Road and Track reviewed the RX8 in this month's issue. It was generally a very positive article, but they did mention some body roll as a result of making a softer suspension for ride quality. Some other items of interest:

0-60 5.9
0-70 8.0
0-80 10.0
0-90 12.8
0-100 15.9
1/4 mile 14.5 @ 95.6

Skidpad .88g R&T Comment: Moderate Understeer
Slalom 65.4 MPH :mad: R&T Comment: Mild Oversteer
Estimated EPA Fuel Economy: 18/24 MPG
Estimated Actual: 19 MPG
Curb Weight: 3,000 lbs. (I think it was the fully loaded Grand Touring?)
Test Weight: 3,180 lbs.
Weight Distribution: 52% Front, 48% Rear (Not sure if this was based on curb or test weight).
Speed at Redline for Each Gear:

1st: 39 MPH
2nd: 65 MPH
3rd: 89 MPH
4th: 124 MPH
5th: 147 MPH
6th: 148 MPH

Did they say with TCS off or on? Care to share the article or at least copy/paste the text?

I don't have the article. I took a quick look at it and jotted down a few things since I was already late! Maybe someone can scan and send it to Hercules??

They didn't mention if the traction control system was on or not? What is the normal testing procedure for sports/sporty cars with it (Z, G35,etc)?

damn now i have to buy 3 mags at once! couldn't they space them out a little!:mad: ;)

Originally posted by revhappy
Road and Track reviewed the RX8 in this month's issue. It was generally a very positive article, but they did mention some body roll as a result of making a softer suspension for ride quality. Some other items of interest:

0-60 5.9
0-70 8.0
0-80 10.0
0-90 12.8
0-100 15.9
1/4 mile 14.5 @ 95.6

Skidpad .88g R&T Comment: Moderate Understeer
Slalom 65.4 MPH :mad: R&T Comment: Mild Oversteer
Estimated EPA Fuel Economy: 18/24 MPG
Estimated Actual: 19 MPG
Curb Weight: 3,000 lbs. (I think it was the fully loaded Grand Touring?)
Test Weight: 3,180 lbs.
Weight Distribution: 52% Front, 48% Rear (Not sure if this was based on curb or test weight).
Speed at Redline for Each Gear:

1st: 39 MPH
2nd: 65 MPH
3rd: 89 MPH
4th: 124 MPH
5th: 147 MPH
6th: 148 MPH

what happened to the supposed SUPER HANDLING ABILITY?

skidpad g: .88
slalom: 64.5

wtf??!?!? those arent very impressive to say the least.

hell look at the evo 8's specs done by the same mag
skidpad g: .97
slalom: 68.7
now thats impressive
http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=466&page=2

remember all that talk about how the rx8 would rape a evo8(and sti) around the track?

Originally posted by zoom44
damn now i have to buy 3 mags at once! couldn't they space them out a little!:mad: ;)

actually 4;)

autoweek
road&track
car and driver
automobile

:o forgot about Autoweek:o

Originally posted by zoom44
:o forgot about Autoweek:o
I've never read a single issue of Autoweek but I know some people that swear that it is by far the best of them all.

Originally posted by tribal azn


what happened to the supposed SUPER HANDLING ABILITY?

skidpad g: .88
slalom: 64.5

wtf??!?!? those arent very impressive to say the least.

remember all that talk about how the rx8 would rape a evo8(and sti) around the track?

Road & Track 12/97:
McLaren F1
Skidpad, g: 0.86
Slalom, mph: 64.5

Wow, I guess the RX-8 would also be faster around a track than a McLaren F1 by the same (flawed) logic.

dam m477 u beat me to it! :p

Here's other specs from Road and Track:

Nissan 350Z
0-60 mph 5.8 sec.
0-1/4 mile 14.4 sec.
Skidpad 0.88g
Slalom 67.3 mph
Braking 80-0 mph 213 ft.
Lap time: 01:40.06

BMW M3 SMG II
0-60 mph 4.9 sec.
0-1/4 mile 13.5 sec.
Skidpad 0.89g
Slalom 68.8 mph
Braking, 80-0 mph 213 ft.
Lap time: 01:40.09

