New Car and Driver article.. thanks to BryanH!
03-03-2003, 03:44 AM
#51
Registered User
Originally posted by TJRX8
The one thing the G35 has that the RX8 doesn't is automatic electric sliding front seats to gain access to the rear seats. The 8 has two extra doors so it doesn't need this frivolous accessory.
Loaded vs loaded I think they are a wash. Add another category to the 8's total.
PS: what the hell is the Mustang doing in there?
The one thing the G35 has that the RX8 doesn't is automatic electric sliding front seats to gain access to the rear seats. The 8 has two extra doors so it doesn't need this frivolous accessory.
Loaded vs loaded I think they are a wash. Add another category to the 8's total.
PS: what the hell is the Mustang doing in there?
And like I said since it doesn't have any memory, everytime someone sits in the rear, this process has to be repeated...
I am not sure how the G35c got a 10 score on the ammenities. It's nice inside but it isn't a luxury car. I know the scores are relative but when the RX-8 and the Mustang gets scores in the 5 area, 10 makes the G35c sound like a Bentley which it isn't.
-Mr. Wigggles
03-03-2003, 03:58 AM
#52
Registered User
Originally posted by threeputtwash
Am I the only one who noticed that you needed a 8k rpm clutch drop to get the 0-60 5.9sec time? 5-60 7.5 seconds? So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
Am I the only one who noticed that you needed a 8k rpm clutch drop to get the 0-60 5.9sec time? 5-60 7.5 seconds? So we're talking about 8 seconds for a 0-60 without a clutch drop?
Is this normal?
And of course the blurb on the low trunkspace isn't too inspiring...
They explained their 5-60MPH procedure exactly a while back. Anyone else want to fill in the details?
-Mr. Wigggles
03-03-2003, 04:00 AM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the RX-8 had more torque it would require a piston engine, a three rotor or a larger two rotor. All three options would mean, to varying degrees, more cost, more weight, higher CG and higher yaw moment of inertia. Now what do we have? An Infiniti G35c. This car is already available.
I prefer to stick with a car that is more nimble (has better transient response) and can be controlled during low speed slides more easily. These qualities combined with great shifter, clutch, brake and steering feel are what makes a car fun to drive on the [B]street[B]. Precious few of us actually track our cars. Miatas and MR2's are good track cars but they are great street cars. A Vette is a great car track but not as fun as a street car as an MR2 or Miata.
Of course if Mazda could up the torque 20% but not affect the engine mass I'll take it.
I prefer to stick with a car that is more nimble (has better transient response) and can be controlled during low speed slides more easily. These qualities combined with great shifter, clutch, brake and steering feel are what makes a car fun to drive on the [B]street[B]. Precious few of us actually track our cars. Miatas and MR2's are good track cars but they are great street cars. A Vette is a great car track but not as fun as a street car as an MR2 or Miata.
Of course if Mazda could up the torque 20% but not affect the engine mass I'll take it.
03-03-2003, 04:56 AM
#54
Are you driven?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: socal
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Freshalloy.com
Hercs post...
Hi all,
I felt I needed to reply as many of you are 'against' Mazda and the least I can do is defend the car I'm buying.
The G35 Coupe is a great car, and I'd consider it against the RX-8 if it had bigger back seats and was a few grand cheaper. However, the RX-8 fills for me, the utilitarian needs that are necesary in my next car.
Four good sized seats, an okay trunk, reasonable power, and a fun car. I believe on this, the RX-8 wins. I will lose in a straight line race to many cars. That's fine. I'll lose at the track too. That's fine also. But I will have a car that is smooth shifting, seats four comfortably, and fits in my budget.
This car isn't meant to compete with the likes of the G35 Coupe and Mustang.. probably moreso with the G35 Sedan, 330i sedan, and others in this range. Regardless though, C&D rated it number one out of the trio they reviewed. This is rather irrelevant to me however.
The type of 'fun' I want to have with the RX-8 isn't perhaps the type of fun most people have.. I go to empty lots and 'beat' on my cars, handbrake pulls, whatever... fun stuff for me. And of course there is autocrossing the car, which I also intend to do. Being that the car is more nimble than the G35 Coupe, this is where it will excel. Most people don't have tracks in their vicinity and as a result can only do autoxing due to availability. And for that practicality, the RX-8 will be quite good.
