I received book! PISSED!!
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boca Raton, Fl
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I received book! PISSED!!
Today i recieved the prelude booklet as they call it in the mail. It is like a 180 page color book all about the process of making it and stuff. In the middle it had specs and it said 0-60 stick-6.6, and 0-60 automatic 9.5!!! I know i got automatic because im gonna be shleppin back and forth to college on 95 alot but i didn't think the car was gonna be that slow. ANyways does anyone know if thats true because all the magz here say 6.0 and 5.9 for stick.. If it is what kind of stuff can i do to the automatic to atleast make it move alittle bit.. DAYUM!!!!
#2
Prodigal Wankler
Re: I received book! PISSED!!
Originally posted by adamp316
it said 0-60 stick-6.6, and 0-60 automatic 9.5!!! [...] ANyways does anyone know if thats true because all the magz here say 6.0 and 5.9 for stick.. If it is what kind of stuff can i do to the automatic to atleast make it move alittle bit.. DAYUM!!!!
it said 0-60 stick-6.6, and 0-60 automatic 9.5!!! [...] ANyways does anyone know if thats true because all the magz here say 6.0 and 5.9 for stick.. If it is what kind of stuff can i do to the automatic to atleast make it move alittle bit.. DAYUM!!!!
#3
_________________
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cambridge - UK
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: I received book! PISSED!!
Originally posted by adamp316
It is like a 180 page color book all about the process of making it and stuff.
It is like a 180 page color book all about the process of making it and stuff.
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: irvine/fullerton, ca
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: I received book! PISSED!!
Originally posted by adamp316
Today i recieved the prelude booklet as they call it in the mail. It is like a 180 page color book all about the process of making it and stuff. In the middle it had specs and it said 0-60 stick-6.6, and 0-60 automatic 9.5!!! I know i got automatic because im gonna be shleppin back and forth to college on 95 alot but i didn't think the car was gonna be that slow. ANyways does anyone know if thats true because all the magz here say 6.0 and 5.9 for stick.. If it is what kind of stuff can i do to the automatic to atleast make it move alittle bit.. DAYUM!!!!
Today i recieved the prelude booklet as they call it in the mail. It is like a 180 page color book all about the process of making it and stuff. In the middle it had specs and it said 0-60 stick-6.6, and 0-60 automatic 9.5!!! I know i got automatic because im gonna be shleppin back and forth to college on 95 alot but i didn't think the car was gonna be that slow. ANyways does anyone know if thats true because all the magz here say 6.0 and 5.9 for stick.. If it is what kind of stuff can i do to the automatic to atleast make it move alittle bit.. DAYUM!!!!
anyways dont worry, alot of manfuctures underrate their performance numbers. like BMW, mercedes, etc. mags. got 5.9-6.2 with the manual(excluding motortrends 6.5 bullshit). with that said, auto should be around high 8's which is still pretty damn slow. but thats ur fault, shouldnt of gotten auto
#6
Pure Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't got the book either (but I am still at work - perhaps a surprise when I get home...).
And I feel really sorry for the automatic contingent if this is true. A 3 second deficit between auto and manual is horrendous - a 1 sec difference is more typical. In this case the engine is somewhat different and weaker for the auto but still I expected 7.5-8.0...
Let's hope that a real world test of the auto can allay your fears. East Moon - are you near a drag strip?
And I feel really sorry for the automatic contingent if this is true. A 3 second deficit between auto and manual is horrendous - a 1 sec difference is more typical. In this case the engine is somewhat different and weaker for the auto but still I expected 7.5-8.0...
Let's hope that a real world test of the auto can allay your fears. East Moon - are you near a drag strip?
#7
Originally posted by AsianStyle
Did anyone notice that the book also still states the 20 - 30 mpg for the rx-8 and estimates mixed driving at 23.
Did anyone notice that the book also still states the 20 - 30 mpg for the rx-8 and estimates mixed driving at 23.
it does, however, make a GREAT coffee table book!
#9
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Staten Island NY
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sure hope u guys are right i am thinking if the 250 HP is 5.8 or so i am hoping to see like a 7.5 or so for the Auto yes less HP but a bit more torque. I can live with like a 1.5-1.7 sec diff but if its in the high 8's or 9's then no matter how beatifull the car looks.
32,000 k is too much for a fully loaded civic performance type car even if i am in love with the interior.
PS this news really bummed me out i was lookin forward to gettin this car and i have to change cars in the next month or 2 cause i need to sell my VW and cant wait much longer.
Ack i dont want the Z but i might have to cope :-(
Sorry for the longish rant but i have to vent .
PLZ PLZ Mazda give us 250 hp with the Auto
32,000 k is too much for a fully loaded civic performance type car even if i am in love with the interior.
PS this news really bummed me out i was lookin forward to gettin this car and i have to change cars in the next month or 2 cause i need to sell my VW and cant wait much longer.
Ack i dont want the Z but i might have to cope :-(
Sorry for the longish rant but i have to vent .
PLZ PLZ Mazda give us 250 hp with the Auto
#11
Registered
Originally posted by Calibus
PLZ PLZ Mazda give us 250 hp with the Auto
PLZ PLZ Mazda give us 250 hp with the Auto
Why not get the manual? If you ever needed proof that auto transmissions suck...
Regards,
Gordon
#13
Registered User
The 5.9 sec 0-60 of Road and Track et. al. was generated by a 8,000 RPM clutch drop with tire smoking ect.
