Mazda RX8 Vs. BMW E46 M3

[SSSnail]

I've always thought the RX-8 is comparable to the 330Ci.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: geokilla
The RX-8 is a good handling car, but doesn't have the power the RX-7 had.

Yes the RX-7's 255HP is leaps and bounds ahead of the RX-8's 238HP...cut it out :laugh:

I think you're underrating the RX-7's power and overrating the RX-8's power.

This x100.

Someone is playing with numbers in their asshole

Just going by the documented numbers.

 

[AMCRambler]

Bah. Zane Johnson's Acclude with the H22 motor swap would destroy them both! He shuts down Corvette's from a rolling start all the time!

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: canadageek

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: geokilla
The RX-8 is a good handling car, but doesn't have the power the RX-7 had.

Yes the RX-7's 255HP is leaps and bounds ahead of the RX-8's 238HP...cut it out :laugh:

I think you're underrating the RX-7's power and overrating the RX-8's power.

the FD sold in the US had 255-265ps depending on if it was an AT or MT.

the RX8 has 231 HP, less with the slushbox

Don't forget about the huge torque advantage of the turbo rotary. It's also lighter I believe by 150-200 lbs.

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: RichUK
I was at a little ?party? (if you can call it that) around a friend?s house last night and I met this know-it-all, annoying prick who thought he knew everything when it came to cars ? always shouting you down claiming his word as truth. I will give him his dues, he is quite clever, but it?s just the way he came across that really irked me.

...

So what is his screen name here?

Not sure how much of a point you want to make with this guy, but refer him to the Top Gear lap times, and then challenge him on a circuit. IMO, driving skill is much more a bragging right than what your car will do in the hands of a pro. Also IMO, the E46 M3 is a better looking car than the RX-8.

 

[Koing]

The E46 on most tracks but it's more down to driver skill as to who will be fastest on an decent track

Koing

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: canadageek

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: geokilla
The RX-8 is a good handling car, but doesn't have the power the RX-7 had.

Yes the RX-7's 255HP is leaps and bounds ahead of the RX-8's 238HP...cut it out :laugh:

I think you're underrating the RX-7's power and overrating the RX-8's power.

the FD sold in the US had 255-265ps depending on if it was an AT or MT.

the RX8 has 231 HP, less with the slushbox

Don't forget about the huge torque advantage of the turbo rotary. It's also lighter I believe by 150-200 lbs.

Lighter by over 250lbs

That's not too bad when you're talking about 400+hp V8 torque monsters, but to a twinkie-motor ~200-250hp power range, it means a lot.

 

[dawheat]

Originally posted by: canadageek

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: geokilla
The RX-8 is a good handling car, but doesn't have the power the RX-7 had.

Yes the RX-7's 255HP is leaps and bounds ahead of the RX-8's 238HP...cut it out :laugh:

I think you're underrating the RX-7's power and overrating the RX-8's power.

the FD sold in the US had 255-265ps depending on if it was an AT or MT.

the RX8 has 231 HP, less with the slushbox

The RX-7 was probably underrated since it ran low 5s and when on the boost, had a bunch more torque than the RX-8. On the other hand, you probably would only get a handfull of laps in before one of the seals blew.

The RX-8 definitely feels weaker than it is, though the upgraded versions are decently quick on a track due to the suspension improvements. On the other hand, you probably would only get a handfull of laps in before you ran out of gas.

 

[MiataNC]

Originally posted by: zerocool84
RX8 has no power to exit the turns. It's so horrible. It looks good and handles well but does not compete in it's segment. There are so many better cars for the money.

Don't tell my RX-8 that ....

With Trac/Stab control turned off and the tach kept over 5.5K (9.5k redline) I have to keep the throttle modulated to keep the rear from spinning up from apex to exit.

What segment do you think it competes in? Every magazine/TV shootout has it right at the top against cars considered to be in it's "segment".

Show me a list of cars you can get new with the following...

1. RWD
2. Manual
3. Independent Rear Suspesion
4. Limited Slip Diff
4. Seating for 4 adults with ease of access (RX-8 has rear suicide doors)
5. Ammenities (Leather, HID, Heated Seats, Homelink, etc)
6. MSRP @$34K loaded, but out the door for a lot less ($27.5 OTD for my '08 40th AE)

I've driven (and can afford) BMWs, including my friends ridiculously awesome '08 M3 (OK can't afford that one heh). Amazing cars.