As per the thoughts on the RX-7 and all their problems... the twin turbo versions of the RX-7 indeed had a lot of problems mainly due to cooling. Inefficient cooling systems made for blown apex seals, which in turn led to a useless motor. The RX-8 doesn't suffer from this, as it's not turbocharged, and rotary engines are generally just as reliable as piston engines, except they don't take kindly to mistreatment, whereas a piston engine is not as susceptible.
If the G35 sedan was better looking, more nimble, had a better transmission and went on a huge weightloss only then could it be a choice for me over the RX-8. The 330i was my first choice in cars but the price for it was obscene, and thus the RX-8 was my choice of what was available.
I don't intend on stoplight racing, track racing, etc.. Probably just a little autox and then whatever I do on my day-to-day commute, maybe taking the scenic route home and hitting some twisties.
I believe when Mazda releases the RX-7 to compete against the Nissan 350Z and the G35 Coupe... you will see quite a battle. Mazda's cars are historically very capable handlers (much to the chagrin of some people that HATE Mazda!), though I admit the power has always lacked in their cars.
The next evolution of the sports cars from Mazda is the RX-7, and MPS RX-8. The RX-7 in my opinion will be far superior to the Nissan 350Z in every respect, as the RX-7 will be put on another weightloss from the RX-8 missing two doors and seats. However this is just my personal hypothethesis right now.
To those of you who hate Mazda... it's cool. I have a Nissan Maxima SE 2001 and I don't like it much either. I also have a Mazda Millenia which is obscenely slow, but very fun to drive. I suppose that for me, and many others considering the RX-8, power isn't the deciding factor because most times you can't use it on the street. But a fun and controllable car with a great shifter you can use every day, and for many people, that makes up their mind in getting the RX-8 or something else.
I look forward to future reviews though, more specifically with the RX-7 that will be released at some later date (hopefully). Should make for some interesting articles.
Oh and lastly, Car and Driver isn't the only magazine that gave the RX-8 'rave reviews.' CAR, EVO (my two faves), Edmunds, Canadian Driver, Autoweek... they all say the car is a blast to drive, and mention the same shortcomings of its midrange power.
I think it's hard to judge until you get behind the driver's wheel and just beat on it somewhere... then and only then can you make the true decision whether or not the RX-8 is more fun than the G35 Coupe or not. I've already put money on the RX-8 being more fun on a day-to-day basis and all around than the G35 Coupe. That's not to say it'll be faster... but many people equate speed to fun... and that's simply not how it is for me.
Anyhoo... cya on the highway in June
Very well said Herc! :D
Hi all,
I felt I needed to reply as many of you are 'against' Mazda and the least I can do is defend the car I'm buying.
The G35 Coupe is a great car, and I'd consider it against the RX-8 if it had bigger back seats and was a few grand cheaper. However, the RX-8 fills for me, the utilitarian needs that are necesary in my next car.
Four good sized seats, an okay trunk, reasonable power, and a fun car. I believe on this, the RX-8 wins. I will lose in a straight line race to many cars. That's fine. I'll lose at the track too. That's fine also. But I will have a car that is smooth shifting, seats four comfortably, and fits in my budget.
This car isn't meant to compete with the likes of the G35 Coupe and Mustang.. probably moreso with the G35 Sedan, 330i sedan, and others in this range. Regardless though, C&D rated it number one out of the trio they reviewed. This is rather irrelevant to me however.
The type of 'fun' I want to have with the RX-8 isn't perhaps the type of fun most people have.. I go to empty lots and 'beat' on my cars, handbrake pulls, whatever... fun stuff for me. And of course there is autocrossing the car, which I also intend to do. Being that the car is more nimble than the G35 Coupe, this is where it will excel. Most people don't have tracks in their vicinity and as a result can only do autoxing due to availability. And for that practicality, the RX-8 will be quite good.
