Review: 2009 Mazda RX-8 Sport
08-12-08, 10:47 AM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2009 Mazda RX-8 Sport
A Review of the 2009 Mazda RX-8 Sport
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=RX8
In a Nutshell: Versatile, quirky, and somewhat underpowered by sports car standards, but unique and could become a collector's item.
Mazda's rotary-engine RX series, in the American-market, goes back to 1978 with the original RX-7, a car introduced to more or less compete with the famous Datsun (Nissan) 260Z/280Z sports cars of the time (and to this day, of course, it still competes with the Nissan 350Z). The original RX-7 was trim, compact, agile, well-built, and quickly developed a cult-like following among sports-car purists (remember, this was before the stunningly successful Miata was introduced). But, despite the car's many excellent points, it was saddled with a small but quirky aluminum twin-rotor engine that, like the rotary-engine Mazda RX-2/RX-3 coupes/sedans and the non-U.S. market Cosmo sports car before it, was notorious for high gas consumption, high oil consumption, and huge clouds of smoke when the engine flooded, as it was prone to do with the carburators of the era. The rotor apex seals, comparable to piston rings in a normal gas engine, clearly did not equal most piston rings in long-term durability....a problem Mazda engineers have worked on for decades and still have not completely solved. In addition, the combustion characteristics of rotary engines produce a rather high level of emissions and require advanced calalytic converters and other hardware just to pass minimum exhaust standards in many states...one reason why, even today, with the new RENESIS rotary used by the RX-8, you generally don't see any ULEV, SULEV, or partial-zero emission versions of rotary engines.
In the mid-1980's, the second-generation RX-7 was introduced, which was larger, bulkier, heavier, and, IMO, not as well-built as the first-generation car....despite being heavier overall, it used noticeably lighter materials for the body and interior. Its only real advances, IMO, were the better fuel injection and the turbo option. I did not find this car partiularly impressive at all, and actually preferred driving Mazda sedans (a few of which I owned during this period).
In 1993, a real firecracker third-generation RX-7 was introduced to compete with the Nissan 300ZX, Toyota Supra, and top models of the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4/ Dodge Stealth. This car was an acceleration/braking/handling sensation, and became, in modified form, the first Japanese-designed car to win the 24-hour race at Le Mans. In street form, it quickly won great accolades from the automotive press, but the car's excellent performance was achieved by overboosting the small engine with twin turbos and using ultra-lightweight aluminum components for the chassis and underpinnings which compromised durability, especially from the shock and impact of rough roads. A number of third-generation RX-7's wound up with bent steering/suspension parts from bad roads and potholes, plus, the car's generally thin construction transmitted a LOT of noise inside the cabin (I remember, I test-drove one). It was an excellent design for a smooth race track, but not a particularly good one for extended common street use.
And, by the mid-1990's, the market for high-powered, expensive Japanese sports cars was rapidly drying up in the U.S., brought on by high list prices, operating costs, and insurance premiums. Plans were made to drop them from the American market. I argued myself with some representatives from these companies that, instead of just dropping them, the prices of these cars could be lowered by decontenting them, and that would have made them more affordable to more people (and perhaps with lower insurance premiums, too). But, as often happens with auto marketers (they can be some of the most stubborn and dense people on the planet), suggestions fell on deaf ears, and, one by one, these cars were pulled from the American market. By the late 1990's, they were gone, except for the extremely slow-selling...and expensive....Acura NSX.
Yet, some were to return, in somewhat less expensive, less powerful versions (were my earlier suggestions prophetic?), by around 2005 or so. Back came the all-new Nissan 350Z with some retro styling and interior work, and, shortly later, the all-new Mazda RX-8, with 2+2 seating, small rear half-doors like Saturn coupes, and a new, redone rotary engine named the RENESIS. I won't go into the new 350Z here (that is not the subject of this review), but the new RX-8 was vastly different from the RX-7's of the 1980's and 1990's. A small rear seat, though clearly unsuitable for large adults, could be used by children and short people, and as a shelf for packages and grocery bags (providing, of course, that fluids didn't run out on the nice seat upholstery). The small, forward-opening rear half-doors greatly helped not only rear-seat access itself by not having to bend oneself into a pretzel just to add or take packages out. However, the loss of the double B-pillars can weaken the unibody structure somewhat, despite the now-common use of high-strength steels and computer-aided design....more on that below.