When I needed more seats than my Miata offered my short list included the 135i, Mustang GT, 350Z, MazdaSpeed3, WRX/STI, and GTI. When all was said and done the car that felt the best on the road (handled closest to my suspension tuned Miata), offered the best value (in my opinion), and put the biggest smile on my face was the RX-8.

Personally I don't drive a spec sheet, and I don't live at the track. Mr. Winkie doesn't need any compensation, and you can only go so fast on the street (I keep it sane/legal and never race). I drive whatever puts the biggest smile on my face, and for me that is the RX-8.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Lighter by over 250lbs

Where are you people getting your numbers? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

RX-8 = 2932lbs
RX-7 Turbo (FD3S) = 2830lbs


looks like about a 100lb difference. Where the hell did you find 250lbs of a difference?

 

[StageLeft]

When I needed more seats than my Miata offered my short list included the 135i, Mustang GT, 350Z, MazdaSpeed3, WRX/STI, and GTI.

I drove an RX-8 once. I liked it. I loved the rear seats, too. Still, it's a damn shame Mazda used a rotary for it.

 

[ballmode]

straights = m3
curves = rx8

 

[ballmode]

Originally posted by: AMCRambler
Bah. Zane Johnson's Acclude with the H22 motor swap would destroy them both! He shuts down Corvette's from a rolling start all the time!

LOL

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: ballmode

Originally posted by: AMCRambler
Bah. Zane Johnson's Acclude with the H22 motor swap would destroy them both! He shuts down Corvette's from a rolling start all the time!

LOL

Lulz at "Acclude" :laugh:

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Lighter by over 250lbs

Where are you people getting your numbers? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

RX-8 = 2932lbs
RX-7 Turbo (FD3S) = 2830lbs


looks like about a 100lb difference. Where the hell did you find 250lbs of a difference?

Edmunds.com, but most sites list at least ~3000lbs for the RX-8. In any case, less HP, a lot less TQ, and added weight = performance downgrade. Of course, the RX-8 was never meant as a direct replacement for the RX-7, but it's sort of a shame regardless. A hypothetical ~300hp / 280tq 3.0L 24V V6 RX-8 would have been brilliant.

 

[geokilla]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: canadageek

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: geokilla
The RX-8 is a good handling car, but doesn't have the power the RX-7 had.

Yes the RX-7's 255HP is leaps and bounds ahead of the RX-8's 238HP...cut it out :laugh:

I think you're underrating the RX-7's power and overrating the RX-8's power.

the FD sold in the US had 255-265ps depending on if it was an AT or MT.

the RX8 has 231 HP, less with the slushbox

Don't forget about the huge torque advantage of the turbo rotary. It's also lighter I believe by 150-200 lbs.

FD3S also has loads more torque than the RX-8. Plus don't forget, the Japanese Gentlemen's Agreement restricted HP ratings to 276HP. However many manufacturers underrated their engine output. Take the R34 for example. It was rated at 276HP, but it actually produced like 300HP or something.

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Lighter by over 250lbs

Where are you people getting your numbers? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

RX-8 = 2932lbs
RX-7 Turbo (FD3S) = 2830lbs


looks like about a 100lb difference. Where the hell did you find 250lbs of a difference?

Edmunds.com, but most sites list at least ~3000lbs for the RX-8. In any case, less HP, a lot less TQ, and added weight = performance downgrade. Of course, the RX-8 was never meant as a direct replacement for the RX-7, but it's sort of a shame regardless. A hypothetical ~300hp / 280tq 3.0L 24V V6 RX-8 would have been brilliant.

The RX cars are powered rotary engine. They will never put a V6 engine in there.

 

[Arkaign]

^^ That's obvious, but a real shame, considering the Renesis rotary is hardly a competitor to a decent V6.

 

[MiataNC]

Originally posted by: . A hypothetical ~300hp / 280tq 3.0L 24V V6 RX-8 would have been brilliant.

And totally ruined the telepathic handling that that the 50/50 weight distribution achieved with a rotary offers.

It would also leave behind all of the character of the car.

It is an RX-8 for a reason.

A 3rd rotor or a factory turbo option is what the car really needs to appease spec sheet racers.

