen mountain pass, though, it's superb.

cheers

Oh, and of course we tested it with the spare tyre. we tested all cars as they'd be presented to an owner. Some cars had no spare, but everything that had one was tested with one.
that's only fair.
As for F*&$ing idiots, who develops a chassis to have no spare when they know full well it will be sold with one?

well answered Micheal,

I think the good thing to come out of this discussion is that one of the main weaknesses of the rotary can be pointed out. Hopefully Mazda are keeping an eye on rotary fans thoughts, heated and passionate they may be and consider us when planning the rx7. I mean how desperate are people here to get another 7-8hp?? The answer may not be a turbo, definitely not a turbo four, but lots of talk about increased capacity and electric supercharging. One interesting idea, how many people would prefer less weight to extra power?? If you could only choose one would you go for a m3csl type weight reduction rx8-csl with the same engine or go for a turbo rx8-sp model.

Michael, thank you for your posts. It is no secret that mazdas chassis development has been excellent in all it's performance line ups, however a lack of power has always been a concern. This goes no just for the RX8, but also for cars made in the past.

Could you please address the issue of correctly switching off the traction control.

By the way, your use of profanities on this board is not required.

Hi Michael,

Nice to see you come on and back up your comments with reasoned argument :) I love our RX-8 to be (it's on the boat right now!) but I also understand that it isn't quite the worlds best car either. ;)

I read the article yesterday, and I must admit, that I found the sucess of the Z a little perplexing, but hey you guys drove all the cars back to back and I didn't.. Can I have the lucky bastard slot next year please? I doubt I'll be as entertaining as Strap- On, but I'm sure I can back some expensive piece of gear off the track at warp factor 9. ;)

The Z was not that much quicker around the track- less than 1 second as I recall, it's about equal in straight line performance, but it's a harsh, unforgiving bugger on the road, the chassis balance is not quite there, and it doesn't stop as well as the 8.

Sure you have to get up the 8 to make it sing, but hey we are talking PCOTY here not Trundle to the ShopsCOTY are we??

I don't really see the difference between top speed 235 and 251 km/hr as being that relevant either on road, nor on most tracks is Aus either.

I don't doubt you guys put the time and effort into the decision and I don't think that I really have the experience to vehemently disagree with you :D

I must admit if I was going to do anything to the 8 it'd be wack a positive displacement supercharger on it...

Cheers

Rowdy

Hi Michael,

I think at least a couple of times in various Motor magazine tests of the RX8, it has been mentioned that the DSC still lurks in the background applying brakes etc. on the limit, even with the button switched off.

In the PCOTY issue, it is said , and I quote "the DSC (even deactivated) rams on the brakes if there's too much yaw". Now this would surely affect lap times? Well, if you hold the button down for 7 or 8 seconds, a light appears on the dash indicating DSC is FULLY off. In this scenario, there would be no ramming of brakes and the car would do better lap times.

If you look at the TopGear video of the RX8 from the UK, you can see the car performing powerslides without any indication of DSC being active - and in the same video the car was lapping the same times as an M3. Given the M3 is quite a bit quicker, this certainly shows the car handles better than anything this side of a Lotus Elise.

Michael,

Firstly thank you for responding to us directly in this thread. I have since purchased the magazine and read it thoroughly.

I still have 2 points to make.

The reason the car is as beatifully balanced as it is is the weight but more importantly the compact dimensions of the rotary. Yes it is lacking torque but surely a better solution is to get them to put in a 16b or turbo the existing motor. Any other solution destroys the entire point of the car.

I have not driven the Z4 so you guys are one up on me in that respect. I am sure it is a beatifully balanced car. With the exception of top speed the RX8 beat it in all performance measurements and it is a beatifully balanced car that is over $30,000 cheaper! I can only assume the reason that it beat the RX8 was that it had nore usable torque for everyday driving. This seems strange to me as your magazine seems to be aimed at performance orientated drivers.

I guess I must be biased!

