Gotian and a RX-8 Test Drive

[VR43000GT]

Originally Posted by TatII

not true. a RX-8 doens't even come close to what a stock RX-7 puts down. sure they are rated similar but mazda is nortorious for over rating their cars. at first then rated the car at 250hp then people strapped it to the dyno and it only made 190whp. so its not even a 240hp car because a S2000 making only 240hp is putting down 200whp.

so what does mazda do? they just took the lazy way out, they re rated the car to 238hp ( which in my opinion is still alittle bit overated ) and they would buy the car back from owners or give those a year of free maintainance.

also i don't know where you saw 350hp from for a greddy turbo kit, but the kit is suppose to raise the power up to a pathetic 230whp. no thanks, i'd rather whip my ass with hundred dollar bills then to waste money to get less whp then a stock SRT-4 and having to blow 4K doing it too.

but if you think 230whp is little, well considering the car puts down 190whp stock its a 40whp gain with very low boost so it okay. but to put it into perspective, a stock RX-7 is known to put down 220-230whp stock, so its not even close in power wise. a RX-7 traps 102-103mph, when a RX-8 traps up to 97mph which is laugabily bad. also they claim the RX-8 is light well its a 3000lb car so its not exactly light like a 2700-2800 lb rx-7. however i do admit its built alot better but the interior still will fade over time, the a/c barely works, and the interior gets really hot because of the rotary engine sitting so close to your leg.

too many flaws, its ugly, slow, and expensive. i would rather take a rsx type S over a rx-8 becasue its just as fast, but cheaper, and better built.

Even if what you say is true who cares? Why don't we just compare a late 90's vette to the RX-8 since it costs about the same as a brand new RX-7. Or compare rx-7 to a 911 Carerra? The point is is that the RX-7 damn well better be better in every aspect for the price it costs. It was simply made to be a higher performing car.

[CassiesMan]

Originally Posted by SL3000gt

The point is is that the RX-7 damn well better be better in every aspect for the price it costs. It was simply made to be a higher performing car.

An Escalade costs more than an 8, should it be better performing?

The question we need to find out is, based on intrest rates and all that economic shit I don't understand, would an RX-7 today cost the same as it would back in 93? Oh, and you can find a low miliage, good->excellent condition RX-7 for under 15k if your willing to look hard and travel a bit.

[GForce957]

Originally Posted by CassiesMan

An Escalade costs more than an 8, should it be better performing?

The question we need to find out is, based on intrest rates and all that economic shit I don't understand, would an RX-7 today cost the same as it would back in 93? Oh, and you can find a low miliage, good->excellent condition RX-7 for under 15k if your willing to look hard and travel a bit.

Wouldnt the price be even higher now, inflation and all that jazz?

[VR43000GT]

Cassie, come on. Obviously a escalade shouldnt perform as well with a sports car because it was meant to compete with other large luxury SUV's. These are both sports cars so what do you think they are meant to compete agianst?.........Sports cars. And we aren't comparing used RX-7's because when they were brought up in this forum they were implying how dissapointed they were when the RX-8 came out as opposed to when the RX-7 came out. I'm talking about each car the way they started out, not one used and one brand new because once agian that would be an unfair comparison.

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by GForce957

Wouldnt the price be even higher now, inflation and all that jazz?

that would be expected... of course there are other factors though such as demand, maybe the demand for a RX-7 isnt nearly as high nowadays so they would be forced to make the price lower... there are quite a few factors to consider.

[CassiesMan]

Originally Posted by SL3000gt

Cassie, come on. Obviously a escalade shouldnt perform as well with a sports car because it was meant to compete with other large luxury SUV's. These are both sports cars so what do you think they are meant to compete agianst?.........Sports cars. And we aren't comparing used RX-7's because when they were brought up in this forum they were implying how dissapointed they were when the RX-8 came out as opposed to when the RX-7 came out. I'm talking about each car the way they started out, not one used and one brand new because once agian that would be an unfair comparison.

Using your logical structure and argument, if it costs more, it should perform better.