As per the thoughts on the RX-7 and all their problems... the twin turbo versions of the RX-7 indeed had a lot of problems mainly due to cooling. Inefficient cooling systems made for blown apex seals, which in turn led to a useless motor. The RX-8 doesn't suffer from this, as it's not turbocharged, and rotary engines are generally just as reliable as piston engines, except they don't take kindly to mistreatment, whereas a piston engine is not as susceptible.
If the G35 sedan was better looking, more nimble, had a better transmission and went on a huge weightloss only then could it be a choice for me over the RX-8. The 330i was my first choice in cars but the price for it was obscene, and thus the RX-8 was my choice of what was available.
I don't intend on stoplight racing, track racing, etc.. Probably just a little autox and then whatever I do on my day-to-day commute, maybe taking the scenic route home and hitting some twisties.
I believe when Mazda releases the RX-7 to compete against the Nissan 350Z and the G35 Coupe... you will see quite a battle. Mazda's cars are historically very capable handlers (much to the chagrin of some people that HATE Mazda!), though I admit the power has always lacked in their cars.
The next evolution of the sports cars from Mazda is the RX-7, and MPS RX-8. The RX-7 in my opinion will be far superior to the Nissan 350Z in every respect, as the RX-7 will be put on another weightloss from the RX-8 missing two doors and seats. However this is just my personal hypothethesis right now.
To those of you who hate Mazda... it's cool. I have a Nissan Maxima SE 2001 and I don't like it much either. I also have a Mazda Millenia which is obscenely slow, but very fun to drive. I suppose that for me, and many others considering the RX-8, power isn't the deciding factor because most times you can't use it on the street. But a fun and controllable car with a great shifter you can use every day, and for many people, that makes up their mind in getting the RX-8 or something else.
I look forward to future reviews though, more specifically with the RX-7 that will be released at some later date (hopefully). Should make for some interesting articles.
Oh and lastly, Car and Driver isn't the only magazine that gave the RX-8 'rave reviews.' CAR, EVO (my two faves), Edmunds, Canadian Driver, Autoweek... they all say the car is a blast to drive, and mention the same shortcomings of its midrange power.
I think it's hard to judge until you get behind the driver's wheel and just beat on it somewhere... then and only then can you make the true decision whether or not the RX-8 is more fun than the G35 Coupe or not. I've already put money on the RX-8 being more fun on a day-to-day basis and all around than the G35 Coupe. That's not to say it'll be faster... but many people equate speed to fun... and that's simply not how it is for me.
Anyhoo... cya on the highway in June
Very well said Herc! :D
03-03-2003, 09:11 AM
#55
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, I'd like to thank the non-RX-8 fans for contributing. You guys (or gals) have done an excellent job of stating your points while keeping it friendly and not resorting to flaming. Thank you! You're welcome here any day, in my opinion.
My feeling is that these are all extremely different cars. People interested in the Mustang are not going to be interested in the RX-8, and vice versa. There are few cars I have less interest in that a Mustang, no matter how fast it goes on the track. The ones I've driven just feel really wrong to me. I suspect that anyone who likes Mustangs would be horribly disappointed by the power delivery of the RENESIS.
As for the autocross comparison, that's a moot point, in my book. How many people are competetive at the national level? Not many, and probably none of us here. In autocrossing, the driver is the difference. In my stock Miata, I've beaten tons of Corvettes, 3000GT VR-4s, Turbo Supras, FD RX-7s, a Lotus Esprit Turbo, M3s, and the list goes on and on. Many of those were on racing slicks as well, while I use the stock tires.
I've also been beaten by a stock Hyundai and plenty of other "lesser" cars.
Except at the most elite level, the car makes far less difference than the driver, and even at the elite level the driver is still most of it.
Anyway, there's really not much that the anti-RX-8 crowd can say that will convince me (or most people here) that the RX-8 is less of a car than anything else in a similar class. I believe the base RX-8 will be something like $6,000 less than the G35 and Mustang in the test. I don't need leather or any of the other garbage, so those aren't even remotely under consideration for me. They also don't have a rotary, which has the characteristics that I like in an engine: low weight, small size, high revving, high HP, and smooooooth. For what I want, the RX-8 is more car at a lower price. Yep, if you love torque it's not for you, but the gearing and light weight make that far less of a factor than the numbers would indicate. So it's 0.1 seconds slower on the track than the G35? I won't take it on the track. Also, see the above section on the driver.
