received it today.........

Originally posted by Gyro
received it today.........

I think the image is corrupt, it's only showing the top edge of the graphic

please fix the pic ;))

Please fix it!!!!...
:p

pic works for me.....

Thanks for posting, hopefully I will have mine when I get home....can you post a pic of the "attached form" as well?

Works fine for me.

Thanks for the info

Well that's a masterwork of spin isn't it!
At least the $500 is do what you like with.

I wonder what the definition of 'reasonable wear and tear' is? There's a loophole and a half...

The "attatched form" is really basic. it just has a checkbox next to the free scheduled maintenance offer.....then has a ""If you wish to discuss the option of having you 2004 Mazda RX8 repurchased, please call Mazda at 1 800 622 6779".

It also has a disclaimer stating that if you accept the offer of keeping the car with the free maintenance....."the offer is full and complete resolution of any claim he/she may have against MNAO and any of its authorized dealers"

so what are you going to do?

pics works fine

thanks for the info

wonder when we will receive the $500 debit card.....

Gyro, thanks for posting the letter, just back from the post office and no letter yet. Going to call to get the buyback process going right away.

Originally posted by Lensman
Well that's a masterwork of spin isn't it!
At least the $500 is do what you like with.

I wonder what the definition of 'reasonable wear and tear' is? There's a loophole and a half...
it says "unreasonable wear and tear" not "reasonable." which means reasonable wear and tear is acceptable and won't decrease the refund while "unreasonable" wear and tear will decrease the amount refunded.

yes, they didn't define what "unreasonable" was but i'd consider this a reasonable (pun intended) loophole...not a "loophole and a half." ;) i wouldn't expect anyone on this forum would have unreasonable wear and tear on their 8 already. (except that one member that got rearended by the SUV :()

I can't see the pic eiter. But damn SteveT gots quite a garage there.

>> ... rating of North America-specifications vehicles ...

so I think Canada is also include...

Doesn't mean we will get the offer, just that our vehicles are not rated as high, two totally different things.

With a $1000.00 deposit / purchase contract/dealer supplied VIN # and the vehicle on some freight car....qualify you

I just saw in another thread where part of the $500+service agreement is that you wave right to legal action at a later time.

Does this mean that if Mazda announces in another 2 months that the car only has 210 HP, which is closer to what some of they dynos are pointing at, i would be SOL.

I don't mind losing 8 hp as long as the car is still sporty, handles great, and is reliable. I don't think I want to pay $30,000 for a 210HP car though. Thats still 'sporty' but not $30,000 'sporty'. There are a LOT of other choices in the $20,000-$25,000 range that would then be comparable.

Wow.. that's it?!?!?! No explanation.. no details.. just HERE THIS IS OUR OFFER, YOU HAVE UNTIL OCT 1st...

Hmm.. I dunno about you, but it seems like they're just brushing us off. To me, this one page letter, seems insincere and just something someone wrote up quickly to mail ASAP..

I know, Mazda really doesnt have to provide such options, and it's very nice of them to try to help "repay" the owners, but WOW.. at least give us the benefit of the doubt and tell us WHY. There has GOT to be a reason why, not just because, "Oh, we did more testing and now it's not really as beefy as we first listed"...

That's crap.. how long has the RX-8 been in pre-pro, testing, development, blah blah.. and NOW, after its in the market and in owner's hand they find this discrepancy?? BOOL.

Excellent point!! And I believe that's exactly what it means.

And I have a very stinky feeling, as do most here, that's we've lost more than "4%". And in which case, we're all SOL once we take the free candy offered by Mazda.

wow, that's not right...it seems only fair that this agreement is for this stated hp and if we find that it's still not the correct stated hp then they should compensate us even more just for being loyal and keeping the car...it seems that the only people that are going to get screwed are the ones that are sticking with them...my respect for Mazda just keeps getting lower and lower...

Whether a further claim based on a change of facts is waived or not would depend on the specifc language of the waiver. We'll have to wait and see.


In many cases one would have a further claim if the first waiver was induced by fraudulent misrepresentation, mutual mistake, etc. But again it is dependent on the language of the contract. Most release are drafted to be very broad.

I called the customer service number. They went through an explanation of the offer and said all of the letters should be sent out by the end of this week.

The customer service rep asked me what I was going to do. I don't know if it was just conversation or if they're keeping a list of responses.

Anyway, I'm keeping the car --

Frankly, I'm amazed they've made ANY sort of response this quickly!

Look at it this way -

- The VERY FIRST RX-8 to go into a US owners hands was on 7-11, about a month and a half ago.

- The first dyno tests were around 2-3 weeks after that, and there was another week of discussion, backing up the test, etc.

So, Mazda, being a large corporation, sat down, did the math on how much they'd be out making this offer (which is similar if not identical to what they did with the Miata), and has already put in place a program and mailed out letters to owners.

That's quick.

I'm glad they're at least making amends - they could EASILY say "oh well, our bad, tough" and not have done anything about it.

