This is what journalists and owners have been saying since it came out.

I'd love to have a 8 with 30 more HP, but I didn't buy the car because I wanted the fastest car under $30K. There were a lot of other factors involved.

If you want a better hard core speed demon, go drive something else.

 

"The Mitsubishi Evo MR was another excellent-handling car. It also had the benefit of serious power, achieving 124.0 mph on the straight. These virutes were supplemented by plenty of grip and tremendous stability. The Evo managed to combine quick turn-in behavior with a nicely planted feel in the corners. Its steering was precise, and the Evo's highly supportive seat made it a driver favorite. We would like to see less fade in the brakes, but there was enough stopping power to put together at least one good lap per session, and the best of those was cloced at 3:13.5."

 

"In the LL1 class, only the Nissan350Z could beat that (the Evo's) time, with a best lap of 3:12.5. The 350Z was as gutsy as the Evo, and its thrust was of the naturally aspirated variety with, naturally, no turbo lag. That made it possible to feed in power much more precisely—and earlier—when exiting corners. The Z-car's handling was not quite as buttoned down as the Evo's, and the Nissan demanded a more precise driving style. But its smooth power delivery worked well with fine handling balance to allow genuine power oversteer when necessary to tighten the car's line. Long live the king of LL1!"

 

This test bothers me because it's using the Evo MR and 350Z Track and calling them under 30k cars. Either test base models and use base model prices or use fully loaded models and use the corresponding price.

How do I trust they did the test fairly if they can't even report on it accurately?

 

Looks like a good article. I wish I still had my subscription.

 

They used base model prices for their price placement. The Evo MR's base price is 29,774. Then they encouraged makers to add performance options.

As tested the cars priced out at:
350Z Track - 35,865
Evo MR - 36,924
RX8 - 31,505
Mustang GT - 30,345
Cobalt SS - 22,385
GTI - 27,725
Civic Si - 22,635
MX5 - 25,495

Charger - 43,505

I think not many people are paying over 30 grand for a new RX8 now, every weekend dealers around here are knocking 6000 off all in stock

 

And for you that need to thump your chests.... In sector 2 of the track the 8 almost kept pace with the Ford GT, and in sector 5 no other car in the test had a higher minimum MPH.

 

Go to the magazine rack and buy one.

 

If I was Mazda, I would have sent a Sport package only 6-speed manual. That would have listed for 2006 MSRP $28,295. The Touring and Grand Touring additions only add weight in a test like this, since they include no other performance enhancing mechanical additions.

And the base Sport Pkg only adds HID, DSC and fog lights. I bet the track drivers turned off the DSC for this test so even a base 6-speed 8 would have sufficed.

People estimate the GT package adds about ~50-75LBs of weight.

 

Looks like the Cobalt SS is the best bang for the buck. Impressive IMO.

 

Nah, to pay $4 an issue is a waste. I had a good deal through magsforless.com where I got 12 issues of 3 different mags for @ $15. I may have to sign back up for that.

 

I was very suprised by that one. I never expected the SS to get numbers like that.

 

I thought MR was an option on the Evo. Evo RS, IX and MR. RS wouldve been around 29k but they tested the Evo MR -_-. Same HP though lol.

 

eBay--check mag subscriptions there. I have bought 5 or 6 from there and paid like less than 5 bucks per subscription.

 

The base model would've been the way to go as it contains all the performance stuff (DSC might be a great safety net, but it still slows you down) with nothing else.

 

Thanks for the info! I just got 2 yrs of Car and Driver for 5.95 and 1 yr of Motor Trend for 4.50. Awesome

 

They handle pretty well and are pretty quick. Don't quote me on this, but I think in Motortrend it had the best slalom speed of any FWD car they had ever tested, and it topped the Z51 C5 vette on the skidpad.

 

Neat comparison. I'm also confused as to why they would use a 350z track instead of the normal 350z. But whatever, It's still cool to see how the 8 did.

 

I'm quoting you. You were close.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._interior.html

“How good is it? In testing, the Cobalt SS is the fastest regular-production front-drive car through the slalom we've tested in three years, rocking through the cones even faster than the new Corvette Z51. The SS outcornered the VW R32 on the skidpad, outgunned the Mini Cooper S 0-to-60 mph, and outstopped the Subaru Impreza WRX 60-to-0 mph.”

 

That's pretty cool!

 

Didn't know the SS could pull that slalom. When I drove one, it didn't feel all that good, and I still left the drive with the MSP as the best handling FWD car. The SS just didn't feel as balanced to me and I just wanted to get out the car as soon as possible.

 

Always glad to be of help.

From the various sellers with good feedback I've bought from, I have never had a problem receiving the mags. The subscriptions are an absolute steal.

 

I think GM has loads of talent, it is too bad they have been been buried under bean counter directives and stifling bureaucracy. It looks like things are changing, but maybe not fast enuff. GM needs to move more like the Cobalt SS and less like the Buick Rendevous.

 

As much as I hate using mags to compare stats, I did look up my latest Road&Track the ratings for the SS. It is listed as doing 66.9 in the skidpad. The RSX-S beat it by running a 67.1 and the Saturn ION Redline with a 67.6. Still, those are pretty good numbers for $20k FWD cars.

 

Hell, after listening to threads on this site suggesting that GTI's/Si's/SS/etc. are as fast if not faster than an 8, I'm almost surprised the 8 beat them.

With the Evo pulling a 3:13.5, I would have expected;
350 3:17
Mustang 3:17.5
RX8 3:18
Cobalt 3:21
Miata 3:24
SI 3:25
GTI 3:25.5

So really, I'm stunned about the speed of the 350, and surprised how slow the new Miata was. I think it was Car and Driver that track tested a 8 vs. a G35 Coupe 'brembo" and they matched times, so a 6 second difference is really surprising. Oh, and the Charger, at 425hp and a full IRS, it should have been faster.

Otherwise, no big surprises. But where was the Eclispe, S2000, MS6, MS3, Celica, Tiburon, Crossfire, SRT4, WRX, etc.

At the end of the day I always like to know the average of the fast laps (more realistic), and difference between slowest to fastest laps (gauge difficulty of car). Otherwise, it'll be cool if they add this test to each review.