rx-8 = slow??
06-04-2004, 01:51 AM
#126
Registered
FWD was developed for ease of drivability on the streets for the average driver. The average person has little driving talent or abilities. The bad thing is that most of them think they do. Go look at most if not just about all of the ignorant street racers to find these people. The FWD car was created for this person who doesn't know what to do in an emergency situation except panic and stomp on the brakes as hard as possible while turning the wheel. The FWD car is more forgiving in this scenario than the RWD car. If you know what you are doing this really isn't an issue. The downside is that their performance suffers. They are all traction limited during acceleration and this is very noticable on wet roads. They typically don't corner as well and have less potential to corner well since they typically understeer. Please don't argue with me about who's hopped up FWD car can outcorner who's RWD or AWD car. With equal vehicle setups and equally skilled driver's this can't happen. There is nothing special about the Celica over any other FWD car. Sure it may handle better than a Civic or a Focus and may be quicker, but it is still FWD and therefore lacking overall potential.
For all of the people who argue that the RX-8 is slow for it's price or get's bad gas mileage for it's price, go take a look at the Ford Thunderbird. Base price bare bones starts at $36,000 which is more expensive than for the RX-8. It's gas mileage figures are 17/23 which are strangely similar to the RX-8 which is cheaper. It is not available with a standard transmission. Yes it has 280 hp but still only does 0-60 in around 7 seconds. Where's the RX-8 again? Faster? The T-Bird is slower in the quarter mile than the RX-8 and doesn't handle as well. It weighs 3800 pounds which is much heavier than the RX-8. It also only holds 2 people. I ask you, why would anyone want a Thunderbird over an RX-8 since the RX-8 seems superior in every way? The T-Bird has an almost cult like following and there is nothing you can tell those guys that will convince them that their car isn't the best. If that is the case with the T-Bird, why should anyone here care if there are any little souped up econoboxes that are faster? We shouldn't and it doesn't matter. It only matters if your ego is bigger than your intelligence level or driving abilities. The only things that makes the EVO or the STi handle better or faster is the fact that the dealers took the original tin cans and modified them to that performance level. Just tell yourselves that the RX-8 as we know it is equivalent to the standard model Neon, the Lancer, and the Impreza. Mazda hasn't come along and modified ours yet. Those other cars suddenly don't look so impressive do they? It's all about marketing point of view.
For all of the people who argue that the RX-8 is slow for it's price or get's bad gas mileage for it's price, go take a look at the Ford Thunderbird. Base price bare bones starts at $36,000 which is more expensive than for the RX-8. It's gas mileage figures are 17/23 which are strangely similar to the RX-8 which is cheaper. It is not available with a standard transmission. Yes it has 280 hp but still only does 0-60 in around 7 seconds. Where's the RX-8 again? Faster? The T-Bird is slower in the quarter mile than the RX-8 and doesn't handle as well. It weighs 3800 pounds which is much heavier than the RX-8. It also only holds 2 people. I ask you, why would anyone want a Thunderbird over an RX-8 since the RX-8 seems superior in every way? The T-Bird has an almost cult like following and there is nothing you can tell those guys that will convince them that their car isn't the best. If that is the case with the T-Bird, why should anyone here care if there are any little souped up econoboxes that are faster? We shouldn't and it doesn't matter. It only matters if your ego is bigger than your intelligence level or driving abilities. The only things that makes the EVO or the STi handle better or faster is the fact that the dealers took the original tin cans and modified them to that performance level. Just tell yourselves that the RX-8 as we know it is equivalent to the standard model Neon, the Lancer, and the Impreza. Mazda hasn't come along and modified ours yet. Those other cars suddenly don't look so impressive do they? It's all about marketing point of view.
06-04-2004, 02:09 AM
#127
yes, I bite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by playdoh43
new here, friend has rx8, Ive also driven it many times, but i dont own one. Ive also driven the Evo (extensively) and the 350z.......
new here, friend has rx8, Ive also driven it many times, but i dont own one. Ive also driven the Evo (extensively) and the 350z.......
06-04-2004, 04:22 AM
#128
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rotarygod
FWD was developed for ease of drivability on the streets for the average driver. The average person has little driving talent or abilities. The bad thing is that most of them think they do. Go look at most if not just about all of the ignorant street racers to find these people. The FWD car was created for this person who doesn't know what to do in an emergency situation except panic and stomp on the brakes as hard as possible while turning the wheel. The FWD car is more forgiving in this scenario than the RWD car. If you know what you are doing this really isn't an issue. The downside is that their performance suffers. They are all traction limited during acceleration and this is very noticable on wet roads. They typically don't corner as well and have less potential to corner well since they typically understeer. Please don't argue with me about who's hopped up FWD car can outcorner who's RWD or AWD car. With equal vehicle setups and equally skilled driver's this can't happen. There is nothing special about the Celica over any other FWD car. Sure it may handle better than a Civic or a Focus and may be quicker, but it is still FWD and therefore lacking overall potential.
For all of the people who argue that the RX-8 is slow for it's price or get's bad gas mileage for it's price, go take a look at the Ford Thunderbird. Base price bare bones starts at $36,000 which is more expensive than for the RX-8. It's gas mileage figures are 17/23 which are strangely similar to the RX-8 which is cheaper. It is not available with a standard transmission. Yes it has 280 hp but still only does 0-60 in around 7 seconds. Where's the RX-8 again? Faster? The T-Bird is slower in the quarter mile than the RX-8 and doesn't handle as well. It weighs 3800 pounds which is much heavier than the RX-8. It also only holds 2 people. I ask you, why would anyone want a Thunderbird over an RX-8 since the RX-8 seems superior in every way? The T-Bird has an almost cult like following and there is nothing you can tell those guys that will convince them that their car isn't the best. If that is the case with the T-Bird, why should anyone here care if there are any little souped up econoboxes that are faster? We shouldn't and it doesn't matter. It only matters if your ego is bigger than your intelligence level or driving abilities. The only things that makes the EVO or the STi handle better or faster is the fact that the dealers took the original tin cans and modified them to that performance level. Just tell yourselves that the RX-8 as we know it is equivalent to the standard model Neon, the Lancer, and the Impreza. Mazda hasn't come along and modified ours yet. Those other cars suddenly don't look so impressive do they? It's all about marketing point of view.
FWD was developed for ease of drivability on the streets for the average driver. The average person has little driving talent or abilities. The bad thing is that most of them think they do. Go look at most if not just about all of the ignorant street racers to find these people. The FWD car was created for this person who doesn't know what to do in an emergency situation except panic and stomp on the brakes as hard as possible while turning the wheel. The FWD car is more forgiving in this scenario than the RWD car. If you know what you are doing this really isn't an issue. The downside is that their performance suffers. They are all traction limited during acceleration and this is very noticable on wet roads. They typically don't corner as well and have less potential to corner well since they typically understeer. Please don't argue with me about who's hopped up FWD car can outcorner who's RWD or AWD car. With equal vehicle setups and equally skilled driver's this can't happen. There is nothing special about the Celica over any other FWD car. Sure it may handle better than a Civic or a Focus and may be quicker, but it is still FWD and therefore lacking overall potential.