I also doubt they would put in a letter mailed to general RX-8 buyers the technical reasons for the discrepancy. "Our testing has shown the connuter valve hangs up while in the forth octave phase, causing a harmonic imbalance that limits VE through the powerplant". There will be an exact answer at some point, but remember, this is a LARGE corporation with lots of lawyers and bean counters - things take time. Not everything happens in "internet time" where a post made a week ago is old news and forgotten.

Personally, I'm not worried - I'm still planning on buying an RX-8. Heck, if I want the extra power, I'll put an intake and cat-back on and go have fun. The car is a great package, whether it's up or down on power.

Dale

If that's the case then I wouldn't sign it. If the car dyno's around 180whp then the crank hp is closer to 228, not 238hp.

Originally posted by Quick_lude
If that's the case then I wouldn't sign it. If the car dyno's around 180whp then the crank hp is closer to 228, not 238hp.

Which, strangely enough, is the UK power output. What an odd coincidence...

heres what I think. If we sign the agreement, we basically now hold Mazda to 238 HP. OR...+or- 5% as allowable by law. The Real HP is probably 225-228, which is within the 5% margin. Therefor releasing them from any legal liability.

They basically lowered the HP figures to WITHIN 5% of the ACTUAL figures. which is legal. They Know that the car actually makes 225....but saying 238 makes them look better and keeps their head above the law.

Very deceptive.......think about it.

From dcfc3s's post - "- The first dyno tests were around 2-3 weeks after that, and there was another week of discussion, backing up the test, etc."

Wow, I really thought Mazda might have one of those new fangled dyno things at the factory. :D

The auto mags have to know about this by now.

Shouldn't we expect some mags to do some test of there own.

If Mazda really wants to put there customers minds at ease they should have some INDEPENDENT testers rate the hp of there car.

If I can get an official independent test that says 238, I'm happy. I just find it a little harder to trust Mazda and their numbers at this point.

although the service and 500 bucks is good.. I'd still like to get what I "paid for". I still think that there is some tweaking that needs to be done to this car to get it where it should be../ I don't know if the oil/ gas problem has something to do with it, possibly, but I'd like to have the credit PLUS the problem fixed.

Originally posted by Wing
Doesn't mean we will get the offer, just that our vehicles are not rated as high, two totally different things.

Hey Wing...

Do you have any contacts that could pull the thread on the Canadian cars?

I second Gyro's thoughts.

Originally posted by Gyro
heres what I think. If we sign the agreement, we basically now hold Mazda to 238 HP. OR...+or- 5% as allowable by law. The Real HP is probably 225-228, which is within the 5% margin. Therefor releasing them from any legal liability.

They basically lowered the HP figures to WITHIN 5% of the ACTUAL figures. which is legal. They Know that the car actually makes 225....but saying 238 makes them look better and keeps their head above the law.

Very deceptive.......think about it.

Originally posted by Gyro
It also has a disclaimer stating that if you accept the offer of keeping the car with the free maintenance....."the offer is full and complete resolution of any claim he/she may have against MNAO and any of its authorized dealers"

Can someone scan the form in? I'm curious to see exactly how the release is drafted. If it is limited to any claim related to or arising out of the difference between 247 and 238 hp, that's one thing; if it just says "any claim," that literally encompasses claims that have nothing to do with the hp issue. Now, a court would not necessarily enforce the full, literal scope of the release, but it might. That's a question of contract interpretation.

here you go....

oops....here it is

Originally posted by Roadrunner
With a $1000.00 deposit / purchase contract/dealer supplied VIN # and the vehicle on some freight car....qualify you

it qualified me. same exact situation.

I third what gyro said:

"heres what I think. If we sign the agreement, we basically now hold Mazda to 238 HP. OR...+or- 5% as allowable by law. The Real HP is probably 225-228, which is within the 5% margin. Therefor releasing them from any legal liability.

They basically lowered the HP figures to WITHIN 5% of the ACTUAL figures. which is legal. They Know that the car actually makes 225....but saying 238 makes them look better and keeps their head above the law.

Very deceptive.......think about it."

Originally posted by mmm
If it is limited to any claim related to or arising out of the difference between 247 and 238 hp, that's one thing; if it just says "any claim," that literally encompasses claims that have nothing to do with the hp issue. Now, a court would not necessarily enforce the full, literal scope of the release, but it might. That's a question of contract interpretation.

This concerns me too. Here's the scenario:
1. Mazda advertises 247 hp
2. After US introduction and emissions tuning, and after people dyno it, they revise the figure to 238 hp.
3. We take the offer and release them from liability.
4. In November, Mazda revises the hp down to, say 215, which more closely matches the dyno results we are seeing.

Those of us who took the this offer are SOL. I'm no HP junkie, but it would sound like they're limiting their exposure here. 9 hp is not much, but 30?

I also wonder if we take the service offer, now we have to take it to the dealer for an oil change, and they can mess with the ECU. I don't know why they would - increase HP, increase MPG, whatever.

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."

... and accepts the Offer as full and complete resolution of any claim he/she may have against MNAO and any of its authorised dealers...

Be scared. Be VERY scared! There's no context here, they aren't linking this legal restriction to the power loss. If you sign this then you can't sue them for ANYTHING or indeed a dealer. Like I said: be scared!