I want a fun, tossable, lightweight, high revving car for under $30,000 that can seat 4 people. The G35 and Mustang have *none* of those characteristics, except the seating. If someone wants a fast, V-8 american car to take to the track at $35,000, then the RX-8 is the wrong car. If someone wants to drag race at stop lights without destroying their clutch in a few days, the RX-8 is the wrong car.
Isn't that what's great about all this? There are cars for everyone, regardless of their personal tastes. None are perfect, but there sure are lots of good choices!
My feeling is that these are all extremely different cars. People interested in the Mustang are not going to be interested in the RX-8, and vice versa. There are few cars I have less interest in that a Mustang, no matter how fast it goes on the track. The ones I've driven just feel really wrong to me. I suspect that anyone who likes Mustangs would be horribly disappointed by the power delivery of the RENESIS.
As for the autocross comparison, that's a moot point, in my book. How many people are competetive at the national level? Not many, and probably none of us here. In autocrossing, the driver is the difference. In my stock Miata, I've beaten tons of Corvettes, 3000GT VR-4s, Turbo Supras, FD RX-7s, a Lotus Esprit Turbo, M3s, and the list goes on and on. Many of those were on racing slicks as well, while I use the stock tires.
I've also been beaten by a stock Hyundai and plenty of other "lesser" cars.
Except at the most elite level, the car makes far less difference than the driver, and even at the elite level the driver is still most of it.
Anyway, there's really not much that the anti-RX-8 crowd can say that will convince me (or most people here) that the RX-8 is less of a car than anything else in a similar class. I believe the base RX-8 will be something like $6,000 less than the G35 and Mustang in the test. I don't need leather or any of the other garbage, so those aren't even remotely under consideration for me. They also don't have a rotary, which has the characteristics that I like in an engine: low weight, small size, high revving, high HP, and smooooooth. For what I want, the RX-8 is more car at a lower price. Yep, if you love torque it's not for you, but the gearing and light weight make that far less of a factor than the numbers would indicate. So it's 0.1 seconds slower on the track than the G35? I won't take it on the track. Also, see the above section on the driver.
I want a fun, tossable, lightweight, high revving car for under $30,000 that can seat 4 people. The G35 and Mustang have *none* of those characteristics, except the seating. If someone wants a fast, V-8 american car to take to the track at $35,000, then the RX-8 is the wrong car. If someone wants to drag race at stop lights without destroying their clutch in a few days, the RX-8 is the wrong car.
Isn't that what's great about all this? There are cars for everyone, regardless of their personal tastes. None are perfect, but there sure are lots of good choices!
03-03-2003, 10:41 AM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: frisco, tx
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 5.0THIS
you were kinda wrong huh? :o And dont tell me it isnt a proper autocross, this is SCCA solo 2 here, and this was the national championships.. it doesnt get any more "proper" than that. Miata guys may never be willing to admit it, but the heavy vette with the big V8 owns all right now when it comes to autocross, hands down. the proof is in the stats!
you were kinda wrong huh? :o And dont tell me it isnt a proper autocross, this is SCCA solo 2 here, and this was the national championships.. it doesnt get any more "proper" than that. Miata guys may never be willing to admit it, but the heavy vette with the big V8 owns all right now when it comes to autocross, hands down. the proof is in the stats!
03-03-2003, 12:21 PM
#57
Administrator
i was asking months ago what people thought of a comparison between a mustang and the rx-8. most people thought i was insane for asking but agreed that the entry mustang with the v6 would at least warrent a comparison. never did i think that soemone would compare the rx8 with a cobra. lets remember that the cobra is a worked over 5.0 liter (or more?) v8. the rotary in the rx8 is 1.3 liter! is there a torque and straight line power difference? OF COURSE THERE IS!! while most people here don't like the mustang i have been a fan of this car since i was born. spent the first 7 years of my life in the back of my dad's '64 1/2 stang(which he had to wait 5 months for after ordering-sorta like my wait for the rx-8). i spent 5 years in my 20's redoing a '65 'stang. but the fact that THIS magazine chose a 1.3 liter rotary and a v-6, both from japan mind you, over the SVT Cobra version shows just how much Ford needs to update the mustang! remember folks this car , the RX-8, is the same size as a 911 and weighs, according to C&D, 200lbs less and yet as everyone who has seen both it and the mustang will tell you there is way more room in the back than in the 'stang.