For all of the people who argue that the RX-8 is slow for it's price or get's bad gas mileage for it's price, go take a look at the Ford Thunderbird. Base price bare bones starts at $36,000 which is more expensive than for the RX-8. It's gas mileage figures are 17/23 which are strangely similar to the RX-8 which is cheaper. It is not available with a standard transmission. Yes it has 280 hp but still only does 0-60 in around 7 seconds. Where's the RX-8 again? Faster? The T-Bird is slower in the quarter mile than the RX-8 and doesn't handle as well. It weighs 3800 pounds which is much heavier than the RX-8. It also only holds 2 people. I ask you, why would anyone want a Thunderbird over an RX-8 since the RX-8 seems superior in every way? The T-Bird has an almost cult like following and there is nothing you can tell those guys that will convince them that their car isn't the best. If that is the case with the T-Bird, why should anyone here care if there are any little souped up econoboxes that are faster? We shouldn't and it doesn't matter. It only matters if your ego is bigger than your intelligence level or driving abilities. The only things that makes the EVO or the STi handle better or faster is the fact that the dealers took the original tin cans and modified them to that performance level. Just tell yourselves that the RX-8 as we know it is equivalent to the standard model Neon, the Lancer, and the Impreza. Mazda hasn't come along and modified ours yet. Those other cars suddenly don't look so impressive do they? It's all about marketing point of view.
The Celica does handle quite well, not just for a FWD car but for any car even in stock form. One of the big adavantages of the roatary is supposed to be it's light weight yet the Celica is around 500 pounds lighter than the RX-8 with one of those heavy cylinder engines... A high revving cylinder engine at that. As far as potential goes, it can pull around 1g on a skidpad with basic mods, it doesn't seem to be lacking to me. Now I'm not crazy about the Celica or FWD cars in general but I think you need to take a trip to the local autox track and watch a Mini, Celica, ITR, or even Neon take some laps and see that FWD can, if done properly, be damn good on a road course.
Ummm even Ford realized the T-Bird is a joke, it was cancelled after it's first production year in case you don't know (remind me of how the RX-8 performs with an AT again?). Also, the dealers don't do a damn thing to the EVO or STi, that would be the car manufacturers. If you knew 1/10 of what you do about those cars that you do about rotaries you would have never made those comments and I wouldn't be laughing at how ignorant you sound. I really expected more from you than that... If you need to tell yourself that the RX-8 is like the Lancer and Impreza when it costs about the same as the STi and EVO then I feel sorry for you.
To expand on playdoh's excellent post, "some people will call the RX-8 a girly car", some people will call the STi and EVO unimpressive or econoboxes, they're all ignorant.l
06-04-2004, 04:33 AM
#129
The Stickinator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR.
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey now who you callin' ignant? J/K :D . Just wait till I get my turbo... Then we'll see how the RX-8 stands next to the STI. I figure if I would've chosen the base model 8 and done some good engine work, brakes, and suspension I could compete with the STI fairly easily including in price. But I chose more of the luxury items and partially because of that and because I want to get between 350-400 hp outta my 8 after the turbo is in I don't think I will be able to compete with the price . It will take me longer to upgrade the brakes and suspension due to the cost of the turbo.
06-04-2004, 04:46 AM
#130
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 93rdcurrent
Hey now who you callin' ignant? J/K :D . Just wait till I get my turbo... Then we'll see how the RX-8 stands next to the STI. I figure if I would've chosen the base model 8 and done some good engine work, brakes, and suspension I could compete with the STI fairly easily including in price. But I chose more of the luxury items and partially because of that and because I want to get between 350-400 hp outta my 8 after the turbo is in I don't think I will be able to compete with the price . It will take me longer to upgrade the brakes and suspension due to the cost of the turbo.
Hey now who you callin' ignant? J/K :D . Just wait till I get my turbo... Then we'll see how the RX-8 stands next to the STI. I figure if I would've chosen the base model 8 and done some good engine work, brakes, and suspension I could compete with the STI fairly easily including in price. But I chose more of the luxury items and partially because of that and because I want to get between 350-400 hp outta my 8 after the turbo is in I don't think I will be able to compete with the price . It will take me longer to upgrade the brakes and suspension due to the cost of the turbo.
06-04-2004, 04:48 AM
#131
2010 Prius - Miss the 8
Usually I like IKE's comments.. because they are funny... but in this last response.. I would have to disagree.
1) Why nitpick about EVO 8s and STIs being modified by dealer or manufacturer only to be a *****.. I mean, I'm sure that's why rotarygod meant.
2) I've always considered the Lancer/Impreza's as just a regular car. Just like RX-8 as a regular version. Then we have a "Modified" version of their cars.. EVO/STI's/Mazdaspeed. I really doubt standard cars come off the lot with exhaust, rims, better suspensions, engine modifications..etc. But then look at what the RX-8 has that the Lancers/Imprezas have... oh wells. It is indeed the money spent that matters... Which RX-8 is pretty expensive compare to the Lancers/Imprezas. Then you have to look at what you paid for that money.
3) STi's and EVOs look pretty bad compare to the stylings of the RX-8/350z/G35 based on my own opinion. Part of the reason I stuck with the RX-8 is because it looked better than the STi's/EVOs. My friend that went test driving with me at the Subaru dealership asked me why I wanted to test drive an STi. I told him, that sucker is fast, and it's fun to drive. After the test drive, it was fast... handles pretty crazy... but it didn't have anything special with the interior/exterior. My friend then told me... "Why don't you just get a Camry or Corolla, it's cheaper and it looks about the same." Actually it does... Look at the EVO's.. no matter how much you fix them up, body kits, wings, rims.. they still look like an old Corolla. I'm 27 years old this week, and I really didn't want to drive a fixed up looking "Corolla" as my daily driver.
Though if I had to pick between a Subaru or Mitsu.. I'd take the Subaru anyday. I mean, both look pretty ricey when you buy a STI/EVO... might as well go with the one that looks even more fixed up looking. The EVO seriously looks like a fixed up grandma car. I'd be embarass to park an EVO next to a Porsche or Ferrari. At least with the RX-8, it can look decent.
Guess here in So Cali... Appearence is everything.
1) Why nitpick about EVO 8s and STIs being modified by dealer or manufacturer only to be a *****.. I mean, I'm sure that's why rotarygod meant.
2) I've always considered the Lancer/Impreza's as just a regular car. Just like RX-8 as a regular version. Then we have a "Modified" version of their cars.. EVO/STI's/Mazdaspeed. I really doubt standard cars come off the lot with exhaust, rims, better suspensions, engine modifications..etc. But then look at what the RX-8 has that the Lancers/Imprezas have... oh wells. It is indeed the money spent that matters... Which RX-8 is pretty expensive compare to the Lancers/Imprezas. Then you have to look at what you paid for that money.
3) STi's and EVOs look pretty bad compare to the stylings of the RX-8/350z/G35 based on my own opinion. Part of the reason I stuck with the RX-8 is because it looked better than the STi's/EVOs. My friend that went test driving with me at the Subaru dealership asked me why I wanted to test drive an STi. I told him, that sucker is fast, and it's fun to drive. After the test drive, it was fast... handles pretty crazy... but it didn't have anything special with the interior/exterior. My friend then told me... "Why don't you just get a Camry or Corolla, it's cheaper and it looks about the same." Actually it does... Look at the EVO's.. no matter how much you fix them up, body kits, wings, rims.. they still look like an old Corolla. I'm 27 years old this week, and I really didn't want to drive a fixed up looking "Corolla" as my daily driver.
Though if I had to pick between a Subaru or Mitsu.. I'd take the Subaru anyday. I mean, both look pretty ricey when you buy a STI/EVO... might as well go with the one that looks even more fixed up looking. The EVO seriously looks like a fixed up grandma car. I'd be embarass to park an EVO next to a Porsche or Ferrari. At least with the RX-8, it can look decent.
Guess here in So Cali... Appearence is everything.
