How is this not an RX8?

[Khyron686]

I have lusted for an RX8 since they came out, and the R3 even more so.

But what kills it for me:

Price - the car is 40K+ in Canada.

MPG - my v6 SUV does better

Flood - I know it's been addressed, but you still can't move the car from garage to driveway and turn it off. Floods.

Doors - I LOVED the suicide doors, until I considered how to get into it in a tight parking space or garage. You can't open the back without the front open, and once you do that you're kind of stuck half-closing it to get the kid through then open again to get it. BAH.

Trunk - I will not drive a car without a spare. Fix-it-gunk/Roadside works in Europe but not here where it can be 2+ hours of waiting if you even have service. If you get the optional spare, the trunk is virtually full.

Reliability - I'm ok with the oil consumption (by design) but the fact is the engine design means rebuilds and that means specialists. $$$

FRS is similar looks/speed/handling with usable trunk/spare and normal coupe doors and a backseat that kids can use. Great mpg, standard simple NA motor. And it's 28K all in, vs 45K.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by iShaveWithKatana

The FT86/BRZ was the natural go to replacement for the now discontinued RX-8, and I do like what I've seen about it, but as the reviews come in, I'm growing less confident that it's in the same league as the RX-8 in terms of handling or stock straight line performance.

Of course, the FT86/BRZ is going to be much easier/less expensive to add FI to if one is so inclined, and that's huge, it will get better fuel economy, it should prove reliable, and the boxer motor is a proven platform from which to make great leaps in terms of power. I'm cheering the tuners on when it comes to FT86/BRZ mods.

I think the car has a lot of potential, but in stock form, it was teased for a long, long time, and like with everything so teased, there are some letdowns that have started to make themselves known if the early reviews are to be believed. But as they say, the real test will be in the actual driving, when these twin vehicles are more widely available, and real people report in.

Your comments about the RX8's strengths are spot on, and the FT86 ought to offer similar driving dynamics. Can you elaborate on what you see as letdowns for the FT86? On paper, they're very close according to Motor Trend:

Metric           RX8        BRZ
0-60 MPH (s)     6.4        6.4
1/4 mile (s@MPH) 14.8@94.3  14.9@95.5
skidpad  (g)     0.88       0.90
slalom   (MPH)   67.1       - (Insideline's BRZ slalom = 69.1)

Granted, Motor Trend's testing methodology may have changed since 2003 and to be fair to the RX8, that was the loaded version (the base model is lighter and marginally quicker). Also Car and Driver did 0-60 in 5.9 sec and the 1/4 mile in 14.5 sec @ 96 MPH for the RX8, though they might've been testing a JDM early production version (that comparo mentioned 250 HP).

Anyway, the FT86 ought to be almost as quick. In both cases, they're momentum cars, which generally don't put up impressive numbers. More important is that the RX8 was widely praised for being much more fun than its times indicated, and the FT86 is getting even more praise.

Originally Posted by ZDan

FR-S/BRZ will be 300 lb. lighter weight than the RX-8

The difference is 289 pounds if you compare a fully loaded USDM RX8 (3065 pounds) to the BRZ Limited. But if you compare other trims, the difference is considerably less. What I posted at NASIOC a couple weeks ago (FWIW since it was about the 2004 RX8):

Originally Posted by Deslock

Adjusted for inflation, my 2004 RX8 base 6MT's street price (also just above invoice) was more than the rumored FRS' MSRP by ~18-25%. Even the rumored BRZ Limited's MSRP is less than the 2004 base RX8's street price, and comparing MSRP to MSRP favors the FT86 even more.

As far as curb weight goes, scales vary, as do magazine and manufacturer numbers. FWIW:

2004 RX8 6MT curb weights (pounds):

2889: JDM base
2933: USDM Sport (based on various magazines)
3029: USDM loaded

2013 FT86 6MT curb weights (pounds):

2624: JDM 86 RC (stripped model, no A/C, no speakers, 16" rims)
2668: JDM 86 G (16" rims, 2 speakers)
2711: JDM 86 GT
2711: JDM 86 Limited
2762: USDM BRZ Premium
2776: USDM BRZ Limited

Notes: JDM 86 comes with a puncture kit instead of a spare, JDM GT and Limited have 6 speakers (USDM gets 8). See http://toyota.jp/86/001_p_001/spec/spec/index.html.

[OrbitalEllipses]

American everything is always bigger and fatter, woot!