Anyway once again thanks for the contribution.

Originally posted by michael taylor
Oh, and of course we tested it with the spare tyre. we tested all cars as they'd be presented to an owner. Some cars had no spare, but everything that had one was tested with one.
that's only fair.
As for F*&$ing idiots, who develops a chassis to have no spare when they know full well it will be sold with one?

Michael, the car is sold in Japan and US with no spares. The spare we have is GIVEN by Mazda Australia. I debate this concept to Mazda Australia during Prelaunch Drive Day. Certainly it will unbalance the car. I suggested rather including as standard, they should bring it as a GIFT

I still stand by my point that you have not research the cars enough before testing it.

The lotus elise and the porsche boxster (i think) are made and sold without spare tyres.

Originally posted by dbb
Hi Michael,

I think at least a couple of times in various Motor magazine tests of the RX8, it has been mentioned that the DSC still lurks in the background applying brakes etc. on the limit, even with the button switched off.

In the PCOTY issue, it is said , and I quote "the DSC (even deactivated) rams on the brakes if there's too much yaw". Now this would surely affect lap times? Well, if you hold the button down for 7 or 8 seconds, a light appears on the dash indicating DSC is FULLY off. In this scenario, there would be no ramming of brakes and the car would do better lap times.

If you look at the TopGear video of the RX8 from the UK, you can see the car performing powerslides without any indication of DSC being active - and in the same video the car was lapping the same times as an M3. Given the M3 is quite a bit quicker, this certainly shows the car handles better than anything this side of a Lotus Elise.

In best motoring, they taught me how to switch off the DSC. They know what they are doing mate. I would have no idea about switching everything but ABS off until I saw that :eek:

It is 1 sec per lap in a race track with DSC partially off vs totally off, in a good driver of course.

Anyway, I love Michael's command coz he brothers to do so meaning that he cares about cars.

An another thing is any debate is a healthy one even with some sort of firework :)

Originally posted by AMG
The lotus elise and the porsche boxster (i think) are made and sold without spare tyres.

Yes Boxster does not have spares, neither do Z4.

I restrain myself commenting on car with (not enough) knowledge about them in front of michael taylor. :)

1 second off the lap times puts it up one position, nudging out the Audi S4.

Still down a couple hundred thousand dollars and 7 seconds off the M3 CSL and the Lambo (and the GT3, if is was in the group I suppose)

the "ramming on brakes" business is a Cam comment and he's a race driver, so he's not very bright. once we worded him up on it, he was cool. when you see the pcoty dvd and spot the smokey sideways burnout in the RX-8, you might assume we turned it off altogether.
the yaw issue is more to do with having fun than track speed. for most people, anyway.

ahhh... now michael is sucking us in to buy the DVD... very wise businessman!;)

Cameron is a good racer, I wish he could elaborate more... you only have 100+ page on the magazine don't you.

Michael, I think some of us here cringed when reading about the DSC being left on for BFYB and thought the same had happened here. But it may have been Cameron who wrote that for BFYB too :)

BTW I personally thought it was a great read. I dont have it with me, but at one stage you mention a car (the Alfa?) being "one of the few cars including the ... RX-8 not to crack 15seconds for 400m" surely you meant Z4?

PS That 16b photo is a pretty suprising scoop - is it real?

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to visit the forum Michael.

I suppose you always get people bashing your rankings because their favourite car didn't rank well.

When people like LB (10/20) and DM (12/20) list performance down so low, which has them ranking the Rx8 lower than the Porche Toorak Tractor (18/20 for LB???) , the Volvo S60, the Astra SRI Turbo (?!), the Suby GT etc, you have to wonder if they are on drugs.

Oh, and a "fun" factor rating would be cool too. The RX8 would be more fun to drive than a Audi Station Wagon.

Takahashi dude, Porsche Boxsters do come with spares, in the front boot. It's not a full spare, but a space saver spare. Z4 on the other hand comes with run flat tyres so no spares whatsoever, just like the Mini.