Mommy!!!

Another option here is the "Do Nothing" option. What are the scenarios if we go by the October 1 date?

1. The first is that we lose out on a guaranteed $500 and free maintenance.

2. What if something else comes to light later on in the year. Does that position us differently than those who opted out for the deal?

3. Is something like this likely to occur?

Originally posted by Bulldog6670

2. What if something else comes to light later on in the year. Does that position us differently than those who opted out for the deal?


Yes, those who took the deal can't sue, or otherwise hold MNAO liable. Do nothing, and you can.

Are there any lawyers here? There must be a law against them trying to bribe us out of holding them liable. I'm sure it would vary by state/province/country. It would just cost us too much to find out.

What it comes down to for me is this:

I planned on choosing the Free Servicing option prior to the letter.

In order for me to go forward with that signed legal commitment, I would need more technical data provided by Mazda (MNAO). I would like to request Dyno charts that back up Mazda's new data regarding flywheel HP.

I'm leary of the new data coupled with a vague "sign here" letter...releasing them from future legal action.

So....its fair (I believe) to ask for hard data from the reported 11 test vehicles. I will except 238 HP...after all the car feels plenty fast to me. But any less than that is pushing it. Mazda posted HP and Torque curves from the prior 247 HP setup.......now lets see the new ones.

I love the car and plan on keeping it.......All I want is a little more proof than a short blurb stating the "revision". Surely they can produce this.......who else is not satisfied with the dumbed down letter eager for signatures. We should have a few requests for them prior to letting them off the hook indefinately.

Originally posted by Lensman


Be scared. Be VERY scared! There's no context here, they aren't linking this legal restriction to the power loss. If you sign this then you can't sue them for ANYTHING or indeed a dealer. Like I said: be scared!

I'm no lawyer, but the context in which the statement is written could be interpreted as related and ONLY regarding this HP revision. IF any other issues arise, such as other deffects or further HP revisions (or downgrades), it would not fit within the clause in question and its context; therefore rendering it worthless to Mazda.

Any lawyers out ther willing to give some advise?

Originally posted by RX8-TX
I'm no lawyer, but the context in which the statement is written could be interpreted as related and ONLY regarding this HP revision. IF any other issues arise, such as other deffects or further HP revisions (or downgrades), it would not fit within the clause in question and its context; therefore rendering it worthless to Mazda.

Any lawyers out ther willing to give some advise? Not a lawyer, but that's how I interpreted that clause too.

If you're concerned about it, amend the letter with the addition of a clause that spells out that you are signing away your rights to this issue only, before signing and returning it. If they accept your amended form, they are accepting the contract as amended, as I understand it. But I would like to see a real lawyer comment on that, too.

Originally posted by RX8-TX


I'm no lawyer, but the context in which the statement is written could be interpreted as related and ONLY regarding this HP revision. IF any other issues arise, such as other deffects or further HP revisions (or downgrades), it would not fit within the clause in question and its context; therefore rendering it worthless to Mazda.

Any lawyers out ther willing to give some advise?

I'm no lawyer either but from reading the document I get the same thing out of it as you do. So I'm sure if push came to shove a lawyer could argue this one in court.

It seems to me that based on what has been stated here that Mazda could argue that it very well covered any claim. It could be interpreted either way. If someone had a claim later, they would have to put up the money to litigate the issues. I am no lawyer either, I don't even play one on TV but who is going to win if you have to go to court later, with a smaller group of people? The little guy......... not!!!!!!

Another issue is this, here in Florida there is a pretty strong lemon law. Will this settlement effect that? I am only getting 13 miles per gallon, I did not expect to get hybrid car mileage but this is a bit low. Are there other issues we don't know about?

Just a thought but as this letter begins to circulate is this car going to continue to sell for MSRP? Would someone be better off getting the buy back and then purchasing an 8 later at a better discount. Not that I would do such a thing but isn't it possible?:D

Originally posted by eccles
Not a lawyer, but that's how I interpreted that clause too.

If you're concerned about it, amend the letter with the addition of a clause that spells out that you are signing away your rights to this issue only, before signing and returning it. If they accept your amended form, they are accepting the contract as amended, as I understand it. But I would like to see a real lawyer comment on that, too.

I am a Lawyer, in Louisiana. eccles is right (under Louisiana law, and, I believe, the law of most other states). Personally, I would not sign the waiver as is - NOT a legal opinion, just me.

It is my understanding, that with repurchase option, you have to sign a contractual agreement NOT to buy another RX-8.

Originally posted by WARPrints
It is my understanding, that with repurchase option, you have to sign a contractual agreement NOT to buy another RX-8.

Negative. I asked the MNAO rep about this very thing this morning on the phone, and he says you can buy another RX-8 right away if you like. There is no reference to a buy restriction in the letter, either. Seems odd to me that Mazda didn't place such a restriction, but I suppose they'd rather get the sale than see it go to the Nissan/Subaru/Infiniti dealer down the street.

I'm no lawyer, but the context in which the statement is written could be interpreted as related and ONLY regarding this HP revision. IF any other issues arise, such as other deffects or further HP revisions (or downgrades), it would not fit within the clause in question and its context; therefore rendering it worthless to Mazda.

