DSport Magazine Car Review (56k Warning: Big Files)
 

Scanned a few pages from the Sept 2009 issue of DSport Magazine. I tried to resize them as low as I can without making the text from the pages ineligable to read. I apologize if the files are too big.

They reviewed a number of FWD, RWD, and AWD cars but the only cars I scanned are:
- Honda Civic SI
- MazdaSpeed 3
- Honda S2000
- Hyundai Genesis 2.0T
- Hyundai Genesis 3.8
- Nissan 370Z
- Infiniti G37S
- Mazda RX8
- Mitsubishi Evo-X MR
- Mitsubishi Evo-X GSR
- Mitsubishi Ralliart
- Nissan R35 GT-R
- Subaru WRX STI
- Subaru WRX

Since the files are big, I will only post the Mazda RX8 (for obvious reasons ;) ) and the MazdaSpeed3 (which is shared with the Honda Civic SI) for now. If you want to compare them with any of the other cars I listed above, just say which car and I will post the scanned page.

According to the mag, they tested the cars at the Streets of Willow road course. Racepak G2X Data Acquisition System and Vericom VC3000PC were used to collect data. For HP figures, they used a Dynojet 224X dynomometer for the FWD and RWD cars. While a SuperFlow AutoDyn 880 dynomometer was used for the AWD cars. Intercomp SW777RFX wireless scales were also used.

Also, here's the magazine's explanation on their "Advertised" and "Measured" power figures:

The difference between "advertised" and "measured" power figures represent the manufacturer's likelihood of "overrating" or "underrating" engine power output.

"ADVERTISED POWER" represents the manufacturer's claim for horsepower at the flywheel.

"MEASURED POWER" figures represent the calculated flywheel horsepower of each vehicle based on the measured wheel horsepower and a 15-percent assumed driveline loss. "MEASURED POWER" figures can be compared across the group to make real-world comparisons across different cars.

IMO, most people and reviewers miss the point of the RX8. It takes more than 1 or 2 drives to understand how the car works. I've had mine for a little over 3 months now and I'm still figuring out how the engine works best. I'm curious as to what they said about the other RWD cars.

dang, they are really hating on our car.

I'd guess they just didn't get into using the high revs the way they need too for max enjoyment of the limited power available...too bad....and in doing so I'm sure it did feel anemic, specially when they can jump on a 263HP/280ft-lbs MS3 and chuck it around w/power to spare. Compared to that, the 8's a slug, even if fast and nimble.

:nopity: Weird stuff in the review: 0-60 & 1/4 numbers, stupid low ratings for everything(?), WTF up w/the turbo comments not shown, tested, discussed, or id'ed. Fair: the text discussion

So again - Great dynamics, beautiful car, crippled by a engine that simply doesn't meet the power delivery needed to flesh out it's sports car look and feel persona.

..tick...tick...tick...s-i-x y-e-a-r-s (and still counting) Mazda

there 60' time was 2.59. That is horrible!

They got it pretty much right.

I'm just surprised the press car made 190 whp, a car that gets abused consistently and yet makes more whp than a lot of the cars here that are maintained properly.

I was shocked at the 193whp as well. Some modded 8s on here have not seen that high to the wheels.

whoever drove it still sucks. I mean I know the 8 isn't a beast on the 1/4 mile but c'mon 15.8 and a 7.3 0 to 60...

the interesting thing is that they gave props to the ms3, which makes about 250 whp, then shit on the rx8 INCLUDING aftermarket turbo kits, stating that it only makes as much power as a v6.

Give me that 193rwhp STOCK engine NOW! (I've only seen one with my eyes for all the Rx8 dynos so far...in 5 years.)

Most dont even goes above 180...T_T

RX8 is slow no doubt. But they must have had some noob driver drive it to get a 16 second quarter mile. Most mags normally quote mid 14 second times. Stupid comparison tho.

Could you post the track times of the other cars?

the times were a result of a wet track

I think the power rating might be at the crank, seeing as they're saying the speed 3 has 283.8. That would be astonishing if that were at the wheels stock.

Then that's just sad

Okay, I feel stupid because I read the OP's post again, and realized measured power = whp + 15% of the advertised power to make up for the assumed driveline loss.
So in reality, x + 232(0.15) = 193.6
that x, being horsepower to the wheel, is a measly 158.8 whp, thank goodness that's not my 8.

This would also explain why the FWD vehicles have higher measured HP than advertised HP because FWD suffers less driveline loss than RWD, so probably less than 15%.

Okay. Posting the two variants of the Hyundai Genesis coupe for comparison.

Let me know if you want more.

I do wish the Speed3 stayed in boost a little longer. I will agree with that. I hate shifting just when the getting gets good. :)

I could never get into the looks of the NA spec Civic Si. Euro spec Type-R, hell yeah.

By the way, where's the disclaimer stating this article was sponsored by Hyundai? :cwm27:

There's no need. There are still a number of RWD (and also AWD) cars in the article that kicks the Hyundai's behind. :yelrotflm

Sounds to me like you got some scanning/posting to do then. :smoker:

+1 :lol:

Adding Honda's S2000 and Nissan's 370Z into the mix.