P00Man

jesus that is freking insane.
________
Yamaha Yz450F Specifications

revhappy

Very nice video..loved the drifting :D :D :D


Can anyone who has seen the velocity red rx8 in person and on Car and Driver TV comment as to whether the color looks the same or different in person than in the TV show?

That velocity red looked dam good on the show....speeding tickets be damned!!!! :D

Schneegz

Saw the Car And Driver TV episode today with the RX-8. It sounds as though they loved the car, but as usual, the main complaint is the lack of power, or rather, torque. 0-60mph in 5.9s is respectable, but not outstanding. I still think it beats most other coupes out there (I'm thinking specifically of the G-35), but the 8 will need boost to compete with the likes of the Evo VIII and STi.

Elara

That velocity red looks exactly like the color on the car in Detroit- that was one of the first things I noticed when I was watching it yesterday.

I can't imagine how much more throw-you-back-in-your-seat you can want than 5.9 secs 0-60...good grief. There aren't tons of cars this cheap that can handle that. Can we say "picky?" He was just confused by the gear transistions, or something. What a goof.

Hercules

No, it won't.

If people are looking at the RX-8 for a drag racer they are looking at the wrong car. The Evo and STi are just econoboxes meant to go really fast and have a good AWD system. Everything inside them sucks.

Besides the quote I posted earlier already suggests the Renesis will not get turboed, but rather get larger rotors.

Schneegz

I'm not suggesting that the Evo or the STi are better cars overall than the RX-8. I am only stating that the Evo and STi are right in the 8's price range and both will probably outperform the 8 on all points. A recent Road & Track article showed the Evo VIII running from 0-60 in 5.1s, pulling .97g on the skidpad (same as a Vette Z06) and running the slalom at over 68mph (slightly FASTER than the Z06). VERY impressive, especially for a sub-$30K, 4-cyl, 4-door.

Granted, the ride and interior of the Evo are probably FAR inferior to that of the RX-8. And I realize the 8 is not a drag racer. The 8 is all about handling. Well, the Evo, at least, obviously handles right up there with a Corvette Z06, one of the best-handling cars you can buy.

Don't get me wrong. The RX-8 is obviously a great car, and its shape is much sexier than pretty much anything out there right now, but I think it has a little catching up to do in the performance department. Just a little.

ZoomZoomH

iTrader: (1)

that's the millionth time I've read that stupid escape clause on all the car forums I visit. If you have problem with the power output ON PAPER of the RENESIS, just say it and stop sugarcoating to avoid the flaming

DYT

Much is said about how great the Evo and Sti could perform, but I would love to hear about what the long term reliability is like for those 2 cars. While it is a fact that a well maintained NA rotary can last into the 200k range, I serious question whether the Evo and Sti can last 100k without some major repairs. Judging from some of the British magazines, it seems that at least the Evo is a very high maintenance vehicle (one car had 2 clutches replaced after only 6000 miles!)

I predict the Evo and Sti will be great cars for 1 or 2 years, and then stuff will start to fall apart (I wonder how many 5.1s 0-60 runs you can make before you fry the clutch). On top of that, I just couldn't handle the fast and the furious image associated with those cars. I think I will stick with the Rx-8 and then the next Rx-7.

Hercules

No, the Evo and STi will not outperform the RX-8 on all points.

They will not pass the 'fun factor' test that is inherent with RWD cars and limited with AWD cars.

They will not be as controllable in the corners (for a slide as example). They will have massive grip and that's great... but I like to have fun.

If you want to put out tests like the slalom... the Mazda Protege MP3 was also reviewed in Road and Track's edition that featured cars with "Great Grip!" (as was the article named), and guess what.. the MP3 had a better slalom than the Vette as well.

Do you want to know WHY? The MP3 is lighter than a Vette. As a result when cornering and turning, much less mass is thrown from side to side allowing the car to achieve a higher slalom.

For you to compare a RWD car to an AWD car shows that you read the magazines for your performance, and don't drive the cars. When it comes down to it you'll see why the RX-8 is *not* going to be reviewed in the breath of the Evo and STi, because it's a car for a different market, a different buyer, and both trying to achieve different goals.