Porsche 911 Targa
0-60 mph 5.0 sec.
0-1/4 mile 13.5 sec.
Skidpad 0.92g
Slalom 65.5 mph
Braking, 80-0 mph 208 ft.
Lap time: 01:40.79

gee, what happened to the M3 and 911 Targa? just goes to show specs can be deceiving. (note: just an example, not actually saying 350Z is faster than M3 or 911)

Road and Track
Mazda RX8: 0-1/4 mile 14.5 @ 95.6 mph. Skidpad 0.88g
Nissan 350Z: 0-1/4 mile 14.4 sec @ 99.7 mph. Skidpad 0.88g.
very competitive!:cool: :D :p

Originally posted by revhappy
Road and Track reviewed the RX8 in this month's issue.

Slalom: 65.4 MPH :mad:

Porsche 911 Targa: Slalom: 65.5 MPH.
:)

Originally posted by sheylen
Road and Track
Mazda RX8: 0-1/4 mile 14.5 @ 95.6 mph. Skidpad 0.88g
Nissan 350Z: 0-1/4 mile 14.4 sec @ 99.7 mph. Skidpad 0.88g.
very competitive!:cool: :D :p

Don't forget to rev it to 8K! :p

the hard part is going to be remembering not to go over 9k! but luckily they gave us a chime to remind us:p

no i was pointing out the fact that alot of people were saying how the rx8 would absolutly rape the evo8 in handling, look where we r now?:confused:

Originally posted by tribal azn
no i was pointing out the fact that alot of people were saying how the rx8 would absolutly rape the evo8 in handling, look where we r now?:confused: Nobody said that. They did say that the RX-8 being RWD and the Evo being AWD would be more fun to drive :)

Originally posted by Hercules
Nobody said that. They did say that the RX-8 being RWD and the Evo being AWD would be more fun to drive :)


Thank you Herc, you just saved me nearly $30,000!!!!!!!:D

I was contemplating buying an EVO 8, but now I can buy that 1978 RWD Ford Fairmont Station Wagon in the used car lot down the street for $500 since its more "fun"!!!!! :D

Originally posted by revhappy



Thank you Herc, you just saved me nearly $30,000!!!!!!!:D

I was contemplating buying an EVO 8, but now I can buy that 1978 RWD Ford Fairmont Station Wagon in the used car lot down the street for $500 since its more "fun"!!!!! :D

Or spend another $500 and get a Mustang since its the same.:D
1978

Originally posted by revhappy



Thank you Herc, you just saved me nearly $30,000!!!!!!!:D

I was contemplating buying an EVO 8, but now I can buy that 1978 RWD Ford Fairmont Station Wagon in the used car lot down the street for $500 since its more "fun"!!!!! :D


ZoomZoom slaps revhappy with a tuna.

Originally posted by revhappy



Thank you Herc, you just saved me nearly $30,000!!!!!!!:D

I was contemplating buying an EVO 8, but now I can buy that 1978 RWD Ford Fairmont Station Wagon in the used car lot down the street for $500 since its more "fun"!!!!! :D AWD is generally more limiting than RWD, that's all.

If you want to be a smartass nobody's stoppin ya but it really doesn't bolster any type of dialogue.

Originally posted by Hercules
AWD is generally more limiting than RWD, that's all.

If you want to be a smartass nobody's stoppin ya but it really doesn't bolster any type of dialogue.

Limiting (i.e. not "fun") for things YOU enjoy. AWD may be less limiting for what other enthusiasts enjoy. The misrepresentation of personal opinion as objective fact destroys any attempt at constructive dialogue.

Originally posted by tribal azn


actually 4;)

autoweek
road&track
car and driver
automobile

Make it five (5): gotta add Sports Car International to the list.

Originally posted by 73JPS


Make it five (5): gotta add Sprots Car International to the list.

do we get that mag here in the states?

Originally posted by revhappy


Limiting (i.e. not "fun") for things YOU enjoy. AWD may be less limiting for what other enthusiasts enjoy. The misrepresentation of personal opinion as objective fact destroys any attempt at constructive dialogue. My apologies.