And new (in 93) RX-7>new (in '05/'06) RX-8 stock for stock.

[Mad_Maxima]

How much did a RX-7 cost brand new in 93, I really wasn't looking to purchase a sports car at age 7 so I don't know.

[CassiesMan]

Thirty two nine MSRP, so not all that much more...interesting...

[VR43000GT]

Inflation of most everything has gone up since 93 considerably. And using my logical structure if it costs more it should perform better? Well, yeah, it should if its the same type of car. You cant just throw expensive SUV's in the mix and say they should perform better because it costs more, that would be insane and nowhere did I say anything about SUV's. I've only discussed sports cars so wherever you got that idea from I dont know. You also got to take in ideas about if its also luxury, or off road capable but neither of these fit any other category than a small import sport so if one costs more (especially back in 93') then it should perform better (even more so since they are made by the same company).

Edit: I also want to make clear that I'm not trying to make an attack at you in any way, but instead just trying to get my POV across.

[TatII]

no offense taken, if you don't compare the rx-8 to its predecesor, the rx-7, its a fine car in its own respect. however its just a plain fact that a comparison of those cars has to be compared.

most rx-7 owners hates the rx-8, and generally speaking, a car should be faster when a newer model comes out, of course they aren't direct decendants but as i said, when you put the name rx in front, it would end up being compared with other rx's.

to some people its a great car, its not so great to other people, just like i know alot of people who would pick a S2K over a 350Z, however i am not one of them, but they all perform similar. different taste, but if your gonna say the rx-8 makes similar as a rx-7 that means your buying into mazda's b.s. marketing and lies.

i will hold my final judgement until mazda releases a the REAL RX-7. ( i'm hoping they do )

[Gotian]

I love both cars the RX-7 and RX-8, i compare the 2 all the time, BUT as i go back to my point : For being an N/A car the RX-8 is better the the previous Rotary WITHOUT a turbo. Mazda was not trying to out do its previous RX model but instead they went and Improved the engine and kept it more affordable for the consumer.

As far as the horsepower goes, The japanese ones ARE 250HP, AT THE CRANK, Which is where every company puts there numbers from. Our RX-8's are 238 again AT THE CRANK. All these numbers are not wheel power. And most rear wheel drive cars lose alot of power compared to front wheel cars especially if they are N/A.

Also stop talking about trap speeds, I mean come on IT IS NOT A DRAG CAR.

Everyone is entitled to thier own opinion, cause shit i went out of my way to give you guys mine so i'm glad everyone has alot to say about the car whether it be good or bad, but just remember what the car was made for. Forget about 1/4 miles and 0-60 times, thats all going to variate between drivers anyways.

If you guys want a 2nd opinion musashi should put up his own review of the car since we went to the same delearship i went to for him to drive one.

[TatII]

but you should be aware gotian that factorys can easily underrate hp as well as overrate. look at a SRT4 for example. the RX-8 is overrated, while the RX-7 is underrated. simple as that, but yeah as i said, if you just look at the rx-8 as its own car, its a fine car, yes its not that fast, but in its own way, its a nice car, but for me i'd rather drive other cars in its class.

[Musashi3000GT]

Originally Posted by CassiesMan

I ran a 3KGT once, beat it by about a car length and held it off up to 110, 115. Never really thought about posting it, never seemed that big of a deal.

yeah those are the SOHC 160hp models. The DOHC 222HP models actually pull harder then the 325 on the highway. Better 60-100 due to the gear ratios.

Still nice kill. you shoulve posted it.

[VR43000GT]

^^^That gives me some confidence because Im sure Ill run my bosses 05 325 some day soon. At least I hope.

[Musashi3000GT]

^^Oh yeah dude, Ive ran alot of 325s both auto and manuals and they come in two trims 4cyl and I6 but they are mostly just town cars. they arent really tuned out like the M3. so yeah they are sporty but you can outrun one.
Hell Gotian's step dad has an I6 auto and Gotian smokes him.

anyway were getting of track so back on topic: