RX8_Man

Why would they make this car only have 162lb ft of torque? I think it needs atleast 240. Hell 300 would be nice. You'll have to rev the **** out of it to get it to perform, like the S2000. That's why they rev to the moon.

stan11003

Remember we are talking about a car that is 2700 to 3000 pounds. From what I've heard the rotary revs much faster than a piston engine. According to road and track 90% torque will be available at 3000 rpm.

PLUS: if you have time check this link it explains why high rpm torque is better.
http://www.vettenet.org/torquehp.html

zoom44

i agree! 162 lbs/ft has sounded low to me since i first heard it? i have never had a rotory before is this normal? i'm used to alot more but ive mostly driven muscle cars. i even got to drive my dads '87 buick grand national on occasion which delivered 300bhp and 300 lbs/ft of torque! it would shove you into your seat! 0-60 in under 5 seconds..... unless the road was wet and then forget. so sometimes (i can't beleive i'm saying this! )you can have to much torque. still, i want my rx-8 to be the first one off the line at a stoplight!

Pork Chop

162 does sound a bit low on paper, but you have to remember this is a 1.3L normally aspirated motor, so you really can't expect it to have gobs of torque.

To make up for that, the motor revs to 9000 rpm and the 6 speed tranny should have relatively tight gearing. On an S2000, a similarly "torqueless" car, it is a little gutless off the line, but once it reaches the middle of the rpm range it's got plenty of punch. And when it reaches 6000, you'd better make sure the steering wheel is pointed straight! Keep in mind that this "torqueless" car manages 0-60 in the low 5 sec range and runs the 1/4 mile in the low 14/high 13 sec range.

I think the important thing for Mazda to focus on is the weight. Even the 2970 lb that R&T quoted is a bit heavy IMO. Load the car down with a few passengers, turn on the AC, and the thing will struggle. Mazda needs to keep the weight below 3000 lb.

stan11003

I think that a automatic transmissiion will kill this engine.

NOTA V6

If that long torque/hp article teaches us anything, it's not the peak number that matters. It's the gearing and longevity of the torque peak. High revs + proper gearing make the comparatively low peak torque figure kinda moot. Especially if it peaks at say 7500 rpm and has 90% of it available at 3000rpm. That is a wide power band. If the gearing is made to take advantage of that wide band, 162 lb./ft. will be fine with me until RB or Mazdaspeed makes a exhaust system to raise it up a bit.

RX8_Man

I've never had a rotary engined car. Maybe it's different. Granted it revs to 9k, but who in the hell wants to be at the rev limit everytime you want a little "go"? For instance, the 350Z has 287hp and 274lb ft. That's where the RX should be or damn close. The R&T article said that he had to rape it to get really good power which could be cumbersome in everyday use. I drove the Rx-7 once and it pulled like a crazed animal. if it's similar to that, i'll take it. Actually, I think either way I am going to get this car. I love the way it looks in yellow and I'm sure it'll do just fine.

stan11003

at first....

In a brief test drive, I found that this powerplant, much like the Honda S2000's VTEC inline-4, produced most of its power in the upper rev range, which is fun and rewarding on a racetrack but quite cumbersome during real-world driving. I told Mazda's head of product planning, Phil Martens, that the Renesis needed more pop down low.

"We're working on that now," he replied.

then a few months later...

Turn the ignition key, and the 2-rotor Wankel comes to life with a familiar, melodious zing. Depress the accelerator pedal and you'll find that the 2970-lb. sports car leaves the line in appropriate sports-car fashion, chirping its rear 225/45ZR-18 tires before leaping forward. (Standard models will come with 16-in. wheels.) It was immediately evident that this latest version of the Renesis had significantly more low-end punch than before, but its sweet spot remained in the middle of the rpm spectrum.


With 90 percent of peak torque available at 3250 rpm, the RX-8 seems to find its true stride when the tachometer needle sweeps past the 3000-rpm mark, surging forward with alacrity. And the acceleration keeps building all the way to its 9000-rpm redline. Sixty miles per hour comes and goes in roughly 6 seconds; the quarter-mile mark in about 14.5.