Today, for 2009, four versions of the RX-8 are offered....Sport, Touring, Grand Touring, and, new for 2009, the R3. All four, according to the literature, use the same RENESIS engine, with 159 ft-lbs. of torque and either 232 HP (manual) or 212 HP (automatic) versions. Transmissions include a 6-speed manual and 6-speed Sport automatic, except the R3, which is manual only. No turbo version is offered on the new RENESIS rotary engine (perhaps the engineers learned from the bad experiences of the former ones). Yet I found the new engine, by sports car standards, to be somewhat underpowered (more on that below), and, while I obviously did not have the car long enough to measure oil consumption, auto-test magazines report that long-term RX-8 tests require more oil to be added between changes than with most of today's cars. They got into the habit of carrying extra oil around in the trunk because you never knew when it was going to be needed (in fact, somewhat like a two-stroke engine, a small amount of oil is needed in a rotary, because of valve and combustion chamber design, just to keep the engine going, apart from normal lubrication). And, with EPA mileage ratings of 17 City/ 22 highway, the rotary's classic thirst for fuel (remember, this is only a 1.3L engine) is still there to some extent, even without a turbo in this new design. So is the emission performance......while meeting most basic state and EPA standards, I still don't see and super-low-emission versions of this engine on the spec sheet. And, of course, only time will tell how much more durable the new RENESIS engines will be than their predecessors, especially with those all-important apex seals.
Of the four versions, I chose the base Sport manual-transmission version to review, for several reasons. First, the Sport version, starting at only 26K, seems reasonably-priced. Second, the higher-priced versions, though with more equipment, don't offer any more drivetrain benefits...it's the same engine and transmission either way. Third, the Sport version, with less equipment than the others, was probably the lightest, which, all else equal, adds to performance, although that can, of course, sometimes be offset with chassis/brake/tire differences on the more expensive cars. Fourth, a manual-transmission clearly fits the spirit of this car more than an automatic, even in our dense washington, D.C.-area traffic. Fifth, I didn't see any R3 models or automatics in stock, so Mazda probably doesn't plan to sell many. And, Sixth, all manual-transmission cars get an unusual carbon-fiber driveshaft..........I wanted to see how that affected divetrain feel.
Despite the limitations of the rotary engine (and its silky, turbine-like smoothness and incredible ability to rev cancels out some of those weaknesses), I think this car may be headed for classic/collector status. An investment in in one today, though not absolutely certain, could likely reap some nice benefits at classic auto shows maybe 15 or 20 years down the road, especially if well-preserved and kept in mint condition. Why? Basically, because this is the only production rotary-engine car in the American market, and I think the days of the rotary engine, at least here if not in other countries as well, are limited. Thanks to new, more stricter CAFE vehicle mileage and emission rules set to take effect in several more years (cars, for example, will have to average well over 30 MPG), I don't see how the rotary engine, with its inherent limitations, can meet those new standards, even with state-of-the-art rotary engineering. A hybrid gas-electric rotary might work for mileage, but there is still the emission problems, and no manufacturer that I know of, including Mazda itself, is working on a gas-electric rotary hybrid. So, as I currently see it, the RX-8 (and surviving older RX-7s) could easily end up becoming relics of history, and of value chiefly to collectors and those who value older classic designs. Of course, parts for a rotary engine, being a unique design, are not cheap NOW, and if they are discontinued, will be even harder and more expensive to get.
