HTF Car of the Week (12/19): 2003 Mazda RX-8 (1 Viewer)

[Josh Lowe]

it looks like a top hat on wheels.

rotary engines are torqueless wonders -with- turbos, i'd hate to see what they're like without.

 

[Chuck C]

A top hat on wheels

 

[Todd Hochard]

You know what I can't wait for? I can't wait for the rich ricer kids to get them, and put fart cans on them. There is nothing sweeter than a rotary through a fart can.:rolleyes
Nice looking car, but rotaries have been terribly inefficient engines (from a fuel consumption standpoint). My 1980 Z28, with its carbureted 350 and 6-speed manual, gets better fuel mileage than a friend's 1993 RX-7. I wonder if they fixed that?
You know, I've got 260hp in my TL-S, and I notice no torque steer at all. It's seems a common cliche associated with FWD, but often not true.
Todd

 

[David-S]

They claim to have (mainly) fixed the fuel economy problems by moving the exhaust ports somewhat, claims less unburnt fuel goes straight out the tailpipe that way...

 

[John Miles]

Pretty much every car on the road has a 240 HP engine these days, so I'm not surprised the lowly Neon has followed suit. The new ('03) Honda Accord has 240 HP, just like my '76 Ferrari 308GTB. They both have 3.0-liter engines -- one a V8 with dual overhead cams and four Weber carburetors, and the other a V6 with a dozen or so microcontrollers and a lot of hoses running everywhere.

Strange days indeed. I remember when the Accord was a family economy car.

 

[Cam S]

The Accord is lucky if it's getting 190hp at the wheels, and the neon is listed as having 215hp, but under dyno tests it has been tested at 223hp at the wheels. Not bad for 19 grand.

 

[John Miles]

195-200 HP on the dyno is about right for a car that's putting out 240 at the crank.

 

[Chuck C]

So is there some sort of 'rule of thumb' that takes mfr's published hp data and coverts to power at the wheels?

 

[Trace Downing]

Edmund's has a first drive on it...
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadt...1/article.html
Want some specs?
Overall length
174.6 in.
Overall width
69.7 in.
Overall height
52.8 in.
Wheelbase
106.3 in.
Track (front/rear)
59.1 in. / 59.3 in.
Seating capacity
4 persons
Engine
Water-cooled, two-rotor
Transmission
6-speed manual
Suspension
Double-wishbone/Multi-link
(front/rear)
Brakes
Ventilated disc (front & rear)
Tires
225/45R18 (front & rear)
Wheels
18 x 8JJ (front & rear)
Engine
Displacement
1.3L
HP/RPM
250@8500 rpm (targeted)
Torque/RPM
159@5500 rpm (targeted)
I like it. Both the front and back kind of remind me of Aston Martin's DB7. It's hard to guage how big this is. Since it has 4 doors, I'm sure it's bigger than the 350Z. It might be the perfect replacement to my aging MX-6.
And, what the F*** are people talking about some Dodge in a Mazda thread for? I say again, you're talking about a DODGE?!?!?!? in a thread about REAL cars? That's tantamount to trolling. Chrysler burned me once with a K-car based Charger. Biggest POS I've ever owned. Never Again! :p)
Just kidding, Chryslers are nice cars...for you.

 

[Todd Hochard]

So is there some sort of 'rule of thumb' that takes mfr's published hp data and coverts to power at the wheels?

It's typically 15-20% lower at the wheels, than at the crank, due to drivetrain losses. It tends toward the lower end with manuals (more efficient drivetrain), and toward the higher end with automatics. AWD platforms have even higher losses.

Note that this is a rough estimate, and the drivetrain losses aren't linear. In other words, the same drivetrain is not going to suck 20% from a 400hp motor, as it is a 200hp motor.

Todd

 

[Cam S]

And, what the F*** are people talking about some Dodge in a Mazda thread for? I say again, you're talking about a DODGE?!?!?!? in a thread about REAL cars? That's tantamount to trolling. Chrysler burned me once with a K-car based Charger. Biggest POS I've ever owned. Never Again!

Uh ok? I'm not a big fan of Neons, or really any cars from Dodge, but the new Neon SRT-4 has balls, and big ones! So relax a little there ok.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Those who say that there are better-looking comparable cars, can you name one that has a back seat and rear doors making for easy entry for a child?
I'm genuinely curious.
Oh, and any vehicle with front-wheel drive is just transportation; I can't take that seriously for the true enthusiast's driving experience.

 

[Ted Lee]

i've had two rx-7's. an older 83(gxe?) and then an 89 (gtu). i loved both of them. they're truly "fun" cars to drive. the rotary engine allows for really high redlines. so you can really jump on them.

i almost bought the last gen model too. that one was *really* fun to drive. when the dual stage turbo kicked in you could feel the car "lurch" (in a good way).

it's a bummer there's no turbo on this one. even at 240hp, i suspect it will "rip" like it should. as far as styling goes, i'm still in the air. most of these cars never seem to look as good in person. i'm not even diggin' those doors though. yuck!

it's nice to see the rx line back in the saddle, but from a personal standpoint, i doubt i would buy another rx. mostly just as a "time to buy something different" type of attitude...not necessarily because the car isn't any good.

 

[AviTevet]

The WRX! 4 doors, similar size, less hp but more torque. Won't handle as well as the Mazda though, and not as nice an interior. Also, can't you get a 3-series sedan?

 

[Josh Lowe]

Uh ok? I'm not a big fan of Neons, or really any cars from Dodge, but the new Neon SRT-4 has balls, and big ones! So relax a little there ok.

but have you -seen- the SRT-4? it's uglier than a sack full of buttholes. the front fascia looks absurd and it has a shopping cart handle for a wing.. because after all, downforce over the rear wheels is -so- important on a front wheel drive car...
it sounds like an amazing performer but it looks like a riceboy's wet dream.
back on topic - while the RX8 is not my cup of tea looks or engine wise, i bet it'll handle like a go cart and will be very competitive in whatever class it's placed in SCCA Solo II..

 

[Chris Moe]

Oh, and any vehicle with front-wheel drive is just transportation; I can't take that seriously for the true enthusiast's driving experience.

Amen

 

[Josh Lowe]

Oh, and any vehicle with front-wheel drive is just transportation; I can't take that seriously for the true enthusiast's driving experience.

Fiat Uno Turbo? Fiat Coupe? Mazdaspeed Protege?

 

[Cam S]

Acura Integra Type R, no doubt one of the best front wheel drive cars ever made.

 

[Josh Lowe]

i always thought the ITR (along with pretty much any other Honda including the NSX) was a little overrated, personally. :-X

 

[Cam S]

Have you ever driven an ITR or an NSX? They are race bred machines, especially the NSX.