Rx-8

[BigMass]

anybody here own one and would like to chime in on it? They're clearing out the 2004 models now and im considering buying one at a good price since there is basically no difference between the 2004 and 2005 models.

For the money i feel i cant buy a better car. I like the fact that its RWD, lighter and smaller than the 350, awesome interior, class leading handling and brakes and feels like a 2 seater but has backseats incase of emergencies.

Honestly, the only downside i can see is its epic and legendary Dodge Viper like fuel consumption. Oustide of that, i want it :)

It would be my only car. I would use it as a daily driver and maybe 1 or 2 track days/year.

What do you guys think? Honestly the only new cars that appeal to me are the RX-8, 350, S2000 and the MS Miata to a lesser extent. That gives you a good idea of the type of cars i like so dont suggest i should buy a Civic or Sentra instead. Im not rich so money does matter. The fact that the RX8 is the cheapest of the big 3 is a consideration. I also think that regardless of the cost it is the best of the 3 in terms of performance and practicality put together.

[africano]

If you don't intent on modding it, it's a sweet car.


Viper like fuel consumption?

WTF

[GQBalla]

rotory engines suck on mileage:thumbsdow

[africano]

18/24 mpg that's about the same as my 240sx, except the rx-8 has like 90 more ponies.

[BigMass]

I have no real intention of modding it ouside of maybe a nice sounding cat back exhaust system (greddy) later on and maybe an intake to help it breath better. Maybe a second set of rims with winter tires etc. But nothing surgical or invasive. I would rather spend money maintaining the car. I am all about the total balance of the car. That it does not have 300hp doesnt bother me. Im not into drag racing, im more a road course kind of guy.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by africano
18/24 mpg that's about the same as my 240sx, except the rx-8 has like 90 more ponies.


If i could file a lawsuit and make money off that i would hehe. All reports from people that actually own the car and drive it are 15mpg on average. Thats like 70%city and 30 highway. Even on highways no one has got over 20mpg that i know. Track days? Try 8-9mpg if you like keeping it at 8000rpm all lap.

[Akagi Redsuns]

I believe in not buying a car in it's 1st year of production. The RX-8 seems to suffer from some issues that I would hope is resolved with the 2005. The ones I hear mainly are, easy to flood, not enough insulation around the feet....so engine warms up the interior floor compartment, horrible A/C performance, horrible fuel consumption (apparently a reflash of the ECU at the dealer helps?), noisy transmission (hopefully just an operation thing and not signs the thing will fail), no telescoping steering wheel adjustment.

Anyways, every car has it's quirks and issues. The RX-8 is certainly an interesting car but a step back from the performance and sports car persona of the RX-7, but it's in a step in the right direction in terms of refinement and comfort.

The smoothness of the rotary engine is addictive and I don't think you can go wrong in picking up a RX-8, provided you have the right attitude about what an RX-8 is....aka not a drag racing machine with huge torque.

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by africano
18/24 mpg that's about the same as my 240sx, except the rx-8 has like 90 more ponies.

It's rated to get 22/28 with a manual though. (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/1993_Nissan_240SX.shtml) , but yeah, it's still pretty close and as you found out....real life doesn't imitate the EPA testing standards.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns
I believe in not buying a car in it's 1st year of production. The RX-8 seems to suffer from some issues that I would hope is resolved with the 2005. The ones I hear mainly are, easy to flood, not enough insulation around the feet....so engine warms up the interior floor compartment, horrible A/C performance, horrible fuel consumption (apparently a reflash of the ECU at the dealer helps?), noisy transmission (hopefully just an operation thing and not signs the thing will fail), no telescoping steering wheel adjustment.

Anyways, every car has it's quirks and issues. The RX-8 is certainly an interesting car but a step back from the performance and sports car persona of the RX-7, but it's in a step in the right direction in terms of refinement and comfort.

