Quoted from the R&T RX-8 Special Mag..

R&T: Because the RX-8's rotary engine is naturally aspirated, did you have concerns about the lack of low and mid range torque?

Katabuchi: "Not really. Of course, if you compare the RX-8's Renesis to the twin turbo 13B powerplant of the RX-7, low and mid range torque is down. However, we didnt want to give the RX-8 a pure sports car, head snapping feel. We wanted to give it smoothness and linearity. So when you step on the throttle, you're not violently jerked around in the cabin, but accelerated in a smooth, pleasant way. And as with the suspension, those who want more power will be able to customize the car in their own way, whether it be in the form of a turbocharger or supercharger kit."

Well folks.. take that however you wish..

That is what I don't understand. The 8 is being presented as a pure/full blooded/true/down to the bones sports car in every meaning of the word, YET Mr. Katabuchi, you didn't what to give it a pure sports car, head snapping feel...WHY??? Frankly speaking that statement was disturbing but its not gonna stop me anyway :-)

Why? because there trying to sell lots of them and the last 7 has a reputation for being a bit to extreem for most people.

Originally posted by Maximus
That is what I don't understand. The 8 is being presented as a pure/full blooded/true/down to the bones sports car in every meaning of the word, YET Mr. Katabuchi, you didn't what to give it a pure sports car, head snapping feel...WHY??? If the 8 was being presented as a PURE sports car it would have 2 doors, 300 hp and it would be called "RX-7."

Originally posted by Maximus
That is what I don't understand. The 8 is being presented as a pure/full blooded/true/down to the bones sports car in every meaning of the word, YET Mr. Katabuchi, you didn't what to give it a pure sports car, head snapping feel...WHY??? Frankly speaking that statement was disturbing but its not gonna stop me anyway :-)

Negative Ghost Rider. The 8 is a four-door, sport crossover, not a pure sports car. It was never meant to be the fastest ride around, but rather a nice mix of sport and sensibility. Like Puppy said, the RX-7 was (and with a little luck will be again) Mazda's flagship sportscar.

Rotor Motor,
Did you read the R&T RX-8 suppliment? You will find the word 'sports' everywhere :-) I hope no one takes me wrong as I love the 8 for what it offers. I only dont understand Katabuchi's statement about not giving it that head snapping feel. Why not? I mean look at some of the +/- 30K range so called sports cars, (which some of them aren't by definition), these days that give you the same head snapping feel he's talking about. On the other hand just one look at the RX8 and it screams 'sports'! Are 'sports' and 'pure sports' cars two different things ? Well I guess in the end our RX-8 is REALLY a sports car like no other :-) styling like no other, a package like no other, and (linear) acceleration like no other as well :-)

i'm going to probably buy an RX-8 regardless, but i think mr. katabuchi is merely making excuses. what better explanation is there than the "oh, yeah... we intended it to be 'lacking' in low/mid range torque... because it... um... is more comfortable that way. yeah, that's it!"

but then again, i could easily be convinced they are going to pack it all into the new RX-7.

well, think about the differences between the RX-8 and some of the other "sports coupes", eh?? it's somewhere more in between an RSX-S or Celica-GTS and a G35C, performance right in the middle (closer to the upper end), functionality between a sports coupe and a sedan (well, more than those three cars, actually), with a price tag right in the middle (closer to the lower end), with anemities abounding... it's pretty quick in the corners, but with a pretty nice ride; it's pretty small and light, but with room enough for four; it's pretty fast, but with a very quiet and very smooth engine... it's just the kind of tradeoffs this car has made.

Originally posted by Maximus
Rotor Motor,
Did you read the R&T RX-8 suppliment? You will find the word 'sports' everywhere :-) I hope no one takes me wrong as I love the 8 for what it offers. I only dont understand Katabuchi's statement about not giving it that head snapping feel. Why not? I mean look at some of the +/- 30K range so called sports cars, (which some of them aren't by definition), these days that give you the same head snapping feel he's talking about. On the other hand just one look at the RX8 and it screams 'sports'! Are 'sports' and 'pure sports' cars two different things ? Well I guess in the end our RX-8 is REALLY a sports car like no other :-) styling like no other, a package like no other, and (linear) acceleration like no other as well :-)

Hey, I'm not arguing with ya that it definitely looks sporty, but it's clear from the design of the car that it was targeted at a much broader audience that just the sports car drivers. And with that broader audience comes more preferences for how a car should look, feel, drive, etc. It's not likely that may people would buy a Corvette (for example) as a family outing car. The RX-8 on the otherhand will suit that function just fine and be far more fun to drive than a mini-van or SUV.

I think Mazda took the right approach. Design a car (especially since it's the first return of the rotary in a decade) that will appeal to as many people as possible and let those that want more performance enhance it as they see fit (or wait until the Mazdaspeed version is released). The target audience for this car is much braoder than that of a Vette, or a Viper, or a Porsche....

Personally, I don't street race and I don't race on a track. I'm not a rotary lover nor a Mazda purist. My '95 Lumina has got to go before it explodes and the *8* seems like a great sports car with a reasonable price tag. *Most* of the people that buy this car will fall into that category however I am aware that the mojority or people on this forum do not. The low end torque debate is a non-issue for me and looking at it from an objective viewpoint, Mr. Katabuchi is just making excuses. What is he gonna say, yeah we know it's low and that is the way it is. The reason why they made it like that is to keep the price down. That was one of the major reasons the RX-7 didn't sell well. It was too darn expensive. So in order to keep the price down, this was what had to be done. I hope we don't see threads about the torque when the car does car out since everyone here knows about it.

it's clear from the design of the car that it was targeted at a much broader audience that just the sports car drivers. And with that broader audience comes more preferences for how a car should look, feel, drive, etc. That statement it so wrong. This car was NOT designed to a broader audience than just sports cars. Only people looking for a sports car would even consider this car. For you to defend them by saying people that are in the market for a family sedan, would buy this car if it had low, low-end torque and NOT buy it because it had good low-end torque is ridiculous. The statement is ridiculous to begin with because no one looking for a family sedan would buy an *8* regardless.

It's not likely that may people would buy a Corvette (for example) as a family outing car. The RX-8 on the otherhand will suit that function just fine and be far more fun to drive than a mini-van or SUV. To make this car as a "family car" is crazy IMO. While it does have a decent back seat, I for one would never use this car as a family car. It is just too small and I would feel safe carrying my children in the back seat. Of course it is more fun to drive than a mini-van or an SUV. However, NO ONE in the market for a mini-van would consider this car regardless of torque.

that will appeal to as many people as possible and let those that want more performance enhance it as they see fit That is like saying I want a hamburger without the meat.
The target audience for this car is much braoder than that of a Vette, or a Viper, or a Porsche.... This car would appeal to everyone if it had good low-end torque. The reason this car is appealling to more people is because of the price...period. You can't compare a 70K Viper or Porsche to the *8*. If a Viper was around 30K and you could choose between the 2, almost everyone would choose the Viper.

Again it all comes down to price. I really wish people would stop talking about torque. If it bothers you, then don't buy the car. I love it when people say *stuff* about the torque and then follow-up by saying, well I'll buy it anyway. If that's the case, then stop talking about it too. Everyone knows the problem and it should be a non-issue by now. Everyone knows what they are getting in this car. Stop talking about the torque and start talking about *NEW* stuff about the car.

GH22

While it does have a decent back seat, I for one would never use this car as a family car. It is just too small and I would feel safe carrying my children in the back seat. That should be *WOULDN'T* feel safe... BTW

Any questions? (http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2232.shtml)

That statement it so wrong. This car was NOT designed to a broader audience than just sports cars.

yes it was . that's why it has those extra doors and good size room in the back seats.

The statement is ridiculous to begin with because no one looking for a family sedan would buy an *8* regardless.

i would. one of my other choices is a bmw 3 series.

It is just too small and I wouldn't feel safe carrying my children in the back seat

that's a real shame. Mazda has gone out of it's way to make this car safer than it has to be to combat ideas like yours. besides all of the airbags and structural reinforments meant to stop incursions into the passenger areas, it also comes equipped with the isofix child seat attachments specifically to put children safely in the back.

You can't compare a 70K Viper or Porsche to the *8*. If a Viper was around 30K and you could choose between the 2, almost everyone would choose the Viper. you sure can compare cars of grossly different price points. in fact the handling of the 8 has already been likened to that of porsches. I would like to think i would take the viper but in fact i couldn't because it doesn't seat four. i don't have the money to buy both even if they were both 30k.

Stop talking about the torque and start talking about *NEW* stuff about the car.

Now on that we agree! time to talk about something else. Anyone know what the horn sounds like?Wiggles?:D

The RX8 is being compared to the Integra-R (RSX-S) Altezza (IS300) Celica GTS and Honda S2000 in Japanese market. (The RX is compared very favorably to the cars in its class) This is purely base on pricing points and the audience the RX8 attracts. I don't see why there is so much commotion surrounding what Katabuchi said. The RX8 is a sporty 4 door/2door cross over, it's not a pure sport car. Mazda needs to be able to prove the reliability of the rotary before they can sell any of them. It is better to have a moderately powered NA plant that is highly reliable as opposed to a monster rotary that's unreliable. The general public's opinion on the Turbo RX7 is that the engine is very unreliable. Mazda has to change that image! I don't see what's the problem with the Renesis, I don't hear anyone complaining the S2000 and Acura RSX-S not having enough torque.

People keep comparing the RX8 to the 350Z and G35C.... I really don't see a comparison. The Z is a no-compromise 2 seater roaster, and the G35C is a luxury coupe that competes with the BMW 330. Both these cars have 270+ torque, but they are both quite heavy. Heavy means understeer, understeer means no fun in tight corners. The RX8 is more like the Celica/Integra/S2000 in that it is a light car with quick handling and high revving engine. It just so happens the design of the back end of the RX8 allows you to hold 4 people instead of 2.

GH22,

Your argument is so full of holes I could pick it into a million pieces, but I think people would get tired of scrolling after a few dozen points. Besides, I think Zoom already did a pretty decent job.

Skyline, good points. I too am sick of the comparison. The RX-8 fits a niche that, hopefully, will appeal to a wide range of people including: folks that like to bring their friends along to the club, while still being able to take their car out the track on weekends, familys (and yes, this car is plenty safe for kids), the younger generation who wants a fast, nimble, fun car that still has room for visitors (where I fall in), the die hard rotor-heads (where I hope to fall in some day :D ), etc.... That said, it's only natural to compare cars, especially when you're spending 1/2 your years salary on it (at least I am...) I agree that those cars don't fit in a perfect comparison, but they're about as close as you'll get.

Katabuchi says turbocharger or supercharger. Isn't that going to create reliability problems for the renesis?

no, because it was built to take boost.

edit: okay that was not the whole answer. it should have been "not if done correctly by a reputable, knowledgeable rotary tuner who also makes sure the proper tweaks are done to the ecu etc.."

Sports car or not?

Road & Track:
"Real sports cars aren't supposed to have four doors. This one does."
"...it's a very capable-handling, affordable rear-drive sports car with room for four people..."
"So what we have here is an execellent, civilized sports car that just happens to have four doors."

Automobile:
"The RX-8 is different, but it's a true sports car."

Motor Trend:
"But it's nicely balanced handling, combined with an engine that winds up evenly to its 9000-rpm redline, make the RX-8 an easy sports car to drive."