One thing, in particular, on my test car, was rather strange.....the tire specs. The brochure and the web site make it clear that P225/45R18 Bridgestone hi-performance tires come on the base Sport version (verified by the tires on my car). But, when I went to check the tire pressures manually like I always do before a test drive (this is very important to get the intended ride/handling), the ubiquitous label on the door jamb had all the required tire info/vehicle weights/load ratings, but didn't include any tire PSI's. This was odd, because PSI's are almost always on the doorjamb sticker (they are required by Federal Law). I stared at and examined the stickers as carefully as I could, but simply could not not find any English (non-metric) system recommended tire pressures on them. Nor could I find a spare tire of any kind (or a compressed-air Fix-a-Flat bottle) in the trunk...a sure sign of run-flat tires. Yet the literature in the brochure, on the sticker, on Mazda's web site, and even on the tires themselves didn't have that run-flat designation on them (perhaps I just didn't look close enough). None of the RX-8's on the lot had Owners' Manuals in them where I could double-check, either. So, I just checked the PSI's myself, saw that they were a reasonable 35 all around, and decided to do the test-drive that way. I figured that if they weren't correct, it would trigger the now-standard automatic tire pressure warning systems that come on all new cars. The test-drive was successful, and I didn't see any warning signs. I'm thinking that maybe somebody at the factory, on the assembly line, accidently stuck on some non-U.S. tire-spec labels on the doorjamb instead of the proper American-spec ones. I pointed this out to the Mazda people there......maybe there will be a recall if it turns out that was the case.
OK.........so let's take a look at the car in detail.
Model Reviewed: 2009 Mazda RX-8 Sport
Base Price: $26,435
Major Options: None
Destination/Freight: $650
List price as reviewed: $27,085
Drivetrain: RWD, 1.3L RENESIS Twin-rotor rotary, 232 HP @ 8500 RPM, Torque 159 ft-lbs. @ 5000 RPM, 6-speed short-throw manual transmission.
EPA Mileage Ratings: 17 City, 22 Highway
Exterior Color: Diamond Gray Metallic
Interior: Black cloth
PLUSSES:
Sport version reasonably priced.
Potential collector's item.
Handsome (IMO) rear-end styling.
Turbine-smooth engine.
Slick, well-designed clutch.
Slick, sporty, short-throw, but somewhat notchy 6-speed shift linkage.
Excellent, firm, right-now brake pedal.
Quick, sharp steering response.
Jittery but OK ride by sports-car standards; not uncomfortable.
Nice paint job.
Good exterior hardware.
Relatively easy entry/exit for a low-slung sports car.
Small, front-opening rear doors aid rear-seat access.
Full-length console has both front and rear flip-up storage compartments.
Well-designed trunk hinges.
Good front headroom and legroom in non-sunroof Sport version.
Well-designed/operating manual front seat adjusters.
Smart-looking silver "rotary" seatback inserts.
Clear, backlit tach/fuel/engine temperature gauges.
Good but not excellent stereo sound quality.
Slick-operating interior buttons, *****, and controls.
Good interior hardware and trim.
Nice, comfortable oval-shaped handbrake lever.
Well-finished trunk.
Good trunk size for a sports car....but a fairly small trunk opening.
Dealers apparantly willing to discount.
MINUSES:
Wimpy engine torque not up to sports-car standards.
Unique engine design means relatively expensive components and service.
Relatively high gas and oil consumption, especially for such a small engine.
Questionable long-term engine durability.
Annoying (IMO), flat, nasal-sounding exhaust tone.
Premium fuel required.
Unattractive (IMO) bulging front bumpers and headlight styling.
Cheap hood prop-rod.
Poor engine access underhood.
Annoying (IMO) digital speedometer inside the tach.
Lack of B-pillars in the body structure could compromise rigidity.
Rear seat useless for adults.
Too many dull colors and too few (7) exterior paint color choices.
High-mounted digital stereo readouts too far above the stereo buttons/*****.
Notchy shift linkage can miss some gear-slots.
Front seats (in the tested Sport version) a little narrow for wide torsos.
Base Sport version has no Keyless entry/start system.
Only one cloth interior color offered.