If you're decide to go after Mazda because the HP rating is actually lower than what they're stating in this disclaimer, then you have a case. I'm having a similiar issue with Delta Airlines where they make a disclaimer stating that they are not reponsible for their actions if they do something like lose your cat. However, a good lawyer can prove that Delta was blatently negligent. Similiarly, a good lawyer could prove Mazda may be misleading customers (even more so) if we sign that agreement and find out later on the power is even lower.

On a more personal note, I, like many, am not having my car bought back. We bought a car for a certain level of performance and I believe we are recieving that level of performance. That is, to me, the most important factor. This is still the same car that outdid the G35C and Cobra Mustang in a recent comparo by a big-name magazine. This is still the same car that was viewed by another big magazine as a more preferable choice over the 350Z and BMW 330i. And on another important note, we will probably see huge gains by simple aftermarket modifications such as intake, headers, exhaust, and most likely, a reflashed ECU. I know where my 500.00 is going to be spent ;) .

What if everyone who decides to take the offer added to the paragraph ....."the offer is full and complete resolution of any claim he/she may have against MNAO and any of its authorized dealers"..."provided that the actual horsepower is 238 HP SAE and that no further adjustment to horsepower claims will be made at anytime in the future". That should satisfy those who belive the current claim of 238 HP is not acurate and true.
If everyone did it, Mazda would have a hard time not accpeting hundreds of letters worded identically. If this were to be done, I would suggets having any lawyers amongst us provide proper and legally binding wording.
If Mazda is being honest with us, this should not pose a problem for them. What do you think?:o

In this case, wouldn't Mazda have that much more incentive to be negligent and not submit to another HP review? I think it might be better to get a lawyer to look into this

Originally posted by Aratinga


Negative. I asked the MNAO rep about this very thing this morning on the phone, and he says you can buy another RX-8 right away if you like. There is no reference to a buy restriction in the letter, either. Seems odd to me that Mazda didn't place such a restriction, but I suppose they'd rather get the sale than see it go to the Nissan/Subaru/Infiniti dealer down the street.

What if Mazda way over on the other side of the world is keeping the dealers in line... the ones who overcharged like ...way overcharged... .

I was charged 952.00 Over MSRP; some paid as much as 5000. & 7000. Over, to get the first cars, ... IF I was Mazda I would be pissed if dealers were making close to the same profit as I was… dealers not partners


What if Mazda is upset and this keeps the Vultures in line..- seems like what happened with that other little car made by Mazda – and some dealers were way overcharging for their cars.


If you got MSRP or better OK--- but --\
If you paid to much because they were the only place in town to get a car ----then

you get a free loaner car from the vultures that tried to rip you off…
and can get a new car with more options from an honest dealer…….
honest guys will get the business they would have had in the first place ...if they had more cars.
I only bought my car from the place I did because all the other guys were out of cars with the GT pkg, and the wait was another 30 or more days

Why else would they encourage you to sell it back and buy another with more options?

lets see... I'm blindly taking their word *again* about a power output, and this time its legally binding!! That just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about MNAO. :o


I still firmly believe they should fix the problem and not try to buy us off.

What I'm waiting for is the car mags to start catching wind of this. I would like to see mass production RX8's tested by independent organized entities......Like Car and Driver. Do you think they are upset that their credability might be looked at twice. Alot of people assume that they do their own Dyno testing before publishing numbers that people will believe as true. Also what reaction will Mazda have when a HUGE magazine like Car and Driver shows undesirable test figures.

Mazda put alot on the line with this new "revised" HP figure. I'm sure they assumed the RENESIS would be under the microscope after this blunder.

Program Manager Noboru Katabuchi knows this engine upside down and sideways, I doubt he was surprised to find out the output of the mass production engine was lower. Precisely what the letter would like us to believe.....it was a surprise.

If people are choosing to return their 8's, why would you want to buy another one?? It's like going to wal-mart and buying a chicken, tasting it, say you don't like it, and buy the same one a day later. - The issue will still be the same on these cars. Whether or not you return it and REBUY the car - Can a Manufacturer produce cars at a later date fixing all known problems, and leaving those of us whom chose to take the credit as an option suffer from loss of power, and poor gas mileage?? I highly doubt it would go on in that manner, IMO - In order for MAZDA to want to continue to sell this car, the problems that people are complaining about need to be addressed.

If enough people return their RX-8 and the whole false advertisement word gets out, the price of the RX-8 is going to drop pretty fast. There also is no clause in the refund agreement to prevent you from buying another. (according to other forum members) Returning the car by October 1st and buy another one could save buyer thousands on discounts and what not. I think we can all agree that regardless of the reason behind the power drop, a 238hp (or lower) car should not be worth the same as a 247hp car. This is strike 2 for Mazda, so public and media interest regarding this issue could be harsh and fast. Price will drop either way, how many other Mazdas can sell for MSRP more than 2 months?

Dealers who charged stupid premiums over MSRP should learn their lesson from this ordeal. Just return the car and buy another one from a different dealership at discounted price.