with everything this car offers at this price it is most definetly the car for me. but of course i had already decided that issue- this comparo is just icing on the cake:D :D :D
with everything this car offers at this price it is most definetly the car for me. but of course i had already decided that issue- this comparo is just icing on the cake:D :D :D
03-03-2003, 12:30 PM
#58
Originally posted by 5.0THIS
well, in it's repsective class, I think the corvette is the hands down winner. This link is for the 2002 SCCA Solo 2 nationals -- the final and biggest autocross race of the year. In the SS class, 52 placed on this sheet, all but 3 were corvettes, the highest placing no-corvette was an M3 in 29th place
http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...esults/ss.html
Now... here's a link to the class where Miata's compete http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...esults/cs.html now remember, they run the exact same course as the SS class does, and first off, it seems the miata doesnt quite rule it's class quite like the vette does, with a toyota MR2 coming in second behind a miata, and after that the results seem fairly split as far as number of MR2s placing compared to miatas. And oh BTW.... take a look at their times..... they are slower than the vette's times on the same track, so I guess when you said
you were kinda wrong huh? :o And dont tell me it isnt a proper autocross, this is SCCA solo 2 here, and this was the national championships.. it doesnt get any more "proper" than that. Miata guys may never be willing to admit it, but the heavy vette with the big V8 owns all right now when it comes to autocross, hands down. the proof is in the stats!
well, in it's repsective class, I think the corvette is the hands down winner. This link is for the 2002 SCCA Solo 2 nationals -- the final and biggest autocross race of the year. In the SS class, 52 placed on this sheet, all but 3 were corvettes, the highest placing no-corvette was an M3 in 29th place
http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...esults/ss.html
Now... here's a link to the class where Miata's compete http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...esults/cs.html now remember, they run the exact same course as the SS class does, and first off, it seems the miata doesnt quite rule it's class quite like the vette does, with a toyota MR2 coming in second behind a miata, and after that the results seem fairly split as far as number of MR2s placing compared to miatas. And oh BTW.... take a look at their times..... they are slower than the vette's times on the same track, so I guess when you said
you were kinda wrong huh? :o And dont tell me it isnt a proper autocross, this is SCCA solo 2 here, and this was the national championships.. it doesnt get any more "proper" than that. Miata guys may never be willing to admit it, but the heavy vette with the big V8 owns all right now when it comes to autocross, hands down. the proof is in the stats!
Anyhoo... being that the RX-8 has more power than the Miata, and just as good handling.. maybe it would give the Vette a run for its money. Another thing to point out is that Vette drivers have to be a lot better drivers than Miata drivers to get low times. The amount of power in an autocross can be as much a death wish as a blessing
Either way, the RX-8 will be 'easy' to drive in an autocross and the Vettes will retain quite a bit of driver skill... so you can have a blast at the AutoX in your RX-8 even being a mediocre driver... but then some new driver that got a Vette comes along... and a Miata owns
I heard a story a while back of a Lamborghini autoXing being beat by a Miata... that just illustrates my point
Anyhoo... gotta eat!
03-03-2003, 12:45 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally will reserve judgement of the RX-8 until I get a chance to drive one but I can comment on the G35. Some of you guys seem to penalize the G35 on what it has (leather, brembo brakes, power-sliding front seats, NAV, etc) that the RX-8 does not have. Add those features to a RX-8 then you'll have a better comparison but quite frankly as it stands I still wouldn't compare the two. Getting around town in the G35 is effortless with all the monster torque that the thing has. The RX-8 around town prowess remains to be seen but having to do a clutch drop at 8K rpms to get a 5.9 seconds 0-60 doesn't leave a warm and fuzzy in my mind.
