windahdah

Well I broke down and bought a new Suzuki Aerio SX Wagon. I guess there'll be no RX8 (wagon or not) in my driveway anytime. The Aerio has tons of room inside and comes with a nice little 2L DOHC 4 banger. I understand that Suzuki planned for the Aerio Sedan to outsell the Wagon 3 to 1 but the inverse of that has proven to be the case. I bought the last Black SX with a Manual and ABS in the state of California this year (had to search like hell for it). Put a grand down and got 0% financing...can't beat that.

As for my dog I own a beautiful German Shorthaired Pointer named Jake. He's a wonderful dog who's very affectionate yet also protective, he doesn't dig, never wanders (despite still having his boy parts), he never fights and is great with kids. He's also a fine competitor in Dog Aglity Trials (leaps like a gazelle). He likes his new ride just fine and thinks it goes well with his other ride the modified '93 Suzuki Sidekick (black of course).

Alas I fear this might be my last post to this forum...I'm off to the SuzukiAerioForum looking for neat parts to add to my SX.

Armoir Amigos & Happy Wagoning...
Windahdah

Speedbuggy

Good luck and happy motoring, Windadah (hope I spelled that right *S*)

While I still think a rotory wagon is a bad idea for torque reasons, and that the RX-8 is the wrong sort of platform for a wagon configuration, I hope that doesn't send you away from Mazda forever. In fact I would very much like to see you one day test-drive an RX-8 fastback, if they make one, and see if it has the room you need. Maybe then you'll find the best of both worlds, enough space to suit your needs and the performance and zip you'll never find in a true wagon.

However it works out, best of luck and I hope the road is good to you and your four-legged friend.

Take care.

rotorhead

I'd consider a wagon. I thought I wanted a WRX, but the reviews from the press and friends are starting to say "numb and dumb" although I haven't driven one yet.

feelthesweetbea

I would love a wagon.... but only if it rivaled the Audi Sportec RS4 Biturbo Level 2!!!!!!!!! Imagine the looks on corvette drivers faces when all they can see is the dust coming from your "soccer-mom" type wagon!!!!

Hercules

Blech... AWD...

If I wanted a wagon (not yet at that stage in my life) I'd be happy in an Audi for a daily driver but I'd still need a nice light RWD weekend car

Speedbuggy

Ok, this might be wandering off-topic, but...

What is the weight penalty like on a full-time AWD system? And are the benefits in traction, handling, and acceleration worth it?

I know AWD was all the rage in sports cars a few years back, what with the Mitsu 3000GT and Celica All-trac and such sporting it. But I am not a big expert in the stats of those cars or the advantages and disadvantages that sort of system gave them. Could you fill me in if you know more than I do? I'd be curious to find out more.

Thanx in advance.

Hercules

300-500lbs, depending on the system. Also causes a general weight imbalance. Audi's current S4 runs like 63/37, to give you an idea.

It's good for safety though, and rallying, but otherwise I wouldn't want it.. just me though.

trekkerz-06

i am having a hard time imagining what a wagon would look like from the rx-8. Would the suicide doors carry over?

Hercules

There's a reason you're having a hard time.. cuz it would look nasty

Besides the Mazda6 is there for that purpose.

Buger

C'mon Herc, You can add a little truth to your dogma.

The Mazda Tribute awd system adds about 150 lbs.

Brian

wakeech

150 lb is the difference between the AWD and 2WD (dunno much about the vehicle) systems in the Tribute???? WOW!!!!! but could that small discrepency be accounted for by a very very robust (ie, a GUTTED AWD system) 2WD system??
so, what system're they gonna use for the 6 MPS (aka MazdaSpeed)???

Hercules

You aren't forgetting the driveshaft that connects to the rear are ya? I haven't heard of a system weighing the car down by only 150, but hey live and learn..

Buger

Hi Herc,

I got the curb weights from carpoint (http://autos.msn.com/vip/specificati...=10157&src=vip).

DX ........... 3091
DX 4WD .... 3245
154 lb difference

LX (v6) ............ 3292
LX (v6) 4WD ..... 3455
163 lb difference

Of course the AWD system on the Tribute isn't intended for heavy duty off-roading but most car AWD systems aren't intended for heavy duty off-roading either.

