See rotarynews.com for more info... hats off to them!

quick recap, 1/4 miles times are between 14.4 - 15.2 for pre-production cars retrofitted with production engines and full blown production cars...very good news!

Good... now Mazda, show us the dyno charts!

i'm not used to all those numbers but isn't that pretty good times for our "so weak and underperforming" cars??

Yeah those numbers are pretty sweet

I am just waiting for the person to reply with something like:

"Yeah, but I feel cheated because Mazda lied to me about the 247 HP number."

My response before that person even asks:

"Who the F*CK cares? IT can still do the 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds! Shut up!"

Thank you.

Based on my loss of trust in Mazda, I will not believe these claims until I see timeslips from owners of productions cars.

I f these times slips are correct , so whats happening to the cars in the real world . MAZDA should grab a few owners cars at random and do some testing on these and once and for all tell us why 175 or 180 hp figures are predominent in dyno tests .

The great thing was out of all those times, they were all 14.5-14.7 except for two that I saw, that were both about 15.2. Not too shabby at all.

And if anyone thinks these are faked, just how stupid do you think Mazda is? Do you truly believe they'd be willing to dig themselves a hole THAT deep?

There's no pleasing people. The production-engined cars even put on a tenth or two on the pre-prods! And here folks are still biatching.

FOlks, if it does 14.5 on a strip, with timeslips, it does 14.5. No matter what electronic fog the ECU may have about being run with the front wheels stationary on a dyno, phase of the moon, or whatever. Isn't the all-mighty timeslip the ultimate put-out-or-shut-up? Looks like the 8 puts out.

Arent some drivers reporting mid 14's on their own 8s as well, out in the wild? With timeslips to prove 'em?

Whatever. Yeah, they could've handled it better from the get-go (Mazda/Ford has to realize, the 'net age allows for near-instant spead of information), but the car still performs as designed. That's enough for me.

Me, I'm more concerened about the bloody organge peel I keep seeing on new Mazdas. The 8s I've seen in blue and red are particularly bad. The (purple? Blue?!) miata at my local dealer's showroom floor also looks pretty atrocious. My '94 NA has better finish than that.

I think it'a a lose-lose situation for Mazda. Don't produce times and dynos and you're a liar and a cheat, produce the time slips and dyno results and some of the "more whiners" say they won't believe the stats until other cars, others testers, other companies, shit aliens maybe have tested the car.

Give Mazda a break,they made up remarkably quickly for an error that should have never occured but it did. Now we need to cool off and think if we want the car (i'm keeping mine) or if we want a Z or other car that i personnaly don't care for with my 2 kids.

Hehe. That's the kicker isn't it. To some people it is impossible for Mazda to 'fix' this situation. Hell I ordered my car in the middle of all this crap about the hp and the dynos. I drove it, and that told me more than any BS number ever will. The car has power, handling and style - what more can you want?

We're definitely happy about keeping our yellow gt/mt.
Not that we needed timeslips to convince us :D

I'm glad Mazda made their release. Those are pretty good 1/4mi. numbers.

I wonder what they may be for the auto?

Times look about right. Averaging about 14.6@95 mph (throwing out the 15 second runs which look like outliers).

That's about what you'd expect for a 215-220 hp, 3000 lbs car. Trap speed is really indicative of power/weight.

If you look at the BMW 330i (5spd MT) which is a little underrated at 225 hp, but weighs more (3250-3300 lbs w/o driver), it runs similar trap speeds, as does the 260 hp, but much heavier (3450 lbs w/o driver) CL-S 6spd.

SC

And aren't those times, similar to what Mazda claimed before all this HP hubbub?

Did you notice that the tests were run on August 7th - just a week after the first couple of dyno results were produced. So Mazda did react very quickly to the complaints on this site (I am impressed with that), but took their time with a formal public response.

If you look at the BMW 330i (5spd MT) which is a little underrated at 225 hp, but weighs more (3250-3300 lbs w/o driver), it runs similar trap speeds, as does the 260 hp, but much heavier (3450 lbs w/o driver) CL-S 6spd.

The 0-60 and 1/4 mi are about the same if I am not mistaken. That is decent. If it can handle better than both of those cars (which it probably can) than it's still a good deal.

After alot of thinking, I do believe this is the most important aspect to the HP issue. I am very pleased that Mazda released timeslips to the public. I'm sure this very forum was the main driving force behind the release. Yes Dyno charts would be nice....BUT...I think we should be grateful that Mazda has responded to us quickly regarding this issue.
The car is fantastic.....I'm not letting a number that has NO apparent effect on real world performance get in the way of my enjoyment.

I'll add myself to the list of people who are glad that Mazda showed, whatever the HP really is the times are genuine.

Be wary of some people that start complaining that they have seen time slips that show times much worse or that their car can't make those times. Just remember that it takes a lot of skill to produce those times, so no conspiracy theories if people start talking about an under performing car.

I don't want to be a kill joy but the cars they said had the production engines in them, did they also re-map the ecu like they admit doing at the docks?

Originally posted by TurboSE
I don't want to be a kill joy but the cars they said had the production engines in them, did they also re-map the ecu like they admit doing at the docks?
In the article Rotary News said that some Houston area drivers were actually able to beat that time, which would lead me to believe that the engines had the reprogrammed ECUs.

My prayer to Mazda.

Please repeat the experiments with some owners' cars, or at least with some cars that have been "fixed" at port. That will clear up a lot of the controversy. While you are at it, please run one of the cars on a dyno -- why not borrow Church Auto Test's facility if you don't have one this side of the Pacific.

If you need volunteers to loan you a car, please count me in -- especially before Sept. 30 :D

Amen.

I'm guessing the Houston drivers probably ran light on fuel, took out the spare, etc. while Mazda probably tested the cars in road condition to be above board.

In the end, it kind of makes you wonder why Mazda felt the need to spec the car at 247. Its always performed like a 220 hp car from the early tests, and that was fast enough for most people, so why open up this can of worms?

SC

Peak horsepower means nothing. BMW knows this, so they tune their engines for a flat broad torque curve which seems to give them performance numbers that show their engines are 'under rated'. It is possible that Mazda may have originally tuned the Renesis for peak horsepower because of the escalating horsepower wars in the U.S., then when they 'may' have hit emissions problems, they just retuned the engine for a broader torque curve which also cost some peak horsepower. Even at 220hp (if that is what it has), this engine is over a 30% increase in power over that last NA rotary engined Mazda.:cool:

Originally posted by TurboSE
I don't want to be a kill joy but the cars they said had the production engines in them, did they also re-map the ecu like they admit doing at the docks?

Just to clarify; All of the cars tested were full US Spec cars, as delivered to US consumers (except for the few "non-motor" parts of the pre-prod vehicles). So the ECU does have the same coding in it that all US owners have in their 8's. We'll call it, THE PORT CODE.

-Bern

Thanks for the clarification, Bern. Good job on the RotaryNews article. Any plans for dyno test results from Mazda as well?
I, for one, would like to see how many rwhp the 238 engine hp translates to.
(If they did the 1/4 mile test run a week after the dyno results showed on this forum you would bet they did a dyno run as well).

A spare tire is only an option so what good is removing it going to do if it isn't there? I see so many kids go to the drag strip and remove the spare tire and passenger seat only to stay the same speed. Every little bit may help when added up but when every little bit is only a little bit, it probably won't do anything noticable unless you are the planets single most consistent driver.

Anyone who has ever owned a non turbo rotary knows that the difference between a 14.5 and a 15.5 in the quarter mile can be as small as a 1000 rpm difference in launch rpm due to a high powerband. My 1st gen is an average of a half a second slower by shifting at 7500 rpm rather than 7000 rpm (not a typo). The lauch is even harder. It is a very delicate balance between traction and holy sh!t in rpm's. My advice to the people who can't break into the 14's is that instead of blaming Mazda and saying the car is flawed, go learn to drive it. If you are used to torquier cars, you've got a little bit of learning to do.

I and a few others on this forum were allowed to drive an early pre-production car. It was not near as fast as the production model. I guarantee my 1st gen is faster. I didn't take it over 6000 rpm but it isn't anywhere near as potent as the production model is to that rpm. The pre-production car I looked at very thoroughly. The exhaust diameter under the car was only a mere 2". Now go look at yours.

In order to significantly alter the powerband for a broader rpm range would require a complete redesign of the entire intake manifold not just a retuning of the ecu. The ecu can change it a little but it can't perform miracles.

Originally posted by wanker
Thanks for the clarification, Bern. Good job on the RotaryNews article. Any plans for dyno test results from Mazda as well?
I, for one, would like to see how many rwhp the 238 engine hp translates to.
(If they did the 1/4 mile test run a week after the dyno results showed on this forum you would bet they did a dyno run as well).

Your welcome. On the dyno results, all I can say at this moment is, maybe. We are working on it, and should know something by early next week. Stay tuned!!


-Bern

Right that BMW seeks a broad torque curve, wrong that they "seem" underrated. Many actually are underrated, or if you like, every other manufacturer out there overrates their engines ;)

The S52 motor from the E36 M3 was rated at exactly the same hp as the S50, but it consistently dyno'd about 10 hp higher at the wheels. And the new 3.0 liter engine in the 330i is also producing a noticeably more than 225 hp (closer to 240 hp in fact).

As for the spare tire and light on gas, enthusiasts are like that, they'll take out every lbs they can. And 100 lbs (spare, plus fuel light on vs. full tank) can make a couple tenths difference in the 1/4.

SC

Originally posted by BRealistic
Peak horsepower means nothing. BMW knows this, so they tune their engines for a flat broad torque curve which seems to give them performance numbers that show their engines are 'under rated'.

Hate to say that "I told you so!" for all those people who blasted me with the BS meters and what not. :D

Originally posted by RX-WillyStyle
Hate to say that "I told you so!" for all those people who blasted me with the BS meters and what not. :D

I know RX-WillyStyle. I wonder how many people that had the audacity to blast you in the other thread, will have the humbleness to PM you with an apology, and admit they were wrong.

I'm glad to see that Mazda PR, working with Rotary News, release the RX-8's 1/4 mile Time Slips for the production cars. I commend Mazda for taking action and releasing these test results to calm the fears of many RX-8 owners.

For offering a buyback to those that are disappointed in the HP number and want an out, along with compensation to the owners that want to keep the car, we should commend them for that also.

It will be humorous to see now, how some owner's POS will suddenly became a "great" car again because of these results. Looks like we need a bigger bandwagon for people to climb aboard.

taking the thread on a small tangent before i go off on weeklong road trip in my car with the wife.