Now?

My guess is that they haven't stopped tweaking the engine/drivetrain?

Torque is not everything: try a 126 lb-ft Lotus 340R, it does zero to 60 mph in 5.0 seconds, quarter-mile mark in 13.6 sec. at 99.7 mph

NOTA V6

Welcome to rotaries. Drive 'em like you stole 'em. Repeat after me: "Redline buzzers are there to be heard". :D

Pork Chop

You're not going to see 350Z-like torque numbers without forced induction. I'm guessing the RX7 you drove was a 3rd gen? Well, the sequential turbos helped that rotary make a lot of torque. You can't expect the same from an NA motor.

I think most people that are used to regular rotaries or any Honda/Acura VTEC motor should be ok with the RX8. If you're coming from a large displacement torque monster, then you might want to take an extended test drive before you buy one.

Torquey motors are great and in everyday driving situations, they're far more useful. It's nice being able to lug it at 2000 rpm, whereas in your torque-challenged car, you'd have to drop down a gear (or 2) to get some pop. Then again, if the shifter in the RX8 is anything like a Miata or S2000, then it will be no problem for me to row through the gears all the time.

RX8_Man

Yeah, the Rx-7 I drove was 3rd generation and had the turbos. I'm driving a Maxima now that has 255hp and 200sum lb ft. It does me just fine. The power is there when I need it. I would get the 350Z, but they have 5 different models and I not paying 35k for 287hp. I'd find a nice 00 Vette for 30-35K and be done with it.

Rich

"I've never driven a rotary, but 162 lb. feet of torque is too low!"

If you've never driven a rotary, you'll just have to either trust those of us who have or really understand the torque/hp link to understand that the rating of "162 lb. feet" means very little.

Also, if you've come from muscle cars (or most cars!), revving the engine out isn't a whole lot of fun. On rotaries it's a blast!

If you aren't familiar with rotaties, ask yourself why there is such an obsessive following when there hasn't been a new rotary engined car in the states for years. They're truly special engines, but you've got to drive one to understand why.


Happiness is 8,000 PRM with more to go! :D

rbeverjr

Of course, a broad torque band is desirable. A peak torque at high rpm is acceptable under these conditions particularly when the engine is as high revving as 9000 rpm! Nevertheless, this wonderful engine is underpowered. The admirable qualities of this torque band can not make up for the fact that several sport cars have torques of apx. 250-300 ft-lb. Some cars you can get used for a price similar to the new RX8 that will provide more than 300 ft-lbs (ex. the corvette).

Don't disc the muscle cars and dragsters. That's an American heritage. Here in America streets are often straight, where as curves are in abundance in Europe. Perhaps, that is why historically America seems to respect the quarter mile racers while Europe esteems handling?

In the end, perhaps what matters is not a discussion of torque but the absolute fact of how long does it take to make it through the quarter mile and what is the slalom speed.

I do hope that Mazda will offer a turbo (or otherwise enhanced engine) for this car. Otherwise, the performance of the RX8 may not compete well with true sport cars of circa 2004.

RX8_Man

Everyone keeps saying that it'll be okay if your at 9k RPMS. That's a given. How many times a day are you at the redline in your current car? Most cars feel good when you push em to redline. I'm talking mostly about everyday, around the block driving. You need to have the TQ available. I had a V6 Honda Accord that had 205lb ft. If you look at it like that, an accord with more TQ than a RX8. Doesnt sound right to me. Now I know that a Honda wont be faster, but #'s. What does the S2000 have? I drove that car and I had to stay a gear low in traffic just to have the thrust I needed when I needed it (not enough TQ).

zoom44

i recently got to drive a freinds s2000. nice ride but you need to be up in the rpm range to feel the power. i know i shouldn't be saying this but i ( ahhhhh!) have to consider gas mileage. if i have to keep it at 9000( that still amazes me-9000 rpm!) for power, my mileage will be really low and my wife will make me sell 'cause it uses too much gas. this will be my daily driver.

RX8_Man

The RX8 redlines at 8k. On the tach you have 1-7.5 in white and 8-9 in red.