Originally posted by Gyro
What I'm waiting for is the car mags to start catching wind of this. I would like to see mass production RX8's tested by independent organized entities......Like Car and Driver. Do you think they are upset that their credability might be looked at twice. Alot of people assume that they do their own Dyno testing before publishing numbers that people will believe as true. Also what reaction will Mazda have when a HUGE magazine like Car and Driver shows undesirable test figures.



Problem is that there is a several month lag time in magazines from the time a magazine is drawn up to the time its released. For instance, the September issue of car and driver has been out for several weeks already, and that magazine was probably put together back in April/June. The only hope is for Autoweek to get ahold of it, but they are far from mainstream.

By the time this hits most magazines, the Oct 1 deadline will be long since past.

This is just my opinion, but the way I read the letter is that by signing the letter and accepting the $500 and free service, you are agreeing not to seek damages on THIS issue, i.e. the 247 to 239 horsepower re-rating.

Mazda is once again officially claiming the RX-8 horsepower to be a certain number. It's no different than when they originally said it was 247. If they were to re-rate it again, then it would be a whole new set of circumstances, and we would be entitled to sue, receive another offer, or whatever in that case.

Furthermore, if the horsepower is somehow INDEPENDENTLY proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be less than 238 at the flywheel, I would think they are completely open to any claims owners might want to make against them. They'd be in real trouble then. It is to their advantage to get the right numbers out now and not ever have them change again.

I would initially agree with Loco4rx8. It makes perfect sense. They are simply revising the number. if it were found to be different later.....we wouldnt be held to an old "revision".

However.....I posted this earlier today. As much as I dont want to believe it.......

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Gyro
heres what I think. If we sign the agreement, we basically now hold Mazda to 238 HP. OR...+or- 5% as allowable by law. The Real HP is probably 225-228, which is within the 5% margin. Therefor releasing them from any legal liability.

They basically lowered the HP figures to WITHIN 5% of the ACTUAL figures. which is legal. They Know that the car actually makes 225....but saying 238 makes them look better and keeps their head above the law.

Very deceptive.......think about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I am a lawyer (New Jersey), and here is my (personal) opinion: The release is aimed at the HP issue only. It could be phrased to be more on point, but the letter specifically talks about one issue, the hp adjustment. It is pretty much the most basic rule of contracts, that a document is construed against the drafter. In other words, even if we believe that the clause is ambiguous, it is strictly construed in the buyers favor, and against mazda. On a personal note, I have owned the car for a week, and love it. I did not buy it as a racer, that clearly was never mazda's point. It was always portrayed as a sporty performance oriented 4 seater, and not as a "vette beater". I drove the car before I signed, and feel I received good value for my dollar.(6speed, grand touring). There are plenty of cars priced considerably higher, with far less content (audi tt, for example). Clearly, mazda screwed up, but they are acting fast, and it is not a bad deal. If you brought the car to race, then take advantage of the buy back. otherwise, really nothing has changed. The real problem here is that a few very active posters seem to want to force mazda to turn the car into something it is never going to be, or perhaps pay them more then a $500.00 cash settlement . Really, think what is realistic here. They made a mistake, they are offering to make it right the only way they can. The people who are really stuck are those who traded or sold their old car for the rx8.

This is my opinion on the matter:

be scared, be very scared? HAHAHA

whatever man, who cares... take the offer or don't..

as for the legal waiver, big deal, take the money now while you can. If anything that comes up outside of the context of this agreement, the waiver wouldn't hold up fer crap in court. I actually believe in our legal system, as flawed as it may be, I'll take that chance.. I personally don't care to stress over something that might not even happen, so I'll just sit back and watch them service my car for free, while the rest of you are worried about signing away your "life" so to speak...

Life is a box of chocolates, eat it before it it starts looking like shit.

Oh, If the horsepower gets revised again, it is a new claim, since they have posted the new numbers. Old release should then be invalid.

Originally posted by klegg
Well, I am a lawyer (New Jersey), and here is my (personal) opinion: The release is aimed at the HP issue only.

(many further comments deleted to save space)

I'm a lawyer, too, and I would recommend that those of you who want a legal opinon go retain a lawyer. The legal opinions of various anonymous lawyers, whose backgrounds you know nothing about, and who may not ever have practiced law in your state (contract law varies from state to state, and in some respects those differences are quite substantial) aren't something you can take to the bank.

That said, some general rules that generally apply in one form or another in most (and perhaps all) parts of the US include: (1) generally, the goal of contract interpretation is to determine the intent of the parties; (2) in doing that, the important thing is the parties' objective manifestations of their intent (that is, something you or the other party secretly believe to be true, without any indication to the other party, generally will not carry much weight); (3) ambiguities are generally construed against the drafter (here, MNAO); (4) the foregoing typically applies with greater force when the contract is take-it-or-leave it, and/or when the drafting party is the one with greater bargaining power.