Rotaries are not for everyone. Only a few people find their souls moved by them, and are willing to put up with the quirks.

 

[ayabe]

I agree that for better or worse, the RX-* need to keep the rotary, it's what makes it so quirky and cool.

But they need to up the MPG, lower the emissions and up the power to stay competitive. I heard they're working on a DI model, let's hope they couple that with some forced induction for the next car.

 

[geokilla]

There's rumors that the RX-7 is being resurrected. Not sure if it's still happening though, or if it was cancelled by Mazda, just like how Honda cancelled the NSX and S2000.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: MiataNC

Originally posted by: . A hypothetical ~300hp / 280tq 3.0L 24V V6 RX-8 would have been brilliant.

And totally ruined the telepathic handling that that the 50/50 weight distribution achieved with a rotary offers.

It would also leave behind all of the character of the car.

It is an RX-8 for a reason.

A 3rd rotor or a factory turbo option is what the car really needs to appease spec sheet racers.

Rotaries are not for everyone. Only a few people find their souls moved by them, and are willing to put up with the quirks.

13B-MSP Renesis has a curb weight of 156 kilograms (344 lb)

The rotary, while interesting, is not amazingly light nor small by any means. There are HEAPS of cars with perfect or near perfect 50/50 weight distribution that do not have Rotaries.

I think rotary technology is interesting, and should be further developed, but as it stands :

Less torque, less HP, terrible fuel economy = why?

 

[MiataNC]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
why?

Why buy any car?

Go drive one.

Really drive one....

Toss it into a corner
Wind the engine to 9.5k RPM
Feel how the shifter ratchets like the bolt action of a rifle
Toss the rear end around and feel how easily you can control/correct the slide

It may not be the car for you, but if you really drive one and find nothing to like about the RX-8 then you probably have no soul.

Cheers

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: ayabe
I agree that for better or worse, the RX-* need to keep the rotary, it's what makes it so quirky and cool.

But they need to up the MPG, lower the emissions and up the power to stay competitive. I heard they're working on a DI model, let's hope they couple that with some forced induction for the next car.

Fuck the emissions, who gives a shit about that? Save that for the pinkos

 

[Arkaign]

You're preaching to the choir here Aside from the 9.5K rev (you can do close to that on S2K), none of what you listed above would have been any different had they put a better motor in it. And I've said many times that the RX-8 chassis is brilliant, the car overall I very much like and admire. It's that level of excellence which leaves me so frustrated with the weak spot under the hood. If it was just another FF hopped up econobox (like the Speed3 / Focus RS / GTI / Cobalt SS / etc), it wouldn't bug me so much. But the RX-8 is an arguably beautiful car, and indeed well balanced and capable, just with a glaring lack of power, notably torque.

It's the genius of the design which screams out for a proper kick in the pants.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: MiataNC

Originally posted by: . A hypothetical ~300hp / 280tq 3.0L 24V V6 RX-8 would have been brilliant.

And totally ruined the telepathic handling that that the 50/50 weight distribution achieved with a rotary offers.

It would also leave behind all of the character of the car.

It is an RX-8 for a reason.

A 3rd rotor or a factory turbo option is what the car really needs to appease spec sheet racers.

Rotaries are not for everyone. Only a few people find their souls moved by them, and are willing to put up with the quirks.

13B-MSP Renesis has a curb weight of 156 kilograms (344 lb)

The rotary, while interesting, is not amazingly light nor small by any means. There are HEAPS of cars with perfect or near perfect 50/50 weight distribution that do not have Rotaries.

I think rotary technology is interesting, and should be further developed, but as it stands :

Less torque, less HP, terrible fuel economy = why?

344lb is not bad (the number is with accessories, minus AC compressor), a 2L Zetec is 370lb(shipping crate weight). The VG30DETT is ~610 according to some sources(of course, you have to realize the VG30DETT has 2 turbos, and is cast iron IIRC). I'm trying to find the weight of a Duratec 30 but I'm having trouble getting any numbers.

Engine weights are hard to compare since you have variables like accessories, fluids, etc.

A renesis with no accessories, but including manifolds is 267.5lb.

edit: I've found some numbers, a Duratec V6 3L engine is 360lbs fully dressed, which is comparable to the 267.5lb of a Renesis dressed, no accessories.
http://www.bacomatic.org/~dw/library/txt/engfyi.htm