ptiemann

I thought capitalization is for IMPORTANT words. As you would in spoken language say an individual word a bit LOUDER. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

By composing my entire contribution in caps, I assume that my whole message is overly important and, yes, it's perceived as LOUD.

It's also true that it's harder to read.

THE ADVANCED CAPITALIZER THERFORE

ALWAYS PUTS DOUBLE SPACES AND

AN EXTRA BLANK LINE BETWEEN HIS IMPORTANT

CONTRIBUTION.


Boy, my throat is sore now.

Deslock

The EVOLV concept car had 280 peak hp and an 11k redline. I doubt the stock components on a production RX-8 would be able to sustain that engine speed and output for long.

JimW

Well said about the reason Mazda detuned the RX8, Gordon. I knew you would step in at some point. As Canzoomer and other companies get closer to fine tuning the ecu for maximum power, there really is no reason to wait or pin your hopes on Mazda developing a durable catilytic converter and reflash. As it would be quite expensive to purchase this from a dealer to begin with and the Canzoomer and other like modifications will eventually develop much more power for far less money than the original spec of 248 H.P. at the crank!

PhineasFellOff

You better be right, JimW.

ranger4277

Why does everybody have to speak so staunchly against such things. How would you know? Mazda engineers built the damn thing and they did originally quote the power at 280 when it was first unveiled. Yes, we have our forum experts who have messed with the maps and tried to patch our original power, and we have our self proclaimed sages of absolute truth who are always correct... but isn't there a remote possibility there might be tricks we don't know about? Sure a degree of speculation is warranted, but I'm going to at least keep an open mind. Thanks for the new rumor HollywoodHall. It used to be rumors like that that made this forum interesting and provoked some constructive conversation. (maybe i'm just bitter over all the boring reposts.. this forum was in its pinnicle just before the 8 reached our shores and we knew next to nothing)

And feel free to use caps lock all you want man. It may be annoying but there is no law against yelling and being annoying.

neit_jnf

The first side port renesis in the RX-01 was rated at 220 PS, the rx-evolv was rated at 280 PS and the final Japanese version of the RX-8 is rated at 250 PS. I believe the 250 rating is possible to attain and surpass with proper ECU tuning. Add a tuned exhaust, light flywheel and pullies and some more ecu tricks to match and the 280 maybe even more could be possible.

Gord96BRG

As mentioned, it was only the RX-Evolv that was quoted at 280 - and it was never certified for emissions or durability, that was just a number thrown out by Mazda. The RX-8 was never quoted at anywhere near 280 - the original number was 250, the production number was 247, and the revised number is 238. Mazda has told us exactly why the number was reduced from 247 to 238. They're the ones who have explained why they can not provide more than 238 hp and remain emissions legal with the current hardware. Canzoomer is pretty explicit about his modifications NOT being emissions legal as far as cat durability goes.

(Yeah, he can use all caps if he wants, man, no law against it. Everyone will just ignore him, though, so I don't see why he would want to get everyone pissed off at him.)

Regards,
Gordon

JimW

"Huh", What's that supposed to mean. I better be right or.... what! It has nothing to do with me! It's all in the companies who are developing the aftermarket performance modifications.

PhineasFellOff

I'm not talking about aftermarket. I'm talking about Mazda making steady increases/improvements over the next 4 to 6 years.

JimW

Yes, well it would be smart of them to do it. It seems that most people expected and want more power out of this car and some would be buyers turned away because of the lack thereof, although they still don't know what they are missing. It would be interesting to see what they offer in the future and if current owners could benefit as well. If it isn't much more costly than aftermarket products, delivers comparable performance and a warranty is offered, it would be a desirable option, but by that time most of our warranty would be expired.

