Better engine for RX-8: Renesis or 2.3 Turbo?
 

Say you could go the process of buying your RX-8 all over again. Only this time, side by side in the showroom there is the Renesis-powered RX-8 we all know and love, and next to it there was the exact same car, only with the 2.3 Turbo engine from the MS6. We'll call this one the "MX-8." Also, assume that both cars cost the same price, it's just matter of whether you want the Renesis or the 2.3 Turbo.

So which one would you choose? Please, I'm not trying to start a flamewar or bash either engine, I'm just curious to see what people would choose.

i would still choose the rotary i have come to love it.

I'd hate to say it, but probably the MX-8. Better power and gas mileage, and we were all n00bs when it came to rotaries before we bought the car. But if Mazda realistically did that, it wouldn't make sense for them to make the RX-8.

I wanted an s2k when I was car shopping, but went with the RX-8 for the four seats. The better exterior/interior was a plus, and the rotary experience has been fun.

Weight distribution isn't really the 'key'. Anyone know the weight of the 2.3 compared to the Renesis, though?


Can't wait to lose this Ford Focus rental and get my 8's rear bumper fixed from the shop...it's torture.

umm... i would go for the s2k or Z. i like our engine. might have not gotten the car if it wasn't an RX.

It wouldn't be an RX-8 without the R part

the rotary was one of the selling points for me

Right, which is why I pointed out that the 2.3 Turbo version would be called the MX-8.

Also, recall that in the 1970's many Mazda vehicles were available in both piston and rotary versions, such as the Capella/RX-2, Familia/RX-3, and Luce/RX-4.

this thread has been done numerous times

Really? There has already been a poll comparing the Renesis and 2.3T? If so, please post a link, I did not find a poll like this while searching.

Who said the 2.3 has "modability"?

I voted for the rotary. Give me the same pressure ratio with the Renesis as what the MZR has and it's not even a contest as to which is more powerful. The Renesis is the better engine as far as I'm concerned.

what would the RX series be without the rotary engine thats what makes the car unique. i mean seeing a FD3S with 365-385 rwhp eat up a 600+ awhp BNR34 Skyline in a touge battle dont tell me thats not impressive

I would pick the turbo 4, especially if the car remains rear wheel drive.

I have been driving piston engined cars all my life. I'm sick of it. My RX-8 has finally gotten me off the pogo stick.

Ken

i think i would like the rx8 already turbo/supercharge and call it (T RX-8). F--- the rest i'll pay the extra 5,000 or so is only $100 a month

O rly?


And that's the thing anyway, you don't have it.

Not from the factory I don't. For my cares and concerns, I'm thinking strictly in terms of potential. There's a reason 9psi GReddy turbos are running 290whp. Give the MZR 9psi and tune it all you want and I don't think it will hit 230whp since it is a 160bhp engine NA.

Yeah, I'll take a well-tuned Greddy turboed Renesis as well. But the OP mentioned that you're in the show room, trying to decide between stock and stock. Different perspectives.

Absolutely. :)

If I wanted instant gratification I would have purchased an EVO.

even after two engine replacements I still say the Renesis. If it isn't a rotary it isn't an RX

My reponse to an earlier post, it bears repeating:

Right, which is why I pointed out that the 2.3 Turbo version would be called the MX-8.

Also, recall that in the 1970's many Mazda vehicles were available in both piston and rotary versions, such as the Capella/RX-2, Familia/RX-3, and Luce/RX-4.

So since there is actually precedent of Mazda having both piston and rotary available in the same vehicle, I was simply wondering what it would be like if they did that with the RX-8/MX-8 as well.

It wasn't the engine that got me to buy the car, it was the car. I would take the turbo 4, if they moved the tranny back to keep the balance. If they can maintain the handling the 4 is a better choice.

Yes, I know the blasphamy, but there really is no need for a rotary in todays world. The benefits was alway light weight for balance but there are plenty of piston cars out there that have just as good and some better handling then the 8.

Also 3 moving parts was suppose to show how simple and non-problematic the engine is, but we all know better on that one.There are more powerful engines getting better gas milage and more torque.