I'll make sure to clarify that the platform almost all car magazines prefer for 'fun' is merely an unbased opinion. Thanks.

Also I'm curious... how can an AWD car *not* limit you? As opposed to how an RWD *could* limit you? Please elaborate on this.

It's easier to drive no doubt about that...safer too. but it *does* put more physical limits on the car as well (to the best of my knowledge, which I'll admit I'm wrong on if you can show me how). That's all I was saying.

Originally posted by Hercules
Also I'm curious... how can an AWD car *not* limit you? As opposed to how an RWD *could* limit you? Please elaborate on this.

It's easier to drive no doubt about that...safer too. but it *does* put more physical limits on the car as well (to the best of my knowledge, which I'll admit I'm wrong on if you can show me how). That's all I was saying.

I'm not getting into an AWD vs. RWD debate since that was NOT my point. You again generalized that RWD was less "limiting" implying it was more "fun" when it is in fact YOUR opinion. RWD and AWD are different drivetrains that each have their own advantages and disadvantages. They can both be "fun", but in different ways. Incidentally, I prefer RWD, but I also enjoy AWD and would take a great AWD sports car over a mediocre RWD sports car. Please refer again to the EVO article I posted in our last discussion (see below) about this very same topic:

http://www.rx8forum.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=30857#post30857

Now, when you describe "physical limits", I assume you are talking about cornering ability, transitional handling, track times, straight line performance, etc. To me, I don't really care which wheels driven are the best in theory. I am more concerned given the choices available, which are more "fun" and to a lesser extent which cars have higher "physical limits." Since I haven't driven EVO 8 or an RX8 yet, I can't make the "fun" decision for myself. However, on "physical limits" the EVO 8 exceeds the RX8 on all of the above measures except track times (which we can't prove yet).

Just picked up AMI Autoworld magazine last night sporting a blue RX-8 on the cover. Article is not great in detail, but does have a nice overhead of a red w/ the sunroof up and back in motion although a small pic. Think they are just guessing on some things (like 2900lb) since they said the auto is 'available' with the paddle shifters - I think they are std with the auto. See the scans of the article in the thread about this issue to see what I mean. ;)

Again, always with the critics taking the numbers at face value without ever having driven the car. Numbers can be deceiving, they can also be increased by tuning. If you want a fast 0-60, gear for it, then all the people who only look at 0-60 go out and buy your car to find out that every other thing about it may suck. The fact here is that Mazda didn't tune for any specific set of numbers, they wanted a great all around car, I think they achieved that. I also think most magazines are agreeing that the car is great all around, maybe not the best in any one category, but all around it comes out ahead.

However, for those who want more power, there's the rumored super charger being developed...that'll get you plenty more torque (277 is the rumored number, and in a car of this weight, you'll be sure to whip up on the 350Z with a supercharged RX-8).

For those who want the car to handle better (as if it didn't already handle great), remember that Mazda tuned the suspension for a nice ride too, so you won't be jarred all over the place on the bumpy roads. You want your guts shaken when you slam over some crappy roads, or there are no crappy roads in your area, tighten the suspension. The chassis is already stiff enough AND sports a near 50-50 weight distribution, with a more performance geared suspension setup on this car it should outhandle a 350Z easily enough too.

Now, while some would say they're already paying 30k+ for the car, why should they do all this work...well hell, last time I checked the 350Z was about 4 grand more...put four grand (3 for the super charger, and a grand for suspension) into this car and it should whip all over a Z.

edit: I guess all I'm trying to say is for those saying that this car is losing to a Z or the Infinity, if you were to take the money you saved by buying an 8 and spent it on performance for the 8 you'd beat both of them...most likely badly.

The only thing I learned is that the RX-8 Will Go Zoom Zoom!!!

None of its competition can!!!

The chassis is already stiff enough AND sports a near 50-50 weight distribution

Didnt R&T just put the weight distribution at 52/48?

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ


Didnt R&T just put the weight distribution at 52/48?

52/48 is near 50/50.

If I remember correctly, with driver inside it is supposed to be almost exactly 50/50.

