rx-8 vs. rx-7
#128
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Forester XT
Legacy GT wagon and sedan
WRX wagon and sedan
STI
Evo
Eclipse
G35c
G35 Sedan
M45
FX45
350Z
Altima
Maxima
TL
RL
RSX Type S
Accord V6
Accord V6 hybrid
Civic SI
S2000
Rav4
IS350
GS430
GTI
Jetta GLI
R32
A3
A4
A6
A8
G6 GTP
Grand Prix GXP
GTO
Magnum RT
Charger RT
300C
Crossfire
All the SRT-8 vehicles
SRT-4
Legacy GT wagon and sedan
WRX wagon and sedan
STI
Evo
Eclipse
G35c
G35 Sedan
M45
FX45
350Z
Altima
Maxima
TL
RL
RSX Type S
Accord V6
Accord V6 hybrid
Civic SI
S2000
Rav4
IS350
GS430
GTI
Jetta GLI
R32
A3
A4
A6
A8
G6 GTP
Grand Prix GXP
GTO
Magnum RT
Charger RT
300C
Crossfire
All the SRT-8 vehicles
SRT-4
#129
in response to the original topic, the RX-8 performs better than any RX-7 except the FD.
best numbers recorded stock:
RX-8
0.31 Cd
2950? lbs
5.9s 0-60
14.5 0-1/4mi @ 96mph
0.91g lat accel
155mph top speed
FD
0.29 Cd
2789 lbs
4.9s 0-60
13.5 0-1/4mi @ 105mph
0.99g lat accel
162mph top speed
best numbers recorded stock:
RX-8
0.31 Cd
2950? lbs
5.9s 0-60
14.5 0-1/4mi @ 96mph
0.91g lat accel
155mph top speed
FD
0.29 Cd
2789 lbs
4.9s 0-60
13.5 0-1/4mi @ 105mph
0.99g lat accel
162mph top speed
#130
As the orginal owner of a '93 RX7, and having picked up an '05 RX8 tonight, my initial impressions of the 25 mile ride back home are that the RX7 lacks the structural rigidity of the 8.
That's the one main drawback of the 7, driving-dynamic-wise at least, is that it should've matched the tightness of the NSX. Well, at least they got it right this time with the 8; it's just sort of odd that the ride/handling balance is so much better with a 4 door rather than the "pure", older brother sportscar. Nevertheless, they both rock!
That's the one main drawback of the 7, driving-dynamic-wise at least, is that it should've matched the tightness of the NSX. Well, at least they got it right this time with the 8; it's just sort of odd that the ride/handling balance is so much better with a 4 door rather than the "pure", older brother sportscar. Nevertheless, they both rock!
#131
Originally Posted by RX26b
As the orginal owner of a '93 RX7, and having picked up an '05 RX8 tonight, my initial impressions of the 25 mile ride back home are that the RX7 lacks the structural rigidity of the 8.
That's the one main drawback of the 7, driving-dynamic-wise at least, is that it should've matched the tightness of the NSX. Well, at least they got it right this time with the 8; it's just sort of odd that the ride/handling balance is so much better with a 4 door rather than the "pure", older brother sportscar. Nevertheless, they both rock!
That's the one main drawback of the 7, driving-dynamic-wise at least, is that it should've matched the tightness of the NSX. Well, at least they got it right this time with the 8; it's just sort of odd that the ride/handling balance is so much better with a 4 door rather than the "pure", older brother sportscar. Nevertheless, they both rock!
Indeed, the Mazda engineers were able to dial in a lot of structural integrity into the 8, especially in light of the suicide doors - which means a lack of a B-pillar.
#132
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rupes
The GTI is not faster, nor the accord, or the hybrid accord, nor an altima, a3 or a4, or a6, or the crossfire or the eclipse or the g35 sedan, or the rav 4, civic, or rsx. There are a couple on there I'm really not sure about, but those I know for sure. FX45 per car and driver is 6.3 sec, the maxima is rated at 6.1. In the interest of my time I didn't research some of the other ones. The man wanted small SUV's and family sedans that were faster, not just all sedans and SUV's you could think of. Plus, it's kind of a silly thing for him to ask because many of these "faster" cars are over $50,000
Nearly every car I listed can trap within a MPH or two of the RX-8 (or much higher) and just about every single car I listed runs high 14s or better. A GTI may not be quite as QUICK to 60, but it's every bit as fast, the Accord V6 will actually pull away from an RX-8 on the highway, so will the G35 Sedan, Eclipse, Maxima, Altima. Hell, the new Eclipse traps over 100mph, it wouldn't even be close. The new Rav 4 can run high 14s at close to 95mph, if you don't think that can give your RX-8 a run for its money you're in for a rude awakening.