Brian

Speedbuggy

Wow... interesting numbers there. I'm willing to bet that a similar system for a car, being for a smaller wheelbase and such, would weigh less than it's counterpart in the Tribute. Kinda makes you wonder if it's a good idea to consider in the RX-8, considering that some of the target market for the car will be thinking twice about an RWD vehicle because of winter driving needs. And if it can improve takeoff accelleration (those all-important 1/4 mile and 0-60 times) and cornering as well, then it might be a good idea indeed.

Really, it's a matter of market appeal. As much as we performance types love our rear drive, we need to face the fact that a rear drive car will never be anything more than a niche vehicle in the modern mainstream market. And front drive just doesn't cut it in a performance car. So maybe, just maybe a properly designed and tweaked AWD might be the answer to satisfy both camps. After all, Mazda is already seeking a more practicality-oriented market by making the car a 4-door four seater. Giving the car the added safety and bad-weather handling capability of AWD without sacrificing performance might be just the right move for this car.

if they can do it without adding too much in the way of additional weight or cost, and without robbing the car of it's weight balance and performance, then it's something I'd definitely consider buying.

Especially if it came in a fastback. *G*

Buger

You know the funny thing about this is that my Tribute DX (awd) weighs less than the touring 350z. Aren't sports cars supposed to be lighter than SUVs? :p

Brian

Buger

I'm sure that a light AWD system kinda makes you wonder if it's a good idea for the rx-8. :D

Seriously though, the perfect application of the NA rotary is for a small lightweight sports car. Mazda meant for the side port rotary to go into a small lightweight sports car (rx-01) but couldn't get the approval of the company with the purse strings (Ford). The rotary has incredibly high horsepower for an engine it's size but it doesn't have incredibly high torque for an engine it's size.

The reason why we have the rx-8 is because it was the only way to get a new rotary on the market. The rx-8 was built from the beginning with the dual goals of lightweight and affordability. A lot of effort was made to shave a few pounds here and there to get the rx-8 to the weight it is now. A carmaker without Mazda's attention to this might even end up with a sports car that is heavier than an SUV. :p Trust me, Mazda didn't come up with a car this light just so that they could add another 150 pounds for awd.

The Mazda6 was made for the awd market and also has 2 very good engines with great torque curves. People that really want awd should really take a close look at the Mazda6.

Believe it or not, Mazda has already thought of what you are mentioning and already has plans for the awd Mazda6.

Seriously, "performance types" really don't care whether their car has mass market appeal. In fact, most "performance types" probably wish that their car didn't have a large mass market appeal because they don't want a car that everyone else has. Obviously Mazda has made sacrifices to practicality to get their new rotary car to the market. This car isn't meant for awd fans and they are the ones who will have to "face that fact".

IMHO, as much as you hope that there will be an awd rx-8, you will be disappointed.

Brian

Speedbuggy

Ain't it weird? My old Toyota Corolla from '81 was around 2100 pounds, and that was with a larger engine than the RX-8 will be getting and surely less technological advancements. So I couldn't believe when I read they were -hoping- to bring the car in around 2800 pounds! I mean, where is the extra weight coming from? It kinda makes you wonder, huh?

C'mon, Mazda, you can do better than that. The Protege seats five and has a larger engine (2.0 liters for it's 4-banger compared to 1.3 for the Renesis). If you can't make the RX-8 at least as light as it is, you have a problem.

PS: When you're trimming weight, start with those awful 18 inch rims. Can you say unsprung weight? I knew you could.

TheSaCK

I read in motor trend, that the RX8 will be around 30k. Anyone know if this is true? i called the dealer to see if there were any waiting lists for it and a estimate of the price. They were kinda rude and didnt help much. =( I hate being on waiting lists for cars ...

And seirously, they should raise up the HP on the rx-8 .. i was hoping to get one that went over 300 hp .. wanted to get a supra, cause i heard they were gonna redo it around 2005, but guess not.. so .. RX 8 looks like the car to zip around in. is it me or did the weight on the rx8 get heavier?

