Does anyone have any idea, whether the RX-8 comes with a spare wheel??? I think I've seen some other country, where spare wheel is an option.:D

 

I just had a look at the features list for the aussie spec car and it is supposed to come with a spare wheel, puncture repair kit and compressor!

Infact, I was just reading another thread and one of the guys mentioned that delivery of his rx8 was being held up as Mazda had run out of spare wheels!

 

Yes - a compact spare that eats up half the boot and blocks the little port between the back seats.

 

I took mine out straight away and only install it for interstate trips, where the chances of a flat are higher and the probability of finding 225/40/18 Potenza's at the local servo are not so crash hot.

 

The spare wheel is fitted by Mazda Australia to be "more compliant" It can be retrofitted by your dealer at what I assume would be no charge as it is a psudo factory standard, for Aussie cares at least. But boy does it chew up the boot. And a decent subwoofer to the boot and it might leave you with enough space for a six pack or a carton of condoms for L & L.

 

ROFLMAO!!!!

 

The "space saver" spare tyre (one of those runty half sized jobs) sure does take up some room! It also cleverly blocks off the boot light.

It's quite a good sized boot without the spare.

We get both the wheel and the goo repair kit. Be warned however that using the repair kit is a one shot get-you-home solution and, according to the manual, the tyre cannot then be conventionally repaired and re-used afterwards. I.e. the goo kit takes less room but could cost you the price of a new tyre if you used it!

Clearly we need an official Hymee Bull Bar Kit with the spare tyre mounted on the front....

 

That's rubbish. I've used Goo and have had the tyre later repaired. In fact I've had goo in the tyre for up to one month before repairing without any serious issues.

 

Am not sure that I would really want to re-use the punctured tyre even after repair on any high performance vehicle, and suggest others think carefully about it as well.

Presumably, we all spent good money on the 8 for reasons of performance. It is thus a false (and possibly dangerous) economy not to replace the damaged tyre.

Sh*t, I sound a pious bastard! That was my father writing that

 

I had the space saver... when I move from my apartment to a house then I will put it in the Garage...

DO you guy think the bar that left behind can act as a anti roll bar - it is quite strong and it is install in the same position as the intended MazdaSpeed spot - I saw them install it.

 

I think it's just a big lump of metal - I'd be interested if there's proof otherwise...

 

Would it be nice if it worked.... MazdaSpeed does have a rear antiroll bar that is mounted to the exact position!

 

Don't you mean brace? I.e. to stiffen the rear
suspensions turrets? Like the strut brace on the front end.

I suppose if the chassis/suspension is stiffened, the car is less prone to roll over

Cheers,
Hymee.

 

Stiffening of the chassis/suspension won't affect roll over. Centre of gravity is the key factor with roll over. Stiffening will allow better cornering as there is less body flex allowing a greater degree of tyre contact on the road.

 

Well, rubbish or not rubbish, it's what Mazda recommend and they took the trouble to say so more than once in the manual. Presumably they had some reason for this. With some parts you might suspect that they are trying to promote the sale of Mazda spares - but this would not seem to be the case with tyres.

Just because you had no trouble doesn't mean that it's always a trouble free procedure.

I suspect that, as with most things in life, it's not a black and white situation but a percentage game. Mazda are quite clearly suggesting that it's not a good idea to re-use those tyres. Like you, I don't have a clear idea why, and my thinking would have been along the same lines as yours had I not read the manual. But perhaps Mazda does have a reason, and knows more about the situation than we do?

Do you have any reason to believe why they might have ulterior motives for giving this advice unnecessarily?

 

BVD, I personally did not repair the tyre but the tyre shop I use did. I run high performance cars and also race cars as well. I get all my tyres from the same place, they know me and they know what I'm like. If there was any concerns as to the safety issues regarding repair I can assure you that the tyre shop would not do the repair. They have a good reputation amongst the owners of high performance and race cars which I don't think they would want to jeapordise.

Maybe their motive may be to avoid litigation??? There are disclaimers in all things these days.

 

AMG,

I expect you're right - they wish to avoid litigation. However, litigation only occurs when there is a problem - nobody sues if nothing goes wrong. I'm interested to know what Mazda thinks might go wrong, and why they think that.

Many years ago (in the 1960s) I worked my way through college (Motor Engineering) by working in a tyre repair shop. At the time the plug system of repairs was fairly new and there was a fair bit of huffing and puffing from various quarters about safety, warranties, speed restrictions, etc, even talk of banning. But the system proved itself over time and despite some failures and problems the repair industry seemed to work out when and how it was safe and reasonable to use the method.

In that case, despite the technology eventually gaining acceptance , there were a few problems and failures along the way. Perhaps the situation is similar, basically OK, but some possible problems if.... if what though??

I've no idea what could go wrong with re-using a gooed tyre, but if I'm faced with the choice of using a spare (which is supplied in Australia) or taking some sort of punt on a goo repair, then I know which one I'll choose. (At least until I knew what sort of odds I was punting on and why).

Quite apart from the possible expense of a new tyre, I would prefer not to run one new tyre and 3 part worn ones, so I'll always go for having the best chance of getting a clean and uncontroversial repair on the original tyre.

I'd still like to know why Mazda are being fussy though. There's been some discussion about this on the tyre section of the forum, but I've not yet seen anybody quote any expert factual information one way or the other.

 

Its called "Covering your ****"..........:D

 

Yep.. covering yr **** is all tis. Remember the firestone litigation in the states a few years ago? Ford could have avoided the whole problem if they had "covered their ****" just like mazda have done.

 

That's a very good point about the Ford/Firestone business. I imagine it made all the other manufacturers pretty nervous too.

Mazda have very little chance of any control over third party stuff like tyres - one item that is nearly always done by non-dealer shops.

I might have expected to see a general disclaimer about the risks of any kind of tyre repair on 'high performance' vehicles, but I guess that the big difference here is that Mazda have actually supplied the goo, so have a clearer position to cover.

I probably still won't favour the goo, but I will take AMGs line and simply ask the place that I usually get my tyres from. If they say they're confident that a good strong safe job is not a problem, then that should be good enough.