RX-WillyStyle you can say "i told you so" all you want and you were and are still wrong. go back and read what you posted and read the responses by the people, like me , who "blasted" you and you will see that. again i agree with you that the caar is fantastic, that it's performance numbers are right where they should be and there is no way in hell i would give up my car. the service and $500 is icing on the cake. but your post was still factually wrong.

bye folks and have a nice week:D :cool: here i come monterey and Laguna Seca!:D :D :cool:

From what I've read elsewhere, RX-8 owners at the track have tried all day long and not been able to beat 15.6-.7 in the quarter. I'd say Mazda's 14.5 claim is beyond optimistic.


Originally posted by missinmahseven
There's no pleasing people. The production-engined cars even put on a tenth or two on the pre-prods! And here folks are still biatching.

FOlks, if it does 14.5 on a strip, with timeslips, it does 14.5. No matter what electronic fog the ECU may have about being run with the front wheels stationary on a dyno, phase of the moon, or whatever. Isn't the all-mighty timeslip the ultimate put-out-or-shut-up? Looks like the 8 puts out.

Arent some drivers reporting mid 14's on their own 8s as well, out in the wild? With timeslips to prove 'em?

Whatever. Yeah, they could've handled it better from the get-go (Mazda/Ford has to realize, the 'net age allows for near-instant spead of information), but the car still performs as designed. That's enough for me.

Me, I'm more concerened about the bloody organge peel I keep seeing on new Mazdas. The 8s I've seen in blue and red are particularly bad. The (purple? Blue?!) miata at my local dealer's showroom floor also looks pretty atrocious. My '94 NA has better finish than that.

Thanks for posting this Bern,

It's nice to see something from Mazda on this and it points to the fact that the performance is still there.

Good stuff!

Originally posted by rotarygod
A spare tire is only an option so what good is removing it going to do if it isn't there? I see so many kids go to the drag strip and remove the spare tire and passenger seat only to stay the same speed. Every little bit may help when added up but when every little bit is only a little bit, it probably won't do anything noticable unless you are the planets single most consistent driver.

I agree. If ten pounds here and there really made this big of a difference, then THIN people would always win drad races. "Yeah, I got beat again, But I am going on a diet."
But it seems that drag racing attractes the healthy "biggie size that combo please" people too.


Anyone who has ever owned a non turbo rotary knows that the difference between a 14.5 and a 15.5 in the quarter mile can be as small as a 1000 rpm difference in launch rpm due to a high powerband. My 1st gen is an average of a half a second slower by shifting at 7500 rpm rather than 7000 rpm (not a typo). The lauch is even harder. It is a very delicate balance between traction and holy sh!t in rpm's. My advice to the people who can't break into the 14's is that instead of blaming Mazda and saying the car is flawed, go learn to drive it. If you are used to torquier cars, you've got a little bit of learning to do.

-.

I know what you mean about launch. When trying to launch my 100hp beast, the line between the proper amount of spin for the best launch, boggin down or just sitting there with the horsepower goping up in smoke is a very thin line indeed (and it seems to constantly move also). When I actually get it right, I am so suprised that I mess the 1-2 shift by revving to high in 1st.

Originally posted by missinmahseven
-
Me, I'm more concerened about the bloody organge peel I keep seeing on new Mazdas. The 8s I've seen in blue and red are particularly bad. The (purple? Blue?!) miata at my local dealer's showroom floor also looks pretty atrocious. My '94 NA has better finish than that.

By '94 NA, you mean your Miata right? Just curious what you meant by that. And I agree with you on the paint quality of new cars. I think this is an industry wide problem, not just a Ford/Mazda problem. The popularity of unusual metallic (metal flake) paints has moved the industry to make the base coat into a texture (with an electrostaticaly applied clear coat for a thin unuform coat)- to better cover minor imperfections in the paint or body. I don't like this texture mainly because NO body shop can exactly match the factory paint's texture.:mad:

Originally posted by RX8Lover
I am just waiting for the person to reply with something like:

"Yeah, but I feel cheated because Mazda lied to me about the 247 HP number."

My response before that person even asks:

"Who the F*CK cares? IT can still do the 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds! Shut up!"

Thank you.
These times are according Mazda.
The Same Guys now claiming 238HP

From the Rotarynews article:
"Mazda has provided us with copies of times slips for 5 cars,"

You still believe this?

Originally posted by bern


Your welcome. On the dyno results, all I can say at this moment is, maybe. We are working on it, and should know something by early next week. Stay tuned!!


-Bern
You know this because Mazda Told You.
Just like in the spring, when power was down, they TOLD YOU they had sticking valves.

Did you see one of these cars on the test equipment, and see that they had USA maps?
How would/could you tell?

Maybe they are telling the truth.

But as we know now that they are liars, it is pretty hard to believe them.

Originally posted by RX-WillyStyle
Hate to say that "I told you so!" for all those people who blasted me with the BS meters and what not. :D

Willy, I'll give you a free lesson in Quality. You can pass it on to Mazda NA, and Mazda Japan if you like. The really sad part is many of them have had this lesson, but they have probably forgotten it. Dr. Deming started the quality movement in Japan and Taguchi ran with it and it became ingrained in the Japanese culture. Mazda forgot the lessons, so here is a brief reminder.

Quality is determined by the expectations of the customer. The customer decides whether or not a product is a quality product. When a product is supposed to have 4 tires, it better have 4 tires. When it is supposed to have 247 hp, it better have 247 hp, not 220.

Quality is often defined as "meeting or exceeding customer expectations." It's safe to say that in many cases Mazda didn't meet customer expectations, and they sure didn't exceed them.

Now if you want to get into technical measurement of quality you need the following.

1. An appropriately chosen characteristic (number of tires, amount of power)

2. Quality of design

3. Quality of the specification itself

4. Quality of conformance to the specification.

Well in the USofA horsepower is apparently a pretty important specification. The quality of design was there at some point, because Mazda claimed 247 hp. Unfortunately, Mazda could not conform to their own chosen specification! That is low quality no matter how you slice it.

You can make all the excuses you want, wave all the smoke and mirrors you want, but Mazda missed the mark.

Those timeslips are nice, BTW. However, the one real owner timeslip that I've seen showed 90 mph throught the traps not 95-96. That indicates a significant power deficit. ET doesn't really matter that much in terms of hp, but trap speed does.

Anyone else got owner timeslips? What are the trap speeds?

Anthony, I'll give you a lesson in customer satisfaction. Mazda is offering to buy back ANYBODY's car if they are not 100% satisfied.

So all the rest of your points are moot in my book. They are making good in the best way they can. And you may not accept the timeslips, but thats YOUR problem, not others.

Can we please stop the Mazda bashing? They offered ya'll your money back if you didnt like the car over a 9HP mistake. Thats pretty damn generous since it falls in the 5% range of error they are allowed. I'm aware of the zillion arguments that it's more than 5% but I simply dont care. If you have the car and are unhappy, it's YOUR problem. If you dont have the car and are unhappy, deal with it and buy one. Let me enjoy it with other people that do so without having to hear everybody's whining already!

Car&Driver test data

_______________ 0 – ¼ mile ____ Power ___ Weight ____ P/W

Honda Accord
EX Coupe ____ 14.5s @ 98mph ___240 hp ___ 3300 lb ___0.073

Porsche
Boxster ______ 14.6s @ 98mph ___228 hp ___ 3024 lb ___0.075

Mazda RX-8 ___14.5s @ 96mph ___238 hp ___ 2940 lb ___0.081

Nissan
Altima 3.5SE __ 14.6s @ 96mph ___245 hp ___3220 lb ___0.076

Chrysler
Crossfire _____ 14.8 s @ 96mph ___215 hp ___3111 lb ___0.069


All the above cars have manual transmission and NA engine.

Car&Driver tests cars with a full tank of fuel.

Originally posted by Genom
Let me enjoy it with other people that do so without having to hear everybody's whining already!

Happy - happy-Joy-Joy.

And if you are so confident, then why ARE you reading and posting here?

Feeling a little insecure?

Good luck if you break below 15.0 and trap higher than 91 MPH!

Nashua

Originally posted by Gyro
The car is fantastic.....I'm not letting a number that has NO apparent effect on real world performance get in the way of my enjoyment.

Well said!

:D

Originally posted by Supercharger
Car&Driver test data

that graph would be more useful with accompanying dynos. peak hp is great but a flat torque curve would be better.

as for the 14.5 passes, rsx-s with intake/exhaust will run that. probably putting out 190hp/130ft-lbs to the wheels on a 3000lb chassis. keep in mind that this is on a fwd platform.

Originally posted by AnthonyS


Willy, I'll give you a free lesson in Quality..........

Quality is determined by the expectations of the customer. The customer decides whether or not a product is a quality product. When a product is supposed to have 4 tires, it better have 4 tires. When it is supposed to have 247 hp, it better have 247 hp, not 220.

Quality is often defined as "meeting or exceeding customer expectations." It's safe to say that in many cases Mazda didn't meet customer expectations, and they sure didn't exceed them.

You can make all the excuses you want, wave all the smoke and mirrors you want, but Mazda missed the mark.


Agreed~ Mazda USA has a foul reputation for their shady businessn practice over the years. The biggest obsticle Mazda has to overcome is their own poor reputation with the general public. Customer service and quality affects customer loyalty in the long run. Recent events has further hurt Mazda's reputation in consumers minds. It's a shame, because the RX-8 is such a fresh product. Had the RX-8 been produced by Honda or Toyota, it would sell like a hot cake, even if it only comes with 225hp.

If you at Mazda's position, you'll realize they don't have much of a choice in the matter. If Mazda had advertised the TRUE number from the beginning, public interest in this car would have been pessimistic. It's hard to play the power game in the US when likes of Altima and Accords are putting down conservatively rated 240+hp consistently. To advertise a 225hp Renesis that gets around 16-20mpg would be suicide for Mazda. You gotta admit though, despite the grunting in online automobile communities, Mazda's evil strategy is secretly paying off. 90% of the publications and websites are still reporting the RX-8 at 250hp to the general public. Deceptive and clever, but the well informed people don't appreciate this type of strategy.

As far as the user time slips, keep in mind that drag race is more complex than mashing the gas pedal. Everyday Joes with a brand new car probably won't yield the best results. I have my doubts on the 14.5 time, but it's kind of reassuring that Mazda actually tested these cars instead of just relying on magazines for numbers.