Speedbuggy

Nice to hear the good news about the 6. I always thought awd was a superior choice to fwd, especially for performance-minded buyers. That option alone should help cement the 6 as a more sporty car than the 626 was.

For me, though, the 6 will be larger and heavier than what I want. I have no interest at all in a midsize no matter what it's performance is like. And I certainly don't want a 3000+ lb car.

I suppose that brings up the question, what size -will- the RX-8 be? Will it be similar in size to a midsize like the 6 or more like a subcompact like the Protege? That will make a huge difference in what the final weight will be, and I suppose also in if I'm going to want it or not.

Really for me the attraction of the RX-8 is the engine. I love nothing better than a small, light, agile car and the Renesis engine is perfect for that considering it's low size and weight. And though it's torque is low compared to it's horsepower, it's still by far more powerful than a much larger cylinder engine.

One of the main reasons I like the idea of awd in a very small and light car is that it enhances accelleration off the line and out of corners, which is important when you don't have a lot of torque to work with. That's why I thought it would be an interesting idea to see done on an RX-8, since it would really help to make the most out of the torque available and give it performance numbers closer to more powerful cars like the Z.

Then again, my perfect car would be a Protege with awd and the Renesis engine, call me weird. I just love the idea of a subcompact car with more power than it knows what to do with. Kinda like my namesake... room-a-zoom-zoom!

Hercules

The best quote comes from Sam Mitani of Road and Track for the dimensions of the car:
I'm not a big fan of AWD for two reasons.. first, it adds an imbalance of weight and is difficult to engineer that out. BMW succeeded in this area by adding a RWD bias to the AWD system they have in their 3 series. Audi's Quattro system while a great system, adds a weight of something like 350 lbs in addition to a weight balance of 63/37 (in the A4/S4).

While it's not important for every-day travelling, the weight balance can add a severe disadvantage in tossability of the car, not to mention the added weight that AWD brings with it. The Renesis is not a torque monster so coupling it with an AWD car that goes a tad heavy... well it would be a disaster.

Anyhoo, the RX-8 is pretty much ideal for me given my budget, at 30k. It's got room for four, a decent trunk, should handle exceptionally and be pretty quick off the line. Not to mention it looks great and if the build quality is anything like that of the Mazda6, or the Millenia I have now, it's going to be better than any Japanese car out there.

AWD for me would be good if I lived in an area like.... Wisconsin, where you get oodles and oodles of snow. Since I live in Jersey though, it snows during the season but within a day the roads are clear enough to travel on, so I'm not really worried.

rotorhead

Hey, look at the competition, especially the German tanks, 2,800 lbs is not bad! The B pillarless design requires more weighty reinforcements and the RX8 is a much larger car than the Protoge and the higher power output requires much more stiffening. What does a Mitsu Eclipse weigh? 3500?

I agree about the rims; that is why I won't get rid of the factory 14" alloys on my Miata...and the Yokos are cheap in that size...

BUT, I owned a 77 Corolla wagon (the War Wagon) and a 79 Corolla 2 door. I was afraid to hit a cat, let alone a deer or another car. The bodies on those things were ultra cheapo-hence the amazing rusting ability. When you closed a door, it sounded like a lunch box, a cheapo lunch box. Those early 80s Corollas didn't just rust, they DISSOLVED! An engineer friend at Penn State told me the Japs were using inferior, thin steel at the time. I swore my Corollas were made of steel foil. My brother had an early 80s Subaru that looked like it was shot up with a 12 guage rust gun. And at that time there were few, if any, safety requirements, which add hundreds of pounds to cars today. If you crash a 79 or 81 Corolla into a cement barrier at 35 MPH, the crash dummies will exit the car before impact because they know what's coming: certain death!

windahdah

The big difference between the lighter cars of yore (like your 2100 lb. '81 Corolla) and modern cars is Chassis stiffness. In the past 10 years significant gains have been made in Chassis design by nearly all manufacturers (GM notwhithstanding). Following the lead of the German Manufacturers others soon realized that the reason BMW's and Mercedes' cars drove so well and seemed so solid was that they had really stiff Chassis'. Flexy-Flyer Chassis' are now a thing of the past but you can't add stiffness w/o adding at least some weight. The RX-8 of couse has a super stiff Chassis because it needs it to handle well and to shore up the lost "B" pillar where the rear doors usually hang from.

