Hey guys..Ive had the 8 for a little over 6 months now. I like the car a lot. Maybe i'm just thinking crazy but i'm seriously thinking of trading in the car for something else.

I was considering an STI, EVO or maybe some sort of luxury car, maybe IS. I think the 8 is a beautiful looking car. But theirs just too many reasons to trade it in. Theirs not much you can upgrade without swapping the engine or doing something to void the warranty. Theirs so many cars out that are just so much faster. I'm not trading it in because of the speed.

I'm thinking about going to Subaru and Mitsubishi tonite, see what kind of offers I can get on the 8 and how well of a trade in i'll get. I only have 15k miles on it. And its still stock..excluding clear corners.

Maybe i'm just trippen out, who knows i might wake up tomarrow and decide i Love the damn thang...

~Omar

I'm confused. You say there are so many cars out there that are just so much faster, yet you're not trading it in because of the speed? Are there other things you are also factoring into your decision? (ie. mpg)

yah..sorry i wasnt clear. Gas was a real big factor. plus im not impressed with the interior. not much to play with. I wouldnt mind having a navi. also i cant put my i pod in without dropping a gang of money..little dumb reasons...

Go drive the other cars you're interested in. Maybe you'll be disappointed and be happier with the 8, maybe you'll find a new car you like better. Either way it's a win win situation.

yah..sorry i wasnt clear. Gas was a real big factor. plus im not impressed with the interior. not much to play with. I wouldnt mind having a navi. also i cant put my i pod in without dropping a gang of money..little dumb reasons...


You can't get an iTrip (?) thing that transmits your iPod through the stereo???

i have it..it sucks..theirs no antenna on the car... :(

You are in the same boat I am. I want to trade my 8 in also. I been looking at cars for over a month now. One of the reason for me to trade the 8 is because speed but also I have a family and the car is getting to small for 2 kids. So yes I have looked at pretty much everything and I haven't make up my mind yet. My advise for you is stay away from Mazda unless you go for a FD.

BTW there is a DIY thread on how to install a I Pod in the 8 for like $10 and a hour of your time.

Better yet, just get the OEM mp3 player.

I picked mine up for about $250 from another rx8club member almost 2 years ago, works really well.


You can't get an iTrip (?) thing that transmits your iPod through the stereo???

Sounds like this car is not for you to begin with. Take Ike's advice and go test drive the cars that you are considering.

To each his own. Each person likes or loves their their cars for any given reason. Some just want the fastest thing out there, meaning they are content for 6 months. Others simply want newness, always trading their car in on the lastest and supposedly greatest.

So find what excites you.

For me, all cars are slow, one of my motorcycles does a 10 second 140MPH quarter mile. So I look for intangibles. The 8 appeals because of the sounds and the distinct power delivery of the rotary, the distinctive almost artful design, and the perfectly balanced handling. It's unique in the autoworld.

But I have friends who wouldn't ever trade their rides for mine. One loves the "character" of his MG, and couldn't care less that its slower than a schoolbus. I'm convinced he wouldn't trade it for an Enzo. Another loves his BMW 'cause it "talks to him" (though not in German...I asked).

People who understand what really motivates them, and what should motivate them, are usually the most content.

Good luck on your quest. Hope you find what you're looking for.

yah..sorry i wasnt clear. Gas was a real big factor. plus im not impressed with the interior. not much to play with. I wouldnt mind having a navi. also i cant put my i pod in without dropping a gang of money..little dumb reasons...
I think you'll find the interior of the RX8 far more appealing than the interiors of the STi or the Evo, and there's amenities. The RX8 wins in this catagory as well. You'll see.

Do your research this time and you won't be trading again six months down the road.

As for the '8 being too small, I have two teen-aged kids and they still fit, at least for short trips.

If there's doubt in keeping the car then the car is not worth keeping anymore.

As said before, to each his own. I'd wonder why you bought the car in the first place.