IMO, the combination of great looks, torquey engine, luxury anemities, build quality, price and Infiniti service makes the G35 coupe a no-brainer for me. The RX-8 seems to be more boy-racer oriented while the G35's, 330i's, S4's draw a more mature crowd. Honestly, so far there is nothing about the RX-8 that appeals to me because I'm looking for a more upscale car which I don't think the RX-8 is. Maybe the test drive will prove me wrong.
IMO, the combination of great looks, torquey engine, luxury anemities, build quality, price and Infiniti service makes the G35 coupe a no-brainer for me. The RX-8 seems to be more boy-racer oriented while the G35's, 330i's, S4's draw a more mature crowd. Honestly, so far there is nothing about the RX-8 that appeals to me because I'm looking for a more upscale car which I don't think the RX-8 is. Maybe the test drive will prove me wrong.
03-03-2003, 01:01 PM
#60
Originally posted by MJG35C
I personally will reserve judgement of the RX-8 until I get a chance to drive one but I can comment on the G35. Some of you guys seem to penalize the G35 on what it has (leather, brembo brakes, power-sliding front seats, NAV, etc) that the RX-8 does not have. Add those features to a RX-8 then you'll have a better comparison but quite frankly as it stands I still wouldn't compare the two. Getting around town in the G35 is effortless with all the monster torque that the thing has. The RX-8 around town prowess remains to be seen but having to do a clutch drop at 8K rpms to get a 5.9 seconds 0-60 doesn't leave a warm and fuzzy in my mind.
IMO, the combination of great looks, torquey engine, luxury anemities, build quality, price and Infiniti service makes the G35 coupe a no-brainer for me. The RX-8 seems to be more boy-racer oriented while the G35's, 330i's, S4's draw a more mature crowd. Honestly, so far there is nothing about the RX-8 that appeals to me because I'm looking for a more upscale car which I don't think the RX-8 is. Maybe the test drive will prove me wrong.
I personally will reserve judgement of the RX-8 until I get a chance to drive one but I can comment on the G35. Some of you guys seem to penalize the G35 on what it has (leather, brembo brakes, power-sliding front seats, NAV, etc) that the RX-8 does not have. Add those features to a RX-8 then you'll have a better comparison but quite frankly as it stands I still wouldn't compare the two. Getting around town in the G35 is effortless with all the monster torque that the thing has. The RX-8 around town prowess remains to be seen but having to do a clutch drop at 8K rpms to get a 5.9 seconds 0-60 doesn't leave a warm and fuzzy in my mind.
IMO, the combination of great looks, torquey engine, luxury anemities, build quality, price and Infiniti service makes the G35 coupe a no-brainer for me. The RX-8 seems to be more boy-racer oriented while the G35's, 330i's, S4's draw a more mature crowd. Honestly, so far there is nothing about the RX-8 that appeals to me because I'm looking for a more upscale car which I don't think the RX-8 is. Maybe the test drive will prove me wrong.
...First, the RX-8 has all the luxury amenities that the G35 Coupe has. Leather, power seat (only driver, as another would require more weight added!), navigation, etc. The RX-8 doesn't *need* Brembo brakes as its own brakes do a better job of stopping than the G35's Brembos, so I don't see the big deal here.
As per the monster torque of the G35 Coupe (which I agree with), it's for most of us not important. The RX-8 will be quick off the line, quick enough for most of us. Those people that are swayed by 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times are better off not even buying the G35 but rather the Mustang as mentioned in this review.
Like you said, the combination of great looks, build quality (my Mazda Millenia is nicer inside than a G35 Sedan... haven't seen the coupe yet though), *high revving* engine, great shifter, usable back seat, and price lower by 3 or 4 grand than the G35 Coupe... it's a no brainer for us also
I think Mazda is going to get more mature buyers with this car and the boy racers will come along and get the RX-7s. The RX-8 is meant for an adult with a family, or at least the needs of one. G35s, 330s, S4s all can be associated with boy-racers too... whoever has the money can buy whatever they fancy.