The smoothness of the rotary engine is addictive and I don't think you can go wrong in picking up a RX-8, provided you have the right attitude about what an RX-8 is....aka not a drag racing machine with huge torque.

exactly. And remember that 2004 is the second year RX8. A lot of the issues like flooding have been taken care off. Even fuel consumption is better with the new ECU flash. They recommend staying away from the very first models. Early 2003, but people say the 2004 is just fine. The AC problem must be isolated because many people with RX8s say the AC blows ice cold with no issues.

I also realize its not an RX7 and never was meant to be. If the RX7 came out today or was to be re-released i am sure it would be topping 50,000 at least. I cannot afford that much money for a focused 2 seater sports car that would be a daily driver. It would make no sense. Buying a 1993 as a practical daily driver would also make no sense. So while i realize the RX7 is just awesome, its not a car that is right for me at this time. RX8 seems like the perfect balance.

[BigMass]

Can anyone tell me a reason to get the GT model over the GS? I mean, i dont give a shit about Nav, Traction control, leather all that crap etc. As long as the engine, suspension and brakes are the same i could care less about extras. Form follows function unless form comes free.

[1badPT]

The only thing I don't like about the RX-8 is the engine which is ultimately the reason for the car's existance. The fuel economy while it may have been improved is still horrible when comparing it to your other choices, especially if you're looking at this as a daily driver. Style wise and handling wise its great and the design of the interior is great. The engine sucks - they should have stuck with the wankel-type rotaries of the past.

Out of your alternatives, I would pick the MS Miata or the 350Z, though you'd be giving up a back seat in both cases, you'd be getting better performance and fuel economy that won't have you crying poor whenever its time to fill up, and you'll still get great handling.

[Xtrema]

The only advantage of RX-8 is because there's already to many Z on the road.

Z I believe is a better daily driver and cheaper to keep in the long run. But they are everywhere and hard to stand out.

The problem with 8 is engine is weaker than 7. Where's the turbo? And rotrary by design was never meant to last. I don't know what the resale is but I thing you may set yourself up to lose a lot in depreciation if the engine need to be rebuild every 80-100K.

I don't know where you're from but having any of those in Calgary may not qualify as "daily driver" since they are RWD and may have some problem clearing snow.

[BigMass]

the only thing that scares me about driving a sports car in the winter is other drivers. I can handle the car fine, its the idiots in 30 year old cars with 40 year old tires that scare me.

[Ashkente]

What about the G35C? Isn't it a 2+2?

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by Xtrema
snip........... Where's the turbo?And rotrary by design was never meant to last. I don't know what the resale is but I thing you may set yourself up to lose a lot in depreciation if the engine need to be rebuild every 80-100K...........snip

What are you talking about? Mazda has won lots of endurance racing events with the rotary engine, be it at Bathurst in Australia (hence the RX-7 Type-RB edition), not to mention a crapload of IMSA GTU races and championships with the 1st and 2nd generation. And of course the rotary engine powered Mazda 787B did win the 1991 LeMans 24 hours race. Rotary engines are built to last.

I think Mazda was smart by not using a supercharger or turbo on the RX-8. Too many people blew up the 3rd Gen RX-7 by not knowing what they were doing when modding them for more power. Too easy to get into trouble when there is a turbo to raise the boost on. Also, the reliabilty of the 3rd Gen RX-7 was spotty. Some barely got any miles before the engine blows and others had no issues at all. Some spotty design problems and the complex twin sequential turbo system didn't help matters.

[Stratus_Power]

how much are they clearing the 2004 Rx8 out for at the dealer?

I personally thinks for the RX8 is a great car the price ( 7k cheaper than G35c/350Z and 10k cheaper than the S2000), and you still get all the options like heated leather, power seats, HID, Bose audio etc. And god I love the engine, so smooth.

The fuel consumption is not the greatest if you are looking at a 1.3L engine, but it's definitly a great improvement over the RX7 TT.