06-04-2004, 04:51 AM
#132
2010 Prius - Miss the 8
Originally posted by IkeWRX
Please don't do the whole if I just slap a turbo on it thing... So you get to do 5-6k in mods and then you want to compare it to stock STi, put that same amount of money in mods into the STi and then see what happens. Plus the STi driver can do a couple inexpensive mods and run mid 12s, still have a warranty in tact, and daily drive it while getting around 20mpg (even in bad weather). Let's see you pull those things off.
Please don't do the whole if I just slap a turbo on it thing... So you get to do 5-6k in mods and then you want to compare it to stock STi, put that same amount of money in mods into the STi and then see what happens. Plus the STi driver can do a couple inexpensive mods and run mid 12s, still have a warranty in tact, and daily drive it while getting around 20mpg (even in bad weather). Let's see you pull those things off.
STi put more in the performance of the car. RX-8 put more in the styling. Imagine if there was an in between area...
06-04-2004, 05:05 AM
#133
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Outlaws eXtreme
Usually I like IKE's comments.. because they are funny... but in this last response.. I would have to disagree.
1) Why nitpick about EVO 8s and STIs being modified by dealer or manufacturer only to be a *****.. I mean, I'm sure that's why rotarygod meant.
2) I've always considered the Lancer/Impreza's as just a regular car. Just like RX-8 as a regular version. Then we have a "Modified" version of their cars.. EVO/STI's/Mazdaspeed. I really doubt standard cars come off the lot with exhaust, rims, better suspensions, engine modifications..etc. But then look at what the RX-8 has that the Lancers/Imprezas have... oh wells. It is indeed the money spent that matters... Which RX-8 is pretty expensive compare to the Lancers/Imprezas. Then you have to look at what you paid for that money.
3) STi's and EVOs look pretty bad compare to the stylings of the RX-8/350z/G35 based on my own opinion. Part of the reason I stuck with the RX-8 is because it looked better than the STi's/EVOs. My friend that went test driving with me at the Subaru dealership asked me why I wanted to test drive an STi. I told him, that sucker is fast, and it's fun to drive. After the test drive, it was fast... handles pretty crazy... but it didn't have anything special with the interior/exterior. My friend then told me... "Why don't you just get a Camry or Corolla, it's cheaper and it looks about the same." Actually it does... Look at the EVO's.. no matter how much you fix them up, body kits, wings, rims.. they still look like an old Corolla. I'm 27 years old this week, and I really didn't want to drive a fixed up looking "Corolla" as my daily driver.
Though if I had to pick between a Subaru or Mitsu.. I'd take the Subaru anyday. I mean, both look pretty ricey when you buy a STI/EVO... might as well go with the one that looks even more fixed up looking. The EVO seriously looks like a fixed up grandma car. I'd be embarass to park an EVO next to a Porsche or Ferrari. At least with the RX-8, it can look decent.
Guess here in So Cali... Appearence is everything.
Usually I like IKE's comments.. because they are funny... but in this last response.. I would have to disagree.
1) Why nitpick about EVO 8s and STIs being modified by dealer or manufacturer only to be a *****.. I mean, I'm sure that's why rotarygod meant.
2) I've always considered the Lancer/Impreza's as just a regular car. Just like RX-8 as a regular version. Then we have a "Modified" version of their cars.. EVO/STI's/Mazdaspeed. I really doubt standard cars come off the lot with exhaust, rims, better suspensions, engine modifications..etc. But then look at what the RX-8 has that the Lancers/Imprezas have... oh wells. It is indeed the money spent that matters... Which RX-8 is pretty expensive compare to the Lancers/Imprezas. Then you have to look at what you paid for that money.
3) STi's and EVOs look pretty bad compare to the stylings of the RX-8/350z/G35 based on my own opinion. Part of the reason I stuck with the RX-8 is because it looked better than the STi's/EVOs. My friend that went test driving with me at the Subaru dealership asked me why I wanted to test drive an STi. I told him, that sucker is fast, and it's fun to drive. After the test drive, it was fast... handles pretty crazy... but it didn't have anything special with the interior/exterior. My friend then told me... "Why don't you just get a Camry or Corolla, it's cheaper and it looks about the same." Actually it does... Look at the EVO's.. no matter how much you fix them up, body kits, wings, rims.. they still look like an old Corolla. I'm 27 years old this week, and I really didn't want to drive a fixed up looking "Corolla" as my daily driver.
Though if I had to pick between a Subaru or Mitsu.. I'd take the Subaru anyday. I mean, both look pretty ricey when you buy a STI/EVO... might as well go with the one that looks even more fixed up looking. The EVO seriously looks like a fixed up grandma car. I'd be embarass to park an EVO next to a Porsche or Ferrari. At least with the RX-8, it can look decent.
Guess here in So Cali... Appearence is everything.
1.) You're right, it was a bit of a ***** comment, and it's what not why
:p2.) See that's where you're wrong, there are special versions of the STi and EVO that would trounce the cars we have here in America, those are the special versions that you can compare to the Mazdaspeed when/if it ever comes out.
3.) I'm indifferent to the EVO's looks, and I like the STi looks. But they beautiful to me because of the performance. Take a decent looking girl and make her funny, intelligent, and just a joy to ride... err be around and she suddenly becomes beautiful. At least that's how I feel... My fiance looks wise isn't anywhere near being the most beautiful person I've ever been with to the outside observer, but to me she's the most beautiful girl on the planet. That prettymuch sums up how I feel about the EVO. As far as the body panels go the STi and EVO are pretty simple and plain looking, some people prefer that. I like the buggy headlights, hoodscoop, and the fender flares on my car based around the sedan body, it has a sleeper look overall but not too much so. After you beat the Porsche or Ferrari around a track in your EVO after parking next to him who's the embarassed one?
06-04-2004, 05:08 AM
#134
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Outlaws eXtreme
Take the money you spent on an STi/RX-8 and buy a used CRX, fix it up with the money and I bet it will beat both those cars. I mean, isn't that what the point of this is? Money spent?
STi put more in the performance of the car. RX-8 put more in the styling. Imagine if there was an in between area...
Take the money you spent on an STi/RX-8 and buy a used CRX, fix it up with the money and I bet it will beat both those cars. I mean, isn't that what the point of this is? Money spent?
STi put more in the performance of the car. RX-8 put more in the styling. Imagine if there was an in between area...
Your first statement is exactly why it's pointless to start comparing cars with mods. There is an in between area, but most of us can't afford it
Off to bed, this cold has kept me up long enough, g'night guys.
06-04-2004, 05:14 AM
#135
2010 Prius - Miss the 8
Originally posted by IkeWRX
1.) You're right, it was a bit of a ***** comment, and it's what not why :p
2.) See that's where you're wrong, there are special versions of the STi and EVO that would trounce the cars we have here in America, those are the special versions that you can compare to the Mazdaspeed when/if it ever comes out.
3.) I'm indifferent to the EVO's looks, and I like the STi looks. But they beautiful to me because of the performance. Take a decent looking girl and make her funny, intelligent, and just a joy to ride... err be around and she suddenly becomes beautiful. At least that's how I feel... My fiance looks wise isn't anywhere near being the most beautiful person I've ever been with to the outside observer, but to me she's the most beautiful girl on the planet. That prettymuch sums up how I feel about the EVO. As far as the body panels go the STi and EVO are pretty simple and plain looking, some people prefer that. I like the buggy headlights, hoodscoop, and the fender flares on my car based around the sedan body, it has a sleeper look overall but not too much so. After you beat the Porsche or Ferrari around a track in your EVO after parking next to him who's the embarassed one?
1.) You're right, it was a bit of a ***** comment, and it's what not why
:p2.) See that's where you're wrong, there are special versions of the STi and EVO that would trounce the cars we have here in America, those are the special versions that you can compare to the Mazdaspeed when/if it ever comes out.
