who would win 1/4?

[Fishey]

Rx8's only dyno 170RWHP... (my 208Hp 944 dyno's more) Also don't say there is a safty sensors on the front wheels because there is not (Some cars do have that like the E46m3) but the Rx8 doesnt... Ok, My rant on the Rx8 is over...

[mazdaparis]

Hey... have you ever drive to mountain curve???

The RX8 is not for direct course!
The RX8 is construct for real drivers and NOT for childrens who read magazines!

Put that at once in your mind.

[AC_A340-500]

Hey this is an interesting thread.

Let me start out by saying that I think that the RX-8 is a wonderful automobile in virtually every aspect. The engine is smooth, the suspension is firm but not harsh, nothing rattles in the interior, the interior design is pleasant, it has wonderful brakes, a great 6-speed transmission, an elegant touch of oversteer when pushing the car in corners, and, (it took me a while to get used to this) a great sound! And most of all, I loved those rear doors!! After driving the car for a while, it was very difficult to get back into a regular two door car.

My only complaints with the car were the slow-reacting navigational system (it takes less time to load Photoshop 7 on a Pentium 300). Also there was some interior trim that was a little cheap, I thought. Some strange rubber-type material on the seats between the leather seemed out of place. Most of the interior was great though.

I drove the more powerful-engined version RX-8 for a total of 550 kms last weekend. (In Europe there are two engines available - the 192HP and the 231HP version.) The latter engine is rated a little higher in North America due to different ways of calculating horsepower, but it's identical to the 238HP car in N. America. The car I drove was a press car provided by Mazda Germany.

My driving experience was 100% positive, HOWEVER the car never really felt like it had over 230hp. Subjectively it felt more like a 200HP engine in a 1400kg car. The 235km/h top speed in a car with low coefficient of drag and a relatively small frontal area, confirms Mazda's slightly optimistc horsepower figures. Having said that, I would take this engine over other engines rated at 230HP, simply because it's soooo smooth, free of vibration and rev-happy. (BTW, the performance in any aspects reminded me of my ex 944 S2).

So to sum things up, I'd say that even though it's not a hotrod, and the 231 horses under the hood may be of the "small" variety, I'd still take it just because everything else in the car harmonizes so nicely. There's more to GT and sports cars than just horsepower and accelleration. Especially over here in Europe.

As for the quickest accellerating of the bunch (not that it matters): Id have to go with the 350Z, followed by the S2000 and the RX-8. I'm not familiar with the SRT, cause we don't have it here in Europe. I drove the S2000 a year ago (only for one afternoon) and didn't care much for the brakes (they got hot very quickly - especially the rear brakes), the transmission didn't take too kindly to powershifting, and the variable-rate steering took some getting used to.

Back to the RX-8: I cant wait for Mazda to introduce the RX-8 Turbo. Assuming they do (i have no idea if they plan to), it would put an end to any accelleration discussions.

[AC_A340-500]

Well I'm currently at day 4 of 5 days of testing the 350Z. The 350 Z is definately a quicker accellerating car. But the Nissan's V-6 lacks the smoothness of the rotary. Just like the RX-8, the 350Z has great brakes, direct steering and a great sounding exhaust system. I've noticed that the Nissan is more of an attention grabber in terms of looks. However, if I had to go out and buy one of these two cars tomorrow, I'd grab the RX-8 cause I wouldn't want to live without those innovative rear doors and two extra seats.

[bluebird15PSI]

i think it would go down lie this
1st- 350z
2nd-s2000
3rd-srt-4
4th- the rx8

Who ever thinks that the rx8 is soooo fast is sooo wrong. I mean sure you have a right to be upset because you just got ripped off I mean you just wasted your money. I dont car what kind of acceleration you think that this car has because it dosnt. The 350z will whore this car on any given day just like the s2000 as well. As far as the srt-4 goes for about $20,000 it is well worth its money. Every turbo front wheel drive car has alot of wheel spin but the driver can learn to control that. Trust me I would know because I own one that will whore any of these cars. So until you drive a fwd boosted car you dont need to tell anyone about wheel spin

[Steel]

I doubt they'll release a turbocahrged 8, simply for the fact that turbo = no reliability when it comes to rotaries. That's the simple hard truth - look at what the FD 7 did to the stigma of the rotary. Most laymen think that its some novelty engine that sucks a lot of gas and breaks a lot. Well, they wouldn't be that far off in that assumption.