But if i have to choose i probably would shell out a little more for the G35 couple since its more practice, more powerful, more comfty, and it should have a better resale value.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns


What are you talking about? Mazda has won lots of endurance racing events with the rotary engine, be it at Bathurst in Australia (hence the RX-7 Type-RB edition), not to mention a crapload of IMSA GTU races and championships with the 1st and 2nd generation. And of course the rotary engine powered Mazda 787B did win the 1991 LeMans 24 hours race. Rotary engines are built to last.

I think Mazda was smart by not using a supercharger or turbo on the RX-8. Too many people blew up the 3rd Gen RX-7 by not knowing what they were doing when modding them for more power. Too easy to get into trouble when there is a turbo to raise the boost on. Also, the reliabilty of the 3rd Gen RX-7 was spotty. Some barely got any miles before the engine blows and others had no issues at all. Some spotty design problems and the complex twin sequential turbo system didn't help matters.

There's always a couple people in each thread regarding rotaries that make retarded comments like the guy you quoted, trying to set them straight is difficult.

I'm not a huge fan of the styling of the RX-8, and I don't like the looks at all really. Even though I am not a huge fan of the renesis motor I do love the fact North America has a rotary motor in a production car here again. Not to mention I'm happy that Mazda is putting money into R&D for the rotary motor. Imagine if you will the possibilities if the same amount of money that's been put into R&D for the piston motor over the years, was used on the rotary. People here (in general) can't handle a turbo charged rotary. Those people include both the owners and Mazda mechanics. Small problems are often made larger by illprepared Mazda techs (here anyways)

Lots of the people who make negative comments about the rotary motor, can't even explain how they work, and have never seen the internals. It's just one of those things the motor has to deal with here.

Does the motor have some down falls? Sure it does. But it's not the only one, hows the motor in the BMW M3?

[max_boost]

I was on the verge of picking up the RX8 GT in Gray (Gunmetal color) until I was antagonized to death by all those around me, not cool! So I was pressured into not getting it:rofl:

After owning the S2000, and test driving the RX8, I loved it. It was basically the S2K with a roof and the luxury amenities that it lacked. Awesome Awesome Car!!

Everything considered, I would pick it over the S2K and 350Z. Like you said, price, rear seats, styling, handling, brakes, etc. I think it would awesome as a daily driver.

Xtrema, RWD+Traction Control+Snow Tires, it's all good:D We don't get the severe conditions for too long, chinook is always around the corner:D

I love my 330 and all, but I had to pay $25K more for it!:eek: :rofl:

[max_boost]

Article from MSN

http://en.autos.sympatico.msn.ca/advice/standardart.aspx?contentid=4021967&src=home

Article from Edmunds 350Z vs. RX8
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/101039/article.html

[1badPT]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns

...snip
I think Mazda was smart by not using a supercharger or turbo on the RX-8....snip

Its not a question of being smart - its a question of compression and the renesis engine is just above 10:1 so you wouldn't be able to go FI without filling up with race gas. As it is they suggest 92 Octane for the car if I'm not mistaken. The high compression is why Mazda raved about the renesis in the first place because they figured it would make the engine run more efficiently and powerful - neither was really the case.

[tsi_neal]

buy it, you wont be dissapointed!

beautiful exterior, better interior, the motor is SOOO smooth. power is lacking IMO, handling is superb, gas mileage is liveable but not good, comfort is awesome.

My only real complaint is the low power situation, the chassis can EASILY handle another 100hp but its just not there.

all of this is personal driving experiance but not my personal car so i guess its the next best thing to someone who actually owns it.

[cujo_cjc]

yea the rx8 is a good car
i just dont like how some colors you can only get the black/taupe interior color scheme :barf:

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by 1badPT


Its not a question of being smart - its a question of compression and the renesis engine is just above 10:1 so you wouldn't be able to go FI without filling up with race gas.