For me, here's the bad-assness of the RX-8:

1. Not miata small, but not sedan big. It's perfect.
2. Performance driver's seating position; not upright "sedanish" like in an EVO.
3. It feels like I'm driving a Lamborghini or Ferrari. I drive it like one too. People on the road think I'm drving some kind of Italian sports car.
4. The sound is... oh my...
5. Not fast? For me, the point is not to drive 90 mph in a straight road. Instead, I actually look for a path to drive with a bit of traffic. Drive in 2nd at about 6000 rpm's, wait for that teeny weeny opening to enlarge, then BOOM! You feel like you shot out of a cannon you accellerate so fast and before you know it, you went from 30mph to 75 in a matter of seconds and left the entire army of cars behind you. Then you let off the gas and hear that engine wind back down to 45mph... only to do it again later. You can't beat that rush.
6. The sexiest looking car that matches the "sports car" look (besides exotics).

Well said, Mouth.

silver, gas is an issue for you? The depreciation hit that you will take on selling after 6 months let alone what a dealer will give you in trade will cost you more than 4 year's worth of gas.

Whatever makes you happy silver 8. But like they say "the grass isn't always greener".

I think you'll find the interior of the RX8 far more appealing than the interiors of the STi or the Evo, and there's amenities. The RX8 wins in this catagory as well. You'll see.
I do agree on this one. I think the interior of the 8 is awesome. Even the exterior is good looking. Is unique and it can't be confused with any other car.

Not familiar with the iTrip thingy, but there is an antenna on the car. My XM pod is piped into the antenna behind the dash. Not the best solution, but then I can move it around from car to car which is nice since I travel and rent cars a bunch.

Like others have said, get what you want but yes this is going to be a financial blunder on your part. Selling the car after 6 months (AND 15K miles, heck I got 7.4K in over a year of ownership) is going to hurt your pocket.

I'm well aware that our 8's aint the fastest in a straight line but every time I hear people saying it's slow...I question their ability to drive this car fast. No offense to anyone and I'll be the first person to admit this is the fastest car I've owned but in no way do I think it's a slow car.

But...it's your money, spend it where you like. I hope the best regardless...

Ever heard the phrase 'The Dream is better than the reality?'

I have owned Mercedes, Porsche, BMW's and lately a lovely Lexus LS430, many which have been top spec cars.

The one missing ingredient however, has been perfection. :sadwavey:

The Lexus possibly came close, apart from the obvious issue of thirst, and the one I overllooked which was 'FUN'
It would hustle up to an indicated 160mph in near silence, and was so stable it felt like 80mph, while the toys fitted were simply mindblowing (Rear electric heated and massage seats with fridge, for example!!)

However, a quick blast in wifeys MX5 1.8 made me laugh so much, I sadly bade the Lex goodbye, and unable to live with the MX's noise levels and lack of seats, chose the RX.

I could have bought an M5, WRX or Evo , but have owned these 'Extreme performance' machines, and found the servicing to be f@cking horrendous, many are highly strung and quite unrefined all the time, which becomes wearing after the novelty value has worn off.

The RX so far anyway, has a unique versatiliy, as it seats four yet looks sportier than a chavved up hot hatch (WRX, Evo etc) or twice-the-price-of-a-base-version Coupe (Merc or BMW M3) yet offers similar point to point ability, in that it offers the best part of the performance (Real world here, not track driving) of the others, costs the same or a lot less, and yet throws a few more niceties in, such as 'Refinement' and 'Practicality'

I think the fuel consumption issues are a bit overstated too, as the difference in REAL cost between the 19mpg RX owners seem to average (I read all the posts, fear not) and the likely 23mpg the others seem to average (Yes, I had a few, such as the Celica GT4 and Scooby) is a fair trade for the ability to cruise in near silence at 80mph, which the RX does.

Test drives are never as good a test as 6 months of ownership, so just remember, 'The dream is always better than the reality' and you won't get so disappointed.

Remember, even the best looking Girls still fart..... :cussing:

Remember, even the best looking Girls still fart.....