Car and Driver magazine:
"From the driver's seat, the new RX-8 is the best RX ever."
"Despite its engine's lack of wide-ranging power, the RX-8 ultimately delivered the greatest driving satisfaction combined with the best four person usability."

Car and Driver TV:
"With the RX-8, Mazda made good on their promise of making a more practical sports car."

MotorWeek CarKeys:
"The RX-8 may look a little odd, and have four doors like family sedan, but I got behind the wheel and there's no doubt that this is a real sports car."

And the naysayers...

AutoWeek:
Dutch Mandel: "RX-8 is a sports car as Godzilla is a house pet."
Mac Morrison: "...Mazda's sporty new RX-8. That's sporty, not sports car."

I think the ayes have it. And I can't wait til I have it...the sports car/coupe/sedanny thing with the rotor motor.

I'm glad the *8* has been "likened" to that of the Porsche in response to its handling. Too bad it doesn't beat the Porsche in any worthy category. And let's not even talk about comparisons with the Viper.

Second, you are so wrong by saying this car is trying to appeal to people in the family sedan and mini-van etc... genre. No way. I know you love this car and stuff, but think about it objectively; you really think people are going to be thinking..."hmmm, Dodge Caravan or Mazda RX-8". Or even, "hmmm, Caddy Escalade or Mazda RX-8.

Third, I should have said anyone "in their right mind" wouldn't use the *8* as a family car. If you do, more power to you however you are putting your family at risk no matter how many airbags are in it. It is just too small to warrant use as a family car. BTW the BMW 3 series has better safety ratings in EVERY category...so if you are thinking about that car as well, I'd go that way (if you are going to use it as your family car).

The Mitsu Eclipse has 2 back seats BTW and they aren't very practical. While you could fit someone back there, the room is very limited. The same goes for the *8*. There are 2 back seats but it is a tight fit...especially if you have anyone bigger than 5'11 driving the car, or soemone with long legs...the space vanishes quite quickly. Having back seats is a plus, however it doesn't qualify it as use as a family car. If you are using it that way, then that is a very selfish decision on your part.

It all comes down to price, that is what makes this car appealling. If this car was 10K more people have a lot of *other* options available to them.

People are so enthralled with the idea of getting this car they are blind to objective view points. That is why ratings on cars are by unbiased persons. If people took the ratings from Mazda as true, this car would beat its competition singel handedly.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
I'm glad the *8* has been "likened" to that of the Porsche in response to its handling. Too bad it doesn't beat the Porsche in any worthy category. And let's not even talk about comparisons with the Viper.

Second, you are so wrong by saying this car is trying to appeal to people in the family sedan and mini-van etc... genre. No way. I know you love this car and stuff, but think about it objectively; you really think people are going to be thinking..."hmmm, Dodge Caravan or Mazda RX-8". Or even, "hmmm, Caddy Escalade or Mazda RX-8.

Third, I should have said anyone "in their right mind" wouldn't use the *8* as a family car. If you do, more power to you however you are putting your family at risk no matter how many airbags are in it. It is just too small to warrant use as a family car. BTW the BMW 3 series has better safety ratings in EVERY category...so if you are thinking about that car as well, I'd go that way (if you are going to use it as your family car).

The Mitsu Eclipse has 2 back seats BTW and they aren't very practical. While you could fit someone back there, the room is very limited. The same goes for the *8*. There are 2 back seats but it is a tight fit...especially if you have anyone bigger than 5'11 driving the car, or soemone with long legs...the space vanishes quite quickly. Having back seats is a plus, however it doesn't qualify it as use as a family car. If you are using it that way, then that is a very selfish decision on your part.

It all comes down to price, that is what makes this car appealling. If this car was 10K more people have a lot of *other* options available to them.

People are so enthralled with the idea of getting this car they are blind to objective view points. That is why ratings on cars are by unbiased persons. If people took the ratings from Mazda as true, this car would beat its competition singel handedly. While some of what you say has merit, you seem to forget that in its price point... the RX-8 beats MOST cars.

Granted it's not as fast as most of the cars out there... but it handles great (best RWD in that price point imo), has useable rear-seats, looks appealing, has good build quality, and is priced very well.

I know if I had the money, I'd get an M3 Coupe, 6 speed. But I don't have 60k and the 'likening' of the RX-8 to the Porsche is a compliment but not a comparison.

I still fail to see how you'd be putting your family in more peril than most cars out there... it has great crash test ratings, airbags galore, and won't tip over like SUVs. Not to mention its braking is best in class, so that's another safety point.

I think you're entitled to your opinions but it seems to me you're a tad sore that the RX-8 is getting the praise it is... the fact of the matter is for what WE are looking for, a real-world car that we can have a blast in, and not waste all our money doing it..

The RX-8 is the best choice we can make. Period.

"The RX-8 is the best choice we can make. Period."

:D That's quite a powerful statement.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
I'm glad the *8* has been "likened" to that of the Porsche in response to its handling. Too bad it doesn't beat the Porsche in any worthy category. And let's not even talk about comparisons with the Viper.

Second, you are so wrong by saying this car is trying to appeal to people in the family sedan and mini-van etc... genre. No way. I know you love this car and stuff, but think about it objectively; you really think people are going to be thinking..."hmmm, Dodge Caravan or Mazda RX-8". Or even, "hmmm, Caddy Escalade or Mazda RX-8.

Third, I should have said anyone "in their right mind" wouldn't use the *8* as a family car. If you do, more power to you however you are putting your family at risk no matter how many airbags are in it. It is just too small to warrant use as a family car. BTW the BMW 3 series has better safety ratings in EVERY category...so if you are thinking about that car as well, I'd go that way (if you are going to use it as your family car).