The decision to keep it n/a was one with purpose. Not as you would have us believe a misjudgement. You do realize the 13B was available in both n/a and turbo form don't you? If Mazda wanted a turbo or super charged motor they could have used lower comp rotors, as they did in the 13B. Oh and just so you know there's more than a few turbo charged higher comp 13B motors running around. And no they don't run on race gas. They do need to run lower boost, but a high comp piston motor has the same limitations, so bringing it up is useless.

See what I mean people? Bring up the rotary motor and all sorts of know it alls come out of the wood work to barf up the same old stuff they've heard from other people. I'm no expert, don't present myself as one. The motor has down sides and if you want to talk about those I'm game, but lets do our research before opening our mouths.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by 1badPT

The high compression is why Mazda raved about the renesis in the first place because they figured it would make the engine run more efficiently and powerful - neither was really the case.

Sorry forgot to address this gem of a comment. So you think the choice to run a higher comp did NOT result in more power? You think they could have made the same power with a lower comp n/a motor?:rolleyes:

[4doorj]

really nice looking cars

[1badPT]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2
The decision to keep it n/a was one with purpose. Not as you would have us believe a misjudgement...snip

Please show me where I stated the lack of forced induction was a misjudgement - I simply stated that with the amount of compression with the renesis engine that boost really isn't an option without running a very high octane fuel. I never stated my points of view as a piston vs rotary arguement either so quit arguing something that hasn't even been brought up.

I don't care if you criticize my comments, but don't put words in my mouth.

Where I did say they misjudged, was power and fuel economy, and if you want to argue that, go ahead and make yourself look like more of an idiot. The rest of your post I snipped because its basically you opening your mouth and inserting your foot...

[BigMass]

Originally posted by max_boost
I was on the verge of picking up the RX8 GT in Gray (Gunmetal color) until I was antagonized to death by all those around me, not cool! So I was pressured into not getting it:rofl:

After owning the S2000, and test driving the RX8, I loved it. It was basically the S2K with a roof and the luxury amenities that it lacked. Awesome Awesome Car!!

Everything considered, I would pick it over the S2K and 350Z. Like you said, price, rear seats, styling, handling, brakes, etc. I think it would awesome as a daily driver.

Xtrema, RWD+Traction Control+Snow Tires, it's all good:D We don't get the severe conditions for too long, chinook is always around the corner:D

I love my 330 and all, but I had to pay $25K more for it!:eek: :rofl:

I agree, i dont know what those around you antagonized you over it. I just test drove one today and it was amazing. The interior is the best i have ever been in. Way better than the M3 i looked at even. The gauges are the best i have seen outside of a Porsche. The engine revs to 9000 effortlessly. The grip/handling/brakes are outstanding. The handling is the best of any car i have driven before. I took it around corners at high speeds and no sign of understear. Wonderful! Overstear was always an option.

Power is perfect for the real world. As a package its the best i can think of. To me, power is just one of the factors that make a complete car, to others it's everything. Yes, if the RX8 came with 100 hp then yeah, i was say "wtf were they thinking" But 238 at the crank i am perfectly happy with.

The style is nice and i like it. Some dont like how it looks, i do. The rear seats are comfortable and the suicide doors are great. The interior has just enough space not to feel cramped.

At this point, the only reason why i dont have one in my garage is the price. Its a good deal but i am trying to see how i can afford it since i have never purchased a new car before.

Has anyone used Carcostcanada.com? I have heard people in the US get up to $3000 below dealer invoice on the 2004 rx8 models because the dealers are clearing them out for the 2005s.

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by 1badPT


Its not a question of being smart - its a question of compression and the renesis engine is just above 10:1 so you wouldn't be able to go FI without filling up with race gas. As it is they suggest 92 Octane for the car if I'm not mistaken. The high compression is why Mazda raved about the renesis in the first place because they figured it would make the engine run more efficiently and powerful - neither was really the case.