Classic.

i have it..it sucks..theirs no antenna on the car... :(
I am pretty sure the antenna is intergrated into the front/rear glass on the Bose system. When you pull the head unit out, there is plug in the antenna port of the HU. As for the iPod. $120 for the AudioLink iPod controller is very reasonable for a hardwire solution. Have you seen how much adding an iPod to a BMW costs. I got Navi in mine so there is something to play with, but the only thing I enjoy playing with in the car is 6 gears and 9000rpm. If you've lost faith and fun in driving your car, get rid it. It deserves a better home. If I had to pick a new car now, I'd look at the new IS for sure or a 6 speed TL.

Re the iPod thing, go to ilounge.com and you can find reviews on a million different ways to connect your iPod to the car stereo. Agreed the iTrip sucks straight outa the box, but it can be hacked to improve performance / range.

Oh, and its...
"Their" - belonging to them
"There" - over there yonder
"They're" - short for they are

"Their's" - belonging to them
"There's" - Short for there is

I hope when you go to the dealer your math is not as bad as your spelling, or you'll get fried :spank:

I think you'll find the interior of the RX8 far more appealing than the interiors of the STi or the Evo, and there's amenities. The RX8 wins in this catagory as well. You'll see.

Very true, the other cars mentioned are very low rent on the inside. I do understand the gas situation. Look at the Legacy GT much better interior and 0-60 in 5.1 sec.

Re the iPod thing, go to ilounge.com and you can find reviews on a million different ways to connect your iPod to the car stereo. Agreed the iTrip sucks straight outa the box, but it can be hacked to improve performance / range.

Oh, and its...
"Their" - belonging to them
"There" - over there yonder
"They're" - short for they are

"Their's" - belonging to them
"There's" - Short for there is

I hope when you go to the dealer your math is not as bad as your spelling, or you'll get fried :spank:



WOW....i didnt know i was writing an essay...but thanx....??

Re the iPod thing, go to ilounge.com and you can find reviews on a million different ways to connect your iPod to the car stereo. Agreed the iTrip sucks straight outa the box, but it can be hacked to improve performance / range.

Oh, and its...
"Their" - belonging to them
"There" - over there yonder
"They're" - short for they are

"Their's" - belonging to them
"There's" - Short for there is

I hope when you go to the dealer your math is not as bad as your spelling, or you'll get fried :spank:
"Their's"??? What the hell is "their's"??? It's "theirs". You have a lot of chutzpah going around correcting people and having your corrections wrong.

Do you still have stock Potenza RE40? That tire is horrible! I recently purchased new tires (SPT) and Car feels totally different now! I didn't know how much difference tires can make until I got rid of OEM tires.

At times, I considered trading in my 8 too (it even had blown engine too) but I feel like 8 will last just as long as other reliable brands (like toyota) based on the way it drives now. MPG still sucks but car rides so much smoother and I don't think I want to give up the look and feel of finely tuned sports car with the practicality of 4 door sedan to any other car on the road (yet).

Yah im thinkin bout keeping the slut...i really slammed on it today....man..i cant leave the Rotary feeling....i got the stock dunlops..their cool...just ware out quick...

Ill be getting new tires when I get rims. I hope the stocks last till then!

I think you'll find the interior of the RX8 far more appealing than the interiors of the STi or the Evo, and there's amenities. The RX8 wins in this catagory as well. You'll see.

Sweet, how do you think the climate control in the RX-8 compares to the climate control in the STI?

Ever heard the phrase 'The Dream is better than the reality?'

I have owned Mercedes, Porsche, BMW's and lately a lovely Lexus LS430, many which have been top spec cars.

The one missing ingredient however, has been perfection. :sadwavey:

The Lexus possibly came close, apart from the obvious issue of thirst, and the one I overllooked which was 'FUN'
It would hustle up to an indicated 160mph in near silence, and was so stable it felt like 80mph, while the toys fitted were simply mindblowing (Rear electric heated and massage seats with fridge, for example!!)

However, a quick blast in wifeys MX5 1.8 made me laugh so much, I sadly bade the Lex goodbye, and unable to live with the MX's noise levels and lack of seats, chose the RX.

