Other Cars

[Palmy]

Originally Posted by Nafe

FYI guys, the is250 DOES NOT have a manual option. All autos sorry.

Yeah they do...
http://www.carsales.com.au/all-cars/...=~Price&page=1

Originally Posted by Nafe

RX8's ARE NOT unreliable. you do not replace motors regularly. You WILL have to replace your coils, and possibly catalytic converter at some stage,

Dont get me wrong, Im an RX8 fan, but essential parts that invariably fail kinda makes it an unreliable engine by definition.

Originally Posted by Nafe

EDIT - Australian RX8's do not come with "normal" wankel motors.... know you guys in the states have a "high power" and "low power" variant. I am not sure if the low power is an older style wankel, but we only get high powers here and they are Renesis motors, which do vary from the older style of engine.

Renesis is a model designation, they are all in-fact Wankel motors.

Originally Posted by davey90

So true! I have a BMW 120d and a Suzuki Swift, it cost more to service the BMW then the Swift!

Considering the 120d is a $50k car and the Swift is a $13k car, I dont see how thats a valid comparison.

[ahausheer]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

i dont think this car will be much bigger than the mx5 man
i have a RX8 and its great fun. expensive on petrol

go fuck your self. wankel engines are great if maintained. left neglected, they will die. but unreliable they are not.

just like jet engines are great if maintained, but if you have a bunch of retards that have access to the internet and can whine, but dont know how to check the oil level every week or so or even read the user manual that came with it then everything can be perceived as bad.

First off, just because we will never meet in person does not give you the right to be rude. Second, I am not basing the reliability of the Renesis motor on a handful of online complaints, although I understand my post appeared that way. I base my assessment on hard, statistical data such as warranty claims, and 3rd party data collection companies. I personally like the motor and what it stands for, but the best data I have seen simply suggests it is not up to the reliability standards of modern piston engines. I was wrong in saying you will need to replace the motor every few years, I was exaggerating but I'm sorry, you cant argue with data. Just because you or a few people you know took good care of a rotary and it lasted, does not mean they are reliable overall. You got mad at me for appearing to base my opinion on essentially circumstantial evidence but it appears you have done the same.

[70NYD]

First of I would tell you the same thing to your face. I am very upfront.

Warranty claims and statistical data is based on users. Users that have had piston engines their whole life's, or first car they owned. What I am saying is that general population is clueless on how to maintain a rotary. Where Mazda failed is that they should have had a compulsory seminar to new rotory owners before handing over keys, perhaps then people wouldn't be so ignorant towards them. In general, people's maintenance knowledge of a car is what they have heard, as the user manuals are seldom read. If the engine was bad in design, Mazda would have stopped producing it long ago. And a rotors would not be used for light aircraft application if it was unreliable.. General lack of knowledge on maintenance, startup and shutdown procedures is what kills ALL engines, these ones just happen to take it harder. Piston engines are more resistant to neglect as they had many years of development from numerous manufacturers, and combined centuries more rnd done compared to rotaries.
Mine has 125k kms, original engine, compression very good. Previous owner took care of it, as do I (bought it with 107k on it).
Internet+not knowing what you are reading and how to interpret it is making people stupid-smart (ie think they know it but completely wrong). Proof of that is the "end of the world" coming up because two of the Mayan calendars are completing the cycle on the same day.. WOW

[Palmy]

So I started looking at currently available cars on carsales today and came up with a list of 15 cars that matched my criteria in NSW with a bias towards lower prices.

I devised a formula that compared them all with regards to price, power, weight, practicality, equipment, power/weight ratio, fuel consumption and the all important bang for buck factor.

Here are the high-lights:

2007 Ford XR6 Turbo BF Mk2 - $19990 : outstanding bang for buck (B4B henceforth)
2008 Subaru WRX - $23500 : 5sp gearbox lets it down, also great B4B
2009 Holden SV6 VE MY9.5 - $24750 : OK power/weight ratio OK B4B
2007 Holden SS - $24900 : another great B4B, big power, abysmal fuel consumption
2007 Lexus IS250 Prestige - $26999 : poor power + power/weight, poor B4B
2009 Ford XR6 Turbo FG - $28990 : big power, great B4B
2011 Holden SV6 Series 2 - $29000 : OK B4B, quite well equipped
2007 BMW 320i E90 - $29990 : Terrible B4B, hopeless on all fronts, except best fuel consumption
2008 Mazda RX8 GT Series 2 - $30000 : came in middle of the pack in almost every aspect, Fair B4B
2007 BMW 325i E90 - $31990 : poor B4B, well equipped
2007 Nissan 350Z Track - $32900 : good power, good B4B
2007 VW Golf V R32 4-motion - $33000 : OK B4B, not the pick of the litter
2007 BMW Z4 E85 - $34990 : poor B4B
2008 Subaru WRX STi - $36990 - Good all rounder, Fair B4B
2008 Audi s3 8P Quattro - $38999 : Very poor B4B, fairly well equipped

I have some pretty boring pages of numbers and notes I could post if anyone cares to see how I came to these conclusions.

So yeah, this is all mearly my opinion and I invite you all to pick it to pieces and post what ever you think about it.

[JDM-20L]

I just can't see how anything but an MX-5 could offer a similar driving experience... they won't.

Very different fundamentals behind most those cars in the list!