Michael taylor .

I have spent time in both the Nissan 350 Z and the Mazda RX8 , AND I AM NOT A SO CALLED RACING DRIVER car expert , but i know which car i can live with on a day to day basis .

i will be making a 5000km trip from Goldcoast to Sydney Melbourne and back , and i know which car i want to drive .

There was no men tion of the 350Z S engine , being old tecknology as well as its chassy etc .

Theres more to a car than TORQUE ,

CHEERS
MICHAEL

when i used to do some spirited driving through the hills in my little mx5 it was amazing how many HSV's would zoom past on the straight roads only to be reeled in and overtaken when the twisties began. It was funny watching them come close to breaking traction around the corners whilst the mx5 was quite relaxed.

Just goes to show that power is not the be all and end all of performance.

Just remebered in drivers briefs before any mixed entry racing event it was always pointed out to watch out for the cars that outperformed in brakes and cornering as these cars usually had the faster lap times when compared to powerful cars with lesser braking and cornering abilities.

Despite this being a some-what futile debate (this is the RX-8 forum after-all....), I'll throw in my 2cents....

I went for a fang to Wisemans Ferry (on the Hawksbury River for those not from Sydney) last week. My mate in his 350z came along too and we swapped 'rides' for a while. On anything but a smooth racetrack, the Zed's stiff suspension and heavy steering is a real handful and there is no way it could keep up with the '8 through the twisties. There just isn't the same level of control. Driving the Zed, I felt like I was about to skip off the road at every bump and pot-hole.

While the top third of the rpm band may be where the '8 "makes it's money", the difference is that it will happily sit there all day. You don't get the same level of faith in the engine doing that in any other car.

But we are all biased anyway, which isn't a bad thing!

Originally posted by michael taylor
Hi guys,

...The reason the RX-8 didn't do better was down to the engine, ...and the only reason the mention of a turbo four pot engine was thrown up, was that it doesn't have any torque and it absolutely has to be in the right gear to get proper performance out of it.
cheers

I supose that comes down to what you want out of the car. if you want no brainer go with a V8 and a slush box :) while I don't disagree with the lack of torque comment I find the car very good round town it's one of the high points using the Rx-8 as a day to day car. I can drive it happily at 2-3k rpm and yes it is slow if driven this way but the car is very well balanced and the car transforms it's self in to a quick car (maybe not the fastest) then reved.

in the end I reckon magazine reviews/comparisons aren't the judge the drive is. reviews/comparisons have a focus or criteria that isn't nessisarily yours. eg WRX's get good reviews, but one drive and I knew the WRX wasn't for me! same with other cars yet one drive of a rx-8 and I was hooked the right blend of speed practicality and fun

Originally posted by Wildcard
Despite this being a some-what futile debate (this is the RX-8 forum after-all....), I'll throw in my 2cents....

I went for a fang to Wisemans Ferry (on the Hawksbury River for those not from Sydney) last week. My mate in his 350z came along too and we swapped 'rides' for a while. On anything but a smooth racetrack, the Zed's stiff suspension and heavy steering is a real handful and there is no way it could keep up with the '8 through the twisties. There just isn't the same level of control. Driving the Zed, I felt like I was about to skip off the road at every bump and pot-hole.

While the top third of the rpm band may be where the '8 "makes it's money", the difference is that it will happily sit there all day. You don't get the same level of faith in the engine doing that in any other car.

But we are all biased anyway, which isn't a bad thing!

it is futile, but you have to defend the ones you love :D

still I don't share your comments about the rx8's rough road ability. I reckon that the 8 is just scary on a rough back road with it's tram-tracking. if the Z is worse I'm glad I didn't get one of those!

well i suppose the name tells isn't it Performance car of the year.
Maybe they just Looking at the Power, torque and Handling. But ignoring the Price tag.

Originally posted by dbb
When people like LB (10/20) and DM (12/20) list performance down so low

Having read this again, perhaps I can clear a few things up for you.