Put it against its own competition... Four seat cars that are RWD and good horsepower -- the BMW 330Ci, G35 Coupe, even the 350Z, Lotus Elise etc... No magazine pins AWD cars against RWD cars unless that car is specifically aiming to unseat a RWD car. Case in point (and failure in point), the new Audi S4 is Audi's entry against the BMW M3 and every review I've read thus far gives the Audi points 'on paper' for the performance, and it does deliver it... but the M3 always wins for sheer driving excitement.

I think the same case applies to the RX-8. Hope that clears it up... most people on this board realize that you can't compare the driving dynamics of an AWD car to a RWD car, just because of the sheer amount of understeer programmed into AWD cars. The only AWD car that is the exception to that, is the Nissan Skyline... but that's because at speed, the AWD turns into a RWD system.

revhappy

Sigh....why do you get so defensive whenever someone questions the RX8?

Granted there are differences between AWD cars and RWD cars, but to say one is absolutely more fun is YOUR opinion and not the established fact you make it out to be.

Again Hercules definition of fun must apply for everyone???



Hmm...its that simple, right???? Then how come the ~3,250 lb. EVO's slalom speed (68.7 for the EVO VII in the "Great Grip" Article and also on the US EVO VIII from the previously mentioned Road and Track article) exceeds the lighter Z06 (3,118 lbs according to Edmunds) time of 67.3 ("Great Grip" article).

The truth is there are a few more variables. I wondered about why sometimes lesser cars performed relatively well against more performance-oriented cars and posted the question in the following thread:

http://www.rx8forum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1426

Another interesting post about skidpad and slalom performance tests from the WRX forum:

http://www.wrxforum.com/cgi-bin/ulti...c;f=2;t=000538






Don't forget understeer CAN be programmed into any vehicle, even RWD cars. So, every AWD (except the skyline) has such huge amounts of understeer to the point that they are crappy handlers??? Perhaps you should inform the editors at EVO and CAR magazine of this oversight in their rave reviews over the years of various WRXs and EVOs. According to Road and Track, the US EVO VIII "slightly understeers in tight hairpins, however in all other types of corners, it exhibits near-neutal balance."

As for what and what not should be compared to the RX8, what you state is for Hercules, not EVERYONE (though you imply it as a fact). You could split cars into so many categories to the point where each model could have a monopoly over its "class." The truth is a lot of people cross-shop different cars, especially ones that are similarly priced and are built to be fun. In fact I am one of them as the RX8 and Lancer Evolution VIII are my top choices (though I am leaning heavily towards the RX8 because I do prefer lighter weight and RWD). Hell even consumer reports compared the WRX and the FWD RSX-S when both were new, so I don't see why a car mag won't eventually do some kind of comparison test that includes the RX8 and an AWD vehicle.

quicks8

I am going to have to support Herc on this point. The Evo and STi cannot possibly beat out the 8 on all points.

Everyone wants something different out of a car. That is why there are so many out there, it isn't a one car fits all market.

Personally for me, I need a car that has a decent ride, (i.e. better than my 99 Miata), has four seats, handles great (i.e. like the Miata), has some get-up-&-go, and looks good too. Plus I do a lot of traveling and winter driving so things like a Navigation system, and heated exterior mirrors and seats, which to some may be a novelty, are a necessity to me. And it always helps to be able to squeez a couple of golf bags in the trunk for the occasional lunch time outing.

The 8 provides me with this "whole package" that I am looking for and frankly the others don't. Hell, I really wanted to buy a Z when they came out, but I had to give up too much of what I wanted.

So I really don't think you can make a blanket statement like the "all points" one and not expect a few people to jump all over you about it. I wouldn't say Herc is being defensive at all.