I don't think there is any need to doubt the 14.5 timeslips. They are within the realm of possibility for a 220 hp car of the RX-8's weight. The average time for all the cars that day was in the high 14.6's, which is quite reasonable.

However, in looking at the original 247 hp specs for the RX-8, one would have _expected_ such a combination to be running closer to 14.0, maybe even into the high 13's with an aggressive owner on a good day at the strip. Many people may have only looked at the 14.5 numbers and been happy with that, but doing the math would make you think that the car had a lot more in it _before_ the real world data started appearing.

SC

Originally posted by canzoomer


Happy - happy-Joy-Joy.

And if you are so confident, then why ARE you reading and posting here?

Feeling a little insecure?


Nope. it's that this is all the crap anybody is posting now-a-days. There's maybe 5 threads that ARENT dealing with the HP issue. Notice the topic STARTED out with the time slips posted and I was curious. You need to lighten up a bit.

You all are right about the timeslip being a function of driver ability. I'm no expert drag racer, but I probably have 200 passes to my credit in various cars. Trap speed is more indicative of power available. The Mazda published timeslips show 95-96 mph, whether or not they are 14.5 sec runs or 15.2 sec runs. The only owner timeslips I've seen showed 89-90 mph. That is a lot of missing power to be just driver error.

Willy, quality is decided by the customer, not someone working for Mazda. Many customers are speaking by returning cars and / or complaining loudly. Is Mazda really listening or are they trying to sweep this under the rug in the most cost effective way possible? I'd say by requiring owners to sign a release to take the $500 credit and free maintenance, the answer is pretty clear. They are doing all they can to minimize their losses economically. What Mazda can't determine or calculate is how many lost sales this will cost them in the future.

Originally posted by Genom

Nope. it's that this is all the crap anybody is posting now-a-days. There's maybe 5 threads that ARENT dealing with the HP issue. Notice the topic STARTED out with the time slips posted and I was curious. You need to lighten up a bit.

As for this NOT being an HP issue, what ELSE would Mazda have posted these for?

As for lightening up:

I bought a car, as a SPORTS CAR.
Littel details like engine performance are a key element of that decision.
As there are no acceptable replacements in the price range, available in a reasonably short time frame, I am sticking with my 8.

However I have hope that one day my car WILL have the advertised power output.

There are two paths to that goal:
1) Mazda fixing the problem for us.
2) Performing modifications, at the risk of voiding warranty or emmissions laws.

I would prefer the former, and if the majority of the owners and prospective owners made it clear that this is required, then I believe Mazda will step up to the plate.

At present Mazda's lawyers have said:
"Make this offer and almost all the owners will accept it. Nobody likes to be seen as "rocking the boat"".
If we fall into the trap of short time greed and accept the offer we are only ripping ourselves off.
I believe that fixing our cars will cost more than what was offered. But it would be the correct answer to solving their errors.

I hope we can prove them wrong.
For that to happen we need to show them we expect to get what we paid for, and will not be bought off by $500 and some oil changes.
Mazda is fixing the other faults, inclusing floor mats, oil pans, and other cases, so I expect them to fix this one the same way.

I am quite "light" thanks, but will not happily read postings from some apologist who think that the lawyers solution is peachy.
I hope that the majority of the owners will show the thoguth and the strength of will to make it clear that we will not accept being bought off with our own money.

However, in looking at the original 247 hp specs for the RX-8, one would have _expected_ such a combination to be running closer to 14.0, maybe even into the high 13's with an aggressive owner on a good day at the strip. Many people may have only looked at the 14.5 numbers and been happy with that, but doing the math would make you think that the car had a lot more in it _before_ the real world data started appearing.

Can 27hp take over half a second off a 1/4 mile time?

Originally posted by canzoomer
I bought a car, as a SPORTS CAR.
Littel details like engine performance are a key element of that decision.


I consider my '91 RX-7 Coupe a SPORTS CAR and it puts out 160hp. Mind you, neither of these are really sports cars anyway, but rather GT cars. 'Real' sports cars are often in the low 100hp range.

Originally posted by canzoomer

There are two paths to that goal:
1) Mazda fixing the problem for us.
2) Performing modifications, at the risk of voiding warranty or emmissions laws.


1) They are, it's call 'take it or leave it policy'. If you don't like our car, then return it. If don't return it, then quit whinning. That seems to be what Mazda USA and some posters here are saying. There is no need to fix the problem, because people who believes there is a problem should just return their cars. This policy reflects poorly on the customer commitment of a major company, and it will harm Mazda in the future. (As their mistakes in the past is haunting them now)

2) What is an estimate to raise the power of the RX-8 back to its original 250hp spec? $500? $1500? I wouldn't risk getting your warranty void either, 4yr w/ free loaner car is a pretty good plan to toss down the drain.

Originally posted by canzoomer


For that to happen we need to show them we expect to get what we paid for, and will not be bought off by $500 and some oil changes.



Ah but you see, my point is dont try to force us all into YOUR opinion. *I* certainly got what I paid for. I test drove the car before I bought it, because the only thing that matters to me is if it feels like what I want. All specs posted are absolutely meaningless to me. I have been enjoying the hell out fo my car for 3 weeks and this whole HP issue ahs done 2 things. Caused most RX8 forums to be rather tedious, and gotten me what *I* consider to be a free $500, plus no need to outlay ANY money on maintanence. I can see how some people are unhappy about all this, but can we not make every single post a complaint about this? There's already been several sticky notices that more info is being looked for right now by very capapble people. How about we chill out for a bit and see what happens?

Once again your strongest statement is with your wallet. If you are unhappy with *MAZDA* then let *MAZDA* know about it by contacting them. If they cannot make you happy then return your car and buy something else. These forums are not controlled by Mazda so whining and moaning all day long on them isnt really doing what YOU claim to want to do.

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac


1) They are, it's call 'take it or leave it policy'. If you don't like our car, then return it. If don't return it, then quit whinning. That seems to be what Mazda USA and some posters here are saying. There is no need to fix the problem, because people who believes there is a problem should just return their cars. This policy reflects poorly on the customer commitment of a major company, and it will harm Mazda in the future. (As their mistakes in the past is haunting them now)

2) What is an estimate to raise the power of the RX-8 back to its original 250hp spec? $500? $1500? I wouldn't risk getting your warranty void either, 4yr w/ free loaner car is a pretty good plan to toss down the drain.

Well, a buyback option or FREE stuff is alot better than forcing the individual owners to sue if they feel the car was misrepresented.
BTW SKYLINE MANIAC, you are obviously a Nissan fan(I like alot of Nissan's new products) but this over rating horsepower issue is an industry wide problem for advertising power, and has always been a problem. Please explain why the claimed 287hp/274lb-ft 350z only makes 229rwhp and 213 rwlbft?:


http://www.dynoperformance.com/search_details.php?ID=408

Maybe you should be at a Nissan forum bitching about how Nissan screwed all their customers instead of here bitching about a car you niether own nor would even consider buying?

I love it! You guys dissing Mazda need to chill. You have no freaking idea what you are talking about!

For those still whining, go buy S2000's and paint them pink like 2f2f! That is what you need to be driving, because your panties sure are in a bunch over nothing.

Mazda admits they f@#*ed up. And for that reason they are buying back the cars. And if you still like it which every proud owner that I have talked to does, they are giving you free sh*t.

Take the five hundred and get a custome made intake, then it will make up the nine hp "loss"! GEEZ folks it doesn't take a genius to figure out nothing was lost that hasn't been compensated for in full, or more.

Not coming from a mazda employee, yet a mazda customer. JUST LIKE YOU!

I Thank You, I Thank You!

:D

However, in looking at the original 247 hp specs for the RX-8, one would have _expected_ such a combination to be running closer to 14.0, maybe even into the high 13's with an aggressive owner on a good day at the strip. Many people may have only looked at the 14.5 numbers and been happy with that, but doing the math would make you think that the car had a lot more in it _before_ the real world data started appearing.

A better 1/4 mi time and 0-60 WAS expected. At least for me. I went through the original numbers like you did and thought that it would perform better than the pre-production models. It would have been nice to have been pleasantly suprised with high 13's/low 14's for the 1320. I still say were getting the performance that we paid for; that, to me, is satisfaction in itself.

The real question is, can we get it back with something as easy as a reflashed ECU? I was on the phone with a Mazda rep the other day and made a request that Mazda "leak" the ECU code info out to some reputable tuner so that our 500 dollars could be well spent on gaining all that power back PLUS some. Then I could be pleasantly surprised at something like 13.9 in the 1/4. Although, I have to remember, more speed and power are always nice things, but this car shines better in the twisties.

BTW SKYLINE MANIAC, you are obviously a Nissan fan(I like alot of Nissan's new products) but this over rating horsepower issue is an industry wide problem for advertising power, and has always been a problem. Please explain why the claimed 287hp/274lb-ft 350z only makes 229rwhp and 213 rwlbft?:

I think they did the same thing with the Sentra SE-R spec V. It was over rated before it hit showrooms, SCC caught it (and SCC are very much Nissan friendly), and they adjusted their numbers--not the car. It may STILL be over rated, I don't know. Bottom line is: Nissan is guilty of it, too. I don't see them paying up to any of their customers.

I wish more car companies built their engines like Honda---under rated!

Originally posted by BRealistic


BTW SKYLINE MANIAC, you are obviously a Nissan fan(I like alot of Nissan's new products) but this over rating horsepower issue is an industry wide problem for advertising power, and has always been a problem. Please explain why the claimed 287hp/274lb-ft 350z only makes 229rwhp and 213 rwlbft?:



You mean something like this?

350Z: A road test.
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/roadtests/0210scc_350znissan09_zoom.jpg
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/features/0210scc_350znissan/index.html
Measured Wheel Hp: 249 hp @ 6300 rpm
Measured Wheel Torque: 240 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Source: SCC (the guys you can trust)

Compared to something like this:


Half Test of the new RX-8:
Mechanically, it's a minor issue, and should be easily resolved, but the effect is huge, almost exactly like driving an S2000 with the VTEC disabled. With the power port valves stuck shut, the engine becomes effectively the same as the 210-hp engine available in base models in Europe and Japan, and in the sissy, four-speed automatic in the United States. We discovered the problem on our dyno, when the RX-8's power went flat at exactly 6250 rpm.

Given the missing 40 hp, we didn't bother doing acceleration tests.......


Let's just say "EVERYBODY overrates their cars, so Mazda is not any worse than everyone else." Excellent attempt to distract from the topic at hand~ Unfortunately the 350Z is solid as a rock. Now before Herc comes in here and accuse us of 'trying to sell Nissan products,' we are just here to state facts.