But we are splitting hairs here. It isn't that big of a deal.

-Mr. Wigggles

yeah, i think youre right on that wiggles, though i thought it was 50/50 "out of the box"

anyway, i would REALLY like to see you guys start acting like grownups instead of whining at eachother constantly. It is nowhere near necessary to verbally attack eachother, and if you are going to do it, come out and do it, dont try the steal approach cause thats just stupid, if you wanna yell at someone, yell at them and leave it at that, dont go back and forth with stupid underhanded remarks that really take away from the forum. Also, anyone getting that heated over a car, is just a moron. It is a car, not the biggest issue in the world concerning you personally. Check your freking egos. Ive had to say this way to many times lately, so all of you give it a rest. Most of us are plenty calm, but for some reason, some of you become idiots; over nothing. So stop.

CHECK YOU EGOS! and remember, MOMMY LOVES YOU! blahAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ok?

Oh, and i appreciate the fact that you at least tried a little to keep it under control, but try a little harder.
________
Mexico Hotels (http://mexicohoteles.org)

52/48 is near 50/50.

Right; I just find it amusing that people here bashed the Z for being 52/48 (some even suggesting it was an ill balanced, tubby, boat) yet are very VERY quiet when word comes the 8 has similar balance.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ


Right; I just find it amusing that people here bashed the Z for being 52/48 (some even suggesting it was an ill balanced, tubby, boat) yet are very VERY quiet when word comes the 8 has similar balance.
Yes but we also coupled that with the 350Z wonderous understeer. The RX-8 as reported by every magazine isn't that bad and is more neutral in this respect.

And essentially that's what matters. It throws high Gs on the skidpad (higher than the 330 and G35 Coupe, its competition), has better braking than the 350Z, G35 Coupe, and 330, and also costs less than all of them.

I think right now we're pretty happy as to what we expected from the RX-8... no torque monster to be sure, but everything else it delivers in spades. And that's fine by me.

You keep relishing on what's been said in the past... get off it.

Yes but we also coupled that with the 350Z wonderous understeer. The RX-8 as reported by every magazine isn't that bad and is more neutral in this respect.

And the 8 has significantly more body roll then the Z....

I'm not relishing past comments.... I just LOVE both cars; though its clear to me they serve different niches in the market.

I wish I could buy both =( Or the 7 was out so my choice could be made for me ;)

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ


And the 8 has significantly more body roll then the Z....

I'm not relishing past comments.... I just LOVE both cars; though its clear to me they serve different niches in the market.

I wish I could buy both =( Or the 7 was out so my choice could be made for me ;) Yes but body roll has not played a part in the RX-8's handling.. that's why Car and Driver rated it *ahead* of the G35 Coupe. The weight distribution of the 350Z lends itself heavily to understeering.

So while the RX-8 may be more rolly, it's not affecting its performance (well it might be... but it's still doin better than its competition in the handling regard). But the 350Z is plagued with understeer (even by 350Z owners' account) and that *could* be aided with a better weight distribution. I think since the RX-8 is much lighter weight, the weight distribution doesn't hurt it as much as it does a heavier car like the Z.

Allright, I must admit that I have seen the coming of the 8 and it is absolutely beeeeautiful in silver. I like the red and black interior, but I might be swayed to the "stark" all black leather. The picture of the car with all the doors open from a slightly elevated angle gives the impression of an arrowhead. Slick and dangerous, designed to penetrate the air at excessive velocities. That picture also allows you to appreciate the angle of the front end and the curving yet angular front wheel arches. This car is great. The interior is well organized and beautifully appointed.

Performance is more than what I expected. Yes, mid range grunt is a little shy of where I want it to be, but with a sweet shifting 6 speed tranny, keep the revs in the stratosphere and you have no problem. Just make good use of the 250 horses and the 9000 rpm capabilities.

My wife was forced to read the article to me, a trade off for a cup of tea in the morning, only to try to get her "involved" in the 8 phenomena. To my surprise, she actually likes the car, and wants to get one. Only is that she wants the automatic. Well I WOULDN'T go for that. No no no, only the 6 speed for me, thank you. I guess I have to make a lot more tea. She also preferred the interior to many that I showed her, including the G35 coupe.