Goldenhue, I think you're being a little bit harsh. Safety ratings on the RX-8 reportedly have been phenomenal. Granted, no official stats have been released for the US yet, but unless there is something that's changed big-time, it should rate very well here. And you know why I'm buying it? Because I plan on having kids in a few years, and I don't want to buy a sports car I'll have to give up when they start arriving. For you to start making generalizations like "'anyone in their right mind' wouldn't use the *8* as a family car car" is a little uncalled for. I plan to do just exactly that, as do several others here.

You are right about one thing- I doubt many people who would consider a minivan would consider an RX-8- I know I would *never ever* buy a minivan. Or an SUV, for that matter (no offense, of course, to anyone that has). But I do think some people (like me and my husband) will and have considered cross-shopping family sedans like the 3 series with the RX-8.

Goldenhue

Second, you are so wrong by saying this car is trying to appeal to people in the family sedan and mini-van etc... genre. No way. I know you love this car and stuff, but think about it objectively; you really think people are going to be thinking..."hmmm, Dodge Caravan or Mazda RX-8". Or even, "hmmm, Caddy Escalade or Mazda RX-8.

You don't seem to be listening to what people are telling you. A number of us, myself included, are buying this car because we can get the family in it on the limited occasions that we need to. That's not to say its our primary family car, or that we'd ever consider a mini-van, but it is competing with sedans. The inconvenience of bucking kids into car seats in a 2 door coupe has to be experienced to be appreciated. I don't think the term 'family' sedan tells us anything - that's a description of how the car is used, and means different things to different people. One friend of mine with a 5 series has no kids, another has 2 kids. So you tell me whether the 5-series is a 'family' sedan, or a 'sports' sedan, or just a plain 'ol 'sedan'.

Third, I should have said anyone "in their right mind" wouldn't use the *8* as a family car. If you do, more power to you however you are putting your family at risk no matter how many airbags are in it. It is just too small to warrant use as a family car. BTW the BMW 3 series has better safety ratings in EVERY category...so if you are thinking about that car as well, I'd go that way (if you are going to use it as your family car).

Ahh......, so you're from the school that believes that as soon as you have kids, you need to go buy a 3-ton truck, complete with bumper stickers that say "my child was student of the month at ....". Personally, I'd take safe handling and maneuverability over mass, unless, as you suggest, the '8 design is just plain unsafe. I haven't seen published crash ratings for the '8, nor comparisons to the 3-series - have you seen data for this, or is it just a hunch based on your wordly experience.


Having back seats is a plus, however it doesn't qualify it as use as a family car. If you are using it that way, then that is a very selfish decision on your part.

Get over this 'family car' thing. Think sports sedan/coupe for some of us.

Third, I should have said anyone "in their right mind" wouldn't use the *8* as a family car. If you do, more power to you however you are putting your family at risk no matter how many airbags are in it. It is just too small to warrant use as a family car

I never did claim I was 'in my right mind', as this is exactly part of the reason I chose the RX-8 over the Miata, Boxster, Z4. Why not have a Sports Car that I can take the 2 teenagers with the wife to Six Flags, or a Braves baseball game? The RX-8 will be for my family the only vehicle all four of us will fit in comfortably.

Also under consideration was the G35 Coupe, Accord EX Coupe & Beetle Convertible, however the G35 (head) & Beetle (shoulders & head) has less overall back seat room than the RX-8. The Accord quite simply was too bland looking for my not 'in my right mind' taste.

The Mitsu Eclipse has 2 back seats BTW and they aren't very practical. While you could fit someone back there, the room is very limited. The same goes for the *8*. There are 2 back seats but it is a tight fit...especially if you have anyone bigger than 5'11 driving the car, or soemone with long legs...the space vanishes quite quickly. Having back seats is a plus, however it doesn't qualify it as use as a family car. If you are using it that way, then that is a very selfish decision on your part

I never did claim that I was not 'selfish'. This is one of my greatest attributes. However, from the reviews so far, the RX-8 has much more room than a 2+2, and comparable back seat room to many sedans.

So the selfish part of me said, "Why not let your Sports Car have a very functional back seat".

Mazda may not have sold you, but they did exactly what they needed to......to sell me!

Originally posted by ggreen29
Sports car or not?

Road & Track:
"Real sports cars aren't supposed to have four doors. This one does."
"...it's a very capable-handling, affordable rear-drive sports car with room for four people..."
"So what we have here is an execellent, civilized sports car that just happens to have four doors."

Automobile:
"The RX-8 is different, but it's a true sports car."

Motor Trend:
"But it's nicely balanced handling, combined with an engine that winds up evenly to its 9000-rpm redline, make the RX-8 an easy sports car to drive."

Car and Driver magazine:
"From the driver's seat, the new RX-8 is the best RX ever."
"Despite its engine's lack of wide-ranging power, the RX-8 ultimately delivered the greatest driving satisfaction combined with the best four person usability."

Car and Driver TV:
"With the RX-8, Mazda made good on their promise of making a more practical sports car."

MotorWeek CarKeys:
"The RX-8 may look a little odd, and have four doors like family sedan, but I got behind the wheel and there's no doubt that this is a real sports car."

And the naysayers...

AutoWeek:
Dutch Mandel: "RX-8 is a sports car as Godzilla is a house pet."
Mac Morrison: "...Mazda's sporty new RX-8. That's sporty, not sports car."

I think the ayes have it. And I can't wait til I have it...the sports car/coupe/sedanny thing with the rotor motor.



========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"But many of these people still expressed a desire to drive sports cars. Therefore, we thought it was a good idea to build a sports car that could also cater to their everyday lifestyles."

========================
R&T suppliment:
Question: With four doors, can the RX-8 really be considered a sports car?
Katabuchi's answer:
"Of course. A lot of factors go into defining what is a sports car, but the most important, I believe, are weight and size, which include the gerneral proportions of the car. Whether a car has four doors or two is secondary. And we made sure that the RX-8 had the low wieght of a GENUINE sports car as well as proper dimensions and proportions"

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"The one thing we were certain of was that our sports car have four door/seats."