1. Performance is "based on the results at Avalon (speed, acceleration) and Winton (circuit times)".

2. LB = Lucky Bastard. He apparantly found that the Astra SRI (18pts) was just as fast as the Lambo (18pts) and light years ahead of the RX-8(10pts).

3. From this we can assume that Lambo drivers all over the country are terrified of pulling up next to Astras, Cayennes and Volvos.

-pete

You can certainly take LB out of the equation... but everyone of us want to that LB?!

I wonder what that LB drives... a old Holden Commandore S? I bet it is an ute too!!

Falcon. Interestingly he scored the FPV GT pretty low (14) perhaps he was worried about resale value? :)

-pete

Guys
we don't compare cars directly with each other in any criteria., they are compared back to the criteria, always bearing in mind performance relative to its intended function, dynamics relative etc...
that's why some cars got higher performance scores than their raw numbers suggest they deserved.

mt

Surely it is a subjective thing though? Otherwise why would one judge differ widely from another? LB didn't "like" the RX8, judging from the low scores.

If the criteria were clearly understood, then every judge would have consistent marking (at least within 1 or 2 points of each other).

What a coinsidence a double page add for the convertible 350Z rigth in the middle of the PCOTY results .

Luckily i only buy this crappy magazine once a year .(once to many times i think )

motor is equivalent to :

Guys you have to remember what this magazine is all about... Big name brands and who has the bigger advertising contracts.

I stopped buying this magazine a year ago now even before i had my 8 and even though it has many valid points and some good articles its seems the plugs that get thrown in whenever they can are sometimes not welcome.

You have to understand that advertising is where most of the money is made not the few dollars we spend on just the printing cost to buy the magazine.

Anyway this is my two cents worth.

Regards
Phillip

now where have i heard that before? the result you wanted isn't there, the people who were there were obviously wrong, and it's all because of the advertising dollar.
well, lamborghini didn't advertise and they won. Porsche never advertise and they've won five times.
bmw advertise twice a year and they've won it twice.
MOTOR's most loyal advertiser, year in and year out, is Ford. It has never won, nor looked like winning.
That argument is spurious, easily disproven by available facts and verging on libel.

Hi Michael,

I don't agree with the advertising $$$ thing. I don't believe it had anything to do with the results. And I know it must seem like we are a bunch of sore losers. It is agreed universally the 8 is no Porsche GT3 or M3 CSL or Ferrari Enzo etc.

But it is a fun car to drive, delivering superb handling and a super smooth engine which beats most things through the twisties.

It is just that the consistency of the judges results seems to be very subjective, rather than objective. Otherwise, how could we get a spread of results for performance of 14 to 10? 10/20 for performance is simply wrong. The car is better than that.

Dynamics? 17 to 14. Another spread. The chassis is (even in your mag) promoted as the 8's biggest strength, yet it got rated similar to the Astra. The Astra would go flying off a cliff if it tried to follow me through the Adelaide hills.

Thanks again for taking the time to browse our forum.

Well, as I mentioned earlier, I don't like the mag at all and find this type of comparo pretty meaningless for those of us that live in the real world.

But I dips me lid to the editor for having the guts to come in here and defend his position!

Tim

Originally posted by michael taylor
Guys
we don't compare cars directly with each other in any criteria...

Michael, I know. I was just stirring :) It was only intended for a laugh :p

The fact that you kept Paul Cockburn out of the voting is proof enough for me that you were trying to be fair :)

Guys, regardless of how upset some of you are that the RX-8 didnt take a clean sweep of every available award on the planet, there's no need to get nasty. The RX-8 didnt deserve PCOTY - it's just not designed out-and-out performance. It deserved to be run without DSC, sure, but that it lost in track times it gained in abnormally quick 400m on 0-100km/h times.

If the MOTOR's photoshopping is right (engine #35,877 is a prototype engine number?) there's a big banger rotary in the works for those who really need more.