Originally posted by BRealistic
Please explain why the claimed 287hp/274lb-ft 350z only makes 229rwhp and 213 rwlbft?:


http://www.dynoperformance.com/search_details.php?ID=408

Maybe you should be at a Nissan forum bitching about how Nissan screwed all their customers instead of here bitching about a car you niether own nor would even consider buying?

My dynos. 003 is with a K&N, 006 is BONE STOCK with a stock air element. Do the math. That's a 15.8% loss on 006.

http://www.waynewmedia.com/350z/images/DSCN1093.JPG

droidekaus, you mean to tell me thr K&N filter lowered the power on the car? Ok then, time to cancel my K&N filter order online. Also, look at that ridiculous torque curve, these cars are making 200+lb.ft torque at 2000rpm. :D No wonder I get a smoke show going when I step on the gas alittle hard at green lights.

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac
droidekaus, you mean to tell me thr K&N filter lowered the power on the car? Ok then, time to cancel my K&N filter order online. Also, look at that ridiculous torque curve, these cars are making 200+lb.ft torque at 2000rpm. :D No wonder I get a smoke show going when I step on the gas alittle hard at green lights.

Yes. The stock intake with stock filter is the best there is on the Z. Intakes sound AWESOME, but don't add HP on the Z. On those two dyno days, a friend came along both times. He put down 241.7 stock and 241.7 with an Injen. I sh*t you not.

That's why I launch at 2500 RPM. No need to rev any higher.

Sure, that's a 12% increase in power. Should be good for a 3-4% reduction in ET.

SC

Originally posted by JohnnyG


Can 27hp take over half a second off a 1/4 mile time?

Not sure where that 213 Dyno from the 350z came from, I seen LOTS of 350z dyno from 232-250 rwhp and 227-245 rwtq, most fall in the 235-245 range for both HP and Tq..

Originally posted by Blue 350z
Not sure where that 213 Dyno from the 350z came from, I seen LOTS of 350z dyno from 232-250 rwhp and 227-245 rwtq, most fall in the 235-245 range for both HP and Tq..

Gee, you mean it's a bad thing to continuously quote the worst result ever reported, and ignore the results that are significantly better?

Perhaps some of you 350Z aficianados might keep that in mind when you discuss actual RX-8 results of dyno and 1/4 mi testing.

Regards,
Gordon

Originally posted by Gord96BRG


Gee, you mean it's a bad thing to continuously quote the worst result ever reported, and ignore the results that are significantly better?

Perhaps some of you 350Z aficianados might keep that in mind when you discuss actual RX-8 results of dyno and 1/4 mi testing.

Regards,
Gordon

All I ask is a timeslip from a 1/4 track from a human being posted and I will 100% believe it. Not a Mag time, not "I heard some guy that heard from a guy that seen a guy run a 14.7". I want a timeslip from an every day poster with numbers.. I have my time slips, see my sig? Now its your turn.. SHOW ME THE MONEY!:cool:

Originally posted by Blue 350z
Now its your turn.. SHOW ME THE MONEY!:cool:

Not me! Calgary is at 3500' above sea level, whatever time I might get will definitely be slower than a sea level time.

However, let's presume that you are an accomplished drag racer that can get an optimum time from your car. I'm not, and I know that I couldn't get a time that would represent the maximum capability of my car, and I doubt half of us clowns here could either. What's wrong with the time slips presented by Rotary News??? So what if they have drivers familiar with generating 1/4 mi runs - isn't it a good thing to eliminate driver screwups from the equation when you want to know what the car is capable of???

Regards,
Gordon

TADA~ here is a dyno result I got from a friend's friend, whose friend works at a motorshop that has contracts to this dyno place. Everybody with $50 can get a dyno done. So Gord96BRG, how about show us your dyno? You don't have to be a pro dynoster to do stuff like this.

I have only seen one actual driver / owner RX-8 timeslip. It is in the performance section of this forum. It is the ET that I have referred to in this topic. I was shocked by the mph, and not the ET. ET is very driver dependent, but trap speed isn't.

The trap speed posted by the Z guys here 100-102 mph says that all 287 hp is indeed underhood. That is right in line with my old '97 Ford that ran 102-103 and was rated at 305 hp.

I think its important to note that when you look at drag strip time slips, you must consider correction factors. In particular, atmospheric conditions and altitude.

The Mazda corporate slips were done at Pomona Raceway in SoCal. The tests were done late afternoon when temps were in the high 70s/low 80s. Barometric pressure was normal as was humidity. Frankly, these are actually good conditions for August in SoCal. The time slips, therefore are probably representative of what a decent driver would get on a decent day. Now, if they had run the cars at Englishtown, NJ (a very fast track at sea level) in March, then the times could have been much faster, but they would not have been representative of what most owners would see.

Conversely, if an owner runs their car at 1200 ft in 95 F temps with high humidity, the times (and trap speeds will be slower). I work with a lot of Acura RSX owners and their stock traps range from 88-93 mph, and some mags have reported even faster traps. You have to know when and where the times were obtained.

Until more owner data comes in (much like how a number of dynos needed to be done before conclusions were drawn), its difficult to say that the Mazda obtained times were incorrect. As I've said before, they're in line with a 2950 lbs car with 220 hp or so.

SC

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac

TADA~ here is a dyno result I got from a friend's friend, whose friend works at a motorshop that has contracts to this dyno place. Everybody with $50 can get a dyno done. So Gord96BRG, how about show us your dyno? You don't have to be a pro dynoster to do stuff like this.

Would you consider that dyno results might not be necessarily representative of a vehicles 1/4 mile performance ?
Just a question.

Originally posted by canzoomer
You know this because Mazda Told You.

Well CANZOOMER, we know a lot of things at RotaryNews.Com because Mazda tells us. But, we also try to verify a lot of the same information through 3rd party folks (magazines, aftermarket, insiders, etc...) What exactly is the issue here? In some shape, way, or form, we have to trust Mazda to tell us at RN the truth. The only real advantage that we at RN have over "JOE Q PUBLIC" is that we've known the folks feeding us information personally for years, and we trust their integrity. BTW, RN doesn't usually get our insight and information from the traditional marketing or PR channels.


Originally posted by canzoomer
t like in the spring, when power was down, they TOLD YOU they had sticking valves.

RN never had a car with a sticking valve, so we can't comment on the specifics. But again, I doubt here that Mazda lied to the Sport Compact guys. You guys will have to judge.


Originally posted by canzoomer
Did you see one of these cars on the test equipment, and see that they had USA maps? How would/could you tell?

Maybe, maybe not, but this doesn't seem to be the issue here with you. Even If we did see the cars being tested and verified/checked the maps, I think that you would still want 3 or 4 independent lab tests with you present at all of them to verify.

Like a few have stated here; it's a no win situation for Mazda to release information. Damn'd if they do, damn'd if they don't.


Originally posted by canzoomer
Maybe they are telling the truth.

Maybe.. but, don't kill the messengers here, we are just trying to help out. We get nothing from Mazda or enthusiast on this deal.


Originally posted by canzoomer
But as we know now that they are liars, it is pretty hard to believe them.

On the liars issue, "WE" sounds like a consensus of all folks on this forum, and I for one do not agree with your sentiment. I feel Mazda might have been misguided in their final marketing strategy of the RX-8 and guilty of under-estimating the power of the world wide web. I think all OEM's are still struggling with the web and all of it's challenges.

I understand your frustration and principal here, but I think Mazda is genuinely trying to make this whole thing right now.

Cheers,

-Bern

Sorry, was not trying to shoot the messenger.
I was pointing out that it seems likely that Mazda North America knew about the reduced power, and chose to ignore this.

As they did the same thing with the 2001 miata, they are therefore either total idiots, or liars.

Therefore, when they send you some 1/4 mile slips, I personally find it very hard to swallow this, simply based on their word.

I know that by posting this reply I will be harped on this forum by people telling me that Mazda admitting to 9HP and offering a buy back is the end of it.

If they want to believe this, that is their perogative.

Right now I just experienced the oil light problem for the first time this weekend, and so far Mazda Canada is not even aware of it..
I am grateful to internet lists like this one.
I am able to call Mazda Canada and my dealer and discuss it, equipped with symptoms, descriptions of resolutions, and even the replacement part #. Mazda Canada has none of this yet.

However, it is apparent that if anyone with a slight clue and some form of interest in customer satisfaction worked in Mazda North America, they would be all over this by now.

If I was not on this list it is very possible that I would be leaving my car at a dealership, waiting for them to fix it, not knowing they have no information about the problem at all!

I just don't buy the conspiracy theory argument that the suits at Mazda planned this whole hp issue out, or that they intentionally lied. You don't stay in business if you do that kind of thing. Suits want the company to make money in the long run and credibility is important. These "suits" probably attend seminars on ethics and study the old Tylenol case where Johnson & Johnson voluntarily pulled all their product because of a few tampering cases. J&J are still around today and thriving. Mazda seems to be following that example by acknowleding the issue and providing not one, but two solutions. No conspiracy.

Originally posted by LesPaul
I just don't buy the conspiracy theory argument that the suits at Mazda planned this whole hp issue out, or that they intentionally lied. You don't stay in business if you do that kind of thing. Suits want the company to make money in the long run and credibility is important. These "suits" probably attend seminars on ethics and study the old Tylenol case where Johnson & Johnson voluntarily pulled all their product because of a few tampering cases. J&J are still around today and thriving. Mazda seems to be following that example by acknowleding the issue and providing not one, but two solutions. ****No conspiracy.*****

But its so easy to become X File(d) with situations such as this, that it is practically an automatic public reaction

Originally posted by LesPaul
I just don't buy the conspiracy theory argument that the suits at Mazda planned this whole hp issue out, or that they intentionally lied.

OK, let's say that there is no lies.
Then they are incredibly stupid and incompetetent!

The 247HP was blatantly wrong, and even their published figures in Europe and Australia back that up.
Heck the book they sent me rates the car as 177KW in Europe, and that translates to 237.2HP!

Now they have revised to that, and are still way out. Every bit of testing shows it is around 220HP.

So, take that, combine it with the smarmy letter that says:
"Because we're always looking for ongoing improvement in the vehicles we produce, we have continued testing and analysis of mass-production RX-8 engines"

What was the testing? Did somebody in Mazda NA finally run the conversion from 177KW to HP and discover "oops! That is less than what we said!" ???

The only reason they wrote this is because owners like you and I called their bluff!