[ZDan]

Never seen a reported curb weight for the RX-8 less than 3000 lb., have seen them at up to 3100 lb. Weight difference vs. FR-S/BRZ is ~300 lb. as far as I can tell...

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Never seen a reported curb weight for the RX-8 less than 3000 lb., have seen them at up to 3100 lb. Weight difference vs. FR-S/BRZ is ~300 lb. as far as I can tell...

That's why I posted.

MazdaUSA only published the loaded GT's curb weight (with sunroof, etc). The 2004 RX8 base 6MT was 2889 pounds JDM. The base 6MT USDM shouldn't have been more than 50 pounds heavier, if that (and it didn't gain much over the years).

There's been much speculation as to why MazdaUSA never released specs for the lower trims. Perhaps they knew the engine was slightly over-rated and an official lower weight would've called attention to that?

The difference between the 2011 USDM RX8 Sport and the BRZ Premium seems to be ~200 pounds (though the RX8 lacked a spare).

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

American everything is always bigger and fatter, woot!

To be fair, the USDM BRZ isn't much heavier than a similarly equipped JDM 86.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by Deslock

To be fair, the USDM BRZ isn't much heavier than a similarly equipped JDM 86.

This is true. Weigh-ins of pre-prod models have been favorable as well.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Deslock

MazdaUSA only published the loaded GT's curb weight (with sunroof, etc). The 2004 RX8 base 6MT was 2889 pounds JDM. The base 6MT USDM shouldn't have been more than 50 pounds heavier, if that (and it didn't gain much over the years).

I'll take the scales of the magazines that tested them over your guessing!
3000 lb. min, 3100 lb. max is what i've seen.
FWIW, in the motorcycle world it's a given that manufacturers LIE about their "dry" weights. I'm guessing that the 2889 lb. figure you have is at the very least an exaggeration...

[/quote]There's been much speculation as to why MazdaUSA never released specs for the lower trims. Perhaps they knew the engine was slightly over-rated and an official lower weight would've called attention to that?[/quote]220hp and 3050 lb. gives 95.5mph in the quarter. That was the RX-8.

The difference between the 2011 USDM RX8 Sport and the BRZ Premium seems to be ~200 pounds (though the RX8 lacked a spare).

Closer to 300, I think...

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I'm guessing that the 2889 lb. figure you have is at the very least an exaggeration...

Plus

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

Weigh-ins of pre-prod models have been favorable as well.

Yields:

An earlier assertion I made that Subaru's published curb weight of the BRZ is just a wee bit higher than any model would actually be. Not a significant amount, mind you, but enough such that you won't find one in the wild with a full tank of gas, spare + tools, all fluids, and no objects on the inside that weights that amount. Or, the pre-prod weights simply don't match the actual production weights.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I'll take the scales of the magazines that tested them over your guessing!

Again, 2933 pounds came from various magazines. I have some in my basement, and here's an online version of one of the old motortrend articles: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...004_mazda_rx8/

Some magazine articles only listed ranges (2900-3000, 3000-3050) or approximate values (2950, 3000).

It was also widely reported as weighing 29xx pounds by owners that put it on scales with nothing removed (check out rx8club.com). Scales can vary and folks weren't consistant about how much fuel they had, but it supported the notion that the base and sport models were significantly lighter than the 2004 GT's 3029 pounds (from MazdaUSA's site).

Originally Posted by ZDan

I'm guessing that the 2889 lb. figure you have is at the very least an exaggeration...

Nope. The Mazda JDM website specified 1310 kg for the 2004 RX8 (it's long gone, but I read it myself years ago). Back in the day, there were many discussions as to why MazdaUSA only listed the GT's weight (with sunroof, etc).

Originally Posted by ZDan

220hp and 3050 lb. gives 95.5mph in the quarter. That was the RX-8.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from, but the RX8 didn't make anywhere near 220 whp. By the simple weight & hp formula, 207 whp is needed for 3050 pounds and 95.5 MPH, and the RX8 didn't make anywhere near that either.

It's worth noting that formula only provides an approximation as it doesn't account for things like traction, temp, air density, and CoD (which is quite low for the FT86).

[ZDan]

All I can say is, I've been keeping an eye on the RX-8 since before it came out. I've NEVER seen an actual magazine-measured test weight below 3000 lb.
I'm positive that the 2933 lb. in that January 2003 M/T article linked above wasn't from actual data that they measured, it was tech data from Mazda. They also "estimated" 250hp for the 6-speed in that article! Wrong again...