Other thoughts to keep in mind: some contracts are so-called "integrated" documents -- the contract itself says that it supersedes any prior negotiations, that the parties aren't relying on anything that isn't stated in the contract itself, and so on. If you have an integrated contract, it is harder to rely on statements outside the contract (exactly how much harder varies considerably from state to state). MNAO's release doesn't appear to include an integration clause, which would generally make it easier to rely on other docs (such as the letter) to provide context.

Still further thoughts: contract law may not be the be all and end all here. Various states may have special consumer protection statutes, and those statutes could change the rules. Likely, they would make things better for the buyers and worse for MNAO, but that isn't necessarily so.

And, again, I am a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. In fact, like many lawyers, I am licensed to practice law only in one state. In any event, I'm not trying to draw any conclusions here, just offering some general statements about contract law, which may or may not apply in your state.

I'm going to take the lawyers' advice and talk to one of the lawyers at my company. They work specifically with automotive law, and should be able to at least give me an idea if I should hire another one. I'm not too worried about this, and I'm definitely not taking back my car, but I do agree that if Mazda does intend this to be a waiver of rights in case of future issues, that's a big no-no.

Has anyone tried to get in touch with the Mazda North American Legal Department? They've got to have one, and I'm sure if we whined long enough to get this clarified they'd respond.

Personally I think it's a shame to have to seek lawyers for legal advice just to buy a car...... come on Mazda, you can do better than that.

Originally posted by klegg
Oh, If the horsepower gets revised again, it is a new claim, since they have posted the new numbers. Old release should then be invalid.

I called the number listed on the letter and spoke with Clarita. She was tolerant of all of my questions and she also pointed out that there are a lot of people from the forum who have called and expressed concerns. She was polite but was not able to shed any light on this ordeal. The only thing that she knew for sure was that Mazda will not revise the Hp again but there in lies the rub. As Gyro pointed out earlier, if our cars are really only capable of generating 226 Hp, while meeting CA emissons standards, then Mazda does not have to revise the figures again because that falls within 5% of the claimed output. That leaves us 21 Hp short and if we signed the waiver we have almost no leverage to get them to fix the problem.

I think that there really should be a third option and that is to release cars with different emission standards (i.e. CA and general US). That would allow the people who live in states with lower emission standards to have their ECUs flashed with the original program and receive the Hp that they paid for. Unfortunately those that live in states with higher emission standards would still have to chose between the buy back and free maintenance. I tried floating this idea by Clarita but I was stoned walled with the corporate line that we have our two choices and we need to either take it or leave it. To be honest that attitude irritates me more than the revised Hp numbers. :(

I for one am glad they gave us over a month to make the decision - that's plenty of time to learn more about the HP issue and also to see what problems crop up, if any, on our vehicles. Right now I'm very happy with my purchase, although $31,100 and 238HP with no 6-disc changer and no auto climate control doesn't seem quite as good a deal as 247HP did!

Originally posted by dcfc3s
Frankly, I'm amazed they've made ANY sort of response this quickly!

So, Mazda, being a large corporation, sat down, did the math on how much they'd be out making this offer (which is similar if not identical to what they did with the Miata), and has already put in place a program and mailed out letters to owners.

That's quick.
Dale

Quick? not really. They already did it with the Miata, as you mentioned.
Heck, they barely had to rewrite the letter.

They figured what it cost on the Miata and went for it.
Plus, if you DO accept the offer you waive recourse when the real numbers are proven by somebody putting just an engine on a dyno and testing it.

The deadline of October is the giveaway as to what they are trying to pull off here.

Originally posted by rxtreme


We bought a car for a certain level of performance and I believe we are recieving that level of performance. That is, to me, the most important factor. This is still the same car that outdid the G35C and Cobra Mustang in a recent comparo by a big-name magazine. This is still the same car that was viewed by another big magazine as a more preferable choice over the 350Z and BMW 330i.

Sorry, but it is NOT the same car. Those were Japan spec cars, with different ECU setups.

This car is like the UK and Euro car, which as advertised over there has a rated output of 230ps, or 228hp.

Originally posted by Gyro
What I'm waiting for is the car mags to start catching wind of this. I would like to see mass production RX8's tested by independent organized entities......Like Car and Driver. Do you think they are upset that their credability might be looked at twice. Alot of people assume that they do their own Dyno testing before publishing numbers that people will believe as true. Also what reaction will Mazda have when a HUGE magazine like Car and Driver shows undesirable test figures.


You are forgetting one thing:
It takes a print magazine about 4 to 6 months time from writing to publication of an article.
By then the October deadline will be long gone.

Originally posted by klegg
Well, I am a lawyer (New Jersey), and here is my (personal) opinion: ... The real problem here is that a few very active posters seem to want to force mazda to turn the car into something it is never going to be, or perhaps pay them more then a $500.00 cash settlement .

Yeah, we can tell you are a lawyer, as you are putting a "spin" on this to favour your personal viewpoint, and to try and discredit those who disagree with you.

Most of those who are not happy with the offer want to get the car we paid for, including the 247hp and the stated gas mileage figures.

So far both of those claims have gone up in flames.

What many of us want is for Mazda to do the same thing Ford did, and FIX the problem.
If that entails more ECU work, a revised air intake, a better muffler, or something else, I am certain they can improve on this.