========================
R&T Question:
What were the main concerns about the styling of the car?
Katabuchi Answer:
"We wanted it to look like a sports car, period."

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"However, we didn't want to give the RX-8 a pure sports-car, head-snapping feel. We wanted to give it smoothness and linearity."

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"This car will be no doubt be interpreted in many different ways, and there will be those who will say the RX-8 isn't a pure sports car. Thant can't be helped. However, I would like people to recognize the RX-8 as something new and fresh, step forward in the sports or sporty-car realm. If the RX-8 is seen in that light, it would make me very happy."

I'll chime in as someone that the 8 appeals to because I can get my son back there more easily than a coupe, and so I can get people back there period, as opposed to my current 2 seater. It won't be primary transportation for the 3 of us, but primary is a WRX wagon, not exactly that much bigger.

While babies have tons of gear, and I sometimes understand the desire for a vehicle with tons of room (and I have considered a minivan), you really don't need that much room most of the time. Granted, my wife and I are relatively short, and this helps. The back seat of a WRX is perfectly comfortable for us.

There is the whole mass factor in a crash, true. But final US crash results haven't been released for the 8, but since it's a brand new design with safety as a priortity, I'll bet that it's pretty close to the 3 series in crash results. Most newly designed cars get a "good" (the best) rating from IIHS, for example. Plus I'll take active safety over passive safety. The 8 will outbrake, outhandle and generally involve me more (which means I pay more attention to driving) than any SUV or minivan.

To me it really doesn't matter what angle or what segment the marketing guys are trying to sell us the car at. Like most people I just want to get the most out of my money. That means I want a car that satisfies as much of my "needs" and "requirements" at the lowest possible price. In another words, the highest Value per dollar spend.

Sports car or not, Family sedan or not, all I need to know is this car give me performance "close to" a pure Sport car like the 350Z, particallity "close to" a small Sentra, run comfort "close to" a 3 series BMW and a price "around" the areas of a nice Maxima.

In another words, it truely does give me a some of everything that I want and really there isn't a lot of cars around that can do that at around this price.

That's why this car appeals to people from all different segments so of course we are going to have people wanted to get this car for different purposes.

Good job for Mazda.

FWIW, i would just like to iterate that the main appeal of the RX-8 (for me) is the 4 seats AND its sportiness. I want to continue to drive a sports car, but with a 1-yr-old and another one or two coming within the next several years, I cannot ignore that fact that this car will probably have to carry a small child on occasions. With a two-seater (like any roadster), that's impossible; and with a 2+2 (RSX, Celica, even my trusty MX-6, and stretching to an Accord coupe, G35C, et al) that's pretty inconvenient. (I remember taking 10 minutes to put the infant car seat into the back seat of my MX-6... NOT fun... especially in 90+° weather). for us, the *8* is not intended to be the family car and it will never be; we're thinking of getting an SUV for that... and i would venture to say that's applies to a lot of families; one SUV/sedan for family outings, one "secondary" car that serves as a daily / fun commuter or the occasional "mom needs to go here with kid#1, but dad needs to go there with kid #2" car.

anyway, as mazda did for rxeightr, they hit it right on the head for me too.

i was going to reply to that but thanks to Herc, Elara, Rexor, rxeightr, Maximus, deks, Smoker, med_mx6 and of course Katabuchi-san they hit all the points i needed to. :D

Originally posted by Maximus




========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"But many of these people still expressed a desire to drive sports cars. Therefore, we thought it was a good idea to build a sports car that could also cater to their everyday lifestyles."

========================
R&T suppliment:
Question: With four doors, can the RX-8 really be considered a sports car?
Katabuchi's answer:
"Of course. A lot of factors go into defining what is a sports car, but the most important, I believe, are weight and size, which include the gerneral proportions of the car. Whether a car has four doors or two is secondary. And we made sure that the RX-8 had the low wieght of a GENUINE sports car as well as proper dimensions and proportions"

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"The one thing we were certain of was that our sports car have four door/seats."

========================
R&T Question:
What were the main concerns about the styling of the car?
Katabuchi Answer:
"We wanted it to look like a sports car, period."

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"However, we didn't want to give the RX-8 a pure sports-car, head-snapping feel. We wanted to give it smoothness and linearity."

========================
Katabuchi in R&T suppliment:
"This car will be no doubt be interpreted in many different ways, and there will be those who will say the RX-8 isn't a pure sports car. Thant can't be helped. However, I would like people to recognize the RX-8 as something new and fresh, step forward in the sports or sporty-car realm. If the RX-8 is seen in that light, it would make me very happy."


I'm trying to figure out why you're quoting all this. You're basically telling me that someone who WORKS FOR MAZDA is telling you it's a sports car. What do you think he would say otherwise? That it's a 4 door sedan?
You're basically quoting questions and answers from a "car salesman". Of course he's going to tell you what you want to hear. It would be suicidal for him to say otherwise. Do you actually think he's going to critique his own work with a negative slant? Personally, I think he wants to keep his job.

And as for all the mag quotes, what do you expect reviews to say? I've rarely read a review of ANYTHING (not just cars) that is truly negative. There's ALWAYS a positive slant on the items being reviewed. If a magazine (or website) doesn't put a positive slant on everything, do you really think that manufacturers would let them try out their products for review? If they don't get products to review, then less people would read the mag, then they sell less mags, then they go out of business.

It's all politics.....

The few mags that I've read that actually gave deserved harsh reviews (gaming magazines), are all out of business....Go figure...

So we should all take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt. ESPECIALLY the positive reviews.
Because in the end, you're your own best reviewer.

Yup, my take is that the RX-8 is really in a class of it's own. It's really hard to compare it with other sports cars out there. Mazda, from the beginning, set out to make a sports car like no other. From my point of view it looks like they are succeeding.