3.) I'm indifferent to the EVO's looks, and I like the STi looks. But they beautiful to me because of the performance. Take a decent looking girl and make her funny, intelligent, and just a joy to ride... err be around and she suddenly becomes beautiful. At least that's how I feel... My fiance looks wise isn't anywhere near being the most beautiful person I've ever been with to the outside observer, but to me she's the most beautiful girl on the planet. That prettymuch sums up how I feel about the EVO. As far as the body panels go the STi and EVO are pretty simple and plain looking, some people prefer that. I like the buggy headlights, hoodscoop, and the fender flares on my car based around the sedan body, it has a sleeper look overall but not too much so. After you beat the Porsche or Ferrari around a track in your EVO after parking next to him who's the embarassed one?
See that's why I enjoy IKE's post.. honest and to the point.. gotta love that.2) But then what is the US versions of the STi/EVOs? They aren't just a "DIFFERENT" car.. they are suped up versions of their predecessors. Go to any dealership and they'll tell you the same. If you go looking for a Lancer, tell them you want a faster Mitsubishi, they'll show you the perfect car.. the EVO. Looks just like the Lancer, but handles like no other, and faster. It is kinda funny when you beat people in a "grandma" looking car though.
3) I agree here. The STi looks a lot better than the EVO. I mean, at least be a "little" different than the rest... STi's stand out compare to the EVOs. I also agree with your analogy on the girlfriend to car thing... I guess it's true, us RX-8 owners are a bit vain.. we traded the inside for the outside. Hehehe.. it's ok, I can live with that. One day I might be able to afford both the Inside and the Outside when I get that Ferrari.
Off Topic real quick to Ike: What's the deal with the WRC? Are they even sold in the dealerships? I saw one at Autobacs, and didn't think much of it. Then I noticed that I wasn't offered to test drive one when I went to the dealership. Is the WRC better than the WRX? Speed wise that is.
06-04-2004, 08:50 AM
#136
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally cant even phathom the reason HOW you could even Dare to compare the EVO (Super rice Box) or the STI (a rally breed car) or even the S2000 ( a BWM style Ripoff) to the originality of the 8! Stock yes they may have a lil more boost, but look at the other side STI and EVO both have turbos STOCK- RX8 doesn't........ how fast would they be w/o the turbos? NON comparison!....
As for the Subaru with out the Turbo the AWD system couldnt handle any decient 1/4 mile time.
I havent driven the 350Z or s2000(frankly dont care to, one is a ricer ant the other looks like a turd...)
As for the price Difference I would pay more ANY day to have alil better class than a BOX on wheels , a Turd shaped car, or a damn bmw stye taking RICER...
As for the Subaru with out the Turbo the AWD system couldnt handle any decient 1/4 mile time.
I havent driven the 350Z or s2000(frankly dont care to, one is a ricer ant the other looks like a turd...)
As for the price Difference I would pay more ANY day to have alil better class than a BOX on wheels , a Turd shaped car, or a damn bmw stye taking RICER...
06-04-2004, 12:36 PM
#137
Registered
Originally posted by IkeWRX
The Celica does handle quite well, not just for a FWD car but for any car even in stock form. One of the big adavantages of the roatary is supposed to be it's light weight yet the Celica is around 500 pounds lighter than the RX-8 with one of those heavy cylinder engines... A high revving cylinder engine at that. As far as potential goes, it can pull around 1g on a skidpad with basic mods, it doesn't seem to be lacking to me. Now I'm not crazy about the Celica or FWD cars in general but I think you need to take a trip to the local autox track and watch a Mini, Celica, ITR, or even Neon take some laps and see that FWD can, if done properly, be damn good on a road course.
Ummm even Ford realized the T-Bird is a joke, it was cancelled after it's first production year in case you don't know (remind me of how the RX-8 performs with an AT again?). Also, the dealers don't do a damn thing to the EVO or STi, that would be the car manufacturers. If you knew 1/10 of what you do about those cars that you do about rotaries you would have never made those comments and I wouldn't be laughing at how ignorant you sound. I really expected more from you than that... If you need to tell yourself that the RX-8 is like the Lancer and Impreza when it costs about the same as the STi and EVO then I feel sorry for you.
To expand on playdoh's excellent post, "some people will call the RX-8 a girly car", some people will call the STi and EVO unimpressive or econoboxes, they're all ignorant.l
The Celica does handle quite well, not just for a FWD car but for any car even in stock form. One of the big adavantages of the roatary is supposed to be it's light weight yet the Celica is around 500 pounds lighter than the RX-8 with one of those heavy cylinder engines... A high revving cylinder engine at that. As far as potential goes, it can pull around 1g on a skidpad with basic mods, it doesn't seem to be lacking to me. Now I'm not crazy about the Celica or FWD cars in general but I think you need to take a trip to the local autox track and watch a Mini, Celica, ITR, or even Neon take some laps and see that FWD can, if done properly, be damn good on a road course.
Ummm even Ford realized the T-Bird is a joke, it was cancelled after it's first production year in case you don't know (remind me of how the RX-8 performs with an AT again?). Also, the dealers don't do a damn thing to the EVO or STi, that would be the car manufacturers. If you knew 1/10 of what you do about those cars that you do about rotaries you would have never made those comments and I wouldn't be laughing at how ignorant you sound. I really expected more from you than that... If you need to tell yourself that the RX-8 is like the Lancer and Impreza when it costs about the same as the STi and EVO then I feel sorry for you.
To expand on playdoh's excellent post, "some people will call the RX-8 a girly car", some people will call the STi and EVO unimpressive or econoboxes, they're all ignorant.l
Outlaws figured it out, I meant manufacturer not dealers. Simple typo, it happens. Get over it.
Here's a wake up call. The EVO is a factory modified Lancer and the STi is a modified Impreza. Where's the confusion? Those cars are econoboxes that have been taken to a different level of performance. My comparison is that the RX-8 is in it's simple, unmodified from the factory form. When we get another version, then we will have the equivalent of the RX-8 version of the EVO or STi. Until then you are looking at the bare bones low end model.
I hate it when ricers judge the performance level of their cars against others solely by how much money they have into it or by how much each car is worth. That is irrelevant. So please don't use the same lame excuse. If I can go out and buy a used car for $500 and then spend $5000 on modifying it so it beats a Ferrari 360 Modena, does that mean I have a better car than the Ferrari for the money spent? Nope. At the end of the day I'd still be the moron going home without the Ferrari. Apply this to the RX-8 vs other car scenario and that's what the argument sounds like. At the end of the day the Celica is still front wheel drive, and the EVO and STi are still nothing more than econobox Impreza's and Lancers that have a little money into them.
If total money spent is the only thing important then I have the ultimate auto-x car already. I bought my 1st gen RX-7 GSL-SE for $300, spent $500 rebuilding the engine and another $300 on suspension. I have never lost to a single fwd car on the auto-x track and beat up on most rwd cars as well. I have never lost to a WRX or an EVO out there either since they are actually quite pathetic there. About the only thing faster aside from the unlimiteds are the Miata's! Does this mean that my car is better than any of the others because of how much I have into it. NO! Get over the damn price comparisons and please don't tell me about how those other cars would be me in a rally race. Irrelevant. I drive on pavement 100% of the time anyways.
Money may buy speed but it doesn't buy class. Study it. Learn it.