Last edited by Ike; 03-01-2006 at 12:02 AM.
#133
Require IQ test to vote!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, yes, drag racing... the masturbation of motorsports.
How about something useful, like lap times? I ate Vipers, 911 Turbos, NSXs, modified C4s, M3s, etc.
Oh, and that modified 3rd gen RX-7? 0-60 in 3.2, 1/4 in 10.8@128mph. And that's on track tires, not drag tires. With the stock twin sequentials, not some big single turbo (on/off boost is bad for road racing). And yes, 13B-REW.
Is that good?
How about something useful, like lap times? I ate Vipers, 911 Turbos, NSXs, modified C4s, M3s, etc.
Oh, and that modified 3rd gen RX-7? 0-60 in 3.2, 1/4 in 10.8@128mph. And that's on track tires, not drag tires. With the stock twin sequentials, not some big single turbo (on/off boost is bad for road racing). And yes, 13B-REW.
Is that good?
Last edited by jwitzer; 03-01-2006 at 12:58 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 jwitzer
Ah, yes, drag racing... the masturbation of motorsports.
How about something useful, like lap times? I ate Vipers, 911 Turbos, NSXs, modified C4s, M3s, etc.
Oh, and that modified 3rd gen RX-7? 0-60 in 3.2, 1/4 in 10.8@128mph. And that's on track tires, not drag tires. With the stock twin sequentials, not some big single turbo (on/off boost is bad for road racing). And yes, 13B-REW.
Is that good?
How about something useful, like lap times? I ate Vipers, 911 Turbos, NSXs, modified C4s, M3s, etc.
Oh, and that modified 3rd gen RX-7? 0-60 in 3.2, 1/4 in 10.8@128mph. And that's on track tires, not drag tires. With the stock twin sequentials, not some big single turbo (on/off boost is bad for road racing). And yes, 13B-REW.
Is that good?
Someone called me on saying that there were plenty of cars that could beat or keep up with an RX-8, that's the only reason I made that list.
#135
Require IQ test to vote!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is that acceleration numbers aren't the correct measure of a car's performance. You're thinking in one dimention. Any moron can put down horsepower. Do it with the ability to maintain speed throughout a real-world test like a road course.
Exceptional cars conserve velocity, not create it.
Exceptional cars conserve velocity, not create it.
#136
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jwitzer
My point is that acceleration numbers aren't the correct measure of a car's performance. You're thinking in one dimention. Any moron can put down horsepower. Do it with the ability to maintain speed throughout a real-world test like a road course.
Exceptional cars conserve velocity, not create it.
Exceptional cars conserve velocity, not create it.
#137
i pwn therefore i am
Originally Posted by Ike
I also was not looking at 0-60 times, that's for little boys, trap speeds are for men
I guess all I'm saying is that trap speeds, and 1/4 mi times, and 0-60 times are different measurements highlighting different parts of a car's performance. I personally couldn't care less about trap speeds because I'm never going to go 100+ down the highway. What I want (not that anyone was asking) is a fast 0-60 time so I can pwn n00bs, good 30-60 times so I can come out of corners like I'm retarded, and 50-80 times so I can pass people on the highway.
So, basically, I want a car with the 8's style and the Evo/STi's power. I don't really care if the car instantly warps me from 0-30 and then takes 5 seconds to go from 30-60 or if it's nice even curve from 0-60 in 5 seconds. Of course, I'd probably want to go with the latter or I could end up in the future or something.
Last edited by saturn; 03-01-2006 at 12:32 PM.
#138
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by saturn
Why are trap speeds so important? You can have a car have a higher trap speed and still lose a 1/4 mi run even if the response times are identical. Now, if the race continues and it's a 1/2 mi race or more then the car going faster is likely to catch up and pull away eventually, but there's no guarantee. It's all about the area under the acceleration curve -- go math!
I guess all I'm saying is that trap speeds, and 1/4 mi times, and 0-60 times are different measurements highlighting different parts of a car's performance. I personally couldn't care less about trap speeds because I'm never going to go 100+ down the highway. What I want (not that anyone was asking) is a fast 0-60 time so I can pwn n00bs, good 30-60 times so I can come out of corners like I'm retarded, and 50-80 times so I can pass people on the highway.