I've rarely read a review of ANYTHING (not just cars) that is truly negative. There's ALWAYS a positive slant on the items being reviewed

Interesting point. And since we have been talking here about the mags, with their choosing to call the RX-8 what Mazda hoped for, a Sports Car....

I was reading the May issue of Road & Track, and they did a 1st drive of the new Nissan Maxima. The article mentioned how Nissan was wanting to change the image of the Maxima to more of a sports sedan.

This mag saw it different for the Maxima, and were not afraid to tell it like they saw it. I certainly do not believe any magazine would call the RX-8 a Sports Car if it indeed wasn't.

I'm wary about magazines myself... only because sometimes there is conflicting information.

For example Motor Trend which I believe is probably the worst piece of automotive journalism on the market today... has rated cars I felt were terrible as "very good."

It makes you wonder how much advertising and sponsorship play a part in the writing of these articles. Evo and CAR however have been better and give more accurate reviews.

The only way you'll truly appreciate a car is when you drive it for yourself... but given the way Mazda has made past cars I think I'm satisfied in the decision I've made in the RX-8. And that decision is mine to make; just like it's anybody elses not to.

Shouldn't you at least test drive the car before making a FINAL DECISION? ;) Test driving the car is the only way you will be able to tell whether or not you will like it. Magazine reviews are to be taken for its face values only. A car might look very good on paper, but when you drive it.... it blows in terms of driving excitement and handling. (Such as the last Audi S4, plenty of power, but handles like a boat) You are controdicting yourself by saying you are satisfied with a decision you made without ever drove the car. Wait a couple of months and drive the car before setting your mind up for the car. You don't want to regret your decision later on~

btw: this applies for every car out there, not just the RX-8. NEVER buy a car without a nice test drive first, unless we are talking about $150+ cars that you buy for show off purposes.

Im a torque loving wh0re .

i hate wut the dood said.

I still wanna test drive the rx8 .... and hope the higher range has more torque.

shoot. i hsould hae gotten the rx7

He says he thinks he is satisfy give his past experience with Mazda cars. It's called making an educated guess. ;)

Also, I think Herc has backup plans for a G35c (in case he doesn't like the 8) if I'm not mistaken. I think most here are smart enough to test drive before buying. But that can't be said of some who reject the car (because of performance not situation) before trying it out...(alluding to member in another thread, hint name starts with S :p )

Originally posted by threeputtwash
And as for all the mag quotes, what do you expect reviews to say? I've rarely read a review of ANYTHING (not just cars) that is truly negative. There's ALWAYS a positive slant on the items being reviewed. If a magazine (or website) doesn't put a positive slant on everything, do you really think that manufacturers would let them try out their products for review?

This is mostly true for the North American magazines, although Car and Driver is known to be quite critical at times, if a bit less frequently nowadays than they used to be.

However, outside of the US, car magazines are much more objective and critical where required. In the UK, magazines like CAR, EVO, Top Gear, etc. will often slam a rotten car - witness Top Gear's savaging of the previous generation Vauxhall Vectra as one of the most obvious examples - the review was so bad, that the factory workers at the Vectra plant went on strike to complain! The mags still get test cars, because most all the magazines will be critical when necessary, and are honest and objective, so there's no differences and the manufacturers need the press from the car mags - they just have to hope it's good. So - when CAR and EVO praise the RX-8 as a genuine sports car, then you can feel slightly more confident that it has some merit.

Regards,
Gordon

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac
Shouldn't you at least test drive the car before making a FINAL DECISION? ;) Test driving the car is the only way you will be able to tell whether or not you will like it.

...

btw: this applies for every car out there, not just the RX-8. NEVER buy a car without a nice test drive first, unless we are talking about $150+ cars that you buy for show off purposes.

I saw the videos of the 8 at Laguna Seca, and the C&D TV test. I saw enough to KNOW I'm gonna like it!

Buy the car if you like it. Who cares what others think. . I honestly don't give a FUK about what anybody else thinks. :D :p

Originally posted by TiRX8
Buy the car if you like it. Who cares what others think. . I honestly don't give a FUK about what anybody else thinks. :D :p

damn straight.

You guys are funny, you prove my point everytime you speak. Look, I'm not trying to offend anyone and I'm not trying to bash this car. Shit, I'm buying the thing, I was one of the first to pre-order. All I'm saying is that this should not be someone's primary car to travel with their kids in the back. Period. How can anyone argue with that? It's nice that it handles well and it's nice that it looks good etc... I agree with all of that. But when someone says that they are buying this car as their primary car because it has back seats which the 350Z and MX-6, Miata etc...that is a very selfish decision. Very selfish. You are comparing small sports cars to a small sports car with a limited back seat. All those that replied said the same thing. Between, the miata and the 350 etc... this one had a back seat and I can put my kid in the back bla bla bla. True and between those choices this one is probably better. But the problem is that you (those that responded to me saying I was wrong) aren't willing to put safety first for your family by getting say a Maxima or a Monte Carlo or a Grand Prix or any sizeable car. You can talk about safety ratings all you want but the point of those is to compare them to their class. Therefore, the *8* will be compared to other sports cars. You do a safety test with the *8* against any of the cars I mentioned nor any SUV or Mini-van and the *8* couldn't hold the other cars jock straps. Again the problem is that you aren't willing "grow-up" and take a "hit" for your family to put them in a safer car (if this is your primary car). You all aren't willing to part without a sports car for the sake of you family...sad. Do people buy mini-vans because they have performance? No. Do they buy them because they look good? No. They buy them because they hold lots of shit and they are safe for a family. Not just because they can transport them around; another point you are so missing. I am single and 25. I'm getting this car because I want it and can afford it. I have no responsibilities except to myself. If you can't afford 2 cars then wait until you can if you have a family, for the safety of your kids. Otherwise, again, it is an extremely selfish decision on your part because you want to show-off your car to strangers on the road with it's speed and *handling*.