FWIW: The T-bird is still in production. It's funny how you started to ask how the AT RX-8 compares to the T-bird since it is an auto. I was only comparing it to the RX-8 in general. That's OK. Isn't the T-bird $10K more than the AT RX-8? I thought you were hung up on price comparisons. That would make your comment irrelevant wouldn't it? By your standards the T-birds price would be justified only if it is compared to the AT RX-8. How about against the standard? When someone makes a worthwhile comparison to another car, you immediately bash the other car but stick up for the cheap tin can cars. It's all or nothing in an argument and you've deviated.
IKE: I've never had an issue with you before, unlike many others here, but I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just some little ricer kid. Don't insult my intelligence again without first knowing what you are talking about. You want to know why the Celica and other FWD econoboxes are so light? Go weigh the drivetrain sometime and tell me how much it weighs. I thought you might have actually had the ability to figure that one out on your own. Go listen to the amount of roadnoise in any of those cars. Hell get in the WRX and listen then go compare it to the RX-8. The Sti has zero padding and cheap thin carpet. There's not even a radio. Those few things didn't make an appreciable preformance difference. Those cars all sound cheap and hollow when you close the doors. The RX-8 doesn't. As I said earlier, money buys speed easier than it does class. Class is something the EVO, WRX, Celica, Civics, etc... lack. They are just cheap cars.
I weep for the future if the comeback against me was actually considered good.
If you're over yourself I'd still like to consider you someone who I don't have to argue with all of the time. Like I said you've never been an *** to me before. Let this one be the only time.
06-04-2004, 05:22 PM
#139
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rotarygod
IKE: You've never been an ******* to me before so why'd you start now?
Outlaws figured it out, I meant manufacturer not dealers. Simple typo, it happens. Get over it.
Here's a wake up call. The EVO is a factory modified Lancer and the STi is a modified Impreza. Where's the confusion? Those cars are econoboxes that have been taken to a different level of performance. My comparison is that the RX-8 is in it's simple, unmodified from the factory form. When we get another version, then we will have the equivalent of the RX-8 version of the EVO or STi. Until then you are looking at the bare bones low end model.
I hate it when ricers judge the performance level of their cars against others solely by how much money they have into it or by how much each car is worth. That is irrelevant. So please don't use the same lame excuse. If I can go out and buy a used car for $500 and then spend $5000 on modifying it so it beats a Ferrari 360 Modena, does that mean I have a better car than the Ferrari for the money spent? Nope. At the end of the day I'd still be the moron going home without the Ferrari. Apply this to the RX-8 vs other car scenario and that's what the argument sounds like. At the end of the day the Celica is still front wheel drive, and the EVO and STi are still nothing more than econobox Impreza's and Lancers that have a little money into them.
If total money spent is the only thing important then I have the ultimate auto-x car already. I bought my 1st gen RX-7 GSL-SE for $300, spent $500 rebuilding the engine and another $300 on suspension. I have never lost to a single fwd car on the auto-x track and beat up on most rwd cars as well. I have never lost to a WRX or an EVO out there either since they are actually quite pathetic there. About the only thing faster aside from the unlimiteds are the Miata's! Does this mean that my car is better than any of the others because of how much I have into it. NO! Get over the damn price comparisons and please don't tell me about how those other cars would be me in a rally race. Irrelevant. I drive on pavement 100% of the time anyways.
Money may buy speed but it doesn't buy class. Study it. Learn it.
FWIW: The T-bird is still in production. It's funny how you started to ask how the AT RX-8 compares to the T-bird since it is an auto. I was only comparing it to the RX-8 in general. That's OK. Isn't the T-bird $10K more than the AT RX-8? I thought you were hung up on price comparisons. That would make your comment irrelevant wouldn't it? By your standards the T-birds price would be justified only if it is compared to the AT RX-8. How about against the standard? When someone makes a worthwhile comparison to another car, you immediately bash the other car but stick up for the cheap tin can cars. It's all or nothing in an argument and you've deviated.
IKE: I've never had an issue with you before, unlike many others here, but I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just some little ricer kid. Don't insult my intelligence again without first knowing what you are talking about. You want to know why the Celica and other FWD econoboxes are so light? Go weigh the drivetrain sometime and tell me how much it weighs. I thought you might have actually had the ability to figure that one out on your own. Go listen to the amount of roadnoise in any of those cars. Hell get in the WRX and listen then go compare it to the RX-8. The Sti has zero padding and cheap thin carpet. There's not even a radio. Those few things didn't make an appreciable preformance difference. Those cars all sound cheap and hollow when you close the doors. The RX-8 doesn't. As I said earlier, money buys speed easier than it does class. Class is something the EVO, WRX, Celica, Civics, etc... lack. They are just cheap cars.
I weep for the future if the comeback against me was actually considered good.
If you're over yourself I'd still like to consider you someone who I don't have to argue with all of the time. Like I said you've never been an *** to me before. Let this one be the only time.
IKE: You've never been an ******* to me before so why'd you start now?
Outlaws figured it out, I meant manufacturer not dealers. Simple typo, it happens. Get over it.
Here's a wake up call. The EVO is a factory modified Lancer and the STi is a modified Impreza. Where's the confusion? Those cars are econoboxes that have been taken to a different level of performance. My comparison is that the RX-8 is in it's simple, unmodified from the factory form. When we get another version, then we will have the equivalent of the RX-8 version of the EVO or STi. Until then you are looking at the bare bones low end model.
I hate it when ricers judge the performance level of their cars against others solely by how much money they have into it or by how much each car is worth. That is irrelevant. So please don't use the same lame excuse. If I can go out and buy a used car for $500 and then spend $5000 on modifying it so it beats a Ferrari 360 Modena, does that mean I have a better car than the Ferrari for the money spent? Nope. At the end of the day I'd still be the moron going home without the Ferrari. Apply this to the RX-8 vs other car scenario and that's what the argument sounds like. At the end of the day the Celica is still front wheel drive, and the EVO and STi are still nothing more than econobox Impreza's and Lancers that have a little money into them.
If total money spent is the only thing important then I have the ultimate auto-x car already. I bought my 1st gen RX-7 GSL-SE for $300, spent $500 rebuilding the engine and another $300 on suspension. I have never lost to a single fwd car on the auto-x track and beat up on most rwd cars as well. I have never lost to a WRX or an EVO out there either since they are actually quite pathetic there. About the only thing faster aside from the unlimiteds are the Miata's! Does this mean that my car is better than any of the others because of how much I have into it. NO! Get over the damn price comparisons and please don't tell me about how those other cars would be me in a rally race. Irrelevant. I drive on pavement 100% of the time anyways.
Money may buy speed but it doesn't buy class. Study it. Learn it.
FWIW: The T-bird is still in production. It's funny how you started to ask how the AT RX-8 compares to the T-bird since it is an auto. I was only comparing it to the RX-8 in general. That's OK. Isn't the T-bird $10K more than the AT RX-8? I thought you were hung up on price comparisons. That would make your comment irrelevant wouldn't it? By your standards the T-birds price would be justified only if it is compared to the AT RX-8. How about against the standard? When someone makes a worthwhile comparison to another car, you immediately bash the other car but stick up for the cheap tin can cars. It's all or nothing in an argument and you've deviated.
IKE: I've never had an issue with you before, unlike many others here, but I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just some little ricer kid. Don't insult my intelligence again without first knowing what you are talking about. You want to know why the Celica and other FWD econoboxes are so light? Go weigh the drivetrain sometime and tell me how much it weighs. I thought you might have actually had the ability to figure that one out on your own. Go listen to the amount of roadnoise in any of those cars. Hell get in the WRX and listen then go compare it to the RX-8. The Sti has zero padding and cheap thin carpet. There's not even a radio. Those few things didn't make an appreciable preformance difference. Those cars all sound cheap and hollow when you close the doors. The RX-8 doesn't. As I said earlier, money buys speed easier than it does class. Class is something the EVO, WRX, Celica, Civics, etc... lack. They are just cheap cars.