My comment about the Mazda being smart about making the engine in the RX-8 a non-FI rotary engine, stemmed from my belief that they did this primarily for less complexity and to make it more reliable and easier for thier techs to work on. Lots of horror stories of healthy FD 3rd Gen RX-7s going into the shop for a recall work (fuel line recall comes to mind), and coming out with boost and power issues. Not good. If they wanted to make it a turbo, it would been designed that way with low compression rotors, different porting and so on. But once they decided that they are going non-turbo....up came the compression ratio spec for the rotors...and why not really? The most reliable rotary engines it seems are one without a turbo and the average joe can't do much to it to make the engine blow, but it also means the average joe can't mod it to make any more power :(

In any case, the Renesis is a good boost in power from Mazda's previous NA rotary engine, which was in 1991 making a paltry 160HP. Even the turbo in 1991 was only making 200HP, topped to 255 when the 3rd Gen rolled around (of course that engine made 217 ft-lbs of torque though).

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by 1badPT


Please show me where I stated the lack of forced induction was a misjudgement - I simply stated that with the amount of compression with the renesis engine that boost really isn't an option without running a very high octane fuel. I never stated my points of view as a piston vs rotary arguement either so quit arguing something that hasn't even been brought up.

"Misjudgement" may have been the wrong word. You made it sound like Mazda did not add FI from the factory because he motor was high comp. That's not the case. As mentioned by Akagi and myself, using lower comp rotors would have been an easy change. They did it in the 13B. I wanted to make it clear that the choice to keep it n/a was a very thought out one, it was not made simply because they designed high comp rotors. You just said "boost really isnt an option without running very high octane fuel" and that's not correct either. As I said before it can be done just as it's done on high comp piston motors.




Where I did say they misjudged, was power and fuel economy, and if you want to argue that, go ahead and make yourself look like more of an idiot. The rest of your post I snipped because its basically you opening your mouth and inserting your foot...

Did they under estimate power? Yes, once again not the only company to have done that. You argued that the decision to use a higher comp motor did NOT result in a power increase, or a fuel economy increase, and that is incorrect again. There is both a a power and fuel economy increase over the pervious n/a rotary motor, As Akagi has said. You failed to quote my last post regarding this because you were wrong plain and simple, you can keep argueing with me over these points or you can do your research and come back and argue the real downsides of the motor.

[1badPT]

Lower comp rotors really aren't an option with the renesis engine - they've engineered it so tightly that you can't change the shape of the rotors because of where the intake and exhaust ports are on the chamber (the sides). You say its possible but you don't have evidence either - show me a turbo RX-8 from a reputable source and I'll stand corrected, until then you're the one who's guessing.

I didn't respond to your last point cuz you're just going to argue needlessly ad naseum and likely you'll try to make it sound like I said something else like in my previous post. If you can argue based on what I said then here's my response to your next post:

The renesis is a replacement for the previous engines - n/a AND turbo and while it is an improvement over the n/a engine it IS NOT an improvement over the 3rd gen turbo. With FI eliminated as an option for extra power, there's really no way for the renesis to beat the 3rd gen Turbo 1.3L rotary. That means failure in my books.

[Maxt]

You could run lower comp rotors in the rx-8 motor, just by milling the combustion pocket deeper, but there is no point in doing that on a n/a motor... The difference between the rotors of the renesis and the 13bt series is the cut off seal added to the rotor, the real design difference in the renesis is minimizing overlap to reduce emmisions, and thats the pluses of the side port exhaust...
Now to put and end to the Forced induction argument, in the newest hyper rev Rx-7 mag from Japan, is a an article debuting the new Greddy turbo kit for the RX-8.. 500 hp is the stated HP..
When I was at Mazda's factory, they had a renesis 13b on a stand with a IHI turbo on it, with the 10:1 rotors..
High compression and turboiing can be done but its in the tuning.. The best place for mazda to start again with the rotary, was with a non turbo'd car, they didn't need to put a problematic car back into the North American market, the n/a was the safest way to do it, and was what made the first rx-7 a North American success...
The higher compression you pack into an n/a motor, though the more thermally efficient the motor is.. The Renesis in regards to noise, emissions, reliability and efficiency is an improvement over the previous 13b's...
The next stage of renesis devlopment will be interesting, the point of the no overlap design is to run gaseous and alternative fuels such as hydrogen, you will see forced induction as the next step in power production and will surpass the 13b-rew in power output, as the alternative fuels tend to have higher octane ratings than standard pump fuels, which means more boost, and more compression, thus more power, the 10:1 compressions is not a handicap, but just the next level design for better fuels..Maxt