I could have bought an M5, WRX or Evo , but have owned these 'Extreme performance' machines, and found the servicing to be f@cking horrendous, many are highly strung and quite unrefined all the time, which becomes wearing after the novelty value has worn off.

The RX so far anyway, has a unique versatiliy, as it seats four yet looks sportier than a chavved up hot hatch (WRX, Evo etc) or twice-the-price-of-a-base-version Coupe (Merc or BMW M3) yet offers similar point to point ability, in that it offers the best part of the performance (Real world here, not track driving) of the others, costs the same or a lot less, and yet throws a few more niceties in, such as 'Refinement' and 'Practicality'

I think the fuel consumption issues are a bit overstated too, as the difference in REAL cost between the 19mpg RX owners seem to average (I read all the posts, fear not) and the likely 23mpg the others seem to average (Yes, I had a few, such as the Celica GT4 and Scooby) is a fair trade for the ability to cruise in near silence at 80mph, which the RX does.

Test drives are never as good a test as 6 months of ownership, so just remember, 'The dream is always better than the reality' and you won't get so disappointed.

Remember, even the best looking Girls still fart..... :cussing:

Were your "extreme performance machines" hot hatches like the Evo and STI?

260bhp Evo, 240bhp GT4, 200bhp Rover 200 (Surprisingly fast actually) and M3.
Do bear in mind there are faster cars nowadays, but in ntheir day these were good 'uns! (I live in the UK, so we don't have the straight roads or useless American cars like you guys)
All slow compared to my Hayabusa, which I sold before death or jail became a reality :evil_laug

The disappointing thing was how little faster these cars were compared to normal 'just fast' cars when on the road.

I just find it odd that you've owned all these cars yet don't seem to know what a hot hatch is...

Sweet, how do you think the climate control in the RX-8 compares to the climate control in the STI?

No contest. STi climate controls > RX-8 climate controls. Any other questions?

Were your "extreme performance machines" hot hatches like the Evo and STI?

Hey, Ike, did you spot some whilst riding on the Short Bus?

The Evo comes with a variant offering 390bhp. The Impreza offers 280 or 300, IIRC. Neither have hatchbacks.

A "hot hatch" is something like a Golf GTI or Ford Focus ZX3/ST/whatever. There are some "hot hatches" that offer very impressive performance, like the Golf R32, but basically they offer around 200bhp in flawed, FWD, practical bodies.

The Evo and WRX are sedans (the hottest Impreza isn't, I believe, available in 5dr wagon form), with AWD transmissions and specifications/price well in excess of the typical hot hatch.

Still, if you intend to demonstrate your knowledge of cars to insult people, you have done quite adequately here ;)

I think he was pretty much making fun of Johnny5 for calling the WRX and Evo hot hatches in post #22.

The RX so far anyway, has a unique versatiliy, as it seats four yet looks sportier than a chavved up hot hatch (WRX, Evo etc)

Edit: fixed

260bhp Evo, 240bhp GT4, 200bhp Rover 200 (Surprisingly fast actually) and M3.
Do bear in mind there are faster cars nowadays, but in ntheir day these were good 'uns! (I live in the UK, so we don't have the straight roads or useless American cars like you guys)
All slow compared to my Hayabusa, which I sold before death or jail became a reality :evil_laug

The disappointing thing was how little faster these cars were compared to normal 'just fast' cars when on the road.

Johnny, before you want to slag off 'useless American cars', try driving some in context instead of listening to Jeremy Clarkson. The Chrysler 300M will kick an Audi (A6) Quattro's arse around the slalom, and unlike our crappy European cars, a US car will withstand being driven over some potholes without needing new suspension arms and realignment.

I used to drive, amongst other things, a Cadillac Eldorado 4100HTi. Widely considered to be the worst of the Eldorados (maybe, the 8-6-4 variable displacement models of 1981 were held in lower regard), the 4100 engine was poor on paper but torquey and returned 27mpg on the highway - despite being old and knackered. The '82 E-body Eldos got independent rear suspension, rear discs, ABS, and mine had the Touring Suspension Package. As a result, this 18ft+, 5,000lb+ 18 year old coupe would cruise at "Somewhere over 85 (the digital dash wouldn't show higher speeds, in line with US practise at the time)" the car was utterly stable and composed.