Quick

rx8daniel

Where are you located quick8?
IF Mazda hadn't made suggestions about producing the RX-8 these past few years I'd have strongly considered a WRX - the local dealer wasn't too interested in letting me drive one when I told him I had an RX on order - his loss - if I were a sales person I'd let my AWD performance icon do the talking for me - a short stint behind that Momo wheel in what have been described as great driving seats would convince many to buy a WRX that may otherwise leave his parking lot. At any rate - I have a Subaru XT6 fulltime AWD for the snow and winter while the Miata sits undercover. I've had 3 other Subarus, starting with a 73 1300cc DL through my first new car - a 82 GL-10. Have had 5 RX-7s, the last one still alive and recently shod with new tires compliments of it's current owner back in TX. It has to have close to 200K on it by now. One lady I've corresponded with on our ordered RX-8s has an 88 GXL with over 300K on it. THAT is one of the great things about rotaries besides how light and smooth they are - they are tremendously reliable (3 moving parts). My LARGEST concern with a WRX and even more so with anything beginning with 'Mitsu' would be long term reliability (clutch, electronics, turbo, engine itself) - say, past 100K, definitely past 150K. The positives and negatives can objectively be compared easily. The subjective part is where personal preferences and perceptions prevail and persuade one to buy a WRX, an EVO, a Vette, or, my choice, hands down, before I sit in the car, no doubt in my mind, an RX-8!
It's the overall package that is a winner for me: Renesis, real 4 person seating, reliability, on track performance that I'll probably never quite fully explore, on road fun, winding those two rotors out to 9000+ at will, the quiet engine that may need a more open exhaust to let the rotary sound out more, etc. etc. etc.

Good Duck

I don't know why anyone would feel the need to defend the RX-8 at all. It's not a damsel in distress or some helpless three-legged puppy. It's a great car and it will stand on its own. All that matter, are your own personal reasons for buying the car. As for why I chose the RX-8: I like the high-revving rotary engine, the promised of nimble handling, its small size, and I absolutely love the styling.

But I have to concede, the RX-8 overall performance will probably not surpass nor equal that of the EVO and STi. Put on the same track, those two cars will likely outrun the RX-8 (driven equally). But that's not important to me. If it was, I would put my money on those cars instead. As is, I'm putting my money on what I love, the RX-8.

pelucidor

The EVO VIII and STi are appliances for speed. I spend about 20 hours a week in a car. If all of that time was spent on a track at 9/10ths or more (and someone else was paying for tyres/brakes/clutch etc) then I would seriously consider one of these vehicles if limited to $32k.

However I don't - and things other than pure performance appeal to me sometimes - the quality of the leather and plastics, the sound system (although BOSE is usually crap it may be OK in the RX-8), style, service, overall comfort, even quietness and luxury when I want it. I think the RX-8 (and G35C and BMWs etc) are a far better all-round package than the one-dimensional EVO/STi (and look infinitely better to boot).

To put it into perspective - I've probably read 5-6 reviews of a Porsche 911 Turbo against a Ferrari 360 Modena or Spyder. In every case the review spends several pages talking about how much faster the 911 Turbo is in every gear, at every speed, in the corners etc. In every case the Ferrari wins the comparison - it can actually be ENJOYED in ANY gear and at ANY speed (even stationary it is a work of art) - and the Porsche can only be enjoyed at 9/10ths and above (the reviews are where I got my term 'appliance for speed').

The package as a whole, under conditions where you spend 99% of your time, is much better. The main thing that appeals to me about a Miata (I may pick up a '94 next year to fix my convertible lust) is that it can put a huge grin on your face without even breaking the speed limit - now THAT'S performance IMO.

m477

I think that some of you are underestimating the RX-8's track potential.

To use the FD as an example - the 911 Turbo had WAY more power, AND shorter braking distances, yet the FD still turned lower track times with the same driver. The FD could win because it was lighter, the weight in the car was placed more optimally, and had a better suspention.

The RX-8 handles even better than the FD (according to an FD owner), and compares to the STi/Evo the same way the FD compared to the 911 turbo.

Remeber, the RX-8 pulled a 1:50 at Laguna Seca, which is neck-and-neck with an Acura NSX. So at the very least, I think we can say that the RX-8 would be a serious contender with the STi/Evo on a road course.

Schneegz

Hercules:

First of all, I made it quite clear that I never said the Evo and STi were BETTER CARS than the 8. I said they would PERFORM BETTER. I'm talking specifically about hard numbers here, nothing more.

Second, "fun factor" is NOT a measure of performance. Once again, I'm talking EXCLUSIVELY about hard numbers. "Fun factor" is NOT quantifiable.

