Lethalchem

"Mustang Hermit" is a term I can accept:D. I think it's accurate. I have driven many different cars, but owned nothing but mustangs, so my understanding of (but not appreciation for) other cars has been limited, to be sure.

I agree with you completely about the need for high revs on the RX-8, which takes us back to my thoughts about the gas milage that I was trying to suggest in my post a few posts up. While test driving the Rx-8, the salesman actually told me to drive it like I would my own car, so I did:p . It kicked second out fairly well.

I like to think of myself as an individual who has an open mind, and I thoroughly enjoy learning about other vehicles. I can assure you that I'd not consider buying a car for my wife if I thought there was something wrong with it. I had much more fun driving the 8 than I did the WRX, even though the Subaru felt faster (I'm sure that's only due to the low end torque). There is no topping the style of the RX-8, and the comfort/interior of the Mazda is completely in another league altogether.

I've never been one to leave a car stock anyway, so the speed isn't so much of an issue to me as long as there's room for mods. Do you expect the 8 to have any difficulties pulling more power from it? I know the RX-7 was easy, but that was because of the turbo. If they could have kept the HP rating the same for both AT and MT, then I probably wouldn't be worried about it.

RomanoM

Racer X-8

I'm glad to see this happen without any kind of intervention. From lethalchem posts in another thread, I knew where he was coming from. Chuck unknowingly misinterpreted his post here. Both came to an understanding. Way cool & I celebrate the both of you!!!:D :D :D

jonalan

With all the freaking out people are doing on this forum in regards to the "alleged" lack of HP, I'm happy to see that 70% of us would STILL have preordered the car at 220hp.

You know, if we find out that there is NOTHING wrong with our cars (HP wise), this forum will be responsible for ALL of the bad press being leaked out; and WE will be solely responsible for the devaluation of our own car. Shame on us!

We all need to calm down, quiet down and see how Mazda responds before WE kill the rotary!

MPester

Car magazines have tested 0-60 in 5.9 sec. So, I don't care if it's 220 or 247hp for the 5.9sec. I am still getting it.

RX-8 Zoomster

jonalen,

Good post. I agree with you 100%

The real injustice is that there are 2-3 posters here that either decided against the RX-8 earlier (before the dyno controversy) or never intended to buy it in the first place, and they are the ones that are making the most noise about the so-called missing HP. I won't name names, but most people that reads through these threads can pick them out. Real shame.

In addition I agree with people that think like MPester. If the car ends up getting the performance results, why get hung up about the HP numbers? Before some of the dyno results came out, all you heard was how much everyone liked how fast it was, or how much power there was. Now all you hear is that there COULD be up to 23% hp loss to the wheels, and this car is now a POS slug of an automobile. NOTHING changed to make this car slower between then and now, EXCEPT for the suspected HP numbers, and that perception in some people's minds.

Quick_lude

You're not computing the votes correctly. 38% of people would NOT have preordered at the CURRENT price point if the Renesis is only making 220hp. So only 31% would have still got the car.

I agree with the above post, let's see some real life 1/4 mile times and that will tells us how fast the car is. But what about that Japanese mag getting almost exact acceleration times for BOTH the 210ps and 250ps versions? How do you explain that?

Also, I hope you are not including me in one of those "two or three" people that are "stirring" the pot. If you look at the poll there are a lot more concerned owners than three. The only reason I would like to get to the bottom of this is because I'm very serious about the 8 being my next car next spring and I would like it to have the advertised 247hp.

RX-8 Zoomster

I don't know how to explain that. Let's wait and see if Mazda releases some form of explanation. If somehow that acceleration times was only for the 210ps, then the 250ps should have great numbers. If these acceleration times was only for the 250ps, then those times was satisfactory for me to justify my purchase.



Like I said before, I'm not naming names or openly pointing fingers. If the shoe doesn't fit, then don't worry about it. There are some posters here, as evident on various threads, that the shoe fits perfectly like Cinderella's glass slipper.

I do agree that Mazda needs to provide some comforting answers for those like you that are in the market for the RX-8.

But honestlly, if the car got 6 sec 0-60 times, would you care if the rear hp was only 187 instead of 207? Like I said before I'm not hung up about the HP numbers, as long as the car turns performance times like the magazine reviews. If it does turn out there is that much loss (23%) to the rear, I would be depressed from the excessive loss. But on the contrary, I would be pretty damned impressed from the performance it is getting on that 187 hp, as compared to cars that are at least 10-20% higher HP.