HollywoodHall

this forum has turned into a forum about using caps! what the heck!..... who cares.... caps / not capped.. it really doesnt matter. unless you have the brain function of a 3 yr old, or are really high when your on this your reading speed should not be affected by a CAPLOCKED phrase... get over it.... seriously. IF SEEING SOMEONE WRITE IN CAPS RUINS YOUR DAY. THEN YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE PROBLEMS. FIND SOMETHING MORE WORTHWHILE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT. LIKE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IT COSTS TO KEEP THESE RX8 MACHINES FUELED WITH GASOLINE NOW-A-DAYS.........

flatso

"Mazda found that the exhaust gas temperature at high load and high rpm was too high, and that the catalytic converters would likely not last the required 120K miles. To remedy this, they richened the mixture at high rpm high load conditions to lower the exhaust gas temperature, with the byproduct that the peak HP dropped (to no more than 238)."

Why does richening the mixture which I assume means adding more fuel then air lower exhaust temps and power? I would think it would have the opposite effect. Can one of you smart guys explain this. Thanks

zoom44

the fuel doesn't burn and exits the motor in a liquid form qhich helps keep the cat cooler. one thing not mentioned is the effect california law has on all of this. see another way to prolong cat life would be tomove the cat farther from the engine so the gases could cool a little before entering the car. however CA law says the cat has to be up to operating temps from a cold start within 5 minutes. so in order to meet that requirement you have to keep the CAT close. in fact most manufacturers moved their cats forward n order to meet this requirement.

flatso

so thats why the mileage is so crappy the fuel isn't being burnt efficiently at higher RPM's. It just goes out the tailpipe. How can this not effect emmissions I wonder?

MTLbroker

It's not the horsepower. Is there any way to get more torque out of this engine? (I know torque at the wheel is dependent on gearing. I'm talking about torque at the crank.)

Now that is a pursuit worth pursuing.

zoom44

YES THERE IS! It's called FI and it is just around the next corner......hehehhe

zoom44

ahh but it does so then they "de-tune" it with Kflash and so we get what we have now- 238ish HP,flooding issues,cat problems, O2 sensor problems etc. then a bunch of flashes to get it all back in line. read the May issue of RXTuner for more info on the flashes.

Japan8

crap detector alert!! crap detector alert!!

Um no. Japan uses unleaded fuel, diesel, and natural gas only.

As Gordon said... Japanese gasoline does not have a higher octane rating that US gasoline. Do a search for the threads that beat this horse to death.

And I question this whole line of reasoning. I've posted it many times now... while there is little doubt that a Japan, European and US flash exists... the issue of a difference in power between the US and Japan flash is moot in my estimation. Japanese 8 owners complain of the car feeling nowhere near 250ps (NOT hp). Japanese tuners are dynoing the cars at 180ps for Blitz and Trust/GReddy is getting around 268ps on a recent tune of their turbo system... a claimed 60ps increase. It's pretty clear that the JDM cars are pulling the same or very close hp numbers.

If the above is correct, then was there REALLY a cat-converter issue? Hmm...

ml2316

i still remember the first time i read about the rx8 and the "realistic" projections from every mag i read were 0-60 in 5.1-5.2 seconds and a mid 13-second 1/4 mile. what a car that would have been...

8's enough

mazda first reported that we would get 250hp.then dropped it to 238hp.it seems like 80%of the people on this forum who have had dyno's done are between 170-190.i e-mail mazda and the denied are dyno testing .the sells mgr at mazda said it we could get enough menbers to fax mazda there dyno reports then they would have to answer the ?.once you have 50 problems or ? on the same thing mazda has to address it .

TyrellCorpNexus8

I've been wondering the same thing. I mean, the HP issue to me seems much simpler than the MPG issue. Here's what I mean: Getting the rated MPG depends on so many changing variables in driving but all you need is for SOME drivers to get the EPA ratings SOME of the time. Some forum members have achieved the EPA ratings and that fact makes retribution on or concession by Mazda just about unattainable. In this sense, it is more complex and more difficult to formulate a basis for complaint.