-pete

Michael,

To settle some of the controversy why not do a comparo with say

RX8
Z4
350z
WRX STI
Monaro
S2000

The above comparo to include performance testing, track time and some real world stuff.

I do not think that the 8 would neccesarily win against this opposition but maybe a more tightly grouped selection of cars like this would enable their relative strengths and weaknesses to be better assessed.

Steve

PS My money says the Z4 would get beaten by the 8.

Hey I reckon

Ferrari Endo
Lamb Michellago
Merc SLR
Porsche Carrera GT
Ford GT
Audi LeMans
M3 CSL???

I don't mind being that LB Michael! :D

Originally posted by michael taylor
now where have i heard that before? the result you wanted isn't there, the people who were there were obviously wrong, and it's all because of the advertising dollar.
well, lamborghini didn't advertise and they won. Porsche never advertise and they've won five times.
bmw advertise twice a year and they've won it twice.
MOTOR's most loyal advertiser, year in and year out, is Ford. It has never won, nor looked like winning.
That argument is spurious, easily disproven by available facts and verging on libel.
MT, I agree with you completely. Having been a subscriber to Motor for many wheels, I know that you guys do a great job most of the time, and you do report the facts like how you see it.

As a non-owner of RX-8, I think I can give a pretty unbiased opinion here. Although the numbers may not have added up for RX-8, I think the Mazda is definitely a better everyday performance car than the Nissan. I may be wrong, but with these type of test, sometimes the numbers overwhelm the final decision.

One improvement you can make on the format is to include previous year's winner in the test (I emailed you about this MT). This way you have a benchmark and also see which is truly the PCOTY for all cars available in the market. I have been wondering how my Boxster S would fare against the Gallardo, and this would definitely have given me the answer! :)

WAY, is that so you can justify YOUR purchase decision? :)

As an aside did anyone else notice the pattern with the fuel consumption figures in PCOTY? Everything but the liberty drank like a fish!

Originally posted by rpm_pwr
WAY, is that so you can justify YOUR purchase decision? :)

No, this is so I can justify the purchase to my fiancee!!!! "See honey, the Porsche is better than even the Lamborghini!!!". :)

Actually I am a fan of the RX-8. I think you guys have a fantastic car. Would be nicer with a bit more power, but then again so would my car. You can never have too much power as long as it is not overpowering the chasis.

Rx8 (8th place) vs Z4 (6th place)

For a 4 seater coupe the RX8 rocks with a brilliant balance of handling, ride, unique engine (let's even ignore RENESIS Outright International Engine of the Year/Wards 10 Best Engine Awards) and in my experience nothing much gets away from it on our normally rough twisty roads. If you want to talk about sports/racing engines (cars or bikes) they all run in the top end of the rpm range which is where the RX8 rotary lives comfortably all day but at a speed you can use on real roads with that awesome gearbox. Sitting in fourth gear all day riding a fat torque curve is hardly involving!

And if you want to improve the track times turn off the DSC/TCS properly!

Z4 is slower track or road (other than a bit of irrelevant top speed - refer BFYB results), Z4 brakes are inferior, Z4 has flawed new steering system, Z4 engine is good but oh so common - ok it is a convertible but you could save money and buy one from Daihatsu instead ;-)

Come on MT - capitulate and swap those positions!

The acceleration and track time figures were actually quite surprising. This PCOTY test is probably the quickest 0-100kph time I have seen for the RX-8 and the slowest I have seen for the Z4. The 350Z was also slower than expected, as was the Gallardo (I thought the Lambo would easily dispense 0-100 in less than 5 seconds).

The RX-8 posted a very good lap time as well. As for the reason it came 8th, well I felt it was a fair placement, although not for the same reasons as MOTOR. I don't agree with them on the torque issue or a substitute of a different engine, which I think they're missing the point. And although torque seems lightweight on paper, the gearing has a lot to do with how much of that torque is applied to the wheels on the ground, and on a track, you should be in the right gear ALL the time. MOTOR seems to have a certain preference for big-cubed torquey engines and never liked the idea of downshifting so it seems.