I don't see any benefit to a rotary other then a 9K rev, and some pistons are getting real close to that too. Who wouldn't want a MX5 with the 2.3 turbo? or even better an MX8 with the 2.3turbo?

I just don't see a benefit for the rotary...

lets see... i think i'd take the one that comes with 40 more hp stock, better fuel mileage, far better bang for your buck modibility, and the engine that does not require you to drive around the neighborhood just to wash the car

An MX-8 sounds like a good idea to me. But I think it will handily outsell the RX-8.

An 8 without a rotary would be like a Dirty Harry movie without Clint Eastwood. No rotary? No 8 for me.

I bought my RX8 SPECIFICALLY for the "R".

Every since I saw one disassembled in a local shop and learned how they work I knew I had to own a rotary. I really didn't care what vehicle it came in, but I thank the stars it was in the sexy new 8's.

I've had enough of boingers for a while. After rebuilding the cylinder head of my Talon... twice... I'll give them a rest for a while.

Chris...

While I don't exactly meet the specifications of "doing it all over again" as I don't own an 8 currently, my opinion right now would be that I'd rather have the 4 banger turbo. I definitely lean towards the "more power" crowd so whatever gets me more power while maintaining the pimp styling of the 8 is all I really want.

the "what if the RX-8 had engine 'x' instead of a rotary, would you still buy it? blahblahblah" thread has been done alot. just because you chose a different 'x' doesnt make the thread any different

I love the car, the handling, the smoothness of the engine and the sound it makes (especially at 9k RPMs)....I would LOVE more power, but if it cant be made more powerfull, then so be it.
However, if they are going to take the soul out of this car, there could be no way anything less than a powerful 6 cyl. should ever be held in this car (while still retaining its agility).



IMO, this car is nice....but to make it awesome (and to be a great competitor and sell like a stang) we need more power and better MPG (even by a little bit) and it needs to keep it's agility and unique engine with all of it's RPMs.


So keep this engine and keep that 2.3 out of the 8.

Are you even allowed to say that with your username being what it is?

I don't think the mustang is a competitor to the rx-8, and I don't think the RX-8 needs to, or should sell like it.

My point was that there doesn't seem to be any *polls* like this (keyword here is poll).

People don't have to go through the trouble of trying to make an argument or worry about getting flamed to just vote in a poll, so IMO it is different enough. Plus I was curious to see what percentage of people would vote each way.

(The thing that really troubles me though, is how a longtime member and RX-8 owner gets harassed by the mods for starting a legitimate poll, while the trolls that come here for the sole purpose of bashing the RX-8 and other Mazdas seem to be A-OK)

Not sure if it's a competitor...doesnt matter. Im sure Mazda would love to sell a ton of 8s, hell, most of us would. More 8s, more people who would like to mod, more possibilities for our car. Hell, maybe they may even start to consider our opinions in surverys. Selling more 8s would be benefitial for all.

i personally really when towards this car because of the rotary engine, but the idea of better milage and more power do sound enticing

rotary engine all the way.

I choose not to be a fanboy -shrug-

MX-8 all the way test driving both cars you know the MX-8 would have been impressive with the DIZI engine...all the handling plus power to boot. Im an auto enthusiast im not pining for the rotary, its an engine happenned to be mated to a fun car. But if a turbo 4 was available in this package i think i'd have been even more enticed.


All the bla bla about the 2.3L only being a 160hp in natural form...so what...it seems to be able to handle the 280hp, and with more boost prolly will get you to 300whp easily.

A lot of people in this thread are missing the point.

a lot of people in this thread have way to hard a hard on for the rotary engine.

you are comparing a 2.3 to a 1.3 stock and say that it has more power and more torque blah blah blah, but add a litle more size to our beautiful rotary renesis engine and make it a 2.3 how much more power and torque will we have now that the 8 is not the underdog. i think our car those very well in power for the liters it is powerd by

ls1 swap ;)

not to mention the 3mpg you'd get...regardless the rotary while rated as 1.3 is in actuality a 2.6 or 3.9 based on how you want to define displacement.

Not to hijack, but for all the people that said they went towards this car because of the rotary engine would you have bought a Honda Accord if it was the only rotary powered car on the market? What about if there were an sedan (like an Evo) as the only rotary powered car on the market?

