haha i didnt even realise i did that. im sorry

Quote:

I hope your girlfriends name ain't weeniemauler. How insensitive of me, you could be a women.

LOL:D hahahahaha. no im not a women, although i guess there are certain parts of the day that i am "trapped" in a womans body... lol sorry for those who i will offend with that comment. LOL

 

boobietoucher69: So Prelude, Audi, and 350Z wasn't working, so now you try **** Star (or Gynocologist)? OK you win, I am now jealous....... of you job, not your cars.

 

LOL. yeah the 350z might be leaving, i was thinking new m3? i dont know. it pisses me off to not have a backseat. 911 turbo is my first choice.

 

You are so mean...

 

Hi, first post. You guys have generated some interest on a Z forum with all the comparisons between the Z and the 8.

First, nice time Judge Ito.

Second, donald121, your forum needs more people who view things like you do. I agree, both the 8 and Z are beautiful cars and both deserve a lot of respect for what they are. I saw a nice 8 this morning on a canyon road, she looks really good.

 

Alright, this is the kind of people that makes forums such as ClubRSX, S2KInternation, and G35Driver pleasant. No need to bash, except maybe for a joke...and everything settles within seconds. Welcome!

 

****Moderator Edit*****

 

Did JudgeIto ever run his car at the track again?

 

Yes I did, and on both times I tried to launch harder but couldn't get a smooth 60 foot times. The rear end of the Rx8 almost fell apart. I decided to brace the rear end then try again. Right now we are having a very cold winter and the local drag strips are closed.

 

I can't believe that I read this whole post. I think many people have lost sight of what the arguement is about. It's not that the RX8 sucks or is slow. It's that the magazines stated that the RX8 CAN run the 1/4 mile on PUMP GAS in 14.5 seconds. Now what 350z and Ike are stating is that most magazine times can be dupicated by average-above average drivers and what we are seeing is that it's taking race gas and a top notch driver to hit the magazine number.

Also, the trap speed indicates that the RX8 is much lower than 238 hp. To hit mid-14's the RX8 should be trapping in the mid-upper 90's, not lower 90's. Here's my estimate of the horsepower of the RX8 based on a similar car with similar times.

RSX-S hp=200
RSX-S weight = 2778
#/hp = 13.89

RX8 hp=?
RX8 weight=3029
#/hp = 13.89

RX8 hp = 218 hp

 

Argh.... Find me where a Magazine says they run on 93 octane while doing performance testing... btw i was pretty sure 103oct is pump gas its just found at fewer stations?....

 

100 octane can be had at a few specialty pumps for those willing to pay for it.

 

this is a funny thread. There have been decent 1/4 mile times posted yet there are still some that claim cover-up theories on HP?? Oh well. About the theory about trap speeds etc. There have been guys getting good times with-out race gas, so the car will pull pretty good numbers. But your theory about real HP etc etc. fair enough, you can have an opinion. But it is an estimate at best based on no real proof or hard facts.

 

Consumer reports just tested the RX8, 350z, Sti and Evo

RX8:
1/4 = 15.2
0-60 = 6.7

350z:
1/4 = 14.0
0-60 = 5.3

Sti:
1/4 = 13.4
0-60 = 4.8

Don't remeber the Evo at this moment.. And all the people that are holding on to the numbers (5.9 0-60 and 14.5 1/4) in Car and Driver with a PRE-PRODUCTION RX-8 producing 250HP should forget about it, since that test no mag has tested the RX8 anywhere near those numebrs with a production one.

And a somebody getting a 14.6 with racing fuel, powershifting and years of experience doesn't even count. My best in my Z so far with just an intake was a 13.9@100.86mph with only 4k miles, the best STOCK RX8 I have seen a slip for was 14.8x@93.xx. The low traps are a tell all that its putting down quite a bit less then 238hp.

 

Can I believe in what Judge Ito mentioned: In a car with such low torque, mistakes are highly paid...(or somthing like that for this matter) ??