Third, I never used "don't get me wrong" as an escape clause. I was clarifying that I believe the RX-8 is a great all-around car even if it does not outperform the Evo or STi. I also made it quite clear that I do wish the 8 came with more power and torque. Period. No escape clause necessary.

I WILL test drive all three cars when I get the chance and pick between them then on ALL factors, not just hard performance numbers. Until then, my statement that the Evo and STi will PROBABLY beat the 8 on all points of pure performance is correct. The same is true about the 350Z, but you don't see me standing in line at the Nissan dealership, do you?

Hercules

I'll let you slide on your points, as I don't have data to prove mine either.

However, on the fun factor.. it *is* quantifiable. Why do you think the BMW M5 (in a recent review) was favored over the faster Mercedes and faster Audi RS6? Because it was simply MORE FUN. Car magazines will use that type of reviewing simply because when you're behind the wheel of a SPORTS car or even sports sedan, the goal is essentially to enjoy yourself. So sure you can go down the straights faster in an RS6 or Merc, but the BMW will still leave you grinning ear to ear.

And that my friend, is what really matters in SPORTS cars. If people are going to race these cars you'd be they will be dumping money in the right places to mod the car to their specs. Occasional track days and autocross are not really going to prove the performance numbers that the Evo/STi MAY or MAY NOT deliver (in comparison to the RX-8).

Time will tell, but the RX-8 is the most fun car just due to the fact it's RWD... and that's reason enough for me to throw the Evo/STi out of the picture. I'd put the G35 Coupe or 350Z against it but I was never a fan of their quality or styling. Their exteriors have grown on me but I choke when I see/feel the inside.

revhappy

Again you are projecting YOUR personal opinion as an undisputable fact. A lot of people feel RWD is more fun, but there are many who feel AWD is a more exciting experience. They offer two different experiences, which different people have different perceptions of. One example I can think of where I would prefer a rally car is on tight mountain roads (perhaps having a few bumps and snow piles on the side...such as the last few weeks in the northeast). As for your reference to the M5 comparison test, I'm sure I can find many comparison tests calling an AWD car more fun than a RWD car (i..e WRX, 911 turbo). For what its worth, EVO magazine has continually given rave reviews of EVOs and STIs and gives the US/Japanese/European EVO VIII 4.5 stars and gives the RX8 4 stars.

The bottom line is these are two different recipes for providing fun. Personally, I prefer the light, high reving RWD option ( we agree!!!!) to the AWD point and shoot smiley face method. I look for great clutch action, a slick gearbox, agility/tossability more than monsterous acceleration and ultimate grip. I prefer a sexy/curvy (read sports car) exterior, but don't care too much about interior "quality" or creature comforts as long as its not really cheesy (i.e. faux wood).

However, that doesn't mean I can't appreciate or wouldn't have any fun in a rally inspired car. Its kind of like music..hard rock is my favorite type of music, but I also like hip hop too. While I may like my favorite hard rock band more than any hip hop artist, there are many good hip hop artists that I prefer to some pretty mediocre/bad hard rock groups. If the RX8 executes as I hope, it shouldn't be a tough decision. If its watered down, the well-excecuted rally inspired car (at least so far as I have seen) known as the EVO VIII could be chosen (BTW....I do think a rally inspired car is a much easier design to execute).

Hercules

Please find me an article then, that shows a SIMILAR AWD car being more fun than a RWD car. You know, a S4 vs M3 type of comparison, not a Miata vs Porsche 911.

Best of luck.

ZoomZoom

I would like to see that one myself.

revhappy

Perhaps, you should have read the article you previously referenced? The "Great Grip" article from Road and Track ranked thje AWD EVO VII 4th and the RWD M3 7th? Since I think we agree that handling is the biggest element of "fun", then this is a pretty good indicator of which is more "fun." I guess they are not "similar" since the high output Mitsubishi is >$10,000 cheaper!

http://www.roadandtrack.com/features...eID=220&page=8


We can also look at the following article from EVO magazine where the WRX STI gets 5 stars compared to the 4.5 stars fro the M3. As with British magazines, the descriptions of the experiences of the cars is much more telling:

"lambering out of the Lotus and into the big, roomy Impreza is as big a change of scenery as the Elise was after the Civic. It feels good, your hips and ribs squeezed by a seriously supportive seat, feet resting on a set of well-placed alloy pedals. It all helps you to discover an immediate level of confidence. Some of this is undoubtedly due to the psychological effect of the Impreza's stout four-door saloon stance and the added security four-wheel drive gives. Whatever, freed from the nagging fears of excessive understeer or oversteer you're left simply with the task of driving quickly.

