Notices
General Automotive Discuss all things automotive here other than the RX-8

No substitute for torque

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 06-07-2004, 12:10 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
viggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oakland, NJ
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No substitute for torque

Love my RX-8 of course... However, spent the weekend driving a Maserati Spyder with a big V8 -- close to 400hp from 4.2l, no supercharger or turbo necessary (thanks to ferrari's engineering).

Bottom line, car was amazing in every gear -- always enough torque on tap to slam your back into the seat.

Nice to be challenged by Audi RS6s and the like, as opposed to the slammed Civics and Integras that usually want to race my 8.

Regarding my last point, the hp issues have really affected perceptions of the 8 among non-owners -- everyone I know think its slow, therefore, everyone wants to challenge the car because they think they can beat it.

Must admit, I wouldn't mind more power in the 8, now that I'm used to 400!
Old 06-07-2004, 12:11 PM
  #2  
RX-8s Official Cool Guy
 
HiTMaNN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 2,150
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
wow ummmmmm yah lets drop 120k on car i better get good speed what do u think u get what u pay for
Old 06-07-2004, 12:12 PM
  #3  
⎝⏠⏝⏠⎠
 
mysql101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 8,625
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
By the time people's factory warrantees are out, there will likely be dozen's of turbo and FI options available for the RX-8.

So I'm not worrying about it. Not to mention the factory turbo for 2005.
Old 06-07-2004, 12:14 PM
  #4  
Registered User
 
BoxerGT2.5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: No substitute for torque

Originally posted by viggen
Love my RX-8 of course... However, spent the weekend driving a Maserati Spyder with a big V8 -- close to 400hp from 4.2l, no supercharger or turbo necessary (thanks to ferrari's engineering).

Bottom line, car was amazing in every gear -- always enough torque on tap to slam your back into the seat.

I have a midget in the back seat that reaches over and pulls my head back when I hit the gas.....same effect if thats what your lookin for....
Old 06-07-2004, 12:17 PM
  #5  
Humpin legs and takin nam
 
guy321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Clearwater, Fl
Posts: 2,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Re: No substitute for torque

Oh, I didn't know you had kids

Originally posted by MyRx-8yourcar
I have a midget in the back seat that reaches over and pulls my head back when I hit the gas.....same effect if thats what your lookin for....
Old 06-07-2004, 12:18 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
BoxerGT2.5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep....figured the little bastards could at least make my driving experience more "authentic" instead of makin all that noise in the back...
Old 06-07-2004, 12:20 PM
  #7  
Registered User
 
BoxerGT2.5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kidding...kidding....sorry if I offended any vertically challanged 8 owners out there....lol..
Old 06-07-2004, 12:47 PM
  #8  
Registered User
 
HeelnToe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: No substitute for torque

Originally posted by viggen
Nice to be challenged by Audi RS6s and the like, as opposed to the slammed Civics and Integras that usually want to race my 8.
True, it's no torque-monster, and even an Accord V6 can give the 8 quite a challenge in a (drag) race. But so what, that's not what the car is about.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of torque. The feeling or method of power delivery is far more important to me than the actual statistics. I love linear power bands, where the power increases with revs, pushing you farther and farther back into the seat as long as you dare keep your foot in it.

Even if a turbo-8 was available for the same price, I wouldn't have bought it. Turbos, IMHO, upset the balance of a powerband. And the 8, to me, is all about balance, smoothness, finesse...
Old 06-07-2004, 12:53 PM
  #9  
Senior Jackass
 
kbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sure would be nice to be able to afford a maseratti, but you know what, it's nice enough being able to afford the 8. You really think you get 4X the performance out of the maseratti for 4X the price? I don't think so, but if you did, I'd love to drive it.
Old 06-07-2004, 01:28 PM
  #10  
Registered User
 
Seenitall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GREAT WHITE NORTH
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Want torque-get a turbo diesel-all torque no horsepower.
Old 06-07-2004, 05:09 PM
  #11  
Registered User
 
gusmahler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Re: No substitute for torque

Originally posted by HeelnToe
True, it's no torque-monster, and even an Accord V6 can give the 8 quite a challenge in a (drag) race. But so what, that's not what the car is about.
C&D's 0-60 time for the Accord V6 manual is 5.9, same as the RX8. For the automatic Accord, they got 7.0.
Old 06-07-2004, 05:24 PM
  #12  
Registered User
 
Bankotsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: No substitute for torque

Originally posted by gusmahler
C&D's 0-60 time for the Accord V6 manual is 5.9, same as the RX8. For the automatic Accord, they got 7.0.
Thats kinda like the RX-8, but I think the RX-8 might be slower. I am not sure though.
Old 06-07-2004, 06:08 PM
  #13  
Registered User
 
gusmahler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Re: No substitute for torque

