|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Fresh Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
|||||||
| Car Comparisons Compare any cars and find out what every body else thinks. Just refrain from making stupid comparos like Viper vs. Geo Metro :) |
 |
 Show Printable Version | 
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
02-28-2002, 09:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
350Z vs RX-8
Allright guys, I think these two will be competing pretty hard once they're both released. Which car do you think is nicer? I know this may be a retarded question to post in a Z forum (biases, anyone?) but although the 350Z will probably win in the sheer speed department, the RX-8 seems to be the more functional car having four seats and all..... also, the 12,000 redline is a big plus. Might be lots of fun to rev that.
|
|
#2
03-01-2002, 01:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well I am all for good cars regardless of where they come from...but I must chose the Z based on a better engine. The "Renesis" rotary engine maybe new and revolutionary...but it's still a ROTARY and I dont trust rotaries more than I can throw one...which could be far since they are light...but still...besides the point!!! If that engine last even 100K miles w/o major problems...I will be seriously impressed. W/the last rotary engine that Mazda made...the dealers themselves were saying to customers that the engine would not last past 50-60K miles. How comforting is that? Not very...so if this car can even last past that...dope...but go a bit farther since it is NA.
:flamer:ROTARY
__________________
Yours truly, Gabriel 
|
|
#3
03-01-2002, 08:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
350Z all the way!!! Personally, I think the new RX8 is kinda retarded looking, I hate its looks. On the other hand, I LOVE the new Z's styles and everything. The last RX7 was pretty nice. But the new Z is a masterpiece. I LOVE IT!!!
|
|
#4
03-01-2002, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rotary engines are unreliable? That comes as something of a surprise. Well, if the RX-8 isn't gonna last past 60k miles without an overhaul I guess the Z is def. the better choice. Another thing to consider is that I'm an audiophile.... i.e. I need a system in my car before it's complete. How much room is available in the back of the Z?
|
|
#5
03-01-2002, 04:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
SOLID! crew (circa 2002). DeLorean moderator.
|
|
#7
03-09-2002, 04:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#8
06-09-2002, 03:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
By nature, Rotaries have a serious FUD factor (Fear Uncertainty Doubt) because they are different. I have owned several wankel powered cars over a span of 10 years, along with conventional piston cars/trucks.
My trusty '82 Rx-7 made it 155k miles before a coolant seal let go. Upon teardown everything was well within spec and a with news seals its still humming along today. Its quite obviously none of you have every OWNED a rotary powered car/truck. They are far from the inherently flawed engines that common folk take them to be. Im not going to preach Wankel's and bash pistons, but you cant help but admire the simple design and function of a engine with only 3 moving parts. As for the Rx-8 vs 350z its really not a fair comparison... There totally different cars. I like the 350z, and hope it does well enough that it brings back all the Jap sports cars back to the US... If a 4th Gen RX-7 comes out then well compare that to the 350z (course that wouldnt be much of a contest) 
|
|
#9
06-10-2002, 03:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Torque rules and the RX-8 won't have any -- less than 150 ft/lbs. So the Z has more HP and more torque. It's too much work to rev a car to 6000 rpm to make any power.
|
|
#10
06-12-2002, 06:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'd like to make a few quick points:
First, rotary engines are not inherently unreliable. The third generation RX-7 did have some issues related to heat from the turbos, but the RX-8 is a normally aspirated design, and very different engine. It should have none of the issues of that RX-7. Also, look around you on the roads some day. You'll see lots of 1st gen and 2nd gen RX-7s on the road with a couple hundred thousand miles on them. Mazda knows a whole lot more about making reliable rotaties now than they did 2 decades ago. I am not going to say that it will be free of faults, but to simply claim that it won't last is obviously wrong. Who could possibly make and sell a car with an engine that would only last 60k? Second, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm actually not a big fan of how the RX-8 looks either, but Sam Mitani of Road and Track did say, "I believe this RX-8 is the prettiest car to have come out of Japan...ever." Third, torque rules in one sense, but high RPM torque is far better than low RPM torque. The reason is GEARING. If there are two engines with identically shaped torque curves, one produces 150 lb ft. of torque at 8,000 RPM and another produces 250 lb. ft. of torque at 4,000 RPM, which will have the most torque in a car? The one with 150 lb. ft. will. It's easy to picture if you simply add a 2:1 gear on the "lower" powered one that reduces the speed at the shaft to 4,000 RPM. That shaft will be able to twist with 300 lb. ft. of torque at 4k RPM due to the 2:1 gearing advantage. If you want a clear and simple description of this, click here. Besides, there's nothing better than reving an engine up to 8 grand! Reving an engine to 8 grand or above is "work" in the same way that eating ice cream is "work". Sure, you have to move to do it, but the rewards are well worth the effort. Finally, keep in mind the two manufacturers are going after totally different crowds. The RX-8 is supposed to be a more practical car. For me, I don't really want either one. The RX-8 has too many "practical" compromises to be a true sports car, and the Z exceeds my allowable ugly factor by a wide margin. I understand, however, that there are some people that like how it looks, and I respect that. Both should have many thousands of very happy customers. It's just a different if overlapping customer set. Last edited by Iceburn; 06-12-2002 at 07:51 PM.
|
|
#14
06-12-2002, 07:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, if you won't believe me, will you believe the lead designer of the RX-8? Here's a link
Interview With Shigeo Hirata "Designer of RX-8 Concept" ... Question: Is the RX-8 the RX-7 Successor? Reply: Absolutely not, its a whole new idea in sportscars designed to appeal to those who want the performance of a two seater sports car combined with the convenience of a family oriented 4 seater. That is not RX-7's philosophy. Me again... The RX-7 is rumored to be under development, but will only see production if the RX-8 sells well enough. Please try to get your facts straight before making strange claims. I want to emphasize rumored in the first sentence of this paragraph. If that rumor is true, it will be the car to compare the 350Z to. I can't imagine that the RX-8 will match the performance of the 350Z, which ought to be a fantastic car.
|
|
#15
06-13-2002, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You know, the grill/front end of the 350Z does look like some kind of nurse shark... Was this the design model?
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
 |
|
|