Nobody is penallizing the G35 Coupe. I've said it myself on this forum, that if the RX-8 wasn't available I'd be looking at the G35 Coupe without a doubt. The 330i is ideal but too pricey. And please don't say that the G35 Coupe has ANY features over the RX-8... it doesn't even have ONE feature more than the RX-8 (I think :p). Nav, power seat, sunroof, great stereo system (by most accounts), homelink, all that jazz is in the car. I don't think the G35 has any features the RX-8 doesn't, which is why the RX-8 and G35 had such a close margin. If they used a loaded RX-8 vs the G35 Coupe in that C&D comparison the margin of beating the G35 would be higher still.
Anyways... as you said we will all see. The G35 is a nice car but it's not what I need... and it costs more than I want to spend. I had a 30k limit and I'm very close to that (31,100 w/destination). The G35 Coupe similarly equipped is almost 4000 more.
03-03-2003, 01:05 PM
#61
Administrator
Originally posted by Hercules
I had a 30k limit and I'm very close to that (31,100 w/destination). The G35 Coupe similarly equipped is almost 4000 more.
I had a 30k limit and I'm very close to that (31,100 w/destination). The G35 Coupe similarly equipped is almost 4000 more.
03-03-2003, 01:13 PM
#62
Originally posted by zoom44
am i the only one who had a 30k limit and stayed under it? looks like you broke yours shayaan:p
am i the only one who had a 30k limit and stayed under it? looks like you broke yours shayaan:p
Besides then I couldn't get the sunroof! That's immensely important to me
03-03-2003, 01:46 PM
#63
Administrator
back on topic: as far as amenities go shouldn't the infinity have more than the rx-8? isn't that what infinity and acura and lexus are? upscaled models of the regular badged cars? they're supposed to have more lux stuff! i like the way mazda is handling things, instead of a difference in luxury Mazda offers more performance in it's Mazdaspeed/MPS cars :D :D ala Ford's SVT badge
03-03-2003, 01:59 PM
#64
rotary courage
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MJG35C
Add those features to a RX-8 then you'll have a better comparison but quite frankly as it stands I still wouldn't compare the two.
Add those features to a RX-8 then you'll have a better comparison but quite frankly as it stands I still wouldn't compare the two.
03-03-2003, 02:02 PM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Hercules
Anyways... as you said we will all see. The G35 is a nice car but it's not what I need... and it costs more than I want to spend. I had a 30k limit and I'm very close to that (31,100 w/destination). The G35 Coupe similarly equipped is almost 4000 more.
Anyways... as you said we will all see. The G35 is a nice car but it's not what I need... and it costs more than I want to spend. I had a 30k limit and I'm very close to that (31,100 w/destination). The G35 Coupe similarly equipped is almost 4000 more.
03-03-2003, 02:23 PM
#66
Originally posted by MJG35C
This paragraph pretty much sums it up. You can only get what your budget will allow. Hell, if my pockets were deep a 2003 MB SL55 AMG would do nicely. :D
This paragraph pretty much sums it up. You can only get what your budget will allow. Hell, if my pockets were deep a 2003 MB SL55 AMG would do nicely. :D
03-03-2003, 02:42 PM
#68
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow...still want one, but now I'm trying to imagine how the car will handle even more.... I guess, however, that the 0-60 time will never been seen be me though, which does **** me off a bit just because I was hoping that it'd stay under 6 without needing to be tortured to do it...but adding a second to extend the life of my clutch will be tolerable.
Anyway, for those saying that a fully loaded version would pull ahead...I'm now more than ever wondering if it really would. More weight in the fully loaded version may be the real reason C&D didn't get to see a fully loaded car on their test bed. Now considering that I'm getting a fully loaded version, this makes me wonder how much performance I get to toss from it due to the ammenities. I think Mazda figured that most people would see this isn't the fully loaded version, ignore the "bad" ratings in tat category, and then take note of all the performance tricks to put the car on a performance pedestal, and it worked...but will the extra bagged knock it off that pedestal is my question.
Anyway, for those saying that a fully loaded version would pull ahead...I'm now more than ever wondering if it really would. More weight in the fully loaded version may be the real reason C&D didn't get to see a fully loaded car on their test bed. Now considering that I'm getting a fully loaded version, this makes me wonder how much performance I get to toss from it due to the ammenities. I think Mazda figured that most people would see this isn't the fully loaded version, ignore the "bad" ratings in tat category, and then take note of all the performance tricks to put the car on a performance pedestal, and it worked...but will the extra bagged knock it off that pedestal is my question.