Come on, these are lying used car salesmen we are dealing with here, not the engineers that designed the cars!

Idiots or liars, the end result is the same, we get stuck with it.

Idiots or liars, the end result is the same, we get stuck with it. [/B][/QUOTE]

Tell you what, getting "stuck" with a car that handle like this one and that is that much fun to drive and getting 500$ and free maintenance above it... I think i can live with that kinda pain !!

:-)

Originally posted by canzoomer


Idiots or liars, the end result is the same, we get stuck with it.

I agree with f1michel quote: Tell you what, getting "stuck" with a car that handle like this one and that is that much fun to drive and getting 500$ and free maintenance above it... I think i can live with that kinda pain !!

And might I add, no one is stuck with anything. If you don't want to be "stuck with it", accept the buyback.

ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower


Some of you biga big deal out of it ... IT IS LAME .. its not like you rev your engine to 8,500 everytime and do a clutch drop ..


ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower

Originally posted by RX-8 Zoomster


And might I add, no one is stuck with anything. If you don't want to be "stuck with it", accept the buyback.

Yes, Zoomster, I know your opinion on this, and certainly you know mine.

I won't go into why that option is not useful to some of us, but trust me, it isn't.

However, sometimes when people post on these lists it is not for your benefit. It is for others.

There are new readers joining us all the time.
Some know about these things, and some don't.

Some of the new readers will agree with you, I am sure.

However, I think that some of them may want to get all the information, not just what Mazda is dishing out.

It is only 9HP is simply an utterly useless answer, as it is NOT 9HP.

Mazda is either lying or mistaken ( you pick) again at 238HP, just like they were at 247HP.

That being the case, some of us might just find their 1/4 mile claims to be a bit suspicious as well..

Enough people have tested these in enough ways on dynos and GTechs, that we know the car is making around 220HP at the crank, and around 175 at the wheels.

Maybe the 1/4 mile times are right, and Mazda simply picked ones earlier that are way below what the car would be capable of with the full 247HP?
If they are capable of making a "mistake" inone direction on horspower, I am equally sure they are capable of making a "mistake" on 1/4 mile times too..

Maybe the new readers just joining us deserve the benefit of all the info, and opinions, and maybe some of you just might want to ease up a bit?

Keep thinking that.

Originally posted by rx-7~rx-8
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower


Some of you biga big deal out of it ... IT IS LAME .. its not like you rev your engine to 8,500 everytime and do a clutch drop ..


ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower
ITS ONLY 9 Horsepower

Originally posted by canzoomer

Enough people have tested these in enough ways on dynos and GTechs, that we know the car is making around 220HP at the crank, and around 175 at the wheels.

Once again - how did you calculate 175 whp -> 220 crank hp ??

175 whp -> 200 hp - 205 hp at the crank. Check the miata forum - there are tons of topics about measured crank hp of Miatas with similar power and and more powerful. RX8 is no different than a Miata - and the Miata doesn't have 45 hp drivetrain loss at these hp levels !


One version of why did Mazda announce 238 hp instead of 205 hp? Now imagine if they announced 205 hp and that brand new and expensive RX-8 having less horsepower than the cheaper Mazda6 (220 hp). The marketing folks at Mazda North America wouldn't have liked it ;)

Originally posted by jmanolov
Check the miata forum - there are tons of topics about measured crank hp of Miatas with similar power and and more powerful.

Really? I know of NO threads where someone has dyno'd their car on a Dynojet to get rear wheel HP, and then removed their engine, exhaust, and electronics and mounted them on an engine brake dyno to measure flywheel HP the same way that manufacturers do.

Regards,
Gordon

Originally posted by Gord96BRG


Really? I know of NO threads where someone has dyno'd their car on a Dynojet to get rear wheel HP, and then removed their engine, exhaust, and electronics and mounted them on an engine brake dyno to measure flywheel HP the same way that manufacturers do.

Regards,
Gordon



This is just from a bunch of threads from a quick search:

Gibb:


I don't suppose you have actually measured the drive train loss in a Miata????? It is a constant 25-26 hp from the stock 107 rwhp 1.8 to a 240 rwhp supercharged car and a certain few race motors we've measured.

As of yet, no one has actaully measured a higher or lower loss. Perhaps you would like to do an experiment to support your theory? No, I didn't think so.

Gibb
Team Boig, who actually measures things


nramsey:

FWIW Randy has stated in the past that driveline losses on the Miata have proven to be right around 26 horsepower for all power levels that we ever see (including turbo guys). This was seen by folks who did engine dyno, then chassis dyno on the same engine after install into the car.


Randy Stocker:

The Miata drivetrain east up 26 hp. Well documented (do a search).


A question to Gibb:
So Gibb, are you saying that you guys have actually dynoed the same engine at the crank and with it plugged into a Miata at the rear wheels?

Answer to that question from Randy Stocker:

Both Gibb and I have. There are numberous past threads about it. 26 is the number I got.
Randy


Gibb:

Yep! Three different motors, 1 street car, 1 race car all dynoed on an engine dyno by the guys who do the Riley-Scott engine programs, and then the same motors installed in Miata's run on a dynojet.

25-26 HP loss with the stock drivetrane.

BTW, one was a highboost SC car with 225 ft/lbs of torque.

We'll be doing the same exact thing shortly with a Motec equiped N/A race motor with VERY high output.

Gibb




If you don't believe what Randy or Team Boig post and the statements that they pull out engines and dyno them that's another story ... :)

Gord, I thought all that time you spend at Miataforum.com you are reading instead of sleeping :P I might post something which you'll miss to moderate :P :P

Originally posted by jmanolov


Once again - how did you calculate 175 whp -> 220 crank hp ??

175 whp -> 200 hp - 205 hp at the crank. Check the miata forum - there are tons of topics about measured crank hp of Miatas with similar power and and more powerful. RX8 is no different than a Miata - and the Miata doesn't have 45 hp drivetrain loss at these hp levels !


I TOTALLY agree with you, but I am so sick and tired of the frigging flamesters on these forums chewing my ass for stating the facts.
So, in my reply I was being deliberately optimistic..

I just spent the last year making a 143HP car into a 190HP car ( both measured on a dyno).
The car weighed a bit less than my 8, but not that much.
I KNOW what 190 wheel horsepower feels like, and the 8 is about that, may 10 more..

Originally posted by jmanolov
If you don't believe what Randy or Team Boig post and the statements that they pull out engines and dyno them that's another story ... :)

Dman, I'm batting zero today! :o Sorry, Julian, you're right - I do remember now that Randy and Gibb had done just that. So what if it's not "tons" ;), those two are certainly credible enough for me. My apologies!

Regards,
Gordon

Frankly I have to wonder just how abominably stupid some of you think *everyone* at Mazda must be? I mean let's stop and consider things for a moment...

1) Somewhere there was a screwup with regards to the true HP of the RX-8. This was obviously discovered by several people doing dynos, who have posted quite voluminously on these and other forums.

2) Mazda, aware that there is a problem, goes off and investigates. In short order they release adjusted numbers, and offer compensation to people in response to their error.

Those are the two simple, known facts. Now let's cut all the "Mazda is lying to us, it is a conspiracy" bull for a moment and look at the situation without the typical "I've been wronged" american sense of outrage.

Mazda *must* be aware of the dynos performed by people on their cars, and the numbers these dynos are showing. They would have to be beyond moronic not to. Their engineers understand dynos and engines and hp and torque far better than 99% of people on this forum likely ever will.

So what would Mazda stand to gain from fudging numbers at this point? I mean seriously, you have to understand that this whole "Free service + $500" or the 'buyback' scheme is going to cost Mazda a ton of money either way. I mean if we underestimate the value of the service + 500 and say it is together worth only $1000 to Mazda. Then say that only 1000 owners took advantage of it... that's $1,000,000 right there. Over 9 hp.

So Mazda understands that people can dyno their own cars. They know that people have a basic understanding of drivetrain losses. Hence, they should know, especially now, that if their hp numbers are off, people will figure it out. Particularly if those numbers are off by between 20 and 40 hp (I hear 'estimates' ranging from 207 to 220). So let's see... Mazda offers millions of dollars in losses as a show of good faith over 9 hp. How much would they stand to lose over 20 hp?

So, why would they even think about taking that risk? Maybe because they know something we don't. Maybe because they built the freaking engine and the car. Because they don't need to rely on wild speculation and half-assed guesses from dynos of cars that aren't fully 'broken in' yet.

I am not going to argue that the dynos aren't what they should be. That is obvious. However I will look for more logical reasons than some grand conspiracy theory built around Mazda lying. Maybe there is horsepower that doesn't kick in until the car has driven a certain number of miles. Maybe the car just cannot be dynod properly using conventional methods due to computer control systems. I do know this discussion is becoming overblown and ridiculous. Over the next short while, more information will become available. Dynos on cars with more miles on them. Rotarynews.com communicating with Mazda. When it does come out, hopefully it will spell the end to all the doomsdayers, trolls, and people throwing wild speculation around. Hopefully :P

I have two examples for those that don't see why we think that Mazda is lieing and to those that don't have a problem with the hp being down from advertised.


1) I bought my wifes wedding ring and was told that it was 1 1/2 karats. When we had it appraised about a year later we found out that the total weight was about a half a karat. We asked for the manager of the store that we bought it from and demanded that something be done about it. At first they tried to give same lame excuses that some of you are giving for the 8. Aren't you happy with it? Doesn't it look good? It is the ring that she has been wearing for a year. I didn't take it and they replaced the main stone. We have this one appraised and they tryied to pull the same thing, it was about a 1/4 karat off. We went through the same thing again and it is finally fixed. This is why I have a hard time with believing Mazda on this one.

2) This hasn't happened to me but it is the example that I gave to the manager at the jewelry store.

Let's say you had a house built and were told that it was 3000 sq ft. You live in it for a year and have it appraised because you are going to refinance or buy a new house. After the appraisal you find out that the house has 25% less sq ft (2250sq ft) than what you were told after you moved in. Let's say that you were happy with the house, it's location, you have done lands scaping and the house is "broken in". What would you do. I would be upset because.

I think that both of these situations are very similar to what is happening with the RX-8.

omahawk, there is one reason neither of your examples is a valid comparison: mass production.

Any diamond is unique. No two houses are identical (something is different, be it the land they are on, the interior, etc etc).

Mazda is making thousands and thousands of these cars. As I pointed out above, the small goofup they already made is going to cost them millions of dollars. Over 9 hp. If you think they would then be stupid enough to turn around and lie about a *verifiable* number to thousands of people who all bought pretty much exactly the same thing...