I can only wait for the NYIAS in April to see it again, and hopefully, I can sit in it for a change. You know, to get a feel of how everything falls together.

I realize I've deviated away from the Road and Track article, but that was what the article did to me . . . imagine what the real car can do!!!

Actually the R&T article says "52/48 with driver" which is understandable considering where the driver sits. Another thing which can affect the numbers slightly would be what level of options you have on the car. The car itself should still be 50/50.

Anyone else notice that they mentioned that they tested the car with the Grand Touring Package which includes the moonroof, yet the car in the pictures does have a leather interior but no moonroof???

I would also think that if they did test a car with the Grand Touring package, that cars with less options on them will be even lighter and will eek out even slightly better performance.

Originally posted by ToRX-8orToZ


Right; I just find it amusing that people here bashed the Z for being 52/48 (some even suggesting it was an ill balanced, tubby, boat) yet are very VERY quiet when word comes the 8 has similar balance.

its 53/47. :p dunno if that changes anything...

Originally posted by DTECH-RX
Actually the R&T article says "52/48 with driver" which is understandable considering where the driver sits. Another thing which can affect the numbers slightly would be what level of options you have on the car. The car itself should still be 50/50.

Anyone else notice that they mentioned that they tested the car with the Grand Touring Package which includes the moonroof, yet the car in the pictures does have a leather interior but no moonroof???

I would also think that if they did test a car with the Grand Touring package, that cars with less options on them will be even lighter and will eek out even slightly better performance.

The C&D car had a cost of ~28K, which sounds like the sport package. It weighed 2,940 lbs. compared to the 3,000 lb. figure for the Grand Touring Package car for R&T, but both put up near identical acceleration #s.

Originally posted by Donny Boy
Allright, I must admit that I have seen the coming of the 8 and it is absolutely beeeeautiful in silver.


ok here we go again:D when i first looked at the pics i thought "wow someone finally printed pics of a silver one" but the more i looked at it the more i started to believe that it was titanium. someone help me out here-which color is it?

Looks very silver to me.

i hope so that car looks great:D

now how did you get a magic rx-8 ball?
http://www.rx8forum.com/avatar.php?userid=720&dateline=1046925755

Originally posted by Hercules



And essentially that's what matters. It throws high Gs on the skidpad (higher than the 330 and G35 Coupe, its competition), has better braking than the 350Z, G35 Coupe, and 330, and also costs less than all of them.


Hercules:

Check your sources before stating them as facts. November, 2002 issue:

G35C
Skidpad: 0.92 g
Slalom: 67.7 mph
0-60: 6.1 sec
0-1/4mile: 14.6 sec

Oh look at that, the RX-8 is faster than the G35C. :D You should be proud of that.

btw: watch out for the Dodge SRT4, 5.7sec to 60, 14.2 to 1/4mile, 0.85, 4 real doors, 22/30 mpg, and whooo~ look at the price: $20k. Let's not forget about the Lancer and Subaru. Looks like RX8 just got beaten in the value+performance sector. :p

Speed is not everything, neither is handling~ So keep that in mind when you choose to compare RX8 to BMW 330, G35C or whatever. Admire a car for its own merit, no through numbers and data.

Originally posted by DTECH-RX
Anyone else notice that they mentioned that they tested the car with the Grand Touring Package which includes the moonroof, yet the car in the pictures does have a leather interior but no moonroof???


This is exactly the package I want to get. Leather with no moonroof. Come on Mazda!