I weep for the future if the comeback against me was actually considered good.
If you're over yourself I'd still like to consider you someone who I don't have to argue with all of the time. Like I said you've never been an *** to me before. Let this one be the only time.
I don't quite get what you mean by factory modified, every car on the planet is factory modified, that's what they do in factories... They tweak things on cars to make them faster, more fuel efficient, softer suspension, stiffer suspension, etc., etc. Also if you think it's just factory modified then wouldn't they start with a base model and then modify some things? The EVO and STi start from the ground up as an STi or EVO when they are built hence it's stock and is a totally different car. The Mazdaspeed RX-8 may or may not be the same case, most likely it will basicly be an RX-8 with some tweaks, that is NOT the case with the EVO or STi they are built from the ground up as totally different cars.
I agree cares should not be judged by how much money is put into them which is why the new price of the car in stock form should be compared. I agree with everything in that paragraph until you get to the part about an STi or EVO being a lancer of Impreza with a little money put into them, and that's where you show your ingnorance about these cars.
No I'm not defending cheap tin can cars I'm defending good cars that are great cars in their pricerange, and the EVO and STi happen to fall into the pricerange of the RX-8 so there is some basis for comparison. Yes they are totally different cars and all great choices depending on what you want in a car. I respect all of them and have defended the RX-8 many times when it's been bashed by someone that has no clue what they are talking about.
Lastly, everything I've heard indicates the T-bird is being discontinued and Ford is just moving and producing cars with whatever is left of their excess inventory, I could be wrong but who really cares. I think we both agree there nothing all that impressive about the T-bird unless you're just into the nostalgia.
I can assure you I'm not a ricer and am simply a car enthusiast defending other good cars from ignorance. If you really want to know why there is road noise in those cars it has little to do with drivetrain weight (I can guarantee you the drivetrain on the EVO and STi are far heavier than that of the RX-8 yet the WRX and RX-8 weigh about the same) and everything to do with the lack of sound deadening materials used in order to save weight. The doors have frameless windows to save weight and also lack extra sound deadening material, it's a compromise for the sake of performance, not cost. The hood might also feel cheap to you when you close it because it's aluminum, does that mean it's cheap? On the stereo note, it's an option and you can buy an STi from the dealer with a factory stereo. This is a feature that I and many others appreciate since you can get a much better aftermarket stereo for far cheaper than any unit from any car manufacturer.
As for all your silly comments about class, I really don't care if someone thinks my car is classy. I buy a car for myself, to enjoy driving not to impress people that think the badge on a car or how the door sounds when you close it has anything to do with class. If you ask me someone that puts overall performance, a fun driving experience, and the great feeling a brutal acceleration and lateral g's above a higher grade of plastic interior and solid sounding doors or a perceived high end badge is pretty freaking classy in my book.
If you want to take my response as being an ******* towards you so be it, it's not intended that way. You don't have to argue with me we can certainly discuss this like adults, but your elitest fanboy attitude has to go if that is ever going to happen. There are a lot of great cars out there in every price range, the STi and EVO are two of them and if you can't acknowledge that you need to remove your rotary shaped blinders.
Regards,
Ike
Last edited by IkeWRX; 06-04-2004 at 06:04 PM.
06-04-2004, 06:07 PM
#140
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by OrigMiniViper
I personally cant even phathom the reason HOW you could even Dare to compare the EVO (Super rice Box) or the STI (a rally breed car) or even the S2000 ( a BWM style Ripoff) to the originality of the 8! Stock yes they may have a lil more boost, but look at the other side STI and EVO both have turbos STOCK- RX8 doesn't........ how fast would they be w/o the turbos? NON comparison!....
As for the Subaru with out the Turbo the AWD system couldnt handle any decient 1/4 mile time.
I havent driven the 350Z or s2000(frankly dont care to, one is a ricer ant the other looks like a turd...)
As for the price Difference I would pay more ANY day to have alil better class than a BOX on wheels , a Turd shaped car, or a damn bmw stye taking RICER...
I personally cant even phathom the reason HOW you could even Dare to compare the EVO (Super rice Box) or the STI (a rally breed car) or even the S2000 ( a BWM style Ripoff) to the originality of the 8! Stock yes they may have a lil more boost, but look at the other side STI and EVO both have turbos STOCK- RX8 doesn't........ how fast would they be w/o the turbos? NON comparison!....
As for the Subaru with out the Turbo the AWD system couldnt handle any decient 1/4 mile time.
I havent driven the 350Z or s2000(frankly dont care to, one is a ricer ant the other looks like a turd...)
As for the price Difference I would pay more ANY day to have alil better class than a BOX on wheels , a Turd shaped car, or a damn bmw stye taking RICER...
06-04-2004, 06:41 PM
#142
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by OrigMiniViper
others come with turbos....
RX-8 doesnt.....
add one
then compare
U missed the point...
others come with turbos....
RX-8 doesnt.....
add one
then compare
U missed the point...
06-04-2004, 07:49 PM
#143
Registered
I'm not saying I don't like the WRX. I actually almost bought one once. I thought they were fun cars. The suspension was too soft and the abs needed some work but still very fun. Nothing that couldn't be fixed aftermarket. I'd be happy to own one and I'm glad you enjoy yours. I am defending that the RX-8 is not a car that can be compared to them in any way. This includes price and performance. It is irrelevant which one does what better. This is why I am confused why there are ANY negative comments about ANY aspect of the RX-8. It doesn't matter if it is price or gas mileage. It is irrelevant. I'm proud that you aren't a ricer. Very glad to hear it. My respect for you has returned. Please don't use their rationale to argue against other cars though. That is what ricers do to justify their own cars existence. There is a place in the world for every car and a type of person for every car. The fact of the matter is that the WRX and the EVO, started their lives as an economy car and then were redesigned for better performance. If it looks like an Impreza and is built on an Impreza chassis, it's an Impreza. It's even called the Impreza WRX. The EVO is called the Lancer Evolution. It's a Lancer. Where am I wrong? The whole point of saying that is because a hopped up RX-8 will still be a hopped up RX-8. It doesn't matter if the suspension changed, the engine changed, and the interior changed. If the chassis is an RX-8 and it looks like an RX-8, it's an RX-8. Where am I wrong there? This sounds equal among all 3 vehicles to me so how is one different than the other? It isn't. The difference is that the RX-8 started life as a performance sports car. It's upgraded model will no doubt be on a much higher level. The WRX and EVO started as economy cars that have made it to the perfomance level. I'm not ignorant. I'm correct. Deny it if you want to but you know it's true. AWD has it's own advantages but again, it is irrelevant.
I'm going to quote your main problem. "If Mazda adds FI to the RX-8 and it can compete in the same pricerange as the EVO or STi I'll compare". You're still on the ricer price range justification. Stop it. It's a futile argument and is really ignorant. Irrelevant. If I like the RX-8 should I buy an EVO because it is faster. How is that a better deal if I don't like it? The best deal is made when you buy the car tht makes you the most happy. Happiness makes price irrelevant. You have a WRX. It was the best deal for you. Others don't. It doesn't mean they could have had better car for the money. A better car for the money would be the same car but cheaper. If they don't like the car, it isn't better. Where is price involved anywhere? Smart people don't buy cars solely on price. If they do, they don't develop an emotional attachment to them and are just owning transportation at that point or they are ricers whose only concern is how cheap he can beat the other morons to the next stoplight. Like I said, I like the WRX. The EVO wouldn't be so bad if it had a new front end. It doesn't matter if they cost $10,000 new and run 4 second quarter miles while being able to pull 2 g's in cornering. I'd still buy the RX-8 because it is what I want. How do I not get the better deal again?