03-03-2003, 03:43 PM
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DreamWarrior
Anyway, for those saying that a fully loaded version would pull ahead...I'm now more than ever wondering if it really would. More weight in the fully loaded version may be the real reason C&D didn't get to see a fully loaded car on their test bed. Now considering that I'm getting a fully loaded version, this makes me wonder how much performance I get to toss from it due to the ammenities. I think Mazda figured that most people would see this isn't the fully loaded version, ignore the "bad" ratings in tat category, and then take note of all the performance tricks to put the car on a performance pedestal, and it worked...but will the extra bagged knock it off that pedestal is my question.
Anyway, for those saying that a fully loaded version would pull ahead...I'm now more than ever wondering if it really would. More weight in the fully loaded version may be the real reason C&D didn't get to see a fully loaded car on their test bed. Now considering that I'm getting a fully loaded version, this makes me wonder how much performance I get to toss from it due to the ammenities. I think Mazda figured that most people would see this isn't the fully loaded version, ignore the "bad" ratings in tat category, and then take note of all the performance tricks to put the car on a performance pedestal, and it worked...but will the extra bagged knock it off that pedestal is my question.
03-03-2003, 06:17 PM
#71
Registered User
Originally posted by m477
If C&D had use the loaded "Grand Tourning" model RX-8 in the comparo (which has every feature a loaded G35c does) instead of a stripped down base model, then the RX-8's lead over the g35c would only have increased.
If C&D had use the loaded "Grand Tourning" model RX-8 in the comparo (which has every feature a loaded G35c does) instead of a stripped down base model, then the RX-8's lead over the g35c would only have increased.
a small but not meaningless luxury item.
-Mr. Wigggles
03-03-2003, 06:22 PM
#72
Registered User
Originally posted by snow_tires
RedRX,
the renesis is not a 2-stroke engine, it has 4 distinct strokes.
RedRX,
the renesis is not a 2-stroke engine, it has 4 distinct strokes.
Regardless, it is hard to compare to rotorary and piston engines. Some racing organizations mulitply the rotaries volume by 2 to get an equivalent piston displacement. While other organizations multiply the volume by 3 to get the equivalent.
-Mr. Wigggles
Last edited by MrWigggles; 03-03-2003 at 09:28 PM.
03-03-2003, 06:46 PM
#73
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pacifica
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
car is FAST, mere tenths of a second behind an FD... c'mon let's stop
car is FAST, mere tenths of a second behind an FD... c'mon let's stop
Oh, and since we're on the topic of autox, what class do you think it'll be placed in? A-Stock?
Last edited by neofreak; 03-03-2003 at 06:51 PM.
03-03-2003, 06:58 PM
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by snow_tires
RedRX,
the renesis is not a 2-stroke engine, it has 4 distinct strokes.
RedRX,
the renesis is not a 2-stroke engine, it has 4 distinct strokes.
Thanks for pointing this out.
03-03-2003, 07:23 PM
#75
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pre-production 'mule'
The model tested was a pre-production model. As they said it had a "mongrel mix of features". This is likely as much because it was pre-production as much as it seems that the package specs vary for nearly every major country where it will be sold. For example, Canada only gets the sports pkg at the 'base'. In the UK they get the 5sp low HP combo, no auto, sport pkg is std on both; sunroof is stand alone option as is leather and metallic/mica paint - interesting - Nav is only avail w/leather. And of course their 'base' includes a BOSE w/6CD changer,DSC,and heated mirrors. Do they get the better stereo because the Beatles originated in the UK? Also in UK : "Lightning Yellow, Winning Blue and Nordic Green will not be available at official launch time". Since mica or metallic paint covers six colors and are an additional cost option there - does that make black the 'base color'? Also - the UK list shows "Climate Control" - does that simply imply a single temp setting that the system attempts to maintain? anyone? ;-) Thanks! My comments turned more into questions!