So, basically, I want a car with the 8's style and the Evo/STi's power. I don't really care if the car instantly warps me from 0-30 and then takes 5 seconds to go from 30-60 or if it's nice even curve from 0-60 in 5 seconds. Of course, I'd probably want to go with the latter or I could end up in the future or something.
I guess all I'm saying is that trap speeds, and 1/4 mi times, and 0-60 times are different measurements highlighting different parts of a car's performance. I personally couldn't care less about trap speeds because I'm never going to go 100+ down the highway. What I want (not that anyone was asking) is a fast 0-60 time so I can pwn n00bs, good 30-60 times so I can come out of corners like I'm retarded, and 50-80 times so I can pass people on the highway.
So, basically, I want a car with the 8's style and the Evo/STi's power. I don't really care if the car instantly warps me from 0-30 and then takes 5 seconds to go from 30-60 or if it's nice even curve from 0-60 in 5 seconds. Of course, I'd probably want to go with the latter or I could end up in the future or something.
#139
i pwn therefore i am
Originally Posted by Ike
Traps speeds refer to how fast a car is if you're talking drag racing, ETs refer to how quick a car is. Plus, those 30-60 times and 50-80 times have everything to do with trap speeds. Try going 50-80 alongside one of the cars I mentioned having a higher trap speed than the RX-8, they will pull away from you. Cars like the Civic SI, GTI, RSX Type S, etc., will be right with you. I know this all too well from when my WRX was stock. The WRX will kill many cars out of the hole, but once you're rolling some pretty common family sedans and 200ish horsepower FWD cars will pull away.
Anywho, didn't mean to hijack this thread. Just don't want a mass advent of people going, "my car pwns yers cuz the trap speed is higher".
#145
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Traps speeds refer to how fast a car is if you're talking drag racing, ETs refer to how quick a car is. Plus, those 30-60 times and 50-80 times have everything to do with trap speeds. Try going 50-80 alongside one of the cars I mentioned having a higher trap speed than the RX-8, they will pull away from you. Cars like the Civic SI, GTI, RSX Type S, etc., will be right with you. I know this all too well from when my WRX was stock. The WRX will kill many cars out of the hole, but once you're rolling some pretty common family sedans and 200ish horsepower FWD cars will pull away.
#146
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Milwaukee Wi.
Posts: 997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rupes
At those speeds, wouldn't aerodynamics play a big part in which car would go faster? I really have a hard time believing a RAV 4 is anything like the RX-8 in pulling away on the highway. Maybe I'm not understanding. I know this because i rent them (RAV 4), and uhh, on the highway I can't seem to pass anyone if my life depended on it. I could be wrong, but despite a slower 0-60 time, with an engine that draws its power at higher RPMs I'd imagine an RX-8 to be faster once it's already cruising on the highway.
#147
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rupes
At those speeds, wouldn't aerodynamics play a big part in which car would go faster? I really have a hard time believing a RAV 4 is anything like the RX-8 in pulling away on the highway. Maybe I'm not understanding. I know this because i rent them (RAV 4), and uhh, on the highway I can't seem to pass anyone if my life depended on it. I could be wrong, but despite a slower 0-60 time, with an engine that draws its power at higher RPMs I'd imagine an RX-8 to be faster once it's already cruising on the highway.
From C&D:
Zero to 30 mph: 2.3
40 mph: 3.2
50 mph: 4.7
60 mph: 6.3
70 mph: 7.9
80 mph: 10.6
90 mph: 13.5
100 mph: 17.0 (RX-8 longterm test car did 0-100 in 17.5, 16.0 once broken in)
110 mph: 21.4
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.5 (RX-8: 7.4 new, 7.2 broken in, might want to do a 7k launch next time you pull up next to a Rav4 :p))
Top-gear acceleration, 30–50 mph: 3.0
50–70 mph: 3.8
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.9 sec @ 94 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 129 mph
#148
Originally Posted by Ike
...Top-gear acceleration, 30–50 mph: 3.0
50–70 mph: 3.8
50–70 mph: 3.8
They really shouldn't label it as such, because slushboxes are gonna kick down one or two gears.
#149
i pwn therefore i am
Originally Posted by Roaddemon
They think 13 sec quarter miles times is what driving is all about. They are wrong.
#150