However, NO ONE outside of Mazda- not even Racing Beat- has independently achieved 238 HP. This is a SIMPLE fact. Safe mode this, safe mode that- it is irrelevant. Mazda had to have achieved 238 or whatever HP in order to rate it. Since they officially rate it at 238, then they should be willing to prove it. I don't know the fricking law regarding this sort of issue but are not we pretty clearly at a point in time at which Mazda should be legally required to PROVE the 238 HP? A car could be randomly selected from a dealership lot and subjected to an official Mazda engine dyno facility. Isn't this simple? Isn't this reasonable? Shouldn't this be a legal mandate by now?

Perhaps after 5 more ECU reflash updates that supposedly have nothing to do with HP, Mazda will finally do a public dyno.

Mazdax605

The numbers mazda has given has always been flywheel horsepower just like every other manufacturer so therefore the numbers at the rear wheels will be lower.Now if what you are getting at is the 238 number should actually be rated lower according to dyno reports maybe that is so but I don't know and I bet there isn't many people that do know what the acceptable drivetrain loss these cars should have,and how accurate the dynos that these cars were tested on are.There are so many variables with this sort of "hey my car only dynoed XXX horsepower WTF"


I just think we should enjoy the car for what it is.Aside from the 3rd generation RX-7 the RX series has never been the horsepower(or torque for that matter)leader,but most critics even back in the days of the 79-85 12A powered cars liked this series for what it was.A fun to drive,fun to rev cheap(1st gens)-to modestly priced cars(the 3rd gen was not cheap in its day).I find my car gives me many smiles regardless of how much or how little HP i have on tap.Heck I still have a ton of fun in my 120RWHP 12A powered 83 RX-7.It isn't all about RWHP in my book.If it were I would be driving a viper or porsche.I think our cars are great performers for what we pay for them which in some peoples cases it is an expensive car but I really think it is priced just right for what you get.A fun to drive 4 seater with a beautiful body.Is it going to change how I feel about the car if Mazda says"oh yeah it really is more like 220 HP".No,I will still love the car.

w0rm

In the end, who really cares? If i wanted a high HP monster I would get an american muscle car. Why bother getting all puckered up over a few numbers?

Does it really make driving the car any less enjoyable? Do you feel like Mazda should come up with some sort of recall over the issue(which has already happened- why didnt you take advantage of it?). It just gets old hearing the same thing over and over.

TyrellCorpNexus8

I'm talking about ENGINE dyno. Racing Beat made only 218 HP on their ENGINE dyno. Car manufacturers rate HP on engine dynos. Otherwise the official rating method in the entire industry would be for at the drive wheel.

The fact there are so many variables is IRRELEVANT. If Mazda really got 238 HP (which they legally had to have, right?), then they know what all the variables are in order to produce 238 HP. Mazda does not have to divulge their dyno secrets; they simply have to hook up a production engine taken from some dealership lot and PUBLICLY prove the 238 HP. Once again, an incredibly simple proposition.

The issue is a simple legal one. Lots of people on this forum talk about what we should or should not be focusing on, and that's fine and great. But there IS a legal perspective that seems should be pretty damn simple.

TyrellCorpNexus8

Your comment is like many others and your point is well taken.

BUT I have outlined a simple legal perspective that is completely independent of what you're saying. You think I and the thread starter and others don't love our RX8's? Did you read my post in the General Automotive forum comparing the engines of the S2000 and RX8?

Lawyers litigate regardless. The legal case seems very very simple and reasonable.

What I'm saying has not been explicitly stated before on this forum. I've kept track of all the threads for over a year before registering for this forum. Previously, people have complained and complained. I have delineated an incredibly simple and irrefutable line of reasoning, an intellectual basis for a mandate for proof.

I'm NOT calling for more HP. I'm not complaining about not enough HP compared to competitors' cars. I'm calling for proof of the HP. These are fundamentally different issues.