Here's another one from you. "I agree cars should not be judged by how much money is put into them which is why the new price of the car in stock form should be compared." How is the price of a car in stock form not reflective of the money manufacturers put into them vs the base models they were inspired from? Someone is spending the money to modify them. It doesn't matter if it is you or the manufacturer. The only thing different is who does it. You just bought it that way. I'll directly quote you again for the answer. "...every car on the planet is factory modified, that's what they do in factories... They tweak things on cars to make them faster, more fuel efficient, softer suspension, stiffer suspension, etc., etc."
You have zero relevant arguments to this thread. Don't add another one.
I'm going to quote your main problem. "If Mazda adds FI to the RX-8 and it can compete in the same pricerange as the EVO or STi I'll compare". You're still on the ricer price range justification. Stop it. It's a futile argument and is really ignorant. Irrelevant. If I like the RX-8 should I buy an EVO because it is faster. How is that a better deal if I don't like it? The best deal is made when you buy the car tht makes you the most happy. Happiness makes price irrelevant. You have a WRX. It was the best deal for you. Others don't. It doesn't mean they could have had better car for the money. A better car for the money would be the same car but cheaper. If they don't like the car, it isn't better. Where is price involved anywhere? Smart people don't buy cars solely on price. If they do, they don't develop an emotional attachment to them and are just owning transportation at that point or they are ricers whose only concern is how cheap he can beat the other morons to the next stoplight. Like I said, I like the WRX. The EVO wouldn't be so bad if it had a new front end. It doesn't matter if they cost $10,000 new and run 4 second quarter miles while being able to pull 2 g's in cornering. I'd still buy the RX-8 because it is what I want. How do I not get the better deal again?
Here's another one from you. "I agree cars should not be judged by how much money is put into them which is why the new price of the car in stock form should be compared." How is the price of a car in stock form not reflective of the money manufacturers put into them vs the base models they were inspired from? Someone is spending the money to modify them. It doesn't matter if it is you or the manufacturer. The only thing different is who does it. You just bought it that way. I'll directly quote you again for the answer. "...every car on the planet is factory modified, that's what they do in factories... They tweak things on cars to make them faster, more fuel efficient, softer suspension, stiffer suspension, etc., etc."
You have zero relevant arguments to this thread. Don't add another one.
Last edited by rotarygod; 06-04-2004 at 07:52 PM.
06-04-2004, 07:51 PM
#144
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Outlaws eXtreme
Off Topic real quick to Ike: What's the deal with the WRC? Are they even sold in the dealerships? I saw one at Autobacs, and didn't think much of it. Then I noticed that I wasn't offered to test drive one when I went to the dealership. Is the WRC better than the WRX? Speed wise that is.
Off Topic real quick to Ike: What's the deal with the WRC? Are they even sold in the dealerships? I saw one at Autobacs, and didn't think much of it. Then I noticed that I wasn't offered to test drive one when I went to the dealership. Is the WRC better than the WRX? Speed wise that is.
I'm not sure exactly what you're reffering to, do you eman the actula car that they use in the WRC? You can buy the WRC version, and a few other rally ready versions of the car from Prodrive but I dount a dealer in the US would have one unless it's just there for display and making a tour in the US.
http://www.prodrive.com/defaultflash.asp?M=6
There is also a Solberg edition called the WR1 which was built to commemorate the 2003 drivers crown that he won and it's 325hp and has a few other features as well as prodrive parts. It's not available for sale in the US to my knowledge.
http://www.supercars.net/cars/2004@$...za%20WR1g.html
06-04-2004, 08:29 PM
#145
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rotarygod
I'm not saying I don't like the WRX. I actually almost bought one once. I thought they were fun cars. The suspension was too soft and the abs needed some work but still very fun. Nothing that couldn't be fixed aftermarket. I'd be happy to own one and I'm glad you enjoy yours. I am defending that the RX-8 is not a car that can be compared to them in any way. This includes price and performance. It is irrelevant which one does what better. This is why I am confused why there are ANY negative comments about ANY aspect of the RX-8. It doesn't matter if it is price or gas mileage. It is irrelevant. I'm proud that you aren't a ricer. Very glad to hear it. My respect for you has returned. Please don't use their rationale to argue against other cars though. That is what ricers do to justify their own cars existence. There is a place in the world for every car and a type of person for every car. The fact of the matter is that the WRX and the EVO, started their lives as an economy car and then were redesigned for better performance. If it looks like an Impreza and is built on an Impreza chassis, it's an Impreza. It's even called the Impreza WRX. The EVO is called the Lancer Evolution. It's a Lancer. Where am I wrong? The whole point of saying that is because a hopped up RX-8 will still be a hopped up RX-8. It doesn't matter if the suspension changed, the engine changed, and the interior changed. If the chassis is an RX-8 and it looks like an RX-8, it's an RX-8. Where am I wrong there? This sounds equal among all 3 vehicles to me so how is one different than the other? It isn't. The difference is that the RX-8 started life as a performance sports car. It's upgraded model will no doubt be on a much higher level. The WRX and EVO started as economy cars that have made it to the perfomance level. I'm not ignorant. I'm correct. Deny it if you want to but you know it's true. AWD has it's own advantages but again, it is irrelevant.
I'm going to quote your main problem. "If Mazda adds FI to the RX-8 and it can compete in the same pricerange as the EVO or STi I'll compare". You're still on the ricer price range justification. Stop it. It's a futile argument and is really ignorant. Irrelevant. If I like the RX-8 should I buy an EVO because it is faster. How is that a better deal if I don't like it? The best deal is made when you buy the car tht makes you the most happy. Happiness makes price irrelevant. You have a WRX. It was the best deal for you. Others don't. It doesn't mean they could have had better car for the money. A better car for the money would be the same car but cheaper. If they don't like the car, it isn't better. Where is price involved anywhere? Smart people don't buy cars solely on price. If they do, they don't develop an emotional attachment to them and are just owning transportation at that point or they are ricers whose only concern is how cheap he can beat the other morons to the next stoplight. Like I said, I like the WRX. The EVO wouldn't be so bad if it had a new front end. It doesn't matter if they cost $10,000 new and run 4 second quarter miles while being able to pull 2 g's in cornering. I'd still buy the RX-8 because it is what I want. How do I not get the better deal again?
Here's another one from you. "I agree cars should not be judged by how much money is put into them which is why the new price of the car in stock form should be compared." How is the price of a car in stock form not reflective of the money manufacturers put into them vs the base models they were inspired from? Someone is spending the money to modify them. It doesn't matter if it is you or the manufacturer. The only thing different is who does it. You just bought it that way. I'll directly quote you again for the answer. "...every car on the planet is factory modified, that's what they do in factories... They tweak things on cars to make them faster, more fuel efficient, softer suspension, stiffer suspension, etc., etc."
You have zero relevant arguments to this thread. Don't add another one.