With front and rear limited-slip differentials, linked by a viscous centre coupling, the STi feels a very different beast to the standard WRX. The steering is a smidge heavier and while it still lacks the super-detailed, granular feel of the Elise, the stiffer suspension brings with it a greater sense of connection. Drive to standard WRX limits and you'll find the STi shares a similar desire to understeer. Don't be fooled. Get the nose turned in, keep squeezing on the power and you'll feel the steering weight-up in your hands, like torque steer only without the wild deflection from your chosen course. The nose does begin to straighten slightly, requiring you to flex your forearms to stay on line, but stay committed and you can feel the power get redirected through the viscous coupling towards the rear, taking that initial power understeer with it. From this point on, the STi's balance is tail-led. You feel each individual tyre working to find grip, each corner of the car pummelling and digging at the tarmac, generating sensational levels of drive and traction. This is where the STi gets in the zone, the point at which it feels most alive.

The thing that never ceases to amaze is the sheer speed you can carry into any given corner, on any surface in any weather. Quite simply, nothing can live with its ability to absorb such dynamic punishment and adapt to the ever-changing demands of an unfamiliar road. Bumps, crests and tricky cambers? No problem. It's so fast on such a wide range of roads you can't help thinking it shouldn't be allowed.

There's huge overtaking power, too. You just can't beat a turbocharged car for that raw, ballistic rush, and from 3500rpm the STi flies. By 7000rpm the real fire has subsided (thank the Type-UK's extra catalyst for that) but by then whatever was in front of you will be a receding speck in your rear-view mirror. The STi's six-speed 'box helps maximise the thrust, with the intermediate ratios able to dispatch any corner you care to imagine with a full-boost flourish. It's not as manic as an Evo VII, and it's all the better for it. Each gear has an added urgency over and above the standard WRX; an increased ability to strain the tendons in your neck as boost pressure builds. Third and fourth are really impressive and it's these that do most of the work, even on surprisingly sinuous stretches. It still cruises well though; there's less than 3500rpm on the dial at 85mph, so motorways aren't a chore.

Big four-pot Brembo brakes at the front (two- potters at the rear) give the Impreza enormous stopping power. Initial pedal feel is a bit numb and they don't really bite when you gently cover the pedal, but once you're into the meat of the firm pedal's travel you can feel the pads chomp into the discs with conviction. Super Sport ABS takes readings from a lateral g sensor to increase the car's ability in trail-brake situations, and you have to be going mighty hard before the pedal will pulse beneath your foot. They feel well able to cope with anything you could throw at them.

It's easy to tell who's just stepped out of the STi; the ruddy-tinged face, glazed eyes and drugged smile are dead giveaways. Even Harry, a formerly reluctant Impreza admirer, appears to have been converted. 'Astonishing. Absolutely astonishing. I even quite like the look of it! It's like the Integrale Evo – you really couldn't imagine having anything but the wide-arched, winged 'Grale. Well it's the same with the STi. It just looks so much more serious than the WRX.'

Roger, too, is convinced we're once again in the presence of greatness (and no, he's not talking about Harry): 'For the money you'd have to say it's a bit of a bargain. If an M3 can question your need to buy a 911, then this questions your need to buy an M3.' Quite.

Ah yes, the M3. A huge hit at last year's eCOTY contest (in conventional manual form), we brought along an SMG-equipped car to see if the rapid-shift sequential transmission raises the M3's game as a pure driving tool.