This wasn't some restored show-winner, it was a $300 wreck from a Chevy dealer with ripped up seats, depressurised A/C and a cracked dash.

I drove that car 1,100+ miles in 10 days, running around Oklahoma, on dirt roads, highway and in town. It never gave any cause to suspect the chassis was anything but competent and well designed.

As for "faster on the road" - I've chased a bunch of chavs down the A68, them in a "BMW M3" (Sure, yeah, right - but ANY E36 is going to have a better engine than what I was chasing them in) and me in a VW Beetle 1.6 Cabrio, at 100+ around a lot of the bends - they were holding me up, and between us, we wouldn't have held anyone up. I've driven an Impreza, and found it understeered like a bitch - maybe the sportier models are better, but that chassis is seriously flawed IMO, compared to the Legacy. The Evo and WRX undoubtedly rely upon technology and power to get around a poor chassis design; the RX8/MX5 is inherently good, and driven correctly, will prove to be devastatingly quick.

In my experience, if you strap people into a powerful car and they go "WOW! LOL! WTF! IT'S SO VERY FAST", they can't bloody drive. They can press the right pedal and belt down the straight, brake hard for the corner, fail to anticipate road conditions and future input required, and should be restricted to driving Aygos on the public road before they kill someone. If you strap them into a 200bhp Rover and they think that, they should also be jailed by the taste police, unless it's actually a very detuned Rover V8/MG ZT ;)

(I used to have great fun upsetting local boy racers in a 150-174bhp Rover (depends on what you've read/what compression/fuel you're running as to what it produced) 3500S manual. 1975. 4 speed. DeDion rear axle and lever arm front. One of the Boy Racers had an XR4i with a slipper on it, and thought it would be fun to race my old man car. I wasn't into his approach on the single track roads with poor visibility, so he thought I was well behind, until we got into a stretch where I could see the road was clear and could anticipate the layout by the hedges. No-one raced my 3500 again after that :/ - I never got any fun, they wouldn't touch me when I had a piffling little 1.5 X1/9 either).

I think he was pretty much making fun of you for calling the WRX and Evo hot hatches in post #22.

Those are examples of 'chavved up' ;) But, I don't think I posted that.

Those are examples of 'chavved up' ;) But, I don't think I posted that.

Oh, whoops I get you Brits mixed up :pfanndina
I guess he was making fun of Johnny5, not you

PS: We are Americans, so we have no idea what 'chavved up' means.

Oh, whoops I get you Brits mixed up :pfanndina
I guess he was making fun of Johnny5, not you

PS: We are Americans, so we have no idea what 'chavved up' means.

Hmm.

Okay. You know how you get wannabe gangstas?

Well, Chavs are bascially white, wannabe gangsters, usually living on welfare (very famously this week, a young chav in Wales was done for benefit fraud, claiming housing and other welfare payments whilst modifying his own car to the tune of £12,000+, and working on 'mate's' cars - the stupid pillock got himself into a car magazine bragging about what he'd spent on it). They worship bling and burberry, are usually borderline retarded, and drive crap small cars like Suzuki Swifts (better known as the Geo Metro - yes, the 3 cylinder one is common), Vauxhall Novas, Ford Fiestas, worth about a buck, but loaded with crap stick on tat designed to mimic rally cars, race cars or whatever.

The ultimate chavmobile is a Lincoln Navigator, as modelled by football 'celebrity' David Beckham.

The more unpleasant ones of the species are the ones that steal good cars, or bits of good cars, usually to sell parts from to get more bling, and unlike the traditional American Dream, where EVERYONE has a chance of success and can be applauded for getting somewhere, they adopt the UK whine, which goes along the lines of "E's got it, why 'avven't I got it? I should 'ave it!", followed by either spoiling/breaking/stealing what the other person has, or demanding that the tax payer provides it via benefits.