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by 1badPT
Lower comp rotors really aren't an option with the renesis engine - they've engineered it so tightly that you can't change the shape of the rotors because of where the intake and exhaust ports are on the chamber (the sides).

Well that shows how much you actually know. Modifying the chamber on the rotor to have lower compression does NOT affect the dimensons of the rotor in respect to the ports whatsoever. That was just and absurd comment. How many rotary motors have you seen torn apart?


You say its possible but you don't have evidence either - show me a turbo RX-8 from a reputable source and I'll stand corrected, until then you're the one who's guessing.

Alright where should I start.

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=27235&highlight=turbo
http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=38339&highlight=turbo
http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=22653&highlight=turbo

I'll continue if you like? Those are just the one's I found during a half assed search of the RX-8 forum. Max already mentioned the magazine that had the greddy ad for the turbo kit for the RX-8. Would you consider Greddy a reputable source?


The renesis is a replacement for the previous engines - n/a AND turbo and while it is an improvement over the n/a engine it IS NOT an improvement over the 3rd gen turbo. With FI eliminated as an option for extra power, there's really no way for the renesis to beat the 3rd gen Turbo 1.3L rotary. That means failure in my books.

I will agree to one of these points. I do NOT think the renesis is an improvement over the 13bt and 13bREW motors. As far as performance and performance potential is concerned. I have never claimed otherwise. However as far as reliability, fuel economy it IS an improvement Now since a few people have proved FI is an option your point has kind of fallen flat. I would be interested to see a renesis built with low comp rotors and a properly sized turbo. Part of the problem is that living in North America we're missing the real advancements with this motor.

[Toms-SC]

If you don't mind low HP and no torque, go for it.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
If you don't mind low HP and no torque, go for it.

Well I knew that was coming:rolleyes: No discussion about the rotary motor is complete without some yahoo coming in and throwing down that line.

[statick]

i say go for the g35c, pretty good power, luxury, reliable, resale value.

[Toms-SC]

Originally posted by rx7_turbo2


Well I knew that was coming:rolleyes: No discussion about the rotary motor is complete without some yahoo coming in and throwing down that line.


YA HOO - I would not have to say it if it wasen't true. The HP/weight thing can be argued till we are blue in the face but the low torque number is unreal! 159 @ 5500 rpm! Giddy up!

Other then those two issues I like the car itself! Looks good and I really like the interior! :thumbsup:

[Xtrema]

Bring out the.....
http://www.palmerpkg.com/products/decorative_boxes/boxco_web/47248%20popcorn.jpg

:D

[Xtrema]

Time to bring out some facts:

350Z -------------------------------------- RX-8
1463KG ---------------------------------- 1384KG
274lb-ft@4800RPM --------------------- 159lb-ft@5500RPM
287HP@6200RPM ----------------------- 238HP@8500RPM

I'm surpised that RX-8 is that heavy, I always thought it's around 1000-1100Kg.

Just go by the number, if driven by the same driver, RX-8 would not perform as good as 350Z. It has 42% less torque but pulling only 7% less weight. So lauching will be slower.

It may gain some time on the corner/curves but it won't be enough to compensate loss on straights - not unlike S2K. Many Japanese car videos comparo proved that already.

It's $6K less than a starting 350Z Perfromance $8K less to 350Z Track. But Mazda understand why they have to price it they way.

