Mikelikes2drive

i think he's just having buyers remorse and trying to compensate for the fact that he was foolish or ignorant enough to get an automatic on a car that needs a clutch...

basisguy

What have you been smoking?????

zyran

Only users lose drugs.

RXE16T

LOL

canaryrx8

iTrader: (3)

I love my auto, why does this keep coming up over and over and over again, tell us(auto drivers) to get over it? wtf this statement is uncalled for, some of us bought the auto because of preference and it was cheaper, just because someone doesn't agree with your preference does not make them foolish or ignorant, if you would be willing to sedn me a check for the extra 2-3 grand a stick would've cost then that's a whole different story.

Mugatu

iTrader: (1)

this thread sucks.

hotpot

There's nothing wrong with driving an auto. The suck part is that it only has 4 fwd gears, which is really lame for our time, when some automatics come with six gears..

sti_eric

My $.02, not trying to disparage anyone's car:

The manual RX-8 and the automatic RX-8 are in two different classes. When I think of the term "sports car", the first thing that pops in to my head is "performance". The auto RX-8's performance is on par with a Honda Pilot (7.6 0-60, 15.9 1/4 mile). To me, that just doesn't cut it as far as a "sports car" goes. I put the 6MT RX-8 in the same class as other sports cars (sub $40K sports cars, anyway) currently in production: 350Z/G35, Mustang, STi, Evo, S2000, SRT-4, GTO. I put the auto RX-8 in the "sporty" category: Focus, Celica, RSX, Tiburon, Scion tC, MR2...i.e. cars that look like sports cars, but just don't have the performance to back it up. I know some of you don't want to hear this, and this is only my opinion, but I know others feel the same way. This may be why there is so much "auto bashing" on here. It's not that it is a bad car, it is just in a different class than the 6MT.

Oh well, that's my $.02.

Ole Spiff

Why bash the RX8 at all? Those who have one, whether manual or auto trans have a great car! I don't like automatics so I have a manual trans but that doesn't mean I think poorly of someone who has an automatic. Why dampen their enjoyment by bashing them? If you need to do that to make yourself feel better about what you bought, then you're the one with the problems.

As far as the 8's tranny...I have over 20k miles on mine and it works beautifully, and I don't granny drive mine. Whoever is blowing through transmissions every few months is doing something radically wrong, or just plain abusing the car badly. The 8's manual trans is one of the best shifting, best feeling manuals I've ever driven in 35 years of driving. It's a great trans; whoever says otherwise just doesn't have a clue what they're talking about.

truemagellen

amen and ditto and sorry about my old old posts bashing autos...I used to use an automatic car wash on my old cars but now I manually wash my car...huhwhat?

basisguy

Hope you have not lost too many!

Wankeler

I think I'll trade in my 8 for an auto version... while I'm at it, I'll see if I can trade in my Town Car for one with a manual tranny. Hot Rod Lincoln. :D

And to the guy who keeps blowing up trannies (if you visit this forum), remember to stomp on the gas AFTER you've let the clutch out, not before.

Now where did I leave that bong???

MrH

You don't consider the MR2 to be a sports car? It's a sports car in its purest form. Straight line speed is by no means what defines what a sports car is.

As for the automatic RX-8 having more torque than the manual RX-8. It may have more torque at the engine, but take gearing into account, measure torque at the wheels, and it's obvious the manual makes more torque at the wheels than the automatic. You can gear much shorter with 6 gears than you can with 4 gears.

ptiemann

@ayap888

just a question. Did you purchase an automatic RX-8? (You never stated what you drive.)

Purchased it recently? Regret something and that's why you start a post like this so that you can tell yourself you got the right thing? Don't worry, we all make mistakes here or there :D

-Peter

Gord96BRG

So you must think a Maybach 59 limousine is a really hot sports car, right? 0-60 in ~5 seconds?