Hence, all the welfare kids are running about in $100 Nike trainers, have countless toys and gadgets, and the poverty line has been comically described as "only having one Playstation 2".

Sorry. I hate Britain. I especially hate Chavs ;)

Hey, Ike, did you spot some whilst riding on the Short Bus?

The Evo comes with a variant offering 390bhp. The Impreza offers 280 or 300, IIRC. Neither have hatchbacks.

A "hot hatch" is something like a Golf GTI or Ford Focus ZX3/ST/whatever. There are some "hot hatches" that offer very impressive performance, like the Golf R32, but basically they offer around 200bhp in flawed, FWD, practical bodies.

The Evo and WRX are sedans (the hottest Impreza isn't, I believe, available in 5dr wagon form), with AWD transmissions and specifications/price well in excess of the typical hot hatch.

Still, if you intend to demonstrate your knowledge of cars to insult people, you have done quite adequately here ;)

Hey Einstein, maybe next time actually read a thread before spouting off. FYI, the variant Evo you speak of is 405bhp and it's called the FQ-400. The Impreza has many offerings than a 280 and 300hp model, especially in the UK where you have the UK300, S202, 203, Type RA, Spec C, WR1. Many of those cars are also offered with various Prodrive packages.

I am fully aware of what a hot hatch is, Johnny5 is not in case you still haven't figured that out.

Thanks for telling me what a WRX and Evo is :Freak_ani

P.S. The STI and the Evo have been available in wagon/5 door form, just not in all markets.

The STI and the Evo have been available in wagon/5 door form, just not in all markets.

Care to define which Evo? ;)

Care to define which Evo? ;)

Huh, care to define which part of what I just said you're talking about?

i have it..it sucks..theirs no antenna on the car... :(

I beg to differ. I have the new Griffin iTripAuto. It works very well. I am debating not getting an AuxMod because it works much better than i thought. I have it tuned to 87.9 (one of the least used stations anywhere) and it sounds great.

http://www.griffintechnology.com/images/products/prod_itripauto_side02.jpg

Joe

or useless American cars like you guys)



and thanks for not sending those useless British cars over here:)

and thanks for not sending those useless British cars over here:)

There are hardly any true British cars left since they don't even own their own car companies anymore.

I beg to differ. I have the new Griffin iTripAuto. It works very well. I am debating not getting an AuxMod because it works much better than i thought. I have it tuned to 87.9 (one of the least used stations anywhere) and it sounds great.

http://www.griffintechnology.com/images/products/prod_itripauto_side02.jpg

Joe

That's because, obviously, there is an antenna on the car. It's on the back window. As such, the iTrip solutions work better than they do in cars with antennas. Since - cars need antennas outside because they are fundamentally shielded, cars with external antennas get a poor signal.

Er, anyway, those things are useless in the UK due to the proliferation of stations and interference. And technically illegal.

Care to define which Evo? ;)

The Evo IX GSR. Would you like to know anything else about cars?

I used to sell Rovers in the early 80's, and the old P6 3500 was OK, but wasn't a handler, even by 70's standards. Still OK though...I enjoyed a couple of them, but no way were they as fast as the XR4 2.8 which would nudge 130mph.

The X1/9 was horrid, and totally outclassed by the MR2. After 25 years in the motor trade I had most cars I had any vague interest in, which was a nice perk... :ylsuper:

The Rover I referred to was the 400 Turbo, a 2 litre Honda based saloon, which in 1993 would nudge a real 150mph and sub 6 second 0-60. Say what you will, but that was bloody quick in 1993!

When you referred to giving a fast car a hard time in a Beetle, albeit a Golf based one as opposed to an 'Incinerator' I agree.

In a slower car, one can brake later, and they are normally more chuckable within the confines of normal peoples abilities on public roads.

I appreciate your pedantic comments about Hot hatches, you are right of course, but in essence these are still normal everyday cars, just horrifically expensive uprated versions of them, rather than custom designed models such as the RX.

The RX at least looks like £20,000 (UK) while a Scooby does not look like £38,000. That is the point I was making...