It's a cool car too look at and fun to toss around but it's no 350Z. What you're buying with RX-8 is character, not performance.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by Xtrema
Time to bring out some facts:

350Z -------------------------------------- RX-8
1463KG ---------------------------------- 1384KG
274lb-ft@4800RPM --------------------- 159lb-ft@5500RPM
287HP@6200RPM ----------------------- 238HP@8500RPM

I'm surpised that RX-8 is that heavy, I always thought it's around 1000-1100Kg.

It's a cool car too look at and fun to toss around but it's no 350Z. What you're buying with RX-8 is character, not performance.

If it were 1000kg it would make it lighter than a Miata. How could you think the rx8 would be lighter than a miata?

RX-8 is not performance? Funny because it lapped the Top Gear track at exactly the same time as the 350Z and the M3. It's handling is said by many to even surpass the FD RX7 and the brakes are said to be outstanding. I can attest first hand to how good the brakes are.

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by BigMass
snip..........

RX-8 is not performance? Funny because it lapped the Top Gear track at exactly the same time as the 350Z and the M3. It's handling is said by many to even surpass the FD RX7 and the brakes are said to be outstanding. I can attest first hand to how good the brakes are.

It doesn't suprass the FD3S RX-7 in terms of handling. Mazda would like you think that though with their biased promotional video showing the RX-8 keeping up with a Spirit-R at the track.

The FD3S boasted great good slalom and lateral g numbers though. Mid 70mph and .99g in cornering...... numbers that the RX-8 will not attain. But what should it? It is not a RX-7 replacement and it is great for what the car is. Mazda knows how to make a great handling car and the perfect weight distribution that can be attained with small keg of a rotary motor, coupled with its low center of gravity helps out a ton.

[SilverRex]

wow even though I dont know nuttin about the Mazda RX series, I sure picked up alot of good points in this thread. however it may be, in this world people will always make different judgement and assumption about the car they choose to love or hate. It all boils down to personal taste and if RWD + potential for realibility issue isnt a big factor when selecting anyone vehicle then I say RX8 is definaltey worth checking out.

Some points I agree,
There isnt as much RX8 on the road, so personally I think that is great.
With the 2004 clearout, Im pretty sure you can get a smoking deal from the dealership, my bro just recently picked up a MS miata, and I tell you the dealership offered him a price no one can possibly refused, I would have picked one up myself if I had alittle more money laying around.
another point,
with all the reviews outthere, there are enough comparison and test that should be more than enough for anyone person to make a simple decision. Im actually quite shocked at how much coverage there is on this car. Maybe its Mazda's way of marketing the car.

in the end, for the price
I dont think you can find another car besides the Miata that offers a balance in terms of performence, taste and personality.
in other words, this car is in its own class and rights.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by SilverRex


in the end, for the price
I dont think you can find another car besides the Miata that offers a balance in terms of performence, taste and personality.
in other words, this car is in its own class and rights.

that's what i thought, then the Mini Cooper S poped up on my plate recently. Yeah, different cars, but both drivers cars, 4 seater, small, fast, world class handling. And the mini is a good $6000 cheaper when you factor in the fact that you can't haggle on a mini as far as i'm told. Oh yeah and the Mini would cost $100 per month less on gas alone.

[SilverRex]

oh ya forgot about the mini cooper, here is the thing. get the RX8 if the price is right.

im not taking for a good deal here, im talking even better deal. you know how dealership works, as they are clearing out their old models, RX8 is definately a car they have trouble selling I am sure they will get rid of it below invoice.

My experience I think sunridge has the highest potential to give you the best deal. I am not sure if you have a salesmen in mind but try Brad at sunridge, like I mention before, the deal we got on the 04 Mazda speed miata was unbelievable. I am quite confident the same should be with the Rx8 model. So give it a shot and good luck.

[4doorj]

how many km's a tank do these cars get?
also is there a alberta rx8 forum?