One may ask why they have not done so, instead of offering what they did, and to me the answer is simple:
It costs them less this way.

They are counting on the fact that the majority of RX-8 owners will be apologists, like you.

So, why do so many people want to accept this offer?
Being a lawyer you are likely to have a pretty good grasp of human nature.

It is a lot easier to try and downplay this than it is to accept the idea fact that Mazda screwed you.

I have flown to and from Las Vegas many times, and I know that I must attract lucky people.

It seems that at least half the people I sit next to won more money at the tables and machines than they lost.
At least if I believe their claims..

Originally posted by canzoomer
Sorry, but it is NOT the same car. Those were Japan spec cars, with different ECU setups.Has anyone actually dyno'd a JDM RX-8 to give us a comparison baseline yet?

I have not seen any disscussion on the "buy back offer". Do they pay the 3% tax I paid back. I paid MSRP, but most people paid $995 over MSPR at my dealer.

Any comments folks on tax in the buy back?

roachman

I live down here in Miami and am getting about 13 MPG as well. When I called MNAO they stated that they did not have other owners having a similar problem. I am still thinking of keeping my car as well.

Originally posted by 8thSin
If people are choosing to return their 8's, why would you want to buy another one?? It's like going to wal-mart and buying a chicken, tasting it, say you don't like it, and buy the same one a day later. - The issue will still be the same on these cars. Whether or not you return it and REBUY the car - Can a Manufacturer produce cars at a later date fixing all known problems, and leaving those of us whom chose to take the credit as an option suffer from loss of power, and poor gas mileage?? I highly doubt it would go on in that manner, IMO - In order for MAZDA to want to continue to sell this car, the problems that people are complaining about need to be addressed.

Not necessarily. I am wholeheartedly entertaining the buyback option w/ a repurchase of another RX-8, assuming I get a full refund. Here's why:

o My car is one of the "buggy" ones that gets horrendous MPG. 13ish MPGs are the norm for me. And, no I don't drive around with a brick on the accelerator. Potentially, this is just an issue with some early 8s, that Mazda is never going to acknowledge, but that they have quietly resolved. Obviously the hope here is to get a car that performs as well as my current car, but also that I can live with at the pump. (please, no flames if you are among the fortunate ones who do not experience this issue - its all been said before in other threads)

o I have regrets for not getting the NAV system installed. There's a reason why I didn't, but I still wished I had. Now, I get another to have an 8 w/ NAV.

o Other, unforseen issues are more likely to be resolved, the longer the car is on the market. I could potentially avert some of these problems.

o More aftermarket mods will be available, the longer the car is on the market.

o The MSRP of the RX-8s will likely drop somewhat do to all of this. Perhaps I can get a $500 debit card's worth of savings.

o I can change colors, if I want. I have silver, but kinda like titanium. I never got to see titanium until my car was already painted, so I was learly. However, the silveer has grown on me & I might just stay with that.

o I prefer do do all of my own maintenance anyways.

So, you see, cars are more complex than chicken tasting. I like alot about this car. But, there are some concerns which I might be able to address though the buyback. If I can - why not?

canzoomer:Most of those who are not happy with the offer want to get the car we paid for, including the 247hp and the stated gas mileage figures. Unless you've got a whole lot more legal power (I was gonna say horsepower-heeheehee) than you seem to have, you're gonna have to accept the notion that you have two choices: fold or play. That's it, No Mas.

I'm wondering if this will affect new buyers of the car, will they get any bonuses for this misrepresentation. I plan on buying mine soon, but want to know if I'll getr any advantage for this, and if so what that will be and how I can get it.

jcrewetc: I think you're out of luck, or soon will be. There was a deadline to this deal and I believe it was ordering/receiving the car by today, or someting like that. At this point you know what the real HP is, so Mazda didn't mislead/lie in their dealings with you.

[i]I think we can all agree that regardless of the reason behind the power drop, a 238hp (or lower) car should not be worth the same as a 247hp car. [/B]

Car prices are not based upon their HP numbers, this is something the "enthusiast comunity" needs to get through their heads. They are based on materials used and a cars build complexity. There is a reason a Ferrari costs $100+K and it's not because it has 400HP, It's because the car is made out of the finest material by hand. (And because it's got the prancing horse on the hood)

Average Joe Blow doesn't buy a car based upon it's HP #'s most people buy cars based upon: 1) Styling 2) Comfort 3) MPG 4) Driving Dynamics 5) and the all important magazine "expert" review (not in that order)

Enthusiasts are about 1% of the car buying public.

Originally posted by ggreen29
canzoomer: Unless you've got a whole lot more legal power (I was gonna say horsepower-heeheehee) than you seem to have, you're gonna have to accept the notion that you have two choices: fold or play. That's it, No Mas.
Legally speaking I believe you are correct, ggreen

However if a sufficient number of RX-8 owners are able to achieve some PR momentum to contact Mazda, the press, and so on, we might embarrass them sufficiently to get off the pot and try and FIX the problems.

At this point I think our biggest obstacle will be those who do not feel it is a problem, and go out of their way to harass those of us on the lists who are activists for a helpful response from Mazda.