So...what did he say?

nothing... he thinks he's some kind of expert on vehicle safety, and on a high horse about it too.

yeah crack a joke. Nothing intelligent to say huh. Whatever.

nothing... he thinks he's some kind of expert on vehicle safety That is the sad part, you don't ahve to be an 'expert' to know this. It's common sense.

Well, see, I dispute the safety thing. For me I said the 8 isn't a primary kid car - a WRX is. A WRX is barely any bigger and a bit heavier, but I wouldn't say it'd be any safer in a crash. But I think both are safe cars. I think both are safer in a crash than just about any car (or truck) made before, say, 1995 or so.

But they aren't as safe in a crash as an Excursion or an Odyssey, probably. But those aren't as safe as taking a bus. And that's not as safe as staying in your house all the time. Which isn't as safe as living life in a bubble. Where is the line drawn?

There's a pervasive mindset, particularly in America, that is very safety oriented, or at least oriented on the image of safety. In my opinion, some of it is justified, but mostly it's very overblown, and I say that as someone with a child.

This isn't even getting into the whole active safety vs passive safety issue, where sporty/sports cars have it all over most of those land barges. I've been in zero accidents where the speed was greater than 5mph, and two minor ones in a parking lot because, yes, I wasn't paying attention because it was a parking lot. On the other hand, I've avoided many accidents because I was paying attention on the road and (in at least 2 cases) had a car with sufficient handling and braking to save me from a crash in the first place. I'm not sure I could have avoided those with a less nimble vehicle.

But anyway, go ahead and get an SUV and move to suburbia and be afraid of your own shadow when the time comes. It's a free country, at least for now.

I will ask the question again. How do you know the RX8 will have poor safety. It has not been tested. Your comments about safety are based on asumtions not hard facts. I think this thread sould be closed, It has started a flaming war

think both are safer in a crash than just about any car (or truck) made before, say, 1995 or so. Completely and utterly ridiculous. Any of those I previouly listed or many others pre 1995!!! lol. Maybe pre-1980 but 1995?!


But they aren't as safe in a crash as an Excursion or an Odyssey, probably. Ummm, PROBABLY? The *8* would be lucky not to be under those trucks.

There's a pervasive mindset, particularly in America, that is very safety oriented, or at least oriented on the image of safety. In my opinion, some of it is justified, but mostly it's very overblown Another great statement. Safety is over-rated. What other lengths will people go to to defend a car?

But those aren't as safe as taking a bus. And that's not as safe as staying in your house all the time. Which isn't as safe as living life in a bubble. Where is the line drawn? Stop the sarcasm.

Boy, by some of these responses you would think that Mazda was paying you guys.

I never said the car had bad safety ratings...I sais it shouldn't be used as a primary car to travel with kids because it is too small. I've that about 5 times now. It is just too small.

I'm not flaming anyone here or the car. Just backing up responses to other people's comments. Let the thread live.

I know this is off topic, but I just had to post a reply about the safety of this vehicle and comments regarding puting children in the back seat plus minivans.

First, I had a minivan and I did choose it because it was faster, looked better, and was bigger than anything else on the market. I bought the Honda Odyssey. People don't just buy minivans to carry alot of crap, we buy nice minivans to carry alot of crap in style.

Second, I believe the RX-8 is safe enough to carry my kids in, so it's one of the reasons I'm buying it versus the 350z. You ever see the BMW commercial where the driver avoids the accident due to the handling of the vehicle. Accidents aren't just caused by cars, they're caused by the drivers too. Not only does the RX-8 have all the safety features standard like airbags galore, ABS, DSC/Traction control, etc, it has the handling of a sports car. Hopefully I'll be able to avoid the accident instead of hoping all the safety features will keep me from getting injured.

Third, no matter what car you're driving, if you get side-swiped death or serious injury will happen to the person sitting on that side. It's not always about the type of vehicle driven, it's also about the experience of the driver.

The RX-8 is my daily driver. The wife has the Passat for the kids and her. Either car is fine for both.

Keep your eyes open and drive safely everyone. There's precious cargo in them back seats.

Ok then What was this thread started for anyway?? I forgot

It had to do with torque and everyone's concern about the lack of it down low. But a Mazda engineer said that people would find their own solutions to it by adding a turbo or supercharger.

This coming from an engineer implies that adding a turbo or supercharger is not a big deal.

Man i hope adding a supercharger is no big deal. I will wait before I do a mod like that. I plan on doing minor stuff, Intake exhaust, reduce wieght $hit like that.

People don't just buy minivans to carry alot of crap, we buy nice minivans to carry alot of crap in style. True, I'm sorry.

Second, I believe the RX-8 is safe enough to carry my kids in, so it's one of the reasons I'm buying it versus the 350z. Are people reading or just typing? I've said the RX-8 v.s. the 350Z (oh sorry I think I forgot the 'Z' part) as far as traveling with people...*8* wins. But I also said that people are being selfish because they: have families and aren't willing to sacrifice without a sports car...so they choose a sports car with 2 psuedo-back seats.

no matter what car you're driving, if you get side-swiped death or serious injury will happen to the person sitting on that side. That is the point. When you get in a situation that you can't get yourself out of (all you stud drivers) being in an *8* is going to be worse than any sedan, SUV etc... ANY. Period. The end. Stop telling me that you are buying this car because it has a back seat and OTHER SPORTS CARS don't. We know. I agree. The comparison is with other cars NOT in it's class. Whew!

Yeah, this thread isn't even about that comparison, it's about torque. Getting called selfish got me distracted. Sorry.

Going to email for off topic stuff....