By the way, the Chrysler 300... :mdrmed:

ignorance is bliss

and thanks for not sending those useless British cars over here:)

I quite agree....Deepest apologies to you all :mdrmed:

The Evo IX GSR. Would you like to know anything else about cars?

Ah, I was thinking of the Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution. So sorry. I forget that people tend to assume the only Evo is the Lancer ;)

I used to sell Rovers in the early 80's, and the old P6 3500 was OK, but wasn't a handler, even by 70's standards. Still OK though...I enjoyed a couple of them, but no way were they as fast as the XR4 2.8 which would nudge 130mph.


The XR4i 2.8 will do 135, just, in good health - but most of them are shagged now, and were shagged 5 years ago too. It's also not about how fast, but how it handles, and the 3500S handled properly is better than the XR4i by some margin.

If you only drove auto 3500S' then you'd have a poor impression - apparently my manual with PAS was a rare beast. Shame the base unit was rotten, really.

The X1/9 was horrid, and totally outclassed by the MR2. After 25 years in the motor trade I had most cars I had any vague interest in, which was a nice perk... :ylsuper:

Ah, in the trade. That explains it ;)

The X1/9 isn't totally outclassed by the MR2. The MR2 isn't as progressive, as communicative, or as easy to place on the road with some delicacy. MR2s had better engines, but if you look at what Toyota had to play with in 1974 when the X1/9 was launched, you realise that the decade younger MR2 brought very little 'new' to the table, and took rather a lot away.

Not that I don't like MR2s, but point to point I'd be quicker in an X1/9.

The Rover I referred to was the 400 Turbo, a 2 litre Honda based saloon, which in 1993 would nudge a real 150mph and sub 6 second 0-60. Say what you will, but that was bloody quick in 1993!

You can call the R8 Honda based for our Yankee cousins, but you should know that the R8 is as much Rover as it is Honda; that 2 litre GSi Turbo had a Rover engine, and if it was nudging 150, your speedo was over-reading. Very good sleeper though.


When you referred to giving a fast car a hard time in a Beetle, albeit a Golf based one as opposed to an 'Incinerator' I agree.

In a slower car, one can brake later, and they are normally more chuckable within the confines of normal peoples abilities on public roads.

Well - I'm finding with the RX8 that I can brake VERY late, but most people brake the wrong kind of late - I brake late before the corner, they seem to brake going into the corner... they understand the power out bit alright, but don't quite get the stage between braking and power, so they're braking and steering at the same time - I learned on Scottish Borders roads, with rally driver friends, in a small underpowered RWD car without any 'assisted' anything. In fairness, how most of the previous generation of drivers learned (bar the rally driver bit of course), but it seems that today drivers learn "X input on wheel/pedals for Y condition seen". No... adaptability. When I learned it was the case too, but I insisted on learning in my Chevette (it was cleaner than the instructors car! - but also, I liked it and wanted to learn in it).

I appreciate your pedantic comments about Hot hatches, you are right of course, but in essence these are still normal everyday cars, just horrifically expensive uprated versions of them, rather than custom designed models such as the RX.

Heh, I was just taking the piss a bit. I lump the Scoobys and stuff with the other chav shite, not because they cost £38K new, but because the stupid boy racer types are all running about in mid-90s Impreza 2000 Turbos with Halfords spoilers and baked-bean can exhausts, driving around in circles and terrified of bends. They aspire to own the £38K one, and frankly, I do not want to appear to be what Chavs aspire to.


The RX at least looks like £20,000 (UK) while a Scooby does not look like £38,000. That is the point I was making...

I think new cars are too cheap. I think a Scooby should cost £38,000, but I also think that a MINI should cost £25,000, a Yaris £18,000, and so on and so forth. Cheap cars=old cars off the road too soon=environmentally bad, far more so than running a car which does 20mpg average. Relatively speaking:

1989 - Golf GTI Cabriolet 1.8i, 45mpg average (I had one, and yes, they do), no electric anythings aside from the roof (might have still been optional then), no ABS, no airbags, no cat, no ESP, DCS, TCS, WTF. £13,995. 3-bed house? £40,000.