Safety is anther reason why cars weigh more these days. Airbags all 'round and all the techno wizardy involved in making them work adds weight. So bear in mind that 2800 Lbs is a pretty good weight for a modern car, although I'm sure Mazda could have shaved weight with Aluminum or carbon fiber body panels but that gets awfully expensive.

I agree that an AWD system in the RX-8 would be a bad move. The relatively low torque output of the Renesis means that the car will be slow off the line compared with a Corvette or 350Z, just like the old RX-7 was. BUT the RX8 will make up time soon thereafter. When the Chevy shifts at 'round 5500 RPM and the 350Z at around 7000 RPM the RX-8 is still ripping along 'til 9000 RPM. The RX-8 won't be a great car for laying long strips of rubber on the road, but will be a great car for Autocrossing or for road courses etc. So given that the RX-8 relies on it's light weight and high revving engine to generate good numbers an AWD system and the 300 lbs it would add just don't seem appropriate.

But back on point here folks...an RX-8 Sports Wagon, now that would be NEAT!

rotorhead

I remember an Audi ad a few years ago that made me chuckle. It highlighted the (whatever model)'s aluminum space and its light weight. I checked out the car and I think it weighed about 4,500 pounds...now that's heavy! I think the heaviness of the German cars is what gives them their feel.

Speedbuggy

I agree the bodies rusted pretty bad on the old japanese cars, but I don't think that had to do with weak steel so much as steel that was really vulnerable to rust. I know my old Corolla was a &%!@$#ing tank, and those big black rubber bumpers could survive damned near anything.

And perhaps more to the point, "good" steel isn't necessarily any heavier than "bad" steel. In fact the best steel I know, 4120 Chrome Moly steel, is a set-carbon alloy virtually immune to rust, has extreme strength, and is quite a bit lighter than conventional steel. It's more expensive than rgular steel but less expensive than aluminum. They used to use it extensively in racing bicycles until they figured out they could charge more by convincing the customers that aluminum was better.

Point taken though about airbags and other crap they legislated into cars. I hate the damned things, I'm short so I have to sit close to the wheel so my legs will reach the pedals. If my airbag goes off, it's more likely to kill me than the accident is. It's a waste of weight and money, they legislated the crap before even working out the bugs or making sure it worked right. I guess that's policitians for you.

Me, I'd rather the agility to avoid an accident than take the chance of my car protecting me, cause in my experience they don't. Hell, even seat belts can kill you. Maybe if they had crossover belts like they use in racing, sure, they'd do some good. But lap and shoulder belts are as likely to cut your throat and rupture your organs as they are to save your life. Sad but true.

To be honest, the best thing you could possibly have in a car wreck is the same thing that saves people in motorcycle wrecks, and that's a good helmet. But it's pretty unlikely anyone will be wearing helmets inside their cars anytime soon. Hell, even I'm not really advocating the idea. But it'd be something that'd actually do some good compared to the lame-duck safety devices they are using now.

Anywho, I'm not thrilled that the RX-8 will be so heavy or that it will be larger than the Protege. I was really hoping it'd be closer to the MX-3 in size, now that was a cute and fun little car. Maybe they'll do what I'm hoping and bring back something similar to it or give us an option to get a Renesis in the Protege. For that, though, the RX-8 will have to do well. I'm really hoping it will. But it's starting to look less like what I'm looking for.

I still love that engine though.

ZoomZoom

Hold on a second, it’s not fair to compare a 1981 Toyota Corolla to a 2004 RX-8; the safety standards alone make the comparison meaningless.

However, if you compare the 2004 RX-8 with a 2003 Corolla we find the following:

Corolla GT, 2,425 lbs, 140 hp (manual transmission)
Corolla GT-S, 2,500 lbs, 180 hp (manual transmission)

I am not saying that Mazda should not go on a gram hunt to further reduce the RX-8’s weight, but let’s be fair here.

Check for yourself at the Toyota web site.