2010 Mazda RX-8 R3, an AutoWeek Drivers Log
09-15-2010, 08:22 PM
#27
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess which one is my fav.?
09-15-2010, 09:57 PM
#28
Registered
The RX-8 is all about fun-to-drive. The rotary engine is a big part of that. It's simply a fun engine to drive. Without a rotary the "[*]X-8" would probably be a good car and even sell better, but would lose most of it's character, uniqueness and (imo) driving enjoyment.
09-17-2010, 10:04 PM
#29
road warrior
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oakland and Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,861
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Not quite Renesis. I get your intention, and what you are going after, and agree...to a point.
The counter arguement is that other engines possible are about the same weight as the rotory. The counter arguement to that is that it has to sit up higher, and farther forward, so even if it is the same weight, it still shifts the center of gravity/mass.
Skipping that whole arguement and making a final conclusion is where people usually go wrong, in both directions and mentalities.
The fact is that the rotary engine DID NOT enable Mazda to build the world class suspension it has. It DID enable Mazda to build it far easier and cheaper than otherwise.
Piston powered cars can get 50/50 weight. They can be light doing it. They can be in world class chassis with world class suspensions.
The advantage Mazda has is that the rotary engine has inherent attributes that it lends a car in terms of placement within the chassis that do not have to be "engineered over". A piston powered car starts behind the curve, and it costs more to get it to the same point, costs which are transferred on to the buyer. BMW M3, Porsche 911, etc... With a rotary, there is just an inherent benefit that makes the suspension and chassis design much easier to accomplish.
The wonder of the RX-8's handling doesn't come from the engine, or even the suspension. It comes from how cheap it is for the level of handling it provides. Other cars DO beat it in handling after all, and they are all piston powered. They just cost more than the average person can afford.
No one is in shocking amazement when the 911 GT3 handled insanely well. It had better. The shock and amazement is that a $25,000 car does.
The counter arguement is that other engines possible are about the same weight as the rotory. The counter arguement to that is that it has to sit up higher, and farther forward, so even if it is the same weight, it still shifts the center of gravity/mass.
Skipping that whole arguement and making a final conclusion is where people usually go wrong, in both directions and mentalities.
The fact is that the rotary engine DID NOT enable Mazda to build the world class suspension it has. It DID enable Mazda to build it far easier and cheaper than otherwise.
Piston powered cars can get 50/50 weight. They can be light doing it. They can be in world class chassis with world class suspensions.
The advantage Mazda has is that the rotary engine has inherent attributes that it lends a car in terms of placement within the chassis that do not have to be "engineered over". A piston powered car starts behind the curve, and it costs more to get it to the same point, costs which are transferred on to the buyer. BMW M3, Porsche 911, etc... With a rotary, there is just an inherent benefit that makes the suspension and chassis design much easier to accomplish.
The wonder of the RX-8's handling doesn't come from the engine, or even the suspension. It comes from how cheap it is for the level of handling it provides. Other cars DO beat it in handling after all, and they are all piston powered. They just cost more than the average person can afford.
No one is in shocking amazement when the 911 GT3 handled insanely well. It had better. The shock and amazement is that a $25,000 car does.
09-18-2010, 08:05 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From all technical accounts I have read, the rotary's advantage for handling is that it is relatively light and small. This allows placement in a front engine car that produces weight distribution that would be possible only with a mid-engine design in a piston engine. It is no accident that the RX-8 is the only true sports car with a back seat which is not a joke (ie see the back seat of a 911 or Evora). The small size of the engine also allows for lower placement in the engine bay for a lower center of gravity which also aids handling.
09-20-2010, 03:11 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Muncie, Indiana
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm kind of taken back by this thread. I've read through this and so many people haven't grasped the concept yet that Mazda took the rotary engine and built a car around it, not the other way around. The Mazdaspeed 3 is the polar opposite of that, they took the car and built an engine for it. Also, you guys have clearly never worked under the hood as well if you honestly think that the Speed 3's engine would fit without some serious reworking of the turbo setup.
I come from a the rx7 community. Those people buy rotary powered cars for the package, and that package is largely impacted by the rotary inside. The Rx8 fits that bill every bit as much. I would never want to take a rotary out of a rx car, and I'd never want to put a rotary into anything else. Honestly, I don't even like the thought of turbocharging or supercharging a non-turbo car. I would do it to the 8 because I don't view it so much as a sports car, but more like a touring car built primarily around driving every day while maintaining the ability to do serious track time. If the renesis dealt well with major porting, it would be one thing, but I've yet to see anything good enough to justify port work.
I come from a the rx7 community. Those people buy rotary powered cars for the package, and that package is largely impacted by the rotary inside. The Rx8 fits that bill every bit as much. I would never want to take a rotary out of a rx car, and I'd never want to put a rotary into anything else. Honestly, I don't even like the thought of turbocharging or supercharging a non-turbo car. I would do it to the 8 because I don't view it so much as a sports car, but more like a touring car built primarily around driving every day while maintaining the ability to do serious track time. If the renesis dealt well with major porting, it would be one thing, but I've yet to see anything good enough to justify port work.
09-20-2010, 03:39 PM
#33
幹他媽!
one thing that i dunno how many car magazines noticed is that prior to the tsb engine flash that mazda did back in 2007 or 2008, our mileage wasn't all that bad... in fact, when my car was in it's first 2 years, i actually was getting just over 300 miles per tank.
after the flash? i'm lucky to get 250 miles- esp with spirited driving...
<SIGH>
after the flash? i'm lucky to get 250 miles- esp with spirited driving...
<SIGH>
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
garethleeds
Europe For Sale/Wanted
6
11-19-2015 06:32 AM
duworm
Series I Wheels, Tires, Brakes & Suspension
1
10-01-2015 04:57 PM
jasonrxeight
RX-8's For Sale/Wanted
2
09-30-2015 01:53 PM
