How is this not an RX8?

[vividracing]

Originally Posted by R8

There's my baby! LOVE this engine

I've watched that before, and I STILL can't quite figure out how it all works. So many spinning things, and at different rates, and... I'm just really happy it all works so well, lol.

Three moving parts!

We are building a GT35R fed 20b pushed into a RX8.. Almost finished too

[FT-86GOD]

God bless rotories.. One day I'll bite the bullet and get a rx7 series 8... But not until I can afford the rebuilds..

[wbradley]

When I sold Mazdas in 1990 I couldn't help but question why they still used the rotary engine. In this day and age I believe the rotary has way too many tradeoffs for the sake of being lightweight. The Nissan 240SX was a much better car for the $ in the 90's.
I must admit though, I am biased against the brand. Much too "sky active" for me. What a dumb catch phrase. Sounds like it should be used for an airline.

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by wbradley

When I sold Mazdas in 1990 I couldn't help but question why they still used the rotary engine. In this day and age I believe the rotary has way too many tradeoffs for the sake of being lightweight. The Nissan 240SX was a much better car for the $ in the 90's.
I must admit though, I am biased against the brand. Much too "sky active" for me. What a dumb catch phrase. Sounds like it should be used for an airline.

Not to go too far off topic, but the CX-5 (which is their flagship for the SkyActive tech) is a complete joke. They make it sound like its the be-all-end-all of the crossover market, but its a 155 hp lump. A good looking lump, but its grossly underpowered for its size.

/offtopic

As far as why they have stuck with the rotary, it still delivers one of the best powerbands over its 9k rev range, even torque and one of the best power:displacement ratios on the market without a turbo.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

Not to go too far off topic, but the CX-5 (which is their flagship for the SkyActive tech) is a complete joke. They make it sound like its the be-all-end-all of the crossover market, but its a 155 hp lump. A good looking lump, but its grossly underpowered for its size.

/offtopic

As far as why they have stuck with the rotary, it still delivers one of the best powerbands over its 9k rev range, even torque and one of the best power:displacement ratios on the market without a turbo.

I thought I was the only one that notice that its a 2.0L in a 3300 lb SUV design to carry about 800+ lbs of people and their stuff combine. My RSX has the same power in a 2800 lb body and it feels weak as shit and just the other day I had 3 people in my car with A/C on and I just wanted to get out of my car right away. If I buy the BRZ the back seats have to go so I don't have to haul more than one other person.

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I thought I was the only one that notice that its a 2.0L in a 3300 lb SUV design to carry about 800+ lbs of people and their stuff combine. My RSX has the same power in a 2800 lb body and it feels weak as shit and just the other day I had 3 people in my car with A/C on and I just wanted to get out of my car right away. If I buy the BRZ the back seats have to go so I don't have to haul more than one other person.

When I saw the CX-5, I was immediately impressed with its looks. Then I did a quick google search, and was immediately dismayed that it only has the aformentioned 2.0L, 155 hp engine. Sure, it gets 35 mpg on the highway, but it takes forever to get to highway speeds. Just gets a big from me.

[SUB-FT86]

A 1.6/2.0L D/I Turbo is the best choice for that little SUV that weighs a lot. Nissan did it right with the Juke but unfortunately Nissan did it wrong with the looks.

[R8]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

Not to go too far off topic, but the CX-5 (which is their flagship for the SkyActive tech) is a complete joke. They make it sound like its the be-all-end-all of the crossover market, but its a 155 hp lump. A good looking lump, but its grossly underpowered for its size.

LOL, "underpowered..." and yet many reviewers say it's still great to drive because of it's handling and steering feel. Now where have I heard that before?

Have you actually driven one? It's actually a ton of fun to drive, if you enjoy "feel" more than power.

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by R8

LOL, "underpowered..." and yet many reviewers say it's still great to drive because of it's handling and steering feel. Now where have I heard that before?

Have you actually driven one? It's actually a ton of fun to drive, if you enjoy "feel" more than power.