"Performance" means so much more than just straight line, drag strip acceleration times. You're not thinking of sports car, you're thinking of muscle car. What else is included in "performance", especially when we're talking sports car? Handling, cornering, braking, responsiveness? You know that the RX-8 ranks as one of the shortest stopping vehicles on the market, at any price?

You need to do some serious thinking about your definitions of performance. That, or stick to Mustangs, Camaros, Firebirds... I guess it's a given that you don't think a Miata is a sports car, even though it wins regional and National titles at SCCA competitions regularly (that's Sports Car Club of America, by the way). Power and straight line acceleration is NOT what defines a sports car, as evidenced by the Maybach example.

Regards,
Gordon

sti_eric

No, I do not think that the current MR2 spyder is a "sports car". It is a "sporty" car, but it is not a "sports car".

With this kind of logic, I think we can rule out that you are a lawyer or an engineer.

First, the Maybach. Obviously it is not a sports car. I did not say that straight line performance is the only thing that defines a sports car; I just said that it is the first think I think of when someone says "sports car". How can you argue against the fact that a sports car should be fast? A true sports car also needs handling, braking, cornering, AND power.

The point of my post is that the performance of the manual RX-8 puts it in a different class of car than the automatic RX-8. As for the example of the Miata winning competitions in the Sports Car Club of America...first of, I see people with Jettas, Camrys, and Sentras racing in Solo II. Does that mean they are sports cars? Second, the Miata is not in the same class as Corvettes, STis, Evos, etc. This is for a reason. Take drivers with equal skill, and the Miata loses every time. Third, Solo II is more about the driver than the car. I have seen an excellent stock Nissan Sentra driver beat average C5 Corvette, STi, Evo, and Camaro drivers.

So, before you go on lecturing me about my opinion of what a sports car is, perhaps you should spend a minute or two actually researching the subject. Many of the cars I named...RSX, Celica, Focus, Tiburon...also corner and brake very well. But I just do not consider them to be pure sports cars. They are not in the same class as the Evo, STi, 350Z, Mustang, Corvette, etc, all of which both handle well, brake well AND have the power. So, do you think the auto RX-8 belongs in the same category as the Evo, STi, 350Z, Mustang, Corvette? Or, does its performance (handling, braking, power) put it more inline with the Focus, Celica, RSX, and Tiburon?

JeRKy 8 Owner

Eric -- fact ofthe matter is that the manual Rx8 cannot keep up w/any of those cars you just mentioned as being in the same class as the manual Rx8. All of those vehicles out perform the 6spd Rx8 in a straight line. On the otherhand all of the the cars you mentioned as being in the same class as the automatic Rx8 are basically the cars that a manual Rx8 wouldnt have to break a sweat against in a straight line race. So w/your reasoning that would place the manual Rx8 right in between the "sports car" and "sporty" range whenit came to performance. But performanceisnt just about 0 - 60 speed. Youre basically calling the manual Rx8 way above sporty but still below sports car. What doyou think about that?

sti_eric

I admit that the manual RX-8's performance is on the bottom end of the "sports car" category, but nevertheless, I still consider it a sports car. Its 14.5 1/4 mile time is very respectable. 14.5 is within a few tenths (or faster than) the Mustang GT, 350Z, G35, S2000, Boxster, SC430, etc. But a 16+ second 1/4 mile time (auto RX-8) is such a huge difference that it just cannot be considered in the same category as the manual RX-8. I don't think the auto RX-8 is "way above" sporty. Its performance numbers put it on par with the Focus SVT, RSX, Celica GT-S, all of which I consider "sporty" but not "sports car". Also, it is not just about 1/4 mile times. Coming out of a corner in a manual RX-8 is so much different than the auto RX-8. First, you can control what gear you are in much better (I have seen people on here complaining that they can't downshift the auto when they are above a certain speed). Second, just having that much more power behind you pulls you out of the corner better. The straight line performance difference between the two is bad enough, but when you multiply it by all the corners on a track, the disparity is even greater.