Originally posted by zoom44
i hope so that car looks great:D

now how did you get a magic rx-8 ball?
http://www.rx8forum.com/avatar.php?userid=720&dateline=1046925755

Ahhhhhhhhh.... sources say: "Ebay"... girlfriend say: "You paid HOW MUCH??????" :D

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac


Hercules:

Check your sources before stating them as facts. November, 2002 issue:

G35C
Skidpad: 0.92 g
Slalom: 67.7 mph
0-60: 6.1 sec
0-1/4mile: 14.6 sec

Oh look at that, the RX-8 is faster than the G35C. :D You should be proud of that.

btw: watch out for the Dodge SRT4, 5.7sec to 60, 14.2 to 1/4mile, 0.85, 4 real doors, 22/30 mpg, and whooo~ look at the price: $20k. Let's not forget about the Lancer and Subaru. Looks like RX8 just got beaten in the value+performance sector. :p

Speed is not everything, neither is handling~ So keep that in mind when you choose to compare RX8 to BMW 330, G35C or whatever. Admire a car for its own merit, no through numbers and data.

uhhh. he did check his sources....Latest Car and Driver comparo. G35C .86g RX-8 .91g Car and Driver: "a considerable margin beyond the cornering capablities of these two competitors."

HOORAY!
________
Two and a half men forum (http://www.tv-gossip.com/two-half-men/)

i like the last sentence

paraphrasing " a good judge of a sports car is if it leaves a smile on your face after driving. judging from the cheshire cat-like grins on everyone here, the rx-8 has succeded" :D :D

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by zoom44
i hope so that car looks great

now how did you get a magic rx-8 ball?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 73JPS


Ahhhhhhhhh.... sources say: "Ebay"... girlfriend say: "You paid HOW MUCH??????" :D
Dude! I just sent an email to "rx8orders" and asked for one; and they sent it to me. I didn't pay for it!

But, now I'm curious what they're going for on e-Bay. I'd be more than happy to sell mine!!!

If somebody wants to scan the article and email it to me I'll post it up..

(shayaanf@mazdaworld.org)

I'll admit I'm a little dissapointed in the 8's performance numbers in the R&T test (R&T is my favorite car magazine, afterall). According to their numbers, the G35 Coupe beats the 8 in both the skid pad and the slalom by a wide margin. Not good, considering how much heavier the G35 is than the 8.

However, I am very happy that the 8 beat both the Mustang Cobra (never liked that one much anyway) and the G35 Coupe in the Car and Driver article.

I was VERY impressed with the R&T test of the Evo VIII, but I'm not crazy abot the reliability issues a lot of Mitsu cars seem to have over the long run.

I'm looking forward to the US introduction of the STi. Subaru has a good history in the reliability department, and 300hp and 300lb-ft in a 4-door, all wheel drive sedan sounds great to me.

The bottom line is that the two cars I'm most interested in now are the RX-8 and the STi. I'll have to drive both of them before I make a decision, of course. For now, it seems as though the STi may be faster (at least in a straight line) and more practical, especially living in a snowy climate, as I do. The 8 will probably be more fun to drive, and is obviously much sexier. Either way, it'll be a couple years before I make the final decision.

Did anyone else notice that the specifications listed an in-dash 6 disc CD changer as standard equipment?

Pretty cool. I know a few people in the audio section who wanted to hear that news.

-Mr. Wigggles

Originally posted by Schneegz
I'll admit I'm a little dissapointed in the 8's performance numbers in the R&T test (R&T is my favorite car magazine, afterall). According to their numbers, the G35 Coupe beats the 8 in both the skid pad and the slalom by a wide margin. Not good, considering how much heavier the G35 is than the 8.

However, I am very happy that the 8 beat both the Mustang Cobra (never liked that one much anyway) and the G35 Coupe in the Car and Driver article.

I was VERY impressed with the R&T test of the Evo VIII, but I'm not crazy abot the reliability issues a lot of Mitsu cars seem to have over the long run.

I'm looking forward to the US introduction of the STi. Subaru has a good history in the reliability department, and 300hp and 300lb-ft in a 4-door, all wheel drive sedan sounds great to me.

The bottom line is that the two cars I'm most interested in now are the RX-8 and the STi. I'll have to drive both of them before I make a decision, of course. For now, it seems as though the STi may be faster (at least in a straight line) and more practical, especially living in a snowy climate, as I do. The 8 will probably be more fun to drive, and is obviously much sexier. Either way, it'll be a couple years before I make the final decision.
It's odd though, because Car and Driver posted the RX-8 as being higher on the skidpad than the G35 Coupe...