Fair enough, as I have not actually driven one yet. But it kinda flies in the face of the CUV demographic.

And i think the "Great to drive, even if it doesn't have a lot of power" fits a small sports coupe (s2k, miata, the twins, etc), but not something that is designed to fit 5 adults plus cargo.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by R8

LOL, "underpowered..." and yet many reviewers say it's still great to drive because of it's handling and steering feel. Now where have I heard that before?

Have you actually driven one? It's actually a ton of fun to drive, if you enjoy "feel" more than power.

Its design to carry 4 people and their belongings. I can understand if we're talking about a MX5 which is lightweight and can only carry 2 and almost nothing in the trunk for the sake of power 2 weight ratio and handling. I don't think you need to test drive a 2.0L 155hp engine in a 3300 lb vehicle to know that it will feel weak and I am not even going to get into turning on the A/C and stuff.

[R8]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

And i think the "Great to drive, even if it doesn't have a lot of power" fits a small sports coupe (s2k, miata, the twins, etc), but not something that is designed to fit 5 adults plus cargo.

True, probably not the first choice for someone who routinely needs to haul a lot of stuff and people, or especially for towing things. The diesel is supposedly on the way for that

But for empty-nesters (etc.) who rarely carry four people but want it for the occasional home depot trip or taking another couple to dinner, it's a pretty fun, efficient and practical.

Even my RX-8 (desperately trying to get back on topic lol) is designed to carry four people plus trunk cargo, but I'll admit it's not very happy when doing it. Still, it's nice to have that option for the rare occasion it's needed. So I guess whether something will work or not for someone depends on intended use.

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by R8

True, probably not the first choice for someone who routinely needs to haul a lot of stuff and people, or especially for towing things. The diesel is supposedly on the way for that

But for empty-nesters (etc.) who rarely carry four people but want it for the occasional home depot trip or taking another couple to dinner, it's a pretty fun, efficient and practical.

Even my RX-8 (desperately trying to get back on topic lol) is designed to carry four people plus trunk cargo, but I'll admit it's not very happy when doing it. Still, it's nice to have that option for the rare occasion it's needed. So I guess whether something will work or not for someone depends on intended use.

Hey, every car has a target audience, right? The empty-nesters makes sense to me, even if their marketing is towards the younger crowd.

And as I've mentioned before, my dad owns an RX-8, and we have loaded it with stuff and people on numerous occasions, I haven't heard him complain about that yet

[station2station]

I owned an RX8, but I have only ridden in an FRS at an autocross

The immediate thing I noticed was the powerband. When exiting a corner, the car would not lose power momentum? As in, off throttle, turn in, exit, and back on again seemed as though the car never really slowed down, nor did the engine decelerate. It's hard to describe... Almost like if you were driving a constant speed in a straight line and then pushed in the clutch for a second and then let go of the clutch WITHOUT REV MATCHING and the car would seem like the clutch was never engage and the car never decelerated even though there was a loss in speed??

Though maybe comparable in power, the RX8 would only function above 6k RPM... Something I couldn't do often because I couldnt afford the 93 octane... This car seemed much smoother all throughout.... Still not super fast... but I really like the car and I think of it as "EVERYTHING I WANTED IN THE RX8 THAT I DIDN'T GET"

I plan to go test drive one this weekend and see for myself what it feels like to drive. Maybe even purchase one in the near future since I have managed to put a good amount into savings.

[chulooz]

Originally Posted by station2station

I owned an RX8, but I have only ridden in an FRS at an autocross

The immediate thing I noticed was the powerband. When exiting a corner, the car would not lose power momentum? As in, off throttle, turn in, exit, and back on again seemed as though the car never really slowed down, nor did the engine decelerate. It's hard to describe... Almost like if you were driving a constant speed in a straight line and then pushed in the clutch for a second and then let go of the clutch WITHOUT REV MATCHING and the car would seem like the clutch was never engage and the car never decelerated even though there was a loss in speed??

Lets just call that torque,