Anyway, a lot of parameters and variables come into play for empirical tests and should only be taken with a grain of salt. It should serve as an entertaining read and only that.

MOTOR also forgot to mention the M3 CSL runs on R compound rubber, which are easily worth 1-2 seconds per lap at Winton over the other street performance rubber the other cars are shod with.

If the M3 had won, I would have laughed. Hardly fair, letting a car on R-compounds compete for PCOTY. What if it had rained during the testing?

Originally posted by Blackie
MOTOR also forgot to mention the M3 CSL runs on R compound rubber, which are easily worth 1-2 seconds per lap at Winton over the other street performance rubber the other cars are shod with.

forgot? it's mentioned on page 39 ("tyres sticker than a donut-eating copper's fingers"); page 68 ("the sticky Michelin Cup tyres are made for hot lapping"); page 68 again ("tyres didn't go off"); page 81 ("running on Michelin Pilot Cup tyres"); page 80 ("The super grippy Michelin Cup tyres show the rack could be quicker") and page 109 (spec panel "Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 235/35 R19 (f); 265 30 R19 (r)).

Err, I don't think we forgot...

Why is there such a discrapency between MOTOR magazine and WHEELS as to where the RX8 should be number 1 or 8th ???.

I and others cannot see how the 350z got to 4th place 4 places ahead of the RX8 .

I have driven both cars and the 350z is like a 911 porsche of 12 years ago rough , hard to live with not an everiday pleaseant drive ,

Motor praised the RX8 in lots of ways and then gives it 8th place i smell a bit of ass liking on MOTORS BEHALF.

CHEERS
MICHAEL

well i don't know i'm even not happy with the Acceleration they stated :)

I suppose the difference is WHeels is doing the Car of the Year ;)
Motor is Doing the Performance Car of the Year. So i hope you know the difference there ;)

I also don't agree the BMW M3 CSL can be the 2nd, when it has the fastest lap in Winton. So i think the Comparison test is Stuffed up.

if it was just about the fastest lap time at winton, we'd have saved our money and done the whole thing in a day.
the most important day was the road loop day, and it fell away there. and, for a pure track car, we didn't reckon it was quite fast enough, not when you consider a gallardo on the same tyres would have been two seconds faster - at least.

Man you make me laugh , comparing a $400,000 car with a $66.000 Mazda .

i WOULD EXPECT IT TO BE QUICKER .DUH .

MICHAEL

who's comparing it with the mazda? the comment was clearly about the M3 CSL. The Mazda is a lot of things, but it's not a dedicated track car. In fact, it felt a lot less at home on the track than most of us reckoned it should, chassis-wise.
The point of PCOTY is not to compare cars directly against each other, but against a fixed set of criteria, based on their intended function. The mazda, by virtue of its luggage capacity and four useful seats, has a different intended market than the 350Z. Sure, there's a lot of overlap, but there are plenty of people who will look at one or the other (and not both) based on those two points alone.

Originally posted by Lock & Load
Man you make me laugh , comparing a $400,000 car with a $66.000 Mazda .

i WOULD EXPECT IT TO BE QUICKER .DUH .

MICHAEL

and by more than just two seconds, or is our cheap little mazda hiding something that you're not letting on

LOL!

Originally posted by michael taylor
who's comparing it with the mazda? the comment was clearly about the M3 CSL. The Mazda is a lot of things, but it's not a dedicated track car. In fact, it felt a lot less at home on the track than most of us reckoned it should, chassis-wise.
The point of PCOTY is not to compare cars directly against each other, but against a fixed set of criteria, based on their intended function. The mazda, by virtue of its luggage capacity and four useful seats, has a different intended market than the 350Z. Sure, there's a lot of overlap, but there are plenty of people who will look at one or the other (and not both) based on those two points alone.