I've seen rwhp reports for the RX-8 in the 185-190rwhp range. ~220hp at the flywheel.

Quick search on "RX-8 road test"
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ormance-page-2

Averaging just 19 mpg while moving a relatively light 3067-pound curb weight, our RX-8 expelled more gasoline as waste heat than other cars its size. Of course, some of the fuel's energy went to motion, and the RX-8's 238 horsepower and 159 pound-feet of torque gave it initial acceleration times of 6.6 seconds to 60 mph and 15.1 seconds at 93 mph for the quarter.
Racers say rotary engines get faster as they age, the engine's best lap always being the last one. The RX-8 didn't disprove the theory after 40,000 miles, cutting its drag sprints down to 5.9 seconds for 60 mph and 14.6 seconds at 96 mph through the quarter

Well-proven hp for 1/4-mile speed equation:
(96mph/234)^3 * (3060 lb. + 200 lb.) => 225hp.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take-road-test

At 3060 pounds, the R3’s curb weight exactly matches that of our last RX-8 test car [“Four of a Kind,” June 2007].

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/ca...da_rx-8_page_2

Curb weight 3000 lb

http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/MazdaRX8/
Curb Weight Automatic - 3,053 lbs. Manual - 3,029 lbs

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Deslock

I'm not sure where you're getting that from, but the RX8 didn't make anywhere near 220 whp. By the simple weight & hp formula, 207 whp is needed for 3050 pounds and 95.5 MPH, and the RX8 didn't make anywhere near that either.

You forgot to add weight for the driver and some fuel. Try it again with 3250 lb. instead of 3050.

Mazda lied about the RX-8's hp, but not by THAT much!

[edit]Oh yeah, the formula is for flywheel power, not rear wheel. RX-8 rwhp ~185-190 from what I've seen.

It's worth noting that formula only provides an approximation as it doesn't account for things like traction, temp, air density, and CoD (which is quite low for the FT86).

Especially for lower-powered cars, traction doesn't affect trap speed much.
Some mags correct 1/4-mile results for temperature and air density.
Minor differences in drag (Cd*A) won't change results much.

The equation *is* a quick/dirty approximation/estimate. But it's a very good one for getting in the ballpark.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

All I can say is, I've been keeping an eye on the RX-8 since before it came out. I've NEVER seen an actual magazine-measured test weight below 3000 lb.
I'm positive that the 2933 lb. in that January 2003 M/T article linked above wasn't from actual data that they measured, it was tech data from Mazda. They also "estimated" 250hp for the 6-speed in that article! Wrong again...

I've seen rwhp reports for the RX-8 in the 185-190rwhp range. ~220hp at the flywheel.

Quick search on "RX-8 road test"
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ormance-page-2
Well-proven hp for 1/4-mile speed equation:
(96mph/234)^3 * (3060 lb. + 200 lb.) => 225hp.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take-road-test
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/ca...da_rx-8_page_2
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/MazdaRX8/
Curb Weight Automatic - 3,053 lbs. Manual - 3,029 lbs

It's noteworthy that Car and Driver's longterm was for a fully loaded GT, and there's no evidence they weighed it either.

The others are approximations, are taken from the MazdaUSA site (GT), or are for the R3 (with 19" rims).

The official 6MT numbers I know about are:

JDM 2004: 1310 kg (2888 lbs)
USDM 2004 GT: 3029 lbs
USDM 2011 GT: 3065 lbs

I saw other magazine numbers between 2933 and 2960 for the base and Sport, and given the JDM spec and the lack of a sunroof and other extras, they made sense.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

You forgot to add weight for the driver and some fuel. Try it again with 3250 lb. instead of 3050.

Mazda lied about the RX-8's hp, but not by THAT much!



Especially for lower-powered cars, traction doesn't affect trap speed much.
Some mags correct 1/4-mile results for temperature and air density.
Minor differences in drag (Cd*A) won't change results much.

The equation *is* a quick/dirty approximation/estimate. But it's a very good one for getting in the ballpark.

Oops you're right I did forgot to add for the driver, but I still don't think that formula is accurate enough to indicate whether it was 2933 pounds or 3029 pounds (especially given the variance in quarter mile results... I've seen a lot more 93-94.x than 95.x trap speeds reported).

[koyv90]

I like everything about the rx8 the looks are way better than the frs the interior is amazing but the engine is shit and that is why ill take.a frs