2004 - Beetle 1.6i Cabriolet. 8V 1.6, 33mpg average (they claim higher and I usually get good mileage from cars - I get 24-27 from the RX8), electric everything, airbags all around, all the acronyms, better trim, more 'stuff' - £15,500. 3-bed house? £120,000.

By the way, the Chrysler 300... :mdrmed:

I can't be swayed, sorry. The 300M, the LH, has a wide, square stance, good suspension, a decent engine set back in the wheelbase, and is very stable. Materials are pretty crap, but the body is rigid, the car is attractive, and it was cheap and practical.

The 300C... Well, as long as it has a Hemi. But I really want a combination which we may yet get in the UK; 300C front clip, Magnum wagon body, 5.7 Hemi and the 4Matic derived AWD system.

I'm not a car dealer, btw. I just love cars, have done since I was a toddler, hence the number I've owned. I've run about in a lot of 'nice' cars, like an early 80s 90 Quattro (with locking diffs), 200 Quattro (was a wreck though), Porsche 924S, Citroen CXs - all sorts of odd stuff.

The RX8 was chosen with that background, to be something I could be happy with as my main car, without the urge to buy more. As long as they fix the damper soon, I think it will manage that ;)

The Rover was roadtested by several UK magazines at 148-150mph, so my speed was not required for this info!

The 3500 S as the manual car was known, would not do much more than 120mph depite the power. It lacked the Sierras world class (In 1983) drag coefficient, and wasn't as 'Waffer theen' as the Dagenham dustbin.

In fairness, my XR4 was capable of hustling around a bend well enough as long as the right foot remained down. Lift off antics were not pretty... :hahano:

The Rover was roadtested by several UK magazines at 148-150mph, so my speed was not required for this info!

The 3500 S as the manual car was known

Er, no. The 3500S was different trim - Rostyles and the like - but S doesn't designate a manual, in P6 or SD1 form (I nearly bought an SD1 V8 S - rare model indeed - but it was really gutless). The 3500S was a manual by default, but the auto option existed and most survivors seem to be autos for some reason - I suspect the bulk of 3500S production went into Jam Sandwich service.

I can't find road tests for the Rover, but I don't doubt it would do 140, 148 seems optimistic to me. I wouldn't like to be in an R8 going that fast! The 0-60 in sub six seconds seems unlikely, if only for the fact that no-one bought the bloody things and I'm sure they would have with figures like that from the factory...

Nope, fraid you are wrong about the P6.

The S designation was reserved for manual transmission cars.

http://www.gbclassiccars.co.uk/rover_p6_3500.html

I sold loads of the things for many years before they all 'died' and the horrid SD1 took over.

There are many roadtests confirming the Rover 200/400 Bobcats ability to hit nearly 150mph, and the odd 5.9 run to 60 too. It was light and 200bhp, so it figures it should go well enough...

sorry to hear that, but HOW CAN YOU NOT LOVE THE 8!! it's worth every dime you spend on!! I would say listen to everyone and go test drive the other cars.... My friend does have the new '06 STi and I drove it, and I like it, but I say this without starting a Flame war, but in my opinion no car has the handling of the 8! or maybe I'm just obsessed with it! plus I feel that the pros out weigh the cons, and I think everyone here would agree with me..... but hey it's your money so Good Luck to whatever you decide!

Most of the cars in this class, if not all of them, are very nice indeed in my humble opinion.

I would happily buy any of them. I think it's just what turns you on at the time isn't it?

Nope, fraid you are wrong about the P6.

The S designation was reserved for manual transmission cars.


Which would explain why they made a touch over 2,000 of them - a touch over 10% of the total production - with auto boxes ;)

but in my opinion no car has the handling of the 8!

That just tells everyone that you have no experience driving any other cars.

^ you can kinda interpret that as saying its unlike any other car in handling. not specificially saying the 8 is the best.

^Then you can say that about any car, since every car handles differently from every other car. So the statement "no car has the handling of the _________" is true no matter what is in the blank.