Now, if they came out with an aggressively styled, 4th generation RX-7, complete with a nice torubocharger, higher displacement engine (say...1.5 liters) pushing around..oh, I dunno, 320 rwhp, and handling that would put the FD to shame, THAT would be awesome. But It will never happen

[mikegee]

Originally Posted by mazdaparis

Hey... have you ever drive to mountain curve???

The RX8 is not for direct course!
The RX8 is construct for real drivers and NOT for childrens who read magazines!

Put that at once in your mind.

my comments is not for those that read a magazine and then pertend they know it all. i'm merely saying: whats so terrible about reading a magazine, from my economical stand point thats all I have. i've driven in the mountains of PA in my grand am i'm sure that an rx8 is more fun to drive but all i have is a grand am. well maybe i just dont belong here. ohhh :whine: lol

[Aruba27]

yeah, unfortunately i feel the nissan would win this one. I'm a HUGE fan of the rotary, but I believe the RX-8 still needs some work. The car is definetly not made for the drag strip, but is very well suited for autocross. even then, the s2000 would be a very very tough competitor in that situation. The RX-8 is a great car either way, but like i said, it still needs some work.

[deadlywhispr18]

350-z
rx-8
s2000
srt-4

I only say srt-4 last because i've seen a couple of them do the 1/4 and they peel way too much. But i assume if you are a good "off the start" racer it would be third.

[mikegee]

Originally Posted by deadlywhispr18

350-z
rx-8
s2000
srt-4

I only say srt-4 last because i've seen a couple of them do the 1/4 and they peel way too much. But i assume if you are a good "off the start" racer it would be third.

in the strait away i think these 4 are close enough to say itll come down to the driver, handles is a different story and since this thread has nothing to do with handles i will not speak on that, but itll be close in a strait away.

[mx3man]

now dont get me wrong, I hate neons, and the SRT-4 is just a Neon on sterroids. But the SRT-4 is VERY fast, and YES it can be compared to these cars easily.

The RX-8 is overrated, yes it is a sporty car, quite quick but the styling is just disgusting IMO and honestly it isnt that fast at all. Everyone makes this huge deal about rotaries and yet it doesnt step away from the pack. If I were Mazda, I woldve pumped more power out of the car to make the car actally fast.

[randoff]

Originally Posted by 96EKB16BCoupe

honestly who cares about 1/4 mile, your not a fucking drag racer in your street car, and if you street race, go slit your own throat to save me time, and out of those four cars, the rx8,350 and s2k are all much better then srt-4, which is no fun to drive, where as the other three rwd 6 spd n/a cars are all awesome, dont put that shitty neon ricer in the same class as the other three

I happen to agree. I bought my RX-8 to DRIVE not to drag race. And the price I paid for the RX-8 (31,000 dollars) this car is PLENTY fast for me and it handles like a CHAMP!

P.S.; I love it when stupid M-Fers spend 40,000 dollars to "race kit" their Honda Civics...just to get dusted by a stock car. Plus can they take a sharp curve at 50 mph in second gear??? Probably not. LATE!

[randoff]

Originally Posted by mx3man

now dont get me wrong, I hate neons, and the SRT-4 is just a Neon on sterroids. But the SRT-4 is VERY fast, and YES it can be compared to these cars easily.

The RX-8 is overrated, yes it is a sporty car, quite quick but the styling is just disgusting IMO and honestly it isnt that fast at all. Everyone makes this huge deal about rotaries and yet it doesnt step away from the pack. If I were Mazda, I woldve pumped more power out of the car to make the car actally fast.

Dude...are you serious?? You actually bought a Neon SRT? I would never admit to owning a Plymouth and saying it's comparable to a RX-8. Your interior is weak...the car cannot handle like the Mazda and YES it's STILL a NEON. Them NEONS remind me of the Hyundai Excels from the early ninetys. EVERYBODY had one...and you got a sport version...hahahaha!

[mx3man]

dude, your high school is calling, they want their diploma back. Read it again, I never ONCE in that post said i own an SRT-4. On the contrary I said I hate neons.

[mikegee]

Originally Posted by randoff

I happen to agree. I bought my RX-8 to DRIVE not to drag race. And the price I paid for the RX-8 (31,000 dollars) this car is PLENTY fast for me and it handles like a CHAMP!

P.S.; I love it when stupid M-Fers spend 40,000 dollars to "race kit" their Honda Civics...just to get dusted by a stock car. Plus can they take a sharp curve at 50 mph in second gear??? Probably not. LATE!

ok i dont think you know what you are talking about, any v-tec engine can be modded with i'll say $15 grand and it'll out run 80% of all the worlds stock cars.