Page 1

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1374&stc=1

Page 2

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1375&stc=1

Page 3

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1376&stc=1

Page 4

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1377&stc=1

Page 5

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1378&stc=1

Last page: 6

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1379&stc=1

Thx Herc, Great Article. This is exactly what I'm looking for.

But somthing as piqued my interest: Let's compare this article to the C/D article.

In the R/T the RX-8 exhibited faster accleration then the G35, won on braking, but loss, so to speak, on the 200 ft skidpad.

In the C/D, the RX-8 loss on accleration, but won in braking and on the 300 ft skidpad.

Why the differences? My guess is that its because these were all pre-production vehicles, hand built = not exactly the same. Any ideas?

I think that Road and Track were using old numbers from the G35 Coupe because they merely threw it into the comparison, and didn't compare it head on like C&D did.

Besides C&D's numbers are usually to me the most reliable... if I don't like the writing I can always take a glance at the numbers and realize they are pretty dead-on.

thanks herc for getting those posted up i love my silver:D
chenpin just a thought but the c&d comparo was an actual comparo ove rthe course of , i think they said , 3 days. the r&t article is just showing numbers they got from the g35c some time before, so conditions at the time of testing could have a lot to do with it.

edit: herc beat me to it:o someone should figure out a way to measure the torgue at his fingers;)

Originally posted by zoom44
edit: herc beat me to it:o
Course I did :D

Originally posted by zoom44
someone should figure out a way to measure the torgue at his fingers;)

lol, good one :D

Didn't C/D mangage to pull a .91 or .92 on the skidpad. Road and Track only got .88

Originally posted by cueball1029
Didn't C/D mangage to pull a .91 or .92 on the skidpad. Road and Track only got .88 Yea, .91..

I've always trusted C&D's numbers anyways, so the 0-60 times, skidpad and braking numbers I'd rather take from C&D. They generally get better results anyways.

Another interesting observation is that C&D got 5.9 and 14.5 with a 2940 lbs RX-8 and R&T the same numbers with a 3180lbs RX-8. C&D also launched form 8000rpm drop and the R&T from a 7500rpm drop. So is this just minor inconsistance with numbers or does launching it at 7500 make that much of a difference. Though i don't recommend doing that to any clutch but hopefully mazda has taken that into consideration and given us a racing style clutch.

great, now I have to go to the bookstore to get this issue....

Originally posted by ZoomZoomH
great, now I have to go to the bookstore to get this issue.... Of course, my three-year subscriptions to both C&D and R&T expired last month! Grrrrrr.

On-line (http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=496&page_number=1&preview=) now.