I spoke with a lawyer yesterday about this whole mess, and his comments to me indicated that the big obstacle with the law in Canada is that to sue Mazda Canada for relief we would have to show damages from the false claims Mazda is asserting.

That is tough to do.
If the RX-8 was a freight truck, and we could show the lack of power diminished our load capacity it would be fairly simple.

Besides, legal action is always slow and expensive even when you have an iron clad case. That simply would not be the most effective way to encourage Mazda to come up with a more useful response.
The offer Mazda has made is precisely calculated to provide the absolute minimum response to derail legal avenues.

So, the legal route is not going to be of much help.

We have to go after them where it hurts: Bad PR resulting in loss of sales.

For those who are happy with the situation:
Congrats! enjoy your car, have a blast!
But please, how about you let those of us who are not happy have a discussion without the endless redundant comments to muddy the threads?

Please?

Originally posted by rxphink

Average Joe Blow doesn't buy a car based upon it's HP #'s most people buy cars based upon: 1) Styling 2) Comfort 3) MPG 4) Driving Dynamics 5) and the all important magazine "expert" review (not in that order)

Enthusiasts are about 1% of the car buying public.

Very true, rxphink!

In this case many of us read reviews which were using cars and figures provided by Mazda.
These figures are now shown to be false.

In the one case where the reviewers noticed that the car had a problem the cars where immediately whisked away, and an excuse was made about "a sticking valve"

No documentation or evidence of this was ever provided by Mazda to substantiate the explanation.
Now we can see that this was merely a "smoke screen" they used at the time.

The fact is that at around 6,000rpm the engine has a serious problem.

We also need to hold the reviewers to task for their lack of follow-up on that problem.

My dealer called to tell me about the debit card and said it would be in the mail shortly but wouldnt tell me anything about the buyback. He said it didnt exist. heh.

Originally posted by DoobyWho
My dealer called to tell me about the debit card and said it would be in the mail shortly but wouldnt tell me anything about the buyback. He said it didnt exist. heh.

You mean to tell me now the dealerships are lying to RX-8 owners as well? Sheesh, time to call BBB to file some more complaints. What a bunch of non-sense.

For those who are happy with the situation:
Congrats! enjoy your car, have a blast!
But please, how about you let those of us who are not happy have a discussion without the endless redundant comments to muddy the threads? Then start a new thread for you windmill tippers.
You mean to tell me now the dealerships are lying to RX-8 owners as well? Sheesh, time to call BBB to file some more complaints. What a bunch of non-sense. If you've been around since last fall you would know that Mazda salespeople are some of the least informed people out there (excepting the Mazda guys on this forum). It's a sad company except for the engineers and designers.

Originally posted by ggreen29
and since last fall you would know that Mazda salespeople are some of the least informed people out there (excepting the Mazda guys on this forum).

Tell me about it.. I had one guy at Browning Mazda tell me the car had 280+ horsepower.

Another guy at the Mazda dealership in HB tell me the car will do 0-60 "something like 5 seconds".... and proceeded to sell the car on the point that "in a few months" there will be aftermarket mods that will boost the HP to 350+ hp.. This is the same guy that tried to sell me the car with a 5000 markup, and agreed to bend th rules and take off 1500 (as if he was a saint)... heh..

Here is the topper:
A friend of mine, who ordered and deposited in December 2001, was supposed to finally get his yellow RX-8 today.

Got the phone call this afternoon.
Employee at the dealership was moving the car from the basement parking lot to the detailing area, prior to my friend picking it up.

Seems he ran it into a concrete pillar, taking out the front bumper, fender, etc..

Now my friend does not get his car.

They had the gall to offer to fix it for him.

Right.

A pre-crashed RX-8.

They did not even offer a discount for this service!

Oh hell, I will say it:

Weber Motors, Edmonton.

Lol.. I think we can all concur that most, not all but most car dealers and their salespeople are quite "shady" and uninformed. This goes for most manufacturers, not just Mazda. The trick is to find a good one and then spread the word so that dealership gets the business they deserve for honest and informed staff, management and ownership.

thanks for the letter. i can't wait to give my car back.

big caution to the person who wants the nav sys
the controls are poorly postioned. my wrist is constantly hitting the buttons while my hand is resting on the stick. poor ergonomics.b

Originally posted by eficht
my wrist is constantly hitting the buttons while my hand is resting on the stick. poor ergonomics.Some might say that that the root of that problem is the practice of not keeping both hands on the wheel, rather than the ergonomics of the controls. :p

Originally posted by eficht
big caution to the person who wants the nav sys
the controls are poorly postioned. my wrist is constantly hitting the buttons while my hand is resting on the stick. poor ergonomics.b

What does this have to do with Mazda's letter, and why
are you complaining in this thread when you already complained in a different thread? In any case, I have the NAV system too, and I have no problems - but then, maybe I have a better technique for handling my stick! :D

get 500.00 plus 1250.


Off of the MSRP of a new RX8 with 1750.00 worth of more extras body kit, nav, spoiler , or 1750 worth of mazdasport stuff---

I think someone will figure out somehow to get back the HP in time...