Mazda probably doesn't want you driving the car that way so they are being conservative with the 6.6 second estimate. Remember the 5 - 60 Mph rolling start that RX-8 did was 7.5 seconds so 6.6 is not hard to believe.
Now as far as the auto is concerned If the 9.5 seconds is true, that is hard to believe. That is also unexceptable. My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
Mazda probably doesn't want you driving the car that way so they are being conservative with the 6.6 second estimate. Remember the 5 - 60 Mph rolling start that RX-8 did was 7.5 seconds so 6.6 is not hard to believe.
Now as far as the auto is concerned If the 9.5 seconds is true, that is hard to believe. That is also unexceptable. My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
Last edited by MrWigggles; 05-27-2003 at 11:21 PM.
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: irvine/fullerton, ca
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MrWigggles
The 5.9 sec 0-60 of Road and Track et. al. was generated by a 8,000 RPM clutch drop with tire smoking ect.
Mazda probably doesn't want you driving the car that way so they are being conservative with the 6.6 second estimate. Remember the 5 - 60 Mph rolling start that RX-8 did was 7.5 seconds so 6.6 is not hard to believe.
Now as far as the auto is concerned If the 9.5 seconds is true, that is hard to believe. That is also unexceptable. My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
The 5.9 sec 0-60 of Road and Track et. al. was generated by a 8,000 RPM clutch drop with tire smoking ect.
Mazda probably doesn't want you driving the car that way so they are being conservative with the 6.6 second estimate. Remember the 5 - 60 Mph rolling start that RX-8 did was 7.5 seconds so 6.6 is not hard to believe.
Now as far as the auto is concerned If the 9.5 seconds is true, that is hard to believe. That is also unexceptable. My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Hercules
Automatics and rotaries don't mix..
I think a CVT type of dealy would have been better.
Automatics and rotaries don't mix..
I think a CVT type of dealy would have been better.
#18
Pure Unadulterated Fun
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by VWjet
What do you mean they don't mix? Why does an auto tranny have such a difficult time transferring power from a rotary?
What do you mean they don't mix? Why does an auto tranny have such a difficult time transferring power from a rotary?
#19
That better not be the case. If so, why should I get that if my current car is just as fast? This will just lead me more into the direction of the G35, but I guess I'll wait for the tests in the auto mags first.
Last edited by MRocks; 05-28-2003 at 10:28 AM.
#20
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Staten Island NY
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If these performance stats do hold up i agree that is Pathetic
Mazda gave us a good looking car but if my current VW can outrun it with a less HP and less Torque engine, "I have the 180HP 173 Tq GTI AUTO which runs like a 8.5 to 60 and its 3200 lbs" what is the sense to spend $30+K i will either hold on to my VW which i dont want to do, or go for the G35 or 350Z though i dont like them much. Hey at this point the mazda 6S is startin to look good.
This car should run at least 7.0 to 60 with the Auto trans to be competative in this Segment. Wake Up Mazda.
Mazda gave us a good looking car but if my current VW can outrun it with a less HP and less Torque engine, "I have the 180HP 173 Tq GTI AUTO which runs like a 8.5 to 60 and its 3200 lbs" what is the sense to spend $30+K i will either hold on to my VW which i dont want to do, or go for the G35 or 350Z though i dont like them much. Hey at this point the mazda 6S is startin to look good.
This car should run at least 7.0 to 60 with the Auto trans to be competative in this Segment. Wake Up Mazda.
Last edited by Calibus; 05-28-2003 at 10:19 AM.
#21
Int-X 293WHP 242TQ :)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mazda just made the auto/manual decision easy for everybody. The auto is the "ladies" car -- no offense intended Elara. Somewhere in the RX-8 book it describes the difference between the auto and the manual by relating the auto to a Mercedes and the manual to an M series BMW in terms of how they were intended to appeal to the market. Mazda is obviously waiting for the more sophisticated manumatic/SMG transmission be ready for market before they bring out the high powered auto tranny. The current auto was just released to have something to fill that gap in the market for the short-term. I am amazed at how many people want the automatic but I guess there are even people who buy auto Porsches, etc. -- I just don't get it?
#22
Originally posted by MrWigggles
My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
My 1992 85HP Toyota Tercel could do 0-60 in 10 secs.
-Mr. Wigggles
#23
Administrator
Originally posted by VWjet
What do you mean they don't mix? Why does an auto tranny have such a difficult time transferring power from a rotary?
What do you mean they don't mix? Why does an auto tranny have such a difficult time transferring power from a rotary?
#24
but I guess there are even people who buy auto Porsches, etc. -- I just don't get it?
#25
Oversteer = Bliss
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sask, Canada
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that the book stats are a misprint. It seems to me that there shouldn't be such an outlandish difference in accleration.
To test my theory, I dusted off my trusty copy of CarTest 4.5.
Using the data from the Mazda Website on the 4AT and the 6MT, plus the data on this site for the 5MT, I programmed the variables into the program and set her loose. I used Mazda's curb weight of 3053 pounds for the MT and 3085 pounds for the AT plus 200 pounds for the driver.
Here is the result:
To test my theory, I dusted off my trusty copy of CarTest 4.5.
Using the data from the Mazda Website on the 4AT and the 6MT, plus the data on this site for the 5MT, I programmed the variables into the program and set her loose. I used Mazda's curb weight of 3053 pounds for the MT and 3085 pounds for the AT plus 200 pounds for the driver.
Here is the result:
Last edited by SA22C; 05-28-2003 at 01:22 PM.