Spare-tire system amd tire specs unclear.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the car, the first impression you get is that it is a recognizable member of the Mazda family, especially in the front-end styling, which is somewhat similiar to that of the CX-7 and CX-9 (and the all-new 2009 Mazda6 sedan which is also on my review list). I've never been a fan of the way that Mazda did the front end of the current-generation RX-8, especially the bulging, swept-up front fenders. The rear-end styling, however, IMO, is more restrained, quite attractive, and handsome.......easily one of the car's best features. Considering that the car was built for relatively light weight, the exterior sheet metal is reasonably solid-feeling. Exterior trim and hardware is also well-done and seems of high quality. The paint, like on other Mazdas, is generally well-done....smooth, even, and glossy, with only a very slight trace of orange peel, but only seven colors are offered. Of these, there are two different blacks and two silver/grays. Only the velocity Red Mica and Aurora Blue Mica are classic bright sports-car colors....the sun-yellow of the past is gone. However, the White Pearl is always nice on any type of vehicle, sports car or not.
The RX-8, among classic sports cars, is unique in not only having a rotary engine but two small, front-opening rear doors as well, similiar to some Saturn coupes. These, without question, help rear-seat access in a low-slung car like this, but the resulting lack of B-pillars in the body structure is, IMO, a cause for concern about a loss of body rigidity. Mazda claims that local frame reinforcements and built-in vertical door beams that act as a artificial B-pillars when the doors are shut make up for the inherent loss of body rigidity, but I'm not convinced. Though I haven't driven a high-mileage RX-8 to confirm it, it seems to me that a design like this could result in body flex and premature rattles, squeaks, and leaks, like it does on some Saturn coupes. Brand-new, however, on the test car, on the road I didn't notice any problems of this type (more on that below). General entry/exit to the front seat, however, even apart from the rear-access doors, was quite easy for a car of this type.......even with the car's relatively low stance, you didn't have to twist yourself like a pretzel to get in and out under the steering wheel.
UNDERHOOD:
Not one of the car's better points. The relatively lightweight hood lacks insulation and is held up with a hard-to-find prop-rod. Even given that this is the entry-level model for the RX-8, a car in this price range ($27,000) should, IMO, have hood struts. While the battery and some reservoirs are right up front behind the radiator, uncovered (on my test car), and easily accessable, the small rotary engine and manual transmission are placed WAY back, partially under the firewall. This is a common engineering practice among sports and sport-oriented cars; its purpose, of course, is to keep the car from being nose-heavy and make the center of gravity as close to the middle of the car as possible for optimum handling and braking. While it does aid in balanced handling and braking (one certainly cannot argue with that), it can make servicing and engine accessability a pain in the a**. You have to be an NBA guy to have a torso long enough to lean way back and reach the engine components themselves. And the car's relatively low stance doesn't help either....unless it is on a lift, that means bending over even more.
INTERIOR:
The interior, overall, is one of the car's best features....though there are a couple of annoying things. The RX-8 uses the same three-spoke steering wheel with the flip-switches on the spokes as many other Mazda vehicles, though there is nothing wrong with that.....it is a nice-looking and functional design, covered with nice-feeling and stitched black leather. The tachometer, fuel gauge, and temperature gauge are clear, simple, and backlit, with a nice electroluminescent white lighting in the daytime and red at night when you turn on the headlights (I myself much prefer the white). However, I found the digital speedometer, set in the lower-right-hand corner of the tach, rather annoying........I have never liked digital primary gauges. I also found the wide gap between the stereo-readout screen, high up on the dash, and the stereo buttons/*****, far below it, to be annoying as well....a number of vehicles have this, and it is not a design I like either, on any of them.