Either way though, I'm happy with my purchase. I want a few more reviews with some numbers to see what the skidpad numbers are going to be.

The reason the G35C got better numbers than the RX-8 can be explain very simply: Tires. This is the same reason the G35C scored better than the 350Z in every performance categories except for acceleration (R&T data). The G35C wears Michelin Pilot Sport, while the RX-8 and 350Z have inferior Bridgestone Potenza RE 040. Tires make a BIG difference and probably one of the most overlook performance upgrade.

Originally posted by Good Duck
The reason the G35C got better numbers than the RX-8 can be explain very simply: Tires. This is the same reason the G35C scored better than the 350Z in every performance categories except for acceleration (R&T data). The G35C wears Michelin Pilot Sport, while the RX-8 and 350Z have inferior Bridgestone Potenza RE 040. Tires make a BIG difference and probably one of the most overlook performance upgrade. Still doesn't explain how the RX-8 got better than the G35 Coupe in C&D

SCORE! i wanted that 6cd! blahAHAHAhAhAhAHAHAHAHAHaHaHaHahahaha freking GREAT balhAHAHAHAHa
________
bondage girl Cam (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/fetish/bdsm/)

Well, if better tires is all the RX-8 needs, then it's no big deal. I'd probably drive on the stock tires until they wore out just to get the "feel" of the car, then slap on some good sporting tires (not sure which ones yet). I always switch to snow tires in the winter anyway, so lesser traction in bad weather would not be an issue.

Also, I was thinking that some nice, fat, aftermarket antiroll bars would help help correct some of that body roll. Not that it seems to hurt the car's handling, but I'd like to get rid of it anyway.

Add a good, free-flowing aftermarket exhaust, and I'm all set. Until Mazda makes major improvements and I start salivating over the next RX-8 (Mazdaspeed?), that is.

Originally posted by 73JPS

Ahhhhhhhhh.... sources say: "Ebay"... girlfriend say: "You paid HOW MUCH??????" :D

So you are the one that beat me out! You did pay too much :D

My Favorite quote from the article is.

"Real sports cars aren't supposed to have four doors, this one does."

Herc, I'm scanning it now, should have it sent shortly.

Ummmm, I'm new here, but is nobody concerned with the gear ratio?

More specifically 6th gear.

5th gear Redline 147mph
6th gear Redline 148mph????


You would think they would give it a little more room in sixth for better fuel economy no?

Originally posted by Wing
5th gear Redline 147mph
6th gear Redline 148mph????

You would think they would give it a little more room in sixth for better fuel economy no?

Here are the gear ratios for the UK model, I think the US model may be slightly different but only in the lower gears.

3.760
2.269
1.645
1.187
1.000
0.843

As you can see there's quite a gap between 5th and 6th - so the car can't hit redline in 6th, either because of the electronic limiter (150mph?) or lack of power vs. drag.

The number that R&T posted in relation to the Rx-8's balance is i quote:

"Weight dist (WITH DRIVER), f/r,%.......52/48"

in other words without out a driver the car is a perfect 50/50

what happened to the supposed SUPER HANDLING ABILITY?
skidpad g: .88
slalom: 64.5

wtf??!?!? those arent very impressive to say the least.

hell look at the evo 8's specs done by the same mag
skidpad g: .97
slalom: 68.7
now thats impressive
http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=466&page=2

remember all that talk about how the rx8 would rape a evo8(and sti) around the track?


it was all a lie

^^^5years 7months and 16days, is this a thread revival record:lol:

alfy has been going berserk lately!

he seems to like old stuff. see his signature image of an old car.

First PBlue, now alfy... what's up with all the thread revivals? :icon_no2:

he seems to like old stuff. see his signature image of an old car. lol, ii was bored so i just googled a random title of a thread. this thread came up.

That Road and Track article was the reason I bought my 8.

I've still got this issue of R & T on a bookshelf in the bedroom.

I have the specs page from this article posted on my office bulletin board.

I have the specs page from this article posted on my office bulletin board.

Lol, I had a copy of that in my desk at work for the longest time when many coworkers would start questioning me about the car. :)