Sorry michael, I beg to differ. I jave done alot of laps on tracks and in a lot of different cars.

IMHO the rx8 is a four door four seater car with excellent chasis dynamics. Certainly the car needs more power especially bottom end, and there is some body roll, but otherwise the car is an excellent car for the track. In fact I believe it handles equally or slightly better to my S7 RX7

Originally posted by michael taylor

the most important day was the road loop day, and it fell away there. and, for a pure track car, we didn't reckon it was quite fast enough, not when you consider a gallardo on the same tyres would have been two seconds faster - at least.

and this is where the RX8 excels, and it rated poorly.

Time to change judges methinks :)

Possibly not based on $$$ but how would a guy with a $400,000 dollar car feel if a $66 000 dollar car took PCOTY not to mention COTY.. He will look abit funny and feel abit stupid even if his car is to show pony around, been beat by a Mazda at 1/5 of the value.

Previously to the rx8 i have been driving a M3, my best friend bought a 350Z that i drove to work for 4 months while he was on holidays and countless other expensive cars on the list from cousins, uncles etc.

hands down i believe that the 8 has many things that these cars are lacking, hence the reason when buying a new car and never ever experienced a rotary before, i knew the 8 was one of the best out there at nearly half the price i was looking at spending on a car.

Good on you for coming in and defending your mag and results but i got a few emails already from friends that have been in the car and that have bought the magazine ( Two that own cars that are listed ) that think its total BS. They also commented that the magazine is turning into a circus.

I do not read the mag at all and these guys are people that have been buying your mag for years on end. I do not know the reason they feel this way bu they mentioned the RX8 was hard done by these results.

Anyway all the best for the future :)

Regards
Phillip

Originally posted by AMG
and by more than just two seconds, or is our cheap little mazda hiding something that you're not letting on

LOL!

I think the difference was much bigger more like 7 seconds. Which, let's be honest is still pretty surprising.

2 seconds off a Lambo! :eek: I'd like to see that!

I still don't understand why you guys are so upset. The little RX-8 has the smallest effective displacement out of every car listed, yet still managed to fight well above it's weight division.

Wow so much debate that I missed...

I have to agree with Michael Taylor in one thing that it is very hard to compare diff car for diff purposes. Like comparing orange and apple..

We are orange lover and when MOTOR grew up with apple in their mouth... it is very hard for them to swallow an orange...

It is a hard job in MOTOR I reckon.... much like mine - I just love playing with dead bodies ;)

Originally posted by takahashi
I just love playing with dead bodies ;)

that's because they can't sue for negligence

LOL!

well someone has to do it ;)

Well I don't think Motor deliberately awarded the Lambo 1st because it was the most expensive and aren't afraid of handing it to cheaper motor cars (as was with the case of the Nissan 200sx winning it a couple of years back). The M3 CSL didn't win because the ultimate decision still comes down to subjective preferences after all that data is logged and analysed.

And MT, as for mentioning the fact that the M3 had R compounds, no MOTOR you didn't mention that, simply stating that "these are super grippy" and listing "Pilot Sport Cups" does not state to the public that these tyres are made of a completely different compound to the rest of the field and are worth at least 2 seconds per lap at Winton.

As for not coming in 1st for the RX-8, hey I mean come on, it's not the end of the world. And honestly I don't believe it deserved 1st place based on their testing criteria either. It's just a test based on a set of parameters that are at best controversial, and judged by a group of guys that are just like everyone else, they have their own preconceptions and opinions. Get a bunch of you guys here to be the judging panel and the RX-8 would have won, get a bunch a Cayenne owners and even that abomination could have won. You guys lost out to mostly much more expensive automobilia so take it as an entertaining read and get over it. You don't need MOTOR to justify your purchase decisions.

Blackie i dont think they are using the MOTOR to justify the purchasing of their RX8, i believe they are just having a debate & throwing their own personal opinions.

Isnt that what forums are all about:)