The rest of the interior, however, is well-done. All of the buttons/***** operate slickly and have a smooth, solid feel. The stereo sound quality is fine.....not the best I've seen, but better than average. Interior trim materials, while not lavish, are tasteful and of fairly high quality, although wood-tone trim is missing from all versions, and there is lot of monotone black (upmarket RX-8 models, of course, have leather and several different-colored patterns, some two-tone). Two large, smart-looking, silver triangular rotary-shaped trim logos are set into the backs of the front seats....recessed enough, of course, so that your back doesn't hit them. The seats themselves are fairly comfortable and have a nice grade of black cloth (the only cloth color offered), and the side bolsters, while accomodating, can be slightly narrow for wide torsos like mine.......but still not uncomfortable. The manual driver seat adjusters are well-done and operate easily and superbly...I didn't miss having power seats one bit in this car. And, since the standard Sport model doesn't have a sunroof, it was all the more easier to get the seat low enough for me and my ubiquitous baseball cap to fit under the ceiling withoug having to tilt the seatback. The parking-brake handle is also superbly done, with a comfortable, elongated oval-shaped grip and smooth, slick ratchet action. In back, while the small seats, of course, are not suitable for large adults, head and footroom, thanks to the design of the roofline, are OK for children and small adults......and the seats, of course, make a fine cargo shelf, made more easily accessable by the two small rear doors. Anyone who DOES manage to fit in back will have his or her own flip-up storage compartment built into the extended-length rear console.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The rear roofline, though not as raked in some other sports cars (and necessary to accomodate the 2+2 seating), does cut into the trunk opening some, shortening its size, but the trunk itself is large and roomy by sports-car standards, especially compared to the micro-sized cargo compartments you find on some small mid-engine cars. The articulated trunk hinges are quite well-designed, allowing you to flip the trunk lid up past vertical, actually tilting forward so you head won't bang into it (remember that this car sits lower then the average sedan).
While the rear seats don't fold down for extra cargo room (at least I couldn't find a release anywhere for them), they do have a pass-through feature for carrying long things as skis (though this is not a snow car by any means), fishing poles, etc... The trunk itself is well-finished and is covered in a nice grade of light gray carpet. I may be wrong on this (and someone correct me if I am), but I couldn't find any way to pull the floor panel up to get to a spare tire (there may not be one...see my opening comments above), though a small, detachable, hand crank is fitted into the rear wall, presumably for turning a jack. I also could not find a compressed-air-bottle (perhaps from a factory or shipping goof).
All in all, though, a well-done cargo area.........this is one of the roomiest trunks you will find on a classic sports car.
ON THE ROAD:
Start the small rotary up with a conventional transponder key and ignition switch on the side of the steering column (upmarket RX-8 models get Keyless Entry/Start), and it immediately fires up into a turbine-smooth (what else?) but not quiet idle.......the engineers gave it an audible exhaust tone, even at idle. Mazda's "Zoom-Zoom" ad campaign, however, left a good deal of that zoom out of this powerplant, especially at any kind of normal RPM. The engine, as mentioned previously, is only 1.3L, has an extremely narrow and peaky torque band, produces only 159 ft-lbs at 5000 RPM, and below that, is notably sluggish, even with the efficient 6-speed manual. Like the Honda S2000's VTEC conventional in-line four, it has very little torque at lower RPMs, a stratospheric 9000 RPM redline, the 232 HP (manual transmission) peak at 8500 RPM, and feels Granny-sluggish unless you wind it out like a motorcycle where the HP and torque peaks can then kick in. Since this was a brand-new car, I, of course, didn't red-line the engine, but since the engine didn't have pistons, I didn't hold it to the normal 4000-4500 RPM either like is usually necessary with a new car. There was little acceleration noted until about 5000 RPM (not coincidentally, the torque peak), when you then felt some push. I stopped at 5500-6000 RPM, not wanting to take it all the way to the 8500 RPM HP peak on a new engine. So, in a word, this car will move, but only if you really hammer it and persist....I would suggest quietly turning down any stop-light offers you get from big V8-engined performance cars. But, what the engine lacks in torque, it makes up for with an unmatched electric-motor smoothness.....one of the things, of course, that allows such a high redline. If it wasn't for the somewhat annoying and flat/nasal-sounding exhaust note that cuts in on acceleration (and the hood, remember, is not that well insulated), the engine is so smooth that you feel like you may be driving just that.....an electric motor.