[Palmy]

"Driving experience" is such a relative term.
Personally I think it all comes down to fun factor.
I mean, sure a 150kW 1200kg car is gonna be fun, but a car could weigh 3000kg and still be fun with 500kW under the bonnet.

[Nafe]

Originally Posted by Palmy

Yeah they do...
http://www.carsales.com.au/all-cars/...=~Price&page=1

Sweet, I stand corrected I had been told by someone at lexus that they don't. Definitely keep one on your list then, they are beautiful cars

Dont get me wrong, Im an RX8 fan, but essential parts that invariably fail kinda makes it an unreliable engine by definition.

Coils are not actually part of the engine at all. Someone saying replacing engines (as was said above) is not someone saying replacing coilpacks.... Two VERY different things mate. A coilpack is something that sits in the engine bay and provides spark to the spark plugs, an engine is.. well, an engine... So no, coilpack failure DOES NOT make an engine unreliable at all. I am yet to see a car that doesn't eventually need coilpacks replaced That goes for holdens, fords, mazdas, nissans.... Even toyotas.... And I have worked with ALOT of cars...

Renesis is a model designation, they are all in-fact Wankel motors.

Yes, it is still an engine based on the design of the wankel. I didn't dispute it. There are alot of differences though in a current Renesis to an rx7 wankel. Differences that make them more reliable.

[Palmy]

Originally Posted by Nafe

Coils are not actually part of the engine at all. Someone saying replacing engines (as was said above) is not someone saying replacing coilpacks.... Two VERY different things mate. A coilpack is something that sits in the engine bay and provides spark to the spark plugs, an engine is.. well, an engine... So no, coilpack failure DOES NOT make an engine unreliable at all. I am yet to see a car that doesn't eventually need coilpacks replaced That goes for holdens, fords, mazdas, nissans.... Even toyotas.... And I have worked with ALOT of cars...

Personally I consider electrics part of the engine, but thats just semantics. Anything under the bonnet that fails easily makes it unreliable in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Nafe

Yes, it is still an engine based on the design of the wankel. I didn't dispute it. There are alot of differences though in a current Renesis to an rx7 wankel. Differences that make them more reliable.

Agreed.

[Nafe]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

First off, just because we will never meet in person does not give you the right to be rude. Second, I am not basing the reliability of the Renesis motor on a handful of online complaints, although I understand my post appeared that way. I base my assessment on hard, statistical data such as warranty claims, and 3rd party data collection companies. I personally like the motor and what it stands for, but the best data I have seen simply suggests it is not up to the reliability standards of modern piston engines. I was wrong in saying you will need to replace the motor every few years, I was exaggerating but I'm sorry, you cant argue with data. Just because you or a few people you know took good care of a rotary and it lasted, does not mean they are reliable overall. You got mad at me for appearing to base my opinion on essentially circumstantial evidence but it appears you have done the same.

This probably wasn't directed at me, but this line seems to be "Just because you or a few people you know took good care of a rotary and it lasted, does not mean they are reliable overall."
So no, me saying that they are reliable if driven properly (ie red lined fairly often) and maintained well was not based on a few peoples opinions....
Me saying that is based on 5+ years working for Mazda seeing rx8's day in, day out.. So what I have said is based on hands on experience taken from over 5 years.
SO I think I can safely say my "opinion" isn't based on circumstantial evidence. It is a fact that the Renesis motors ARE NOT unreliable if maintained and driven properly.

[JDM-20L]

Originally Posted by Palmy

"Driving experience" is such a relative term.
Personally I think it all comes down to fun factor.
I mean, sure a 150kW 1200kg car is gonna be fun, but a car could weigh 3000kg and still be fun with 500kW under the bonnet.

Well that is going to be user subjective on their interpretation of 'fun'.

As always horses for courses.

[Nafe]

Originally Posted by Palmy

Personally I consider electrics part of the engine, but thats just semantics. Anything under the bonnet that fails easily makes it unreliable in my opinion.

I see your reasoning, but that would mean basically all of the cars on your list should be considered unreliable. Find me a car that has never been in for replacement of some part due to failure.
I was more pointing my fact at the guy who said the engines need to be replaced every few years. The cost of replacing an engine is roughly $17k. the cost of replacing a coilpack is a few hundred.

I had to replace more than one coilpack on my old Nissan, but that car was definitely not unreliable. A 1-2hr job to replace something simple like that, which will fail on any car at some stage, doesn't make it unreliable. But that's just my opinion

[Varvs]

Car reliability is only as good as its owners maintenance.

having said that, the RX8 owners manual recommends topping up 1L of oil every full tank of fuel, which means youre leaving the onus of reliability truly in the hands of the owner.

on the other hand, my RB30 in my VL i had as a kid ran for 3 years without fault and I probably changed the oil twice. put 100,000kms on it and wasnt gentle on her either.


no two cars are created equally.

[70NYD]

Rb30 shouldn't use oil at all. No piston engine should USE oil. Rx8 engine is a net loss oil system.. By design it uses oil. Roughly about a liter every 1000kms heavily dependant on how you drive. I check and topic every fortnight, never dipped past the 1st dot (3 dots, 1.7 liters all together between full and low)

[PRW]

Much as I loved driving my RX-8, I would never have another - it cost me $20k and only lasted 3 months before engine went. I am sure people will say it's my fault, and it probably was.... I am hoping to get the same fun from a BRZ/ FT86, but for a little longer this time...