My point is that most people go for the 8 because of its looks and handling capabilities. The rotary is a just a side-benefit that certainly gives the car a unique feel, but wouldn't be enough on its own. If it were then every complaint about Evo's or 350Z's would be "it doesn't have a rotary" as opposed to what you really hear which is "they're ugly" or "they're not unique enough".

The turbo 2.3L with 280hp exists and comes with a warranty... the 2.3L rotary does not exist

advantage : the engine that is real

The RX8 selling like the Mustang is a double-edged sword. On one hand you would have a lot more options for power adders and those mods would be far less expensive. This is basic economics.....the ROI increases as the # of applications increases. Higher ROI brings more companies into the market. Those high Mustang sales are the reason why they're 10 different FI kits ready to go the first week of Mustang production. The flip-side is the RX8 would no longer be unique and mysterious....which is a big reason for MY choosing it in the first place.

I think most here would agree that even though the "R" in RX8 stands for 'rotary engine'.....most people don't know or care about that. A turbo 4-cyl would out sell the rotary version 5-to-1 based solely on power and fuel economy. Remember, this forum is what.....maybe 3% of the RX8 owners.....our opinion means very little. The majority are like the people that bought my car.....it's cute, the seats are comfortable and they loved the color.

That's a lot of speculation. Is there aftermarket PCM management for the 2.3L? How much will engine tuning/development vary and be slowed just because this is a direct injection engine? Even at SEMA there was no one tuning the Mazdaspeed6, except for Mazdaspeed. Maybe if the engine continues to appear in all of Mazda's line-up consistantly it will attract more tuner attention. Put it in the Miata and I bet it explodes. But last I checked there is virtually zero aftermarket support.

It would be a rx8. if i wanted a piston car i would of gone with the STI or Z.

Put in a 4G63

it amazes me that i point out that a thread topic has been done before and then i get told it hasnt when it has and that someone thinks this is somehow different because it has a poll. im also amazed that its apparently harrassment for me to point it out and answer a rebuttal to my point. i wouldnt care if you were new or had been here longer than me. notice i didnt close your thread? im not stoping you from having it. but to me PERSONALLY it is uber redundant.

it also amzes me that people post "some members have to much of a"hard on" for the rotary" when they are on a rotary forum. and no one on ever says that about people who like to throw out things like "4g63" because they think they sound cool

I sense a lot of people here don't understand that if you were to replace the Renesis with a heavier, higher, more forward sitting piston engine, the RX-8 just wouldn't feel like an 8 anymore. And it's precisely that "feel" that every auto journalist seems to respond so favorably to. Read the reviews. The thing that keeps coming through—review after review—is the unique "feel" of the car—something which can't be measured and is not quantifiable. The 8 is all about smoothness, lightness, and agility. This "quality"—subtle, but distinct—makes the car stand out from all others. Perhaps Evo put it best:

"But if you believe that the best drivers' cars are not necessarily the quickest, but those that blend dynamics and performance so seamlessly and cohesively that the driving experience is a powerful singularity rather than a collection of dazzling party tricks, the RX-8 hits the sweet spot with uncanny accuracy."

It's hard to believe that someone who loves the 8—who really "gets it"—would want a Mustang or a Pontiac. If that's you, you simply bought the wrong car. An RX-8 with a piston engine is not an 8 anymore—and not just because the engine is no longer a rotary. Changing the engine changes not just the engine—it would change the very essence—the "personality"—of the car. If you want a dog, don't buy a cat.

I'm glad that you've found a car that you really love. But can you entertain the idea that some people would be just as in love with an MX-8 as you are with the RX-8? I know that an MX-8 wouldn't handle quite as well, but it would make up for that (in my opinion) by getting better gas mileage, no risk of flooding, more power, etc.

You are acting like it's all or nothing. Either get an RX-8 or a Mustang. Why can't I want something in between? Maybe an RX-8 is the best car out there for me, but that doesn't mean an MX-8 wouldn't be slightly better.

What....no 3-rotor or Turbo Rotary option, for shame....lol.