The 6-speed manual transmission has an extremely well-designed clutch....light, precise, and engaging just about where you would want it...not too high or low off the floor. The engine is so smooth, however, and so low on torque at low RPM's, that you tend to give it a little more RPM's than normal while releasing the clutch from a stop, resulting in some clutch slippage. The shifter itself, with a "rotary" trim-shaped ****, has properly (for a sports car) short throws between gears and a generally precise and pleasant feel, though with a slight bit of notchiness that can cause an occasionally missed shift. Like I've said before in other reviews, I wish auto manufacturers would put lighted numbers on the dash for manual transmissions to positively identify the gear you're in before letting out the clutch, but few if any manufacturers do that. Ferrari has another nice, low-cost solution.....a gated manual shifter with visible slots, but is the only manufacturer that I know of who uses one.
Handling is pretty much what you would expect from a Mazda sports car, especially one with such a light engine/transmission assembly located back at the firewall for a good center of gravity. Though there was a slight bit of initial understeer, steering response was quick, the front end went right where it was pointed, and there was almost no body lean. Power-steering feel from the electrically-boosted unit, while not quite up to BMW standards, was far better than the average Japanese-designed car, especially an electric-power steering one. Some noise from the suspension, Bridgestone high-performance tires, and fairly lightweight body construction was present, as was to be expected in a car of this type, but wind noise, despite the limited sealing effectiveness of the lack of B-pillars at the small rear doors, was well-done. Ride quality, though definitely on the firm side as in any sports car, was not uncomfortable.....despite the firmness over bumps, I could ride in this car for quite awhile and probably not have a sore back, even on small bumps. Like previous RX-7 sports cars, however (see my comments in the opening section), I would avoid rough roads and potholes if possible.
Brakes were another one of the car's best features, and, here again, the lightweight construction and good center of gravity helps out. The pedal had a BMW-firm feel, with virtually no sponginess, good responsive action, progressive modulation, and, fortunately, none of the pedal-spacing hang-up problems that some vehicles have for my big size-15 shoes.
THE VERDICT:
This is, in many ways, a unique and cult-sports car if there ever was one. It is, to this day, the only production car in the American market with a rotary engine, the only sports car of its type with the two rear half-doors for easier access, the only car of its type (perhaps?) with such a roomy trunk, and while cosmetic, the only car I've ever seen where parts of the interior trim actually matched the shape of the interior of the engine (a gimmick, of course, but nevertheless a nice interesting styling feature). It offers a turbine-smooth powerplant, quick, agile sports-car handling, a usable back seat as long as full adults don't ride back there, reasonably easy entry/exit for a sports car, good front seat room (without the sunroof), and BMW-feel brakes. It also has a delightfully easy-to use clutch and generally good shift linkage. The Sport version is reasonably-priced........but upmarket versions, of course, can run quite a bit more.
But, like with all cars, you must take the minuses with the plusses. The way-back placement of the small engine underhood make for difficult access. The lack of B-Pillars will (maybe) cause premature weakening of the central body structure. The engine needs much more torque, especially at low RPMs, to be a true sports car. The annoying digital speedometer needs to be tossed out and replaced with an analog one to match the other primary gauges. The stereo readouts need to be with the pertinent controls.....not way above them. Both gas and oil consumption, with the rotary engine, is substantially higher than average. And Mazda sorely needs to clarify the tire specs....what I found on my test car was, IMO, unacceptable.
And, if you do decide to sign on the bottom line for one, consider keeping it awhile and taking pristine care of it, despite the expense of some of the engine and other replacemant parts. While there is no way to know for sure until the time actually comes (and I don't want to make any false predictions in advance), I feel reasonably certain that Mazda rotary-engined vehicles will become classics simply for their uniqueness, and some auto collectors will, in time, pay for the priviledge of owning one.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=RX8
In a Nutshell: Versatile, quirky, and somewhat underpowered by sports car standards, but unique and could become a collector's item.