An error like that wouldn't cost Mazda millions of dollars... it could cost them everything. One jeweler ripping you off over a single diamond isn't the same thing as Mazda with a mass-produced car. There is simply no way Mazda could get away with lying about the hp by *that* much and get away with it. They know it. We know it. All that's left is to find out what is going on - be it a break-in period or an inability to dyno accurately... or something else. But lies? Come on.

aussie77,

I uderstand how houses are different, I am in real estate. However when you have a builder that builds tract/manufactured housing and they only have 5-6 house plans in a specified neighborhood, the houses are going to have the same dimensions. What I am talking about with the house has nothing to do with the land, or interior. It has to do with hard numbers(square feet). If you are told one thing and it is on paper it had better be that way or you will be doing more construction to to fix it or you will be paying the customer however much it would cost to add the missing square feet of space. I do feel that Mazda has made an atempt to rectify the situation but do not feel that they are being forthcoming with all of the truth, or gone far enough to fix this, it is just my opinion, you have yours and I respect that. I don't feel that Mazda is lying, but rather they are not telling the whole truth.

I have worked for major corporations whose operation is dicated by the bottom line, cutting losses and denying problems until the very end; and if an admission of an issue happens you downplay it and do not tell all that was wrong. The only time that the whole truth comes out is when enough or the right clients/customers say something en mass.

I understand that some of you are happy with your cars, I bet I would also if I do decide to purchase an 8 but I want an 8 with 247 hp, and the performance to match a car that weighs 3029lbs with 247hp.

So, when you "considered" the '8, did you look at the 247hp figure and go "ooh, that's nice", or did you look at the performance and go "5.9 seconds.. thats quick enough for me!"

I doubt the horsepower really makes a big difference in your desicion without knowing the performance, and *that* hasn't changed.


-andy-

Originally posted by aussie77
Frankly I have to wonder just how abominably stupid some of you think *everyone* at Mazda must be? I mean let's stop and consider things for a moment...

1) Somewhere there was a screwup with regards to the true HP of the RX-8. This was obviously discovered by several people doing dynos, who have posted quite voluminously on these and other forums.

2) Mazda, aware that there is a problem, goes off and investigates. In short order they release adjusted numbers, and offer compensation to people in response to their error.

Mazda *must* be aware of the dynos performed by people on their cars, and the numbers these dynos are showing. They would have to be beyond moronic not to. Their engineers understand dynos and engines and hp and torque far better than 99% of people on this forum likely ever will.

Mazda offers millions of dollars in losses as a show of good faith over 9 hp. How much would they stand to lose over 20 hp?

So, why would they even think about taking that risk? Maybe because they know something we don't. Maybe because they built the freaking engine and the car. Because they don't need to rely on wild speculation and half-assed guesses from dynos of cars that aren't fully 'broken in' yet.......................



Obvously you havn't been here long enough to see the story unfold from the beginning. Your argument is that "Mazda is not dumb enough to make a mistake like this!" - Well, they are so incompetently stupid they can't put a production car on dyno before start selling it, and this is not the first time they got caught lying either. We had this whole arguement BEFORE anyone dynoed their cars, BEFORE Mazda revised the power rating to 247hp(the first time) and BEFORE the car even hit US shore. Maybe you should read up on the Best Moroting video thread in the media section.

$500 compensation for 20+hp is a frigging joke, how much money would people have to spend to reaquire the original 250hp? Now then, if you still buy the 9hp claim and you think $500 compensation is such a big deal for a corporation like Mazda, then good for you~ enjoy the car. :p

" How much would they stand to lose over 20 hp?"
They are losing money, but above that, they are ruining the reputation of the company and insulting faith of rotary enthusiasts. 5 years from now the RX-8 might be retired or replaced, but people will always be talking about the power deficit.

"There is simply no way Mazda could get away with lying about the hp by *that* much and get away with it. They know it. We know it. "

You so sure about that? They did the same thing once, having learned their lesson. $500 and free service can easily put off consumers like yourself, and the false advertisement benefits out-weights the consequences. Their announcement for 9hp reduction and $500 credit card is simply a distraction to hush hush consumers. Hell most people still believe the RX-8 has 250hp if you care to ask around in the US. Their strategy is paying off once again unfortunately. In the end, it is the owners who get screwed over, while the rest of the world still thinks the RX-8 is a 250hp machine. A couple million dollars is pocket change for Mazda for the compesation. Take a business ethics class and talk to some lawyers~ Mazda is not doing anybody a favor, they are just doing what won't get them sued. Hey, big heads at Mazda~ nice going with the time slips, but remember that people will be suing you for ENGINE formance, not 1/4 mile time. They are pretty much saying "hey, the production car is as quick as the preproduction mules" Well. Preproduction cars never had the advertised power either? Does that make it ok to have power deficit in the actual production model?

Why settle for 'only' 9hp deficit or 180whp dynos? Did the Mazda dealership 'settle' for $1000 above invoice for a product they under-delivered? I didn't think so. Why settle or anything other than what was promised? Mazda should fix the issue instead of paying off a few disgruntal first-batch owners with miniscule $$$. How many people here would trade their free maintenance for 205+ whp?

To sum it up, Mazda USA screwed up big time and RX-8 owners are paying for it. The question is much you guys are willing to fight for your rights? Then again, you can always just take the easy way out and say what the heck , it's still a great car, who cares if it's missing power, however much it is.

Exactly.

Now be prepared to be flamed by some morons on this list who simply can;t grasp the concepts..

Or some other idiot posting "It's only 9HP" over and over..

The one risk Mazda runs is that if enough people DO turn the cars back, and the news gets around, people might stop buying them.
Then they get stuck with a bunch of cars sitting around.
It IS September, so interest in buying a "sports car" wanes fast, especially up here in Canada.

As an RX-8 owner that possibility really scares me, as I might get stuck with this car, with a reputation as a lemon, and no resale value.

Well to each his own. I just simply cannot believe Mazda would take a risk of that magnitude over an issue like this. Also the naysayers are conjecturing wildly about things they don't truly understand.

Yes people around here obviously have some understanding of typical dyno plots. No they have no clue about this engine, the control systems and their interaction with the engine during a dyno. Mazda does. They built it from scratch, and I'll have a little faith in them first before I believe any 'sky is falling' poster on these forums who has run a dyno on an 8 with 500 miles on it :)

But as I said, to each his own ;) All I know is the car is plenty fast, handles great and is a joy to drive.

Hehe. People are replying even as I'm writing!

Skyline, I have no intention of settling for " 'only' 9hp deficit or 180whp dynos". My point is, let's get facts and base our opinions on those. If it turns out that the 8 really is missing 40 hp, then I'll be expecting a lot more than $500 and free maintenance. And I have faith that if it IS missing that much hp it will be *proven*.

Right now though there is no proof. There are some dynos, but again we are in the early days of this car. Mazda is aware of the situation, and having reviewed their production U.S vehicles they revised their number by 9 hp. I have a little faith that they knew what they were doing when they did so. Because as I have said, they actually know all the things about this motor and the car that we do not.

Now that doesn't mean that faith alone will sustain me for forever. I fully expect that one of two things will happen in the near future.

1) Cars will break in fully and the missing hp will appear. OR some other technical issue which is easily solved will come to the fore.

2) Mazda will get caught trying to rip us off and will pay the consequences (not to mention pay us more money back).

I believe at this stage that #1 is far more likely than #2. Which it truly turns out to be only time will tell, but I don't think Mazda is able to lie about 40 hp and get away with it. Similarly I can't think that they would believe they could get away with it. Again, time will tell.

Be careful about drawing parallels between Miata and RX8 losses - especially on a Dynojet. The RX-8 has substantially bigger wheels/tires/brakes which means it has to spin up substantially more mass. It wouldn't surprise me to see losses in the 35-40 hp range for RX-8 if you compared engine dyno numbers to chassis dyno numbers.

SC

Originally posted by jmanolov


Once again - how did you calculate 175 whp -> 220 crank hp ??

175 whp -> 200 hp - 205 hp at the crank. Check the miata forum - there are tons of topics about measured crank hp of Miatas with similar power and and more powerful. RX8 is no different than a Miata - and the Miata doesn't have 45 hp drivetrain loss at these hp levels !

Originally posted by ChurchAutoTest
Be careful about drawing parallels between Miata and RX8 losses - especially on a Dynojet. The RX-8 has substantially bigger wheels/tires/brakes which means it has to spin up substantially more mass. It wouldn't surprise me to see losses in the 35-40 hp range for RX-8 if you compared engine dyno numbers to chassis dyno numbers.

SC


We are still quibbling over fine details.

Whether it is 200, 205, or 220, the problem is still that it is NOT 238 or 247.

Once we get an honest 238 from the engine we will know it, and be much happier.
I feel that most of us are not going to be overly concerned over stuff that falls into the +/- 5% range.
In this case, we are seeing a claim of 238HP, while we are probably getting between 200 and 220. That is a range of -9 to -16%

As was mentioned by several people, the issue is Mazda either lying or being idiots about the HP issue.

Most of us would prefer they fix it.

Some are happy as is, but it beats me why they bother posting, let alone reading these threads as it just serves to frustrate them.

Some are turning the cars back to Mazda over this, and that will do Mazda much more damage than the cost of fixing the problem.

Once again Mazda has turned to the sales and legal people to fix an engineering problem.
This is the one factor that I KNOW is blatant stupidity, as they have a track record of failures in legal and sales, but are know to be technically proficient at engineering!

Originally posted by omahawk



Let's say you had a house built and were told that it was 3000 sq ft. You live in it for a year and have it appraised because you are going to refinance or buy a new house. After the appraisal you find out that the house has 25% less sq ft (2250sq ft) than what you were told after you moved in. Let's say that you were happy with the house, it's location, you have done lands scaping and the house is "broken in". What would you do. I would be upset because.

I think that both of these situations are very similar to what is happening with the RX-8.

omahawk

I understand your analogy and know why you feel that way. But your house analogy percentage is overblown, by over 20%, along with the HP controversy. The "new" rated horsepower of the RX-8 was down just 3.6 %. If you are going to give an analogy, compare the same percentage. 3.6% of 3000sq ft. is 2892 sq ft. You lost 108 sq ft., equivalent of a little over a 10 x 10 room. Not as bad sounding as your 750 sq. feet lost. But still missing none-the-less, so that's why you feel cheated.