RX8-U-UP

I find it kind of strange that a Japanese mag is posting numbers on a car that is not readily available in Japan. The Japanese automatic and 6MT both came with the 210 HP engine, they do not drive a 250 HP version of the RX8. Maybe they were comparing the auto and 6 MT Japanese version cars that are both 210 HP, thus giving them similar numbers.

Racer X-8

I do. Maybe then it would go even faster! . I would personnaly not mind out-accelerating the EVO VIII, if not just to shut these speed demons from the other side UP! We could have our cake AND eat it too, wouldn't that be nice?

I want Mazda to deliver what we all paid for! Are you reading this Mazda? Why have a carbon graphite driveshaft, an aluminum hood, etc...? I want the 250 hp to go along with all that. If you don't, fine. I do.

I'm picking mine up this week, hopefully today. I just want all 250 horses under that aluminum hood! I paid for them, so I want all 250 of them. It's only right and fair. I can handle the problems that come with it, but only if Mazda owns-up to them and fixes the problem in whatever way is deemed acceptable by all. Fisrt thing is they gotta start the communication flowing here. It's amazing to me how they can remain so darned silent!

Lethalchem

Some of you may or may not know that a similar problem happened with the Cobra in 1999. As more owners dynod, it was evident that there was 20hp missing. Ford put out a recall, and the intake was replaced with the proper one, fixing the problem. I find this encouraging, and perhaps there would be a similar recall on the RX-8 IF they did indeed find a descrepency. I doubt anyone would really care that Mazda didn't speak up about it, as long as they fixed the problem in the end.

As for me, I'm just disapointed they had to limit the rpms on the automatic. All new (meaning new chasis design/first year released) vehicles will have little bugs to iron out. I just wish it was in another area because I know we (wife and I) won't want to wait to buy the car, but I also know that Mazda will fix the problem and bump the AT HP up where it belongs in the next year or two..then I'll be grumpy:p .

Sputnik

Lethalchem,

Check your private messages.

---jps

pelucidor

These numbers were all achieved with pre-production cars. The only production car result I have seen is the very recent Japanese magazine artice which shows 0-60 in 7.04 and 400m (1/4 mile) in 14.97. In both cases the 210PS (207HP) car was <0.1secs behind. Note that I can only understand the numbers table, the text might show extenuating circumstances for the 250PS (247HP) car. Oddly enough RotaryNews thought the production car they drove at Mazda's invitation months ago felt faster than the pre-production vehicle they also got to drive.

RX8-U-UP:
You are wrong about the 250PS 6MT not being available in Japan - do a search before making such statements:

Chuck Clifford

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by JSG
In Japan we have:
base - cheapest 5 sp manual (210ps)
E-type - no classic Jaguar but a 4 sp auto (again 210ps)
S-type - 250ps 6 sp manual

You may think Japan has three versions of cars, but they all get the same numbers, that can't happen. Sound like a standard 5 speed, standard six speed, and an auto four speed duking it out with the same 210 HP engine.

pelucidor

Yep, but one of those 210PS engines should be making 250PS - that's the problem in a nutshell.

I don't THINK this - I KNOW that in Japan the S-type with 6MT has 250PS (247HP) according to Mazda, and several on this forum have bought one since it was released there in April. Where is you evidence?

Do you really think that Mazda will offer a 250PS 6MT car to the rest of the world and not in their own country where emissions regs are much more lax and most cars make more HP than in the USA (e.g. a 240HP S2000 in the USA makes 250HP in Japan).

Chuck Clifford

I know this sounds redundant. Everything that seems to be happening, sounds like the indications descibed when the third ports were not being used, either by programming error or mechanical failure. A 247 HP engine without its third ports operating is essentially a 210 HP engine. Or even worse, as some results have shown, if the ECU starts dumping fuel in anticipation of ports openning, and they don't, that could explain the lag some people feel at the point where they should feel a surge. The less than optimum performance specs in the band where performance should be peaking is another indication of this problem. As opposed to the 210 HP engine, where the ECU and ports are working perfectly, according to the mapping and controls that are set up. Those long ago threads and magazine articles that talk about a kick when the third ports open up, I don't feel. It doesn't feel bad, it just dosn't feel as described. My money's on another third port error, either by design, or otherwise. I'm getting close to 1500 miles, so I will soon put the design alternative to rest. Partial Zoom, Partial Zoom.

pelucidor

More knowledgeable people than you and I have debated this at length already. Compaddicts dyno graph shows the tertiary ports opening at the correct rpm (small blip on curve) - the graph itself is as expected up to 6000rpm but above that it has the right shape but is not steep enough. A/F ratio is the current most likely culprit (see Paul Yaw's comments - we are not worthy!) which might be be modifiable via ECU update (it might even happen automatically at, say, 5000 miles).