All

First post and Mulling over the possiblity of a Low Power RX8, but coming from a Ford Puma, wondering/worrying about the MPG as I will be using it to commute everyday (about 250-300 miles a week).

Not too sure what the Puma does mpg wise (I think it was 34-38), what is the mpg the Mazda is likely to be? Concerned it may cost a fortune in petrol costs compared to what I'm spending at the moment (typically about £27 a week, £50 a week I could not manage!)

Can't wait to see an Rx8 in the flesh!

Cheers all
B.

Firstly, welcome to the forums!

As for fuel consumption, it is going to be quite a bit thirstier than your puma. I don't think that figures have been officially announced for the european derivatives, but it is around 25mpg for the high power version. Possibly up to 30mpg for the 192bhp model.

Official figures are expected end of May.

Like you , I have a big commute (~350 miles/week) so fuel is a big issue.
I would be surprised if the 'low power' is much more economical. I get the impression that it has been tuned for (slightly) more torque and for a lower rev-limit for use with the automatic gearboxes some markets demand.

Now I love my rotaries , and would rather drive over any other engine but I am the first to admit they are thirsty. Mazda claim big improvements over previous rotaries , but it will still be thirstier than most.

I would estimate 28/25 for the low/hi on the combined.
I am hoping for more than this. For instance my current car is rated at 28 on the combined and I get ~32 (all M1 driving).
Hoping for 27/28 from RX8......

Thanks for the reply, 30mpg I could handle, 20mpg I couldn't!

It's currently between a Celica 140, Audi TT 180 or a RX8, so if insurance is reasonable ish, will probably go for the RX8 fingers crossed!:D

Thinking about it some more , Mazda must have indeed performed miracles with this engine -

My 1st gen RX7 was the 12A engine (thinner rotors , less capacity than RX8) and it was normally aspirated.
Produced 120hp and returned 20mpg with v.gentle driving.

Compare to RX8 - 13B size engine (so wider rotors , slightly greater capacity). normally aspirated.
produces 240hp and (hopefully) will return mid-high 20's mpg.

Clever stuff really..... The actual mechanicals are essentially the same , so the advance must have come in the fuelling control (hence fly-by-wire I guess). The computer must do all the work...

Originally posted by morganrogers
The actual mechanicals are essentially the same , so the advance must have come in the fuelling control (hence fly-by-wire I guess). The computer must do all the work... It's actually the side placement of the ports which does not allow for overlap of the intake/exhaust cycles anymore.

I am hoping for the best and expecting the worst. I think on combined, average 25 is hopeful and 20 is worst case.

I only average 17/18 in my Impreza which should do 23 combined.

I dont really think this is the best car to buy if you are that concerned about fuel :( (but it's great for everything else :) )

It's actually the side placement of the ports which does not allow for overlap of the intake/exhaust cycles anymore.

Indeed, it's no longer spitting unburnt fuel out of the exhaust so the efficiency is higher and therefore more power per gallon.

I don't think you'll find many cars that do 0-60 in 6sec getting more than 20/25mpg.

For my part, I'm an Oilman so I don't really care;)

Cheers
Oilman