The paddles certainly make a huge difference to the way you drive the M3. At first you feel clumsy, flipping up and down for no particular reason and with no particular rhythm, but relax with the system and your timing returns. The biggest problem with it is the paddles themselves. They're just not long enough, especially when they lurk behind such a fat-rimmed steering wheel. Consequently when you curl your fingers out for a shift with the wheel pointing straight, chances are you'll flash the lights or squirt the screen washers. More frustratingly, when you reach for a paddle while applying steering lock (surely the whole reason for the paddle-shift system) it's all too easy to forget which side to flip. Mr Montoya might like his paddles attached to the back of his steering wheel, but he never needs to apply more than half a turn of lock. On the road, where full turns or more are often required, paddles fixed to the steering column would be a better solution.

In almost every other respect the SMG system is highly effective, heightening the excitement and involvement of a high-speed blat. I'm not noted for my love of these transmission systems, but even I would have a hard time choosing between manual and SMG. So too would Roger. 'It works so well you rarely feel like you're missing out by not having a manual 'box and it adds to the package without dominating the experience. Would I have one over the standard 'box? Dunno, but it's certainly the first one I'd consider having.' Harry is more decisive. 'I can't imagine having an M3 without it,' he says. Hayman just isn't convinced. 'The SMG gearbox works a treat if you like that sort of thing, he says, 'but I don't, and would have the manual every time. The paddle-shift just makes an already frantic and manic car even more aggressive.'
Transmission aside, there's a satisfying weight to the steering and other major controls, enough to make you feel involved at any rate. It needs more lock than you might expect to get it turned in, which makes it feel slower witted than it actually is. And if you switch off the ASR, as you surely will at some point, the rapidity with which the tail submits to 338bhp is an instant wake-up call that will require rapid armfuls of lock to catch. Once caught, the M-Diff and the M3's excellent weight distribution make it a straightforward beast to hold on to, but the transition from grip to slip is sharper and earlier than with the other cars here.

The biggest failing is the brakes, which lack staying power, even in hard road use. Charging along our valley road, the pedal became softer, the pads and discs eventually grinding and squealing in protest. From experience we know that track work kills them in three laps. Disappointing for a car so thoroughly engineered in every other area.

The over-riding impression of the M3 isn't its raw, *****-out ability but its super-consistent delivery. It might sound perverse, but it's this meticulous attention to the dynamic 'big picture' – the ability to carouse and cosset in equal measure – that is its undoing. Feedback is on a strictly need-to-know basis, and as the chassis is so darned competent and controllable (at least with ASR engaged) you don't need to know that much about the maelstrom occurring between tyres and tarmac. Too supple to feel noticeably more effective as you hit fast, smooth tarmac, too big and weighty to excel when the going gets bumpy-twisty, it simply tackles any road you care to throw at it in the same efficient, calculating manner. Consistently brilliant, it lacks the ability to deliver those fleeting moments of inspiration which the Mini, Elise and STi can serve up."


I'm not trying to prove AWD is better than RWD because frankly, I don't believe it to be! RWD allows a car to be lighter and suffer less drivetrain losses, which negate a lot of AWD's traction advantage as speed increases. In addition, a RWD car (all other things being equal) should be lighter and allow for a higher reving engine (as opposed to a turbo) which I prefer.

Still, my point is that you continually project your opinion as fact. You continually (and arrogantly) dismiss other opinions (and other cars for that matter) by portraying your personal views as the undisputable truth. I'm not the first to point this out, so perhaps you may want to slow your record number of posts a bit and THINK before you write sometimes.

Hercules

rev, I guess I am biased not because of the fact that the RX-8 is RWD.. but I can do more stupid things in a RWD car than I could in a AWD car, and that is a measure of my personal fun factor.

That Evo article by the way, very good The STi has grown on me after reading that, but if Evo's writers weren't so darned good that would not be the case.

At any rate I'll stop before I keep getting shut up I think AWD has a place in fun factor but not *my* personal fun factor. I guess I can't see past it right now... maybe after somebody hands me the keys to an STi....

wakeech

tasteful picture.

... i'm not disagreeing with you, rev did certainly prove his point. though let's have some sense about things yet, eh?? sorry if i seem like a wad, but that's not very funny to me.

Quick_lude

Take that picture out, young people have no common sense anymore..