But here is what is unusual. I think if your house was off by 3.6% you wouldn't be as upset as you are with your car. If you were perfectly happy with your "2892"sq. ft. house with it's perfect location and gorgeous landscaping, you probably wouldn't demand for your contractor to come back and build on a 10x10 addition for his mistake. Although that would be the ethical thing for him to accept to keep your business. Instead, you would probably opt out on a money compensation for his "mistake", from the contractor. Of if you were unhappy with the house, you would definately accept his buyback.

So let's use this car/house comparison if you are keeping the car... If your RX-8 was say, around $31,100 (touring package), the dealer is giving you an cash equivalent of say $500 + free scheduled maintenance of $1250 for a total of $1750. That's 5.63 % of your purchase price. Now if your house was $200,000 and the contractor gave you back $11,260 (5.63%) for his mistake, I think you would be ecstatic, especially if you are happy with your house. If you happened to be as happy with your RX-8, why then feel cheated for being compensated equally for a 3.6% misstated rating?

I think if that was my house and I was "cheated" out of 3.6% of my living space, but was perfectly happy with the house overall, and since it was the best house I ever lived in, then I would accept that type of compensation. We feel equally satisfied with our RX-8, since it is the best car we ever had. That's why I'm keeping it and taking the compensation.

I understand if you feel otherwise, and that's your right.

First- if 'driving feel'meant nothing to the buyer, then 'performance buyers' would always buy the vehicle offering the best acceleration for the money. Is that true?
Second- if you research every new performance oriented vehicle, the first buyers always question the first less than expected dyno results, and then question what they paid.
-the real question is: If you never read any thread about your new vehicle after your purchased it, would you be happier and more satisfied with it now that you actually are? If this is true, then why are you reading this?

RX-8 Zoomster or anyone else, can you tell me how a few oil changes, oil and air filters can add up to 1250$ USD????

So for us Canucks, that a value of 1726.28$ Cnd... but that's for 4 years and since we only have a 3 years warranty, that's 1294,71$ Cnd or 937.57 USD... no way!

Originally posted by RX-8 Zoomster


omahawk

I understand your analogy and know why you feel that way. But your house analogy percentage is overblown, by over 20%, along with the HP controversy. The "new" rated horsepower of the RX-8 was down just 3.6 %. If you are going to give an analogy, compare the same percentage. 3.6% of 3000sq ft. is 2892 sq ft. You lost 108 sq ft., equivalent of a little over a 10 x 10 room. Not as bad sounding as your 750 sq. feet lost. But still missing none-the-less, so that's why you feel cheated.

But here is what is unusual. I think if your house was off by 3.6% you wouldn't be as upset as you are with your car. If you were perfectly happy with your "2892"sq. ft. house with it's perfect location and gorgeous landscaping, you probably wouldn't demand for your contractor to come back and build on a 10x10 addition for his mistake. Although that would be the ethical thing for him to accept to keep your business. Instead, you would probably opt out on a money compensation for his "mistake", from the contractor. Of if you were unhappy with the house, you would definately accept his buyback.

So let's use this car/house comparison if you are keeping the car... If your RX-8 was say, around $31,100 (touring package), the dealer is giving you an cash equivalent of say $500 + free scheduled maintenance of $1250 for a total of $1750. That's 5.63 % of your purchase price. Now if your house was $200,000 and the contractor gave you back $11,260 (5.63%) for his mistake, I think you would be ecstatic, especially if you are happy with your house. If you happened to be as happy with your RX-8, why then feel cheated for being compensated equally for a 3.6% misstated rating?

I think if that was my house and I was "cheated" out of 3.6% of my living space, but was perfectly happy with the house overall, and since it was the best house I ever lived in, then I would accept that type of compensation. We feel equally satisfied with our RX-8, since it is the best car we ever had. That's why I'm keeping it and taking the compensation.

I understand if you feel otherwise, and that's your right.

That is fine that you are happy with your car. I do not feel that I have overblown the numbers in any way. With all of the data to date on the dynos I don't believe that it is even making 238hp.

Also If you are compensated by the builder and do not have him add on the missing sq ft you are not given the percentage difference based on the price paid for the hous, rather you are compensated by how much it would cost to bring the house up to the advertised number. You can't tell me that you are going to be able to get all of the missing hp back with $500. I think that we may have to agree to disagree on this one.

I really hope that Mazda comes up with a resolution soon or gives more information on why the car dynos so low because I would still enjoy having this car. I know I just restated a bajillion other posts with that statement. I am not trying to attack anyone personally I just want answers other than what I have received personally from Mazda, "Go drive the car and you may be suprised." I have driven the car, a test drive and one with over 2500 miles on it. They both performed the same.

I don't understand this obsession with dyno'ing cars. You buy a car for how it drives, how it feels etc. If you had a test drive and were happy, and bought the car then what's the problem.

You have exactly the same spec car that you tested.

Now, if you had tested a different spec from what was delivered that would be different.

Forget the immature "my cars got xx hp more than yours" brigade and enjoy the car.

And what's with all this drag strip stuff?? Who can go fastest in a straight line, how interesting...(yawn)


Us poor brits still have a 2+ month wait:(

Originally posted by hairyfrog
I don't understand this obsession with dyno'ing cars. You buy a car for how it drives, how it feels etc. If you had a test drive and were happy, and bought the car then what's the problem.

You have exactly the same spec car that you tested.

Now, if you had tested a different spec from what was delivered that would be different.

Forget the immature "my cars got xx hp more than yours" brigade and enjoy the car.

And what's with all this drag strip stuff?? Who can go fastest in a straight line, how interesting...(yawn)


Us poor brits still have a 2+ month wait:(

This is a quote from another forum that sums this up well.

I went to Wendy's the other day and ordered a Double Bacon Mushroom Melt. As we all know, the Bacon Mushroom Melt comes with three strips of bacon two beef patties. All the commercials say this. You know what happened? Mine only came with TWO strips of bacon and 1 1/2 patties! Sure, It still tasted good with two strips of bacon and I was still filled up, but I still wonder what it would have been like with 3 strips of bacon and both patties.

Why sit over the computer and debate the 1/4 mile time. Get your @ss to the track and see what she puts out w/ you driving it.

The entire constant 26 hp loss from the Miata drivetrain purported is a complete fallacy. I'll give you a brief answer as to why. I've discussed it with those claiming it, and as of yet they have produced no dyno charts, no data tables, no pictures, but cling dearly to their sacred cow. I can jack up my Miata and turn the drivetrain by hand. I am not capable of producing 26 hp with one wrist while sipping a soda with the other hand. So that proves that power loss varies with rotational speed! Then the supporters of the 26 hp constant loss claim that this loss is the same for a naturally aspirated, supercharged or turbocharged engine at peak hp. There is no way in heck that a Miata that is N/A one that is supercharged and one that is turbocharged will have peak hp at exactly the same rpm! (remember we already know power loss varies with rpm). So there is no way it could be a constant 26 hp for those 3 scenarios.

Then you have to add in the time factor of power. Take a simple two gear system immersed in oil. Turn the gears with an electric motor with a rheostat. The oil gets heat added to it from the power lost due to friction. Now turn up the rheostat increasing power to the motor. The gears spin faster, the oil gets even warmer as more power is consumed and more power is lost! Wow! What a revelation! Not. Any engineer or scientist worth talking to can tell you this. If you want to do something faster it takes more power, period. If you want to accelerate the drivetrain of a Miata, RX-8, Skyline, or Chevy faster it will always consume more power! Higher hp cars always have higher drivetrain losses. It's the very reason it takes 8000 hp to run 4s in the 1/4 mile and 200 hp can run 14s. Do you see a linear or exponential relationship there? It's exponential as related to power. It's actually cubic! As power increases, power lost to friction, intertia and everything else screams upward too in a cubic manner.

That is why some use a percentage. For a quick and dirty calculation, it is as close as you can get. The real math is far to complex. Let's just be absolutely sure it is never a constant number.

That said, no one has ever actually removed an RX-8 engine and tested it to SAE standards except Mazda to date. The fact that they missed the number is sad. Mazda knows owners won't do it so they feel very safe with their current number. To do it according to the actual standards would require all of the engine wiring, factory ECU, complete factory fuel system, complete factory exhaust system all the way to the tip, complete air inlet system as used on the car, and all of the accessories on the engine in operation as sold in the car. No owner would do that to a new car, and Mazda knows it.

Add to all this that the DynoJet itself is a very suspect insturment for measuring power. One DynoJet is a useful repeatable tool for measuring improvements in one car. It isn't a very good tool for calculating actual hp though.

I still say using the best guestimates of the DynoJet, the only real timeslip I've seen and the information here, 238 hp is probably a bit optimistic as well. The car runs a lot more like a 220 hp car from everything that I can tell from the statistical information available. Of course there is only one correct way to do the actual test according to the standard, and I know only Mazda has done it..... They know it too. I'd love to see those dyno plots!

And remember anyone telling you that power lost in a drivetrain is constant is feeding you a constant line of bull. A Miata consumes less than 26 hp driving down the highway at speed. A Miata also only makes 26 hp above about 2500 rpm, and I know for a fact I can drive my car all they way to about 55 mph without breaking 2500 rpm. It sure would be slow getting there though.

Constant drivetrain loss is about as constant as the Earth's position in the universe, the Moon's position relative to the Earth, or as constant as the weather.

Some people once thought the Earth was flat too. They swore to it ad nauseum. They also though the Earth was the center of the universe and the largest thing in the universe too. It didn't make it anymore true.

Originally posted by aussie77
I am not going to argue that the dynos aren't what they should be. That is obvious. However I will look for more logical reasons than some grand conspiracy theory built around Mazda lying. Maybe there is horsepower that doesn't kick in until the car has driven a certain number of miles. Maybe the car just cannot be dynod properly using conventional methods due to computer control systems. I do know this discussion is becoming overblown and ridiculous. Over the next short while, more information will become available. Dynos on cars with more miles on them. Rotarynews.com communicating with Mazda. When it does come out, hopefully it will spell the end to all the doomsdayers, trolls, and people throwing wild speculation around. Hopefully :P

Have you ever even been to a dyno? While there are several major players in the space, Mustang, DynoJet, etc. that measure HP and TRQ (and show discrepencies on the same car as far as measured output), one constant remains the same. A rear-wheel dyno requires a power source connected to a delivery system (drivetrain, wheels) that spins the dyno drum to measure power output. Regardless of the car, a V8 Cobra, a straight-six M3 or a rotary RX-8, NO ONE is going to make excuses for the car at the speed shop about why it's not putting down power.