Whew that was some tangent.. but yes that's what makes these forums great. Being able to hear other minds..

And FWIW, the topic was about what Katabuchi-san, RX-8 Program Manager, said about the 8's torque.

Hey I tried to get it back on topic. I gues it did.nt work:p

Originally posted by threeputtwash



It's all politics.....

The few mags that I've read that actually gave deserved harsh reviews (gaming magazines), are all out of business....Go figure...



Give us a break. You expect us to believe that line. As if we are going to get an expertise point of view about the RX-8 from a gaming magazine. About the only feedback we'll get is that "The RX-8, as displayed in the new PS2 or X-box Need for Speed title, is a accurate scaled representation of the life-size model".

No wonder they are out of business. Thye need to stick to reviews of the new gaming hardware and software and leave the automotive reviews to the automotive mags.

To stick to the topic. Considering the size and weight of the car, I'm sure I'll be happy with the amount of torque it will have. I don't plan on racing from stop light to stop light & be cpncerned how fast I'll get there.

Yes, let's get this back on topic. I'm very interested in increasing the low end torque in my RX-8.

I'm thinking I'll go with a supercharger versus a turbo due to the intricate intake system on the Renesis.
My concern is the RPM's. Since the Renesis can spin up to 10k will there be a supercharger that can handle it and last.

I'm not to smart on superchargers, just the basics. My Passat is a turbo, so I understand those much better.

Can someone enlighten me and provide some input.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac
"The RX-8 is the best choice we can make. Period."

:D That's quite a powerful statement.

Not when you consider that the RX-8 is the greatest feat of human ingenuity history has ever known.

Give us a break. You expect us to believe that line. As if we are going to get an expertise point of view about the RX-8 from a gaming magazine.

That's not what threeputtwash meant. He was pointing out that those magazines gave bad reviews to GAMES and went out of business because the advertisers wouldn't stomach it. There was no implication of the RX-8 being involved.

Now will a moderator please lock this thread before I go mad with boredom about yet more torque related hypothesising. Wait until you've driven the car before jumping on the torque wagon folks, it's been discussed to death, resurrected, buried alive, torched, zombified and it now stalks the forum at night looking for victims. Let's KILL IT!!!

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
When you get in a situation that you can't get yourself out of (all you stud drivers) being in an *8* is going to be worse than any sedan, SUV etc... ANY. Period. The end.

What utter, total, complete rubbish. Period. The end. You're fixated on bigger=safer. You're completely ignoring the engineering and structural standards and regulations that go along with designing a vehicle. You're also completely ignoring the engineering advances in chassis design over the past few years. Do you have ANY engineering experience or education to back up this BS? (No need to answer - the answer is obviously 'no').

I guess all those Europeans who reject monster trucks, SUVs, etc. and put their families in tiny hatchbacks and tiny sedans that weigh under 2000 lbs are being selfish too?

You do know that US light truck regulations did not require side impact door beams until sometime in the mid-90s? You know that Chrysler minivans made before that requirement did not have side impact beams in the doors? You know that pickup trucks didn't either? You know that pickup trucks didn't have to meet the same rollover requirements that sedans did?

I'll say it - the RX-8 will be safer in a collision than 80% of sedans made before 1995. The RX-8 will be far safer than any minivan, SUV, or pickup truck made before 1990. Those are technical, engineering facts, unrelated to assumptions that bigger must equal safer, because, well, it's bigger, see?

Regards,
Gordon

Originally posted by Lensman


That's not what threeputtwash meant. He was pointing out that those magazines gave bad reviews to GAMES and went out of business because the advertisers wouldn't stomach it. There was no implication of the RX-8 being involved.



Then I apologize to threeputtwash for that statement. That's makes more sense. That may be the case for some of those gaming magazines.

But, I disagree that advertising has a direct impact on how the car is rated. I see plenty of car reviews on the RX-8 that point out the negatives or weak points of the car, along with the positives.

The amount of torque being a negative is not an issue to many of these magazine reviewers. Almost all say the torque is adequate to the size and weight to toss this car around the road or track. Plenty enough for my everyday driving.

No need to kill the thread. This forum is both informative and open enough for someone to express their ideas and opinions, no matter how wrong they are. ;)

Apologies if this has been mentioned before (I'm new).... but, hadn't someone posted some pictures a while ago showing an RX8 crash test?

It looked pretty solid to me.... if I remember correctly the cabin portion showed no buckling at all after a 55mph crash (front and back).

I've seen some crash tests with much bigger sedans that didn't fair anywhere near as well.

Originally posted by rossy
Apologies if this has been mentioned before (I'm new).... but, hadn't someone posted some pictures a while ago showing an RX8 crash test?

It looked pretty solid to me.... if I remember correctly the cabin portion showed no buckling at all after a 55mph crash (front and back).

I've seen some crash tests with much bigger sedans that didn't fair anywhere near as well.


rossy,

This is probably the picture you are looking for.

Goldenhue22 is shoveling crap. He does not know what the H he is talking about. The RX-8 received excellent ratings in US, Japanese crash test ratings.

As quoted by Edmunds, http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/firstdrive/78911/article.html ,

"According to Mazda, the RX-8 has already received excellent safety scores in U.S., European and Japanese crash testing, including an upcoming test standard, due in approximately 2005, for rear-impact protection. Items like seat-mounted side airbags, head curtain airbags and crushable pedals contribute to passenger protection, as do "built-in" B-pillars within the reverse-opening rear doors. Much like traditional B-pillars, these beams dissipate side-impact crash energy and contribute to body rigidity".

Sounds safe enough for me.

We have some humvees coming back to Qatar from Iraq. Maybe they can reroute one to Goldenhue22. Maybe he'll feel safe enough in one of those.

Thanks RX-8 Zoomster, these are the pictures that settled the safety issue for me a long long time ago.

Back to torque talk.....