JeRKy 8 Owner

All Im sayinghere is that while the automaticmay be viewed as having "pathetic" track performance versus the "acceptable" performance of the manual, when you buy the 6spd Rx8 youre still acceptinG the fact that youre buying a vehicle that is out performed by allthe other cars in its category and price range. In other words, though my automatic Rx8 is no match for the cars in its price range (350z/g35, mustang gt, wrx sti, or lancer evo, s2000, etc.), it would be redundant for me to sell it and buy a manual Rx8 for performance sake, b/c I still would be left w/a car that is out performed by those same very cars that I wish I could take w/automatic. Whether or not I lose a race by 3 or 4 seconds or lose by .5, Im still nevertheless being out performed. Takingall of that into account in addition to thefact that I use the Rx8 a daily driver (and Im a lazy bastard), I have an automatic and not a 6spd manual.

sti_eric

Again, I'm not saying that an auto RX-8 is not a nice car. People just have to realize what it is and what it isn't. For me, I want a car that not only looks like a sports car, but acts like it as well. The fact that the auto RX-8 has a difficult time beating out Honda Pilots, Nissan Titans, and Toyota Siennas off the line precludes it from being in the same category as the sports cars previously mentioned.

If going up against an STi, Evo, Corvette, Cobra, the manual RX-8 will not win unless the other driver makes a huge mistake (e.g. banging gears). If one of those cars makes a huge mistake against an auto RX-8, the auto RX-8 is so slow that it will not be able to capitalize. A manual RX-8 against 350Zs, S2000s, etc, is a drivers race. An auto RX-8 against these cars still has no shot.

Again, not saying that the auto RX-8 is not a nice car, I just personally (i.e. MY OPINION) think that its power puts it in a different class from the manual RX-8. I'm not going to sit here and condemn anyone for buying an auto RX-8 (as I have seen others on here do). I'm just here to provide another opinion on the subject.

canaryrx8

iTrader: (3)

I had a honda pilot and a bmw x5 try and race me around 2222 here in Austin (a notoriously curvy road) and I embarassed them with my auto, then the pilot try tried at a light to redeem himself and either he missed a gear or your pilot numbers are way off as my 8 pulled him hard. I'm not a big fan of numbers anyway (math can be annoying), with the right driver any car can be competitive. does this mean the auto Vette is not a sportscar? how about we all just agree that some of us like auto's or can't afford a manual or can't drive a stick, some of us like to shift, like 3 pedals, like the extra 40 horses, etc. and we are all privileged to own an 8 no matter what the tranny as some folks are out there driving much less (like minivans..ugh) The auto vs. manual and 8 vs. anything discussion will never end so whatever it is we get to drive we should be happy with it and not bash other people's choices/circumstances.

ayap888

Hey bro .. LOL .. I have driven a stick for 15 years and have been champion with the stick. With my 15 years experience with the stick, I doubt most stick drivers have the same experience as me. My friends called me "the Hell Driver". Cuz with a stick, no one comes close.

But now I am tired of the stick. 15 years is a long time. I will never buy a stick. I don't drag race anymore. So, my purpose of buying the auto is different - I just love the RX8 - its a fun car (stick or auto does not matter). It just started as a joke ... if even said ' if you put a 100 lb. fat kid on the back ... bla bla ..."

Peace out... let's drive our RX8.

Gord96BRG

With that kind of logic, I think we can rule out that you're very good with logic. BSc Mechanical Engineering, 1981.

So what's your threshhold for power? Or is it just acceleration? A Lotus Elise has less power than an RX-8 - is IT a sports car with only 190 flywheel hp? So, 0-60 apparently must be less than 7 seconds to qualify as a sports car, but only if it handles, brakes, etc.?