Pork Chop

The S2000 has 240hp@8300rpm and 153lb-ft trq@7500rpm. Keep in mind it only weighs 2810 lb and despite being "torqueless", still manages 1/4 mile times in the low 14/high 13 range.

You're absolutely correct that it's not practical to be at 9000rpm all the time, it eats up gas and it's so loud that it'll draw too much attention (especially the police). For everyday driving situations, the S2000 is adequate in the regular rpm range.

Ultimately, it comes down to which side of the sports car camp you're on. On one side, we have the heavier, torque monsters like the Vettes and 350Z. The other side, has the lighter, more nimble cars like the RX-8, S2000, and a Miata.

Keep in mind, a torqueless car really isn't meant for the 1/4 mile dragstrip. If that's what you're into, then the RX-8 is not for you.

RX8_Man

Nah, i'm not into the dragsrtip in a car, I got a motorcycle for that. I just want a car that I know has ***** waiting to be kicked. Who knows, Mazda may surprise us and change it. None of the figures so far are written in stone. You made an excellent point. I'd love to get the Performance model of the 350Z, but not for 35k.

NOTA V6

Again we are only speaking of peak torque here. I will take a 162 lb./ft. through a 4500 RPM curve over a 300 lb./ft. though a 1000 RPM curve any day. It more than makes up for it, especially if the gearing is up to the job. It's what makes it to the ground that matters.

Bingo! :D

NOTA V6

Well, technically my current rotary car is not running due to the engine swap project in progress. but when it was running, I heard that redline buzzer countless times per day. And no, I didn't blow the engine before the swap. I just wanted more go.

NOTA V6

If you are concerned about power AND mileage, maybe a rotary is not the ticket for your daily driver.

The Renesis is going to get better mileage than the previous rotaries, but under continual redlining, it won't be that fantastic. Then again, neither would any other car's mileage under constant redlining conditions.

Grimace

That's an old pic. Max HP is at 8500 RPM, redline at 9K.

zoom44

its true that whats important is gets to the road. that rear multi-link should help. i can't wait 'til they let one of the car mags test this thing.

Rich

Here's what I wrote on the 350Z vs. RX8 thread:

Third, torque rules in one sense, but high RPM torque is far better than low RPM torque. The reason is GEARING. If there are two engines with identically shaped torque curves, one produces 150 lb ft. of torque at 8,000 RPM and another produces 250 lb. ft. of torque at 4,000 RPM, which will have the most torque in a car? The one with 150 lb. ft. will. It's easy to picture if you simply add a 2:1 gear on the "lower" powered one that reduces the speed at the shaft to 4,000 RPM. That shaft will be able to twist with 300 lb. ft. of torque at 4k RPM due to the 2:1 gearing advantage. If you want a clear and simple description of this, click here. Besides, there's nothing better than reving an engine up to 8 grand! Reving an engine to 8 grand or above is "work" in the same way that eating ice cream is "work". Sure, you have to move to do it, but the rewards are well worth the effort.

Some people still didn't get it, and so I added more explanatory stuff here.

The people who have said that the real issue is what makes it to the pavement have it exactly correct. If you're worried about torque, hp, 0-60 times, etc., get a Camaro. If you want to drive, you'll have to test drive a whole lot of cars, and make your decision that way. I've been driving tons of cars the past few months in search of a fun, late-model used car, and decided on a Miata. Before I drove it, the low HP and torque numbers did place it low on my list, but once you get over the image (from some ignorant people) and stats, it's the most fun/reliable car anywhere close to the price (12-15k for <20,000 miles). Absolutely, hands down, no questions asked. Hopefully the RX-8 will have some of the Miata's soul.

Those who buy based on stats and bragging rights won't get it, and those who buy based on how it drives might, depending on how well Mazda succeeds.

Strider

I'm finally starting to understand the whole torque thing, but for those interested in possibly modding the car when it comes out... what kind of mods would a person have to put on to get more torque? I know of hella amounts of stuff to add hp and handling, but I'm asking specifically about torque. Or would that go back to the whole hp = (torque) / (rpm) thing?