 

Judge Ito huh..

What about what Johnny Cochran said, if the glove don't fit, you must acquit...(or somthing like that for this matter)

 

90% of all car reviewers who extensively test these cars on tracks all say that the rx8 is better than the 350, evo and sti despite less horsepower and torque.

 

Oh yeah...where did you ever hear that? I would love to see this poll. Sounds like 90% of these reviewers were from Uranus.

Now I can believe the RX8 better than the 350z and STi (maybe) but I have a hard time swallowing that it's a better track car than the EVO. The RX8 might have an edge through the slalom but everything else goes in favor to the EVO. It has better seats, better brakes, better traction, much more power, better steering, more forgiving drivetrain...but we're way off topic.

The topic at hand is 1/4 mile times for the RX8. Now if you would like to further debate the RX8 vs. the EVO let's open a new thread. I would love to see all these reviews that have compared the RX8 to the EVO because I haven't seen one yet.

 

Actually, the RX8's slalom test results were around 65 MPH while the EVO's were around 69 MPH (Road and Track). Consumer Reports did review the RX8 and EVO along with a few cars and the RX8 did slightly beat it out (both were rated in the highest section - "Excellent"), but of course many things besides performance are measured by them.

 

Whatever will make you happy!

 

I've been a long time reader of CR, and although I generally value thier results highly, thier test times appear to more reflect gearing and redlines of the cars. I don't have the article in front of me but look at thier 45-65 times! The time posted for the 8 is so wrong! I'm sure that they don't go past where the red stripes are at on the tach. IIRW the 8's time was somewhere like 4.5 seconds. Please if I'm going 45 in second gear and stomp on it, it does not take any where near 4.5 seconds. It makes me wonder if they shift early on all gears and were in third gear at 60? By shifting early I mean not at the chime.

 

If you been such a long time reader you would know that 45-65 and 65-85 and so on are tests to show low\mid range power (or torque) so they are performed in top gear or sometimes in the 1:1 gear, thats why they are called "top gear acceleration tests".

Also no magazine takes the cars past redline or shifts below it, all shifts are completed at the redline, thats the standard in road testing.

 

I don't read car magazines, so I'll take your word for C&D, R&T, etc. tests regarding 45-65 acceleration. But, from reading CR for over 20 years, I thought thier goal was to guage passing ability, which would typically be done in the best gear.

As far as redlines go, I believe that non-rev limited cars are tested as you describe. But the 8 IS rev limited and the manual does not say "don't drive in redline", rather it says something similar to "extended driving in the red zone may shorten engine life". The mag that got the best times clearly came as close as they could to the rev limiter. As an aside, different engine/gear combinations sometimes provide the best results using shift points other than max rpm, i.e., the dynos of different gears will cross over at some point, so shifts are not always done at the redline . In the 8, best results are acheived at max rpm, and I don't think CR does all shifts at the redline.

I got the latest version of CR today and they've changed the numbers for the 8. TO get the new results, go to thier home page, click on auto, then click on the book ad, the link to the corrected data is near the bottom of the page. They list 4.9 sec. for 45-65. I haven't looked at the original numbers yet.

 

The origional 45-65 was 4.7

 

Maybe this is a little bit out of context but, getting from 45-65mph on a passing or merging situation in real traffic and driving normally would be from 3rd~4th gear?? (depending on driving habits), and I can assure you that there is no way in heaven that the acceleration up there is unacceptable or 'sluggish.' Obviously I haven't timed it, and I have no accurate measurement resources. However, if 4.9 seconds is what it takes to accelerate that much on a properly driven RX, it is (again) by no means slow in my book.

Having the 45-65 done on a high gear is like Popeye without his spinach, or in this case: a rotary trying to accelerate from 2K rpms! on a roll w/o a turbo (ha!). You know what I am saying?

Certain cars have particular characteristics. The method might be useful for comparisson purposes, but by no means what they are doing is indicative of high-end performance. Am I making any sense here?

So, if you drive it, drive it properly!