I've been to two "dyno days" this year at the same speed shop as well as once by myself. As such, I've watched dozens and dozens of cars go on the dyno, everything from base-model Civics to 500+ HP Vipers. The dyno doesn't make mistakes. You either put down the expected power or you do not. There's nothing magical about the RX-8 that precludes it from being properly tested. If the rotary engine was so special, then why aren't RX-7 owners here in droves backing up your hypothesis?

Furthermore, your rotational mass losses at the wheels should theoretically be even smaller with the CF driveshaft. A real CF driveshaft no less, unlike the steel, "CF reinforced" driveshaft that came on my car.

droidekaus thanks for taking the time to reply. It would have been nice if you'd actually read my comments that you are attacking, however.

Nowhere have I claimed there is something magical about a rotary engine that makes it not work properly on dynos. Hence, even if the RX-7 and the RX-8 were the same car, which they are not, I fail to see any validity to your comments about RX-7 owners come out of the woodworks to support the RX-8 dynos.

The thing I *did* mention is computer control systems. The average vehicle on the road today has far more computer power controlling its engine than NASA's first lunar module had at its disposal when making the original moon landing. I can take two identical engines, slap different control systems on them and they will behave in very different ways.

Given that in addition to the 'simple' engine controls, there are also traction and stability control systems, tire pressure control systems, and a myriad of other computer systems hiding around the car, I don't think any of us are perfectly capable of saying with certainty just what is going on. One thing we DO know however is that the computer systems are capable of putting tighter control boundaries on engines during their break-in periods.

Hence, my hypothesis is that this engine will not put out full power at the wheels until certain engine conditions are met. Those conditions could be a combination of things, such as a minimum number of miles on the car, all 4 wheels turning together like they are supposed to... who truly knows?

I'm really really happy for you that you've been to two dyno testing days. Go buy yourself a cookie. But next time take a moment and actually read something before you try to attack it.

Originally posted by aussie77
droidekaus thanks for taking the time to reply. It would have been nice if you'd actually read my comments that you are attacking, however.

Nowhere have I claimed there is something magical about a rotary engine that makes it not work properly on dynos. Hence, even if the RX-7 and the RX-8 were the same car, which they are not, I fail to see any validity to your comments about RX-7 owners come out of the woodworks to support the RX-8 dynos.

The thing I *did* mention is computer control systems. The average vehicle on the road today has far more computer power controlling its engine than NASA's first lunar module had at its disposal when making the original moon landing. I can take two identical engines, slap different control systems on them and they will behave in very different ways.

Given that in addition to the 'simple' engine controls, there are also traction and stability control systems, tire pressure control systems, and a myriad of other computer systems hiding around the car, I don't think any of us are perfectly capable of saying with certainty just what is going on. One thing we DO know however is that the computer systems are capable of putting tighter control boundaries on engines during their break-in periods.

Hence, my hypothesis is that this engine will not put out full power at the wheels until certain engine conditions are met. Those conditions could be a combination of things, such as a minimum number of miles on the car, all 4 wheels turning together like they are supposed to... who truly knows?

I'm really really happy for you that you've been to two dyno testing days. Go buy yourself a cookie. But next time take a moment and actually read something before you try to attack it.

A majority of new cars have the various control systems that you mentioned. How come there's not another car on the planet that seems to suffer like the RX-8 because of some computer glitch or failsafe?

You want to investigate something that might have some validity? My understanding is that there is an actuator that opens the exhaust port on the RX-8. The Acura CL-S has a similar actuator that controls the two-stage intake on the J32 engine. When that actuator fails, the CL-S loses 35 HP right off the top. I say look into that as a cause of the missing HP above and beyond what the ECU re-flash cost in HP.

My point about the dyno days was pretty straightforward. When you've seen a ton of pulls, you gather an understanding of what the plots are actually illustrating and you're less likely to come up with ECU conspiracy theories. In fact, your rebuttal indicates that no, you have never even seen a car dyno'd.

Again you seem to miss the entire point. A dyno simply shows what an engine is outputting. What an engine is outputting is controlled by computers. The right ECU setup could make a 911 GT2 show up with 110 hp on a perfectly good and correct dyno run. But the dyno does NOT tell the full tale. It doesn't analyze the computer systems, or know if in-fact the systems are allowing the engine to run full-throttle.

Yes every car these days has such systems. Again if you took the damn time to read you might have noticed when I said:

The average vehicle on the road today has far more computer power controlling its engine than NASA's first lunar module had at its disposal when making the original moon landing.

However, each system is at least somewhat unique, and given that this is a completely new engine and none of us helped to build it, I don't think any of us can accurately claim to know how the control systems in the RX-8 are set up. And whether or not they ARE limiting the power the engine is putting out, and in what way. So AGAIN, why don't you try reading and understanding before mouthing off. I know it makes you feel all big and manly to be able to 'correct' someone in public, but it is generally good form to know what the hell it is you are correcting. Otherwise you just look stupid.

Sure the computer systems are more complex today. Fine, you can still by palm sized computers with more computing power than your average car.

All of that aside, BMW, Mercedes, GM (Cadillac and Corvette), Lexus, Audi, Porsche, and many others have brought computer systems to automobiles that were every bit as complex or more complex than what Mazda uses in the RX-8. Mazda didn't actually invent any of the controls they copied them and used them in a new application. That doesn't bother me at all.

What I find disturbing is that people are still clinging to the computer does something funny on the dyno theory like its a sacred cow. Name one other car that has this problem! One! And prove it!

If this were the case, how in the heck was Mazda able to dyno the engine on per the SAE requirment without the engine in a car, all 4 wheels turning, and using the engine computer controls per the standard? I'll tell you how. The traction control and yaw control computers aren't a factor in the power output.

Frankly I don't think that the computer is wigging out during a dyno test either. I do suspect that it is a mileage/break-in issue. You take a look at the dyno thread in the tech section, and see results from the same car on the same dyno. Decent sized improvement in slightly cooler weather and with more miles on the car.

When it comes to dynoing it, Mazda I am sure knows how to get the right numbers - be it dynoing a car with the correct miles on it, or perhaps by simply over-riding the ECU settings to pretend break-in is fully over.

Is this necessarily the case? I don't know. Time will tell, but it is a possibility, and not one I'm going to discount just because some people are obsessed with the idea that Mazda is screwing them over.

Originally posted by aussie77
Again you seem to miss the entire point. A dyno simply shows what an engine is outputting. What an engine is outputting is controlled by computers. The right ECU setup could make a 911 GT2 show up with 110 hp on a perfectly good and correct dyno run. But the dyno does NOT tell the full tale. It doesn't analyze the computer systems, or know if in-fact the systems are allowing the engine to run full-throttle.

Yes every car these days has such systems. Again if you took the damn time to read you might have noticed when I said:

However, each system is at least somewhat unique, and given that this is a completely new engine and none of us helped to build it, I don't think any of us can accurately claim to know how the control systems in the RX-8 are set up. And whether or not they ARE limiting the power the engine is putting out, and in what way. So AGAIN, why don't you try reading and understanding before mouthing off. I know it makes you feel all big and manly to be able to 'correct' someone in public, but it is generally good form to know what the hell it is you are correcting. Otherwise you just look stupid.

You know what? You should remain with your head tucked into the sand like that, OBLIVIOUS to the FACTS that have been presented time and time again via member dynos. You're exactly who Mazda wants as a customer. Always thirsting for more Mazda Kool-Aid.

Tell me, exactly what happens in de-tuning the GT2 ECU? What is the action taken?

My head isn't in any sand. The simple truth is, I am willing to wait for some facts before pulling out the tar and feathers and going after Mazda. A little patience never hurt anyone, and that's the simple truth. I find it funny the zeal with which some people, such as yourself, viciously defend your accusations against something about which you still have only *very* limited information. Plain and simple. My head may be stuck in the sand, but yours is stuck up your own ass.

droidekaus:

The big mistake I made was thinking we were having some sort of a mature discussion in which ideas would be bounced around for the purpose of finding the truth.

Then I happened to notice your sig. The fact you own a 350z, not an RX-8, combined with your continued belligerance and willingness to completely ignore the meaning of my words in favor of whatever you can find that might be used as ammunition in a childish argument leads me to realize something.

I stopped and thought for a moment, and wondered what kind of a person goes to the forum of a car they don't even own and have no intention of buying, just to blindly and aggressively belittle both the car and its owners... and everything became clear. So, here is what you are looking for, droidekaus:

Your car is faster than mine.
Your car has more hp than mine.
Your vehicle is clearly superior.
In fact, you may even have a bigger penis that can propel urine for greater distances.

Happy now?

Originally posted by aussie77
droidekaus:

The big mistake I made was thinking we were having some sort of a mature discussion in which ideas would be bounced around for the purpose of finding the truth.

Then I happened to notice your sig. The fact you own a 350z, not an RX-8, combined with your continued belligerance and willingness to completely ignore the meaning of my words in favor of whatever you can find that might be used as ammunition in a childish argument leads me to realize something.

I stopped and thought for a moment, and wondered what kind of a person goes to the forum of a car they don't even own and have no intention of buying, just to blindly and aggressively belittle both the car and its owners... and everything became clear. So, here is what you are looking for, droidekaus:

Your car is faster than mine.
Your car has more hp than mine.
Your vehicle is clearly superior.
In fact, you may even have a bigger penis that can propel urine for greater distances.

Happy now?

I could give a shit about any of this. I feel sorry for RX-8 owners who ordered, waited and paid MSRP for their cars. I feel EXTREMELY sorry for a co-worker who I convinced to give the RX-8 a shot many months back based on my feelings that it was a cool looking car and 250HP was particularly exciting for a 1.3L engine. He's doing the buyback now.

Again, I ask you to answer this question. Tell me, exactly what happens in de-tuning the GT2 ECU? What is the action taken?

Originally posted by droidekaus


I could give a shit about any of this. I feel sorry for RX-8 owners who ordered, waited and paid MSRP for their cars. I feel EXTREMELY sorry for a co-worker who I convinced to give the RX-8 a shot many months back based on my feelings that it was a cool looking car and 250HP was particularly exciting for a 1.3L engine. He's doing the buyback now.

Again, I ask you to answer this question. Tell me, exactly what happens in de-tuning the GT2 ECU? What is the action taken?

I'm an RX-8 owner who:
Ordered my car in January
Waited until July
Paid MSRP

I can assure you that your sorrow for me is misplaced. I love this car and have no regrets. Go cry someplace else. Oh, and judging from the looks I get from other 350Z owners, maybe you should feel sorry for them. They look so sad...

That's enough already.

---jps