So what formerly-known-as-sports cars have you disqualified because they're not quick enough? Obviously any MG, Triumph, Austin Healey, pre-XKR Jaguar, Alfa Romeo, any pre-1978 Turbo 911 Porsche. Many of the street Ferraris prior to the F348 couldn't run 0-60 in under 7 seconds. Even many of the competition GT Ferraris older than early 60s couldn't do 0-60 in under 7 seconds - all are now NOT sports cars.

I didn't say anything about SoloII. I was referring to proper wheel-to-wheel racing. So, you ever see a Spec Sentra racing series? Which of those other sports cars or non-sports cars are so popular that they have their own racing series, the fastest growing grass-roots (ie affordable) race series in the country? However, you said it yourself - SCCA uses different classes to sort out the sports cars into equivallent performance categories. That doesn't mean that the lower-powered cars aren't sports cars, does it? It's just grouping for the sake of competition. PS - a Mustang isn't a sports car, no matter how much power you stuff under the hood. IMHO. Perhaps you're the one that should go do your research about what a sports car is, and start back in the late 1940s and 1950s (the era where your rigid, narrow-minded, bench racing categorization means that NONE of the classic sports cars are actually sports cars anymore.) While you're at it, since you mention Corvette several times - consider that an auto trans RX-8 will blow the doors off any late 70s Corvette, which were only available with an auto trans for several years. But a Corvette is a sports car, right, and the RX-8 isn't?

It's NOT just about the numbers. You can take an econobox and dress it up in WRC gear (STi, Evo) - sure it turns impressive numbers, does that make IT a sports car or a dressed up econobox? How about the econobox it's derived from? Do you insist that a Lancer or Impreza is a sports car, or is it a bit too slow to qualify? Tell me an MGA or Triumph TR250 isn't a sports car, tell me a Ferrari 166 Barchetta isn't a sports car, tell me a Jaguar XKE isn't a sports car, tell me a Miata isn't a sports car, and I'll tell you that you don't really know what a sports car is. IMHO.

Regards,
Gordon

ptiemann

Ok, so you have not bought it yet. Good. That was my question.
Hm, I'd think twice before sinking money in an auto RX-8 and take some more test drives but for each his/her own.

-Peter

sti_eric

It looks like I will have to be the more mature person here and not respond to your childish "I'm not, you are" comment. I wish a 40 year old+ didn't have to resort to such nonsense, but I guess that's too much too ask.

Just like you can't compare Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire to Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, you can't compare sports cars from one era to another. What passed for a sports car 50 years ago does not pass for a sports car today. Technology has vastly improved the power and handling of all cars. The first hemi engine in the 1950s (5.4 liters) put out 180 horsepower. Mazda now has a 1.3 liter engine that puts out 238. You just cannot compare the two. Suspension components have also greatly improved.

I am talking about current production sports cars. Do you disagree that the manual RX-8 is in a different class than the auto RX-8? I still contend in today's sports car world, that the manual's higher performance numbers puts it in the "sports car" category and the auto is in the "sporty" category with the Celica, Focus, RSX, etc.

So, what is your definition of a sports car? If you can't go by the numbers, what do you go by? How it looks? So, if it looks like a sports car, then it must be a sports car? Or is only a good handling car a sports car? By that definition, then a go kart, an ATV, and a lawn tractor must all be sports cars because they stop well and handle well. I think that a true sports car needs power, handling, and braking to be a sports car. I saw a Jaguar E-type compete at a local autocross. It was pitiful. The car has no power and it handled terribly. Yet it must be considered a sports car because it looks like one. Maybe in its era it was a decent sports car, but it just cannot be compared to today's high powered sports cars.

One last thing - about auto Corvettes vs manual Corvettes. The difference in the RX-8 is not solely in the fact that one is auto and one is manual. The difference is that the manual's peak horsepower is 20% higher than the auto and that it is easier to keep the manual in the power band. The manual and auto corvettes have the same peak horsepower. The auto corvette will be a little bit slower than the manual, but the difference is no where near as great as the difference between the manual and auto RX-8.