I'm not saying I don't like the WRX. I actually almost bought one once. I thought they were fun cars. The suspension was too soft and the abs needed some work but still very fun. Nothing that couldn't be fixed aftermarket. I'd be happy to own one and I'm glad you enjoy yours. I am defending that the RX-8 is not a car that can be compared to them in any way. This includes price and performance. It is irrelevant which one does what better. This is why I am confused why there are ANY negative comments about ANY aspect of the RX-8. It doesn't matter if it is price or gas mileage. It is irrelevant. I'm proud that you aren't a ricer. Very glad to hear it. My respect for you has returned. Please don't use their rationale to argue against other cars though. That is what ricers do to justify their own cars existence. There is a place in the world for every car and a type of person for every car. The fact of the matter is that the WRX and the EVO, started their lives as an economy car and then were redesigned for better performance. If it looks like an Impreza and is built on an Impreza chassis, it's an Impreza. It's even called the Impreza WRX. The EVO is called the Lancer Evolution. It's a Lancer. Where am I wrong? The whole point of saying that is because a hopped up RX-8 will still be a hopped up RX-8. It doesn't matter if the suspension changed, the engine changed, and the interior changed. If the chassis is an RX-8 and it looks like an RX-8, it's an RX-8. Where am I wrong there? This sounds equal among all 3 vehicles to me so how is one different than the other? It isn't. The difference is that the RX-8 started life as a performance sports car. It's upgraded model will no doubt be on a much higher level. The WRX and EVO started as economy cars that have made it to the perfomance level. I'm not ignorant. I'm correct. Deny it if you want to but you know it's true. AWD has it's own advantages but again, it is irrelevant.
I'm going to quote your main problem. "If Mazda adds FI to the RX-8 and it can compete in the same pricerange as the EVO or STi I'll compare". You're still on the ricer price range justification. Stop it. It's a futile argument and is really ignorant. Irrelevant. If I like the RX-8 should I buy an EVO because it is faster. How is that a better deal if I don't like it? The best deal is made when you buy the car tht makes you the most happy. Happiness makes price irrelevant. You have a WRX. It was the best deal for you. Others don't. It doesn't mean they could have had better car for the money. A better car for the money would be the same car but cheaper. If they don't like the car, it isn't better. Where is price involved anywhere? Smart people don't buy cars solely on price. If they do, they don't develop an emotional attachment to them and are just owning transportation at that point or they are ricers whose only concern is how cheap he can beat the other morons to the next stoplight. Like I said, I like the WRX. The EVO wouldn't be so bad if it had a new front end. It doesn't matter if they cost $10,000 new and run 4 second quarter miles while being able to pull 2 g's in cornering. I'd still buy the RX-8 because it is what I want. How do I not get the better deal again?
Here's another one from you. "I agree cars should not be judged by how much money is put into them which is why the new price of the car in stock form should be compared." How is the price of a car in stock form not reflective of the money manufacturers put into them vs the base models they were inspired from? Someone is spending the money to modify them. It doesn't matter if it is you or the manufacturer. The only thing different is who does it. You just bought it that way. I'll directly quote you again for the answer. "...every car on the planet is factory modified, that's what they do in factories... They tweak things on cars to make them faster, more fuel efficient, softer suspension, stiffer suspension, etc., etc."
You have zero relevant arguments to this thread. Don't add another one.
I don't care if their shell or chassis was taken from an economy car, they are not economy cars and are very impressive performance cars. I never once in this thread said they were better than the RX-8 nor have I insulted the RX-8, yet you call the STi and EVO "cheap tin cans". I fully agree that whether the STi, EVO, and RX-8 is the best car for you depends on what you are looking for in a car and I have stated that many times before. Which is the whole reason I take offense to some of your comments where you needlessly bash something you don't know much about simply because you think the RX-8 is a better car.
Lastly, it matters quite a bit who modifys the car, if it's manufactured by the factory it's going to be far more raliable in most cases and you have full factorty and warranty support. Which you will not get from a car that you modify yourself.
I've had many relevant arguments in both my threads, and you do nothing to prove them wrong other than making ad hominem attacks by calling me a ricer or by begging the question.
06-04-2004, 08:47 PM
#146
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by IkeWRX
How is it ricer rationale to want to compare cars in the same pricerange. That's just assanine to think the way, yes the STi, EVO, and RX-8 are very different types of cars. However they are supposed to be performance minded and fall into the same pricing category which makes them very comparable.
How is it ricer rationale to want to compare cars in the same pricerange. That's just assanine to think the way, yes the STi, EVO, and RX-8 are very different types of cars. However they are supposed to be performance minded and fall into the same pricing category which makes them very comparable.
The Rx-8 is a different type of a car. It has no "direct" competition. ..Yet it falls in to every catagory. Mazda said the rx8 is not a true sports car, yet not a sports sedan and the end result was a crossover type car. I can respect that. The rx-8 is an absolute bargain. You can buy an rx8 if you are in the market for a 3 series BMW, LEXUS IS300, ACURA, etc.
Or you can buy the rx8 if yhou are in the market for an S2000, 350Z, etc.
Its the one car that fits alot of different molds. I bought the rx8 because of how it feels to drive it. It doesn't feel like any other car I have ever driven, its simply amazing.
So to say they are in the same pricing catagory which makes the m comparable may be true but there are other things to compare than just speed/acceleration. What it gives up there, it more than returns in quality, handling, feel, fun, etc. No other car can offer me so much.
The only good thing bout an EVO or WRX its easier to do the big nasty in the back seat.
06-04-2004, 09:06 PM
#147
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think what RG is really tring to say he is just putting it nicely but I wont...
If u buy a chocalate covered piece of ****...It is still ****
The reason why it is Not Comparable it because .... WEll here I give you this task...
CAll Car and Driver magazine...
Order the back issue Road Test annual
2003 Ultimate Comparisons
.........................................
They are smart enough to know what is Comparable to the rx-8
They compare real Challengers
Infiniti G35 coupe
Ford Mustang cobra SVT
RX-8
................................................
Thats it!
NOTHING else compares...
But instead u want to compare prices ok lets compare prices of a base"starting" vehicle that hasnt been in production ever before
Like RG said you will have the "tin cans" of Lancer and the Imprenza. Are you catching the point yet?
Until the rx8 has been modified by the Company for as many years as the STi or EVo have been you cannot compare. Simply put. Anything else said different (I have to agree with RG again) is irrelevant.
Right now 1st year the Rx8 is just a platform, give them the time that Subaru and mitsu had and see what happens...
The Rx8 will Evolve much better and u will then get your Comparison to the models out now... but by then you will still probally be pissing into the wind saying the Rx8 isnt up to speed with the NEW Riceboxes on the market. Duh! If you havent noticed the 8(I mean original) didnt come out into the puplic market at the same time as the Original lancer or Imprenza.
Does this even so slightly put light on the subject for you yet?
If u buy a chocalate covered piece of ****...It is still ****
The reason why it is Not Comparable it because .... WEll here I give you this task...
CAll Car and Driver magazine...
Order the back issue Road Test annual
2003 Ultimate Comparisons
.........................................
They are smart enough to know what is Comparable to the rx-8
They compare real Challengers
Infiniti G35 coupe
Ford Mustang cobra SVT
RX-8
................................................
Thats it!
NOTHING else compares...
But instead u want to compare prices ok lets compare prices of a base"starting" vehicle that hasnt been in production ever before
Like RG said you will have the "tin cans" of Lancer and the Imprenza. Are you catching the point yet?
Until the rx8 has been modified by the Company for as many years as the STi or EVo have been you cannot compare. Simply put. Anything else said different (I have to agree with RG again) is irrelevant.
Right now 1st year the Rx8 is just a platform, give them the time that Subaru and mitsu had and see what happens...
The Rx8 will Evolve much better and u will then get your Comparison to the models out now... but by then you will still probally be pissing into the wind saying the Rx8 isnt up to speed with the NEW Riceboxes on the market. Duh! If you havent noticed the 8(I mean original) didnt come out into the puplic market at the same time as the Original lancer or Imprenza.
Does this even so slightly put light on the subject for you yet?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
czr
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
4
09-13-2015 11:37 AM
Tsurugi
New Member Forum
0
09-07-2015 08:27 PM