Originally posted by Bankotsu
Thats kinda like the RX-8, but I think the RX-8 might be slower. I am not sure though.
According to this thread, the auto RX-8 goes 0 to 60 in 7.2 seconds.
Old 06-07-2004, 06:28 PM
  #14  
Registered User
 
jonnyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
viggen, besides the huge power, what did you think of the spyder? i see them alot around here and have began to fall in love with them.
Old 06-07-2004, 08:25 PM
  #15  
Absolute Rotary Madness
 
RotorManiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Thessaloniki, Greece
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
all the articles i read about the new maserati say is BS. fact is i love this italian beast but it has gone far away from its tradition. the 3200GT was a true maser as the legendery Ghilbi Cup. you see, all that car maker was about is turbo, twin turbo to be more acurate. i would never buy a n/a maser, porsche does the job much better
Old 06-07-2004, 10:21 PM
  #16  
Registered
 
Gord96BRG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,845
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by RotorManiac
you see, all that car maker was about is turbo, twin turbo to be more acurate. i would never buy a n/a maser, porsche does the job much better
You're right - as long as you completely ignore the first 50 years of Maserati's history, and focus exclusively on the abysmal, crappy cars produced after they introduced the Biturbo.

In other words - your statement that "all that car maker was about is turbo" is utter nonsense - Maserati's entire history except for those horrible Biturbos is about normally aspirated power. From 1914 until 1981, Maseratis were normally aspirated (well, there was the occasional supercharger thrown in waaay back when). Through the glory years of the 1950s with Fangio winning the World Championship, there were no turbos. Through the 60s and 70s and the great sports and touring cars, there were no turbos. The Biturbo, introduced in 1981, and it's descendants were generally considered to be terrible cars, even if the later mid-90s models finally made decent power. Maserati's history and reputation are all about normally aspirated racers and sports cars; all the biturbo cars ever did was tarnish Maserati's reputation.

If you had any sense of and respect for Maserati history, you'd never buy a turbo Maserati!

Regards,
Gordon
Old 06-08-2004, 10:32 AM
  #17  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
viggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oakland, NJ
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A few points:

1. The 3200 GT is not a true Maserati, it was designed under FIAT ownership. The current Coupe/Spyder are based on that car, but are closer to true Maseratis; they were massaged and improved following Ferrari's purchase of Maserati several years ago

2.The new Quattroporte sedan coming in Q4 is all Maserati, the first designed entirely under Ferrari stewardship. It is the best car in its class -- monster performance and style, and a driving experience similar to a 360 with an extra set of doors. Then you have MC12, and Coupe GranSport coming soon - Maserati is back!

3.Maserati was only about turbos during its down years, the 1980s and early 1990s

4.Regarding the torque issue, I love my RX-8 -- however, like other posters, I believe actual 0-60 times are closer to 7 seconds, not 5.9. The car is beautifully balanced, styled, packaged and trimmed, but straightline acceleration is not its strength -- I believe that's why every high-school kid in a slammed civic wants to race, because they're confident they can win or at least keep up

5.Yes the Maserati is expensive, but besides the amazing performance, it has an amazing interior (that Porsche can't touch), tons of character and cachet, and you really feel like you're driving something special
Old 06-08-2004, 03:19 PM
  #18  
Banned
 
PhineasFellOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whereas the lines of the Coupe are pleasantly and elegantly understated, those of the Spyder are virtually nonexistent, lending the car a dull, amorphous, and emotionless feel.

At least one car mag has commented on the Spyder's dullness, that the lines go better with the Coupe.

This visual phenomenon reminds me of the Jaguar XK8, where the convertible appears to have a complete lack of exterior body detail.
Old 06-08-2004, 06:19 PM
  #19  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
viggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oakland, NJ
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree

I agree, the Spyder lacks the visual appeal of the Coupe; neither is really a stunner.

That said, I was shocked by how much attention the Spyder I received everywhere I drove over the past weekend -- suburban NJ, Manhattan, etc..., people swarmed over the car. Also surprising because it was dark blue and rather understated.

Next generation due in 2006 will have even more power/performance and more exciting looks to go along with the drop dead gorgeous Quattroporte...
Old 06-08-2004, 11:53 PM
  #20  
Banned
 
PhineasFellOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with you on the Quattroporte. It looks good. I also agree with you on the dark blue, which makes a dull car duller.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
OnebaddRx8
Series I Trouble Shooting
24
08-25-2019 11:34 PM
airlive
New Member Forum
2
11-04-2016 12:15 PM
Cookingislife1226
New Member Forum
4
03-20-2016 09:51 AM
FubarI33t
New Member Forum
12
09-28-2015 08:45 PM
projectr13b
Series I Do It Yourself Forum
1
09-06-2015 01:04 PM



You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: No substitute for torque



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 AM.