Mazda's rotary-engine RX series, in the American-market, goes back to 1978 with the original RX-7, a car introduced to more or less compete with the famous Datsun (Nissan) 260Z/280Z sports cars of the time (and to this day, of course, it still competes with the Nissan 350Z). The original RX-7 was trim, compact, agile, well-built, and quickly developed a cult-like following among sports-car purists (remember, this was before the stunningly successful Miata was introduced). But, despite the car's many excellent points, it was saddled with a small but quirky aluminum twin-rotor engine that, like the rotary-engine Mazda RX-2/RX-3 coupes/sedans and the non-U.S. market Cosmo sports car before it, was notorious for high gas consumption, high oil consumption, and huge clouds of smoke when the engine flooded, as it was prone to do with the carburators of the era. The rotor apex seals, comparable to piston rings in a normal gas engine, clearly did not equal most piston rings in long-term durability....a problem Mazda engineers have worked on for decades and still have not completely solved. In addition, the combustion characteristics of rotary engines produce a rather high level of emissions and require advanced calalytic converters and other hardware just to pass minimum exhaust standards in many states...one reason why, even today, with the new RENESIS rotary used by the RX-8, you generally don't see any ULEV, SULEV, or partial-zero emission versions of rotary engines.
In the mid-1980's, the second-generation RX-7 was introduced, which was larger, bulkier, heavier, and, IMO, not as well-built as the first-generation car....despite being heavier overall, it used noticeably lighter materials for the body and interior. Its only real advances, IMO, were the better fuel injection and the turbo option. I did not find this car partiularly impressive at all, and actually preferred driving Mazda sedans (a few of which I owned during this period).
In 1993, a real firecracker third-generation RX-7 was introduced to compete with the Nissan 300ZX, Toyota Supra, and top models of the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4/ Dodge Stealth. This car was an acceleration/braking/handling sensation, and became, in modified form, the first Japanese-designed car to win the 24-hour race at Le Mans. In street form, it quickly won great accolades from the automotive press, but the car's excellent performance was achieved by overboosting the small engine with twin turbos and using ultra-lightweight aluminum components for the chassis and underpinnings which compromised durability, especially from the shock and impact of rough roads. A number of third-generation RX-7's wound up with bent steering/suspension parts from bad roads and potholes, plus, the car's generally thin construction transmitted a LOT of noise inside the cabin (I remember, I test-drove one). It was an excellent design for a smooth race track, but not a particularly good one for extended common street use.
And, by the mid-1990's, the market for high-powered, expensive Japanese sports cars was rapidly drying up in the U.S., brought on by high list prices, operating costs, and insurance premiums. Plans were made to drop them from the American market. I argued myself with some representatives from these companies that, instead of just dropping them, the prices of these cars could be lowered by decontenting them, and that would have made them more affordable to more people (and perhaps with lower insurance premiums, too). But, as often happens with auto marketers (they can be some of the most stubborn and dense people on the planet), suggestions fell on deaf ears, and, one by one, these cars were pulled from the American market. By the late 1990's, they were gone, except for the extremely slow-selling...and expensive....Acura NSX.
Yet, some were to return, in somewhat less expensive, less powerful versions (were my earlier suggestions prophetic?), by around 2005 or so. Back came the all-new Nissan 350Z with some retro styling and interior work, and, shortly later, the all-new Mazda RX-8, with 2+2 seating, small rear half-doors like Saturn coupes, and a new, redone rotary engine named the RENESIS. I won't go into the new 350Z here (that is not the subject of this review), but the new RX-8 was vastly different from the RX-7's of the 1980's and 1990's. A small rear seat, though clearly unsuitable for large adults, could be used by children and short people, and as a shelf for packages and grocery bags (providing, of course, that fluids didn't run out on the nice seat upholstery). The small, forward-opening rear half-doors greatly helped not only rear-seat access itself by not having to bend oneself into a pretzel just to add or take packages out. However, the loss of the double B-pillars can weaken the unibody structure somewhat, despite the now-common use of high-strength steels and computer-aided design....more on that below.
Today, for 2009, four versions of the RX-8 are offered....Sport, Touring, Grand Touring, and, new for 2009, the R3. All four, according to the literature, use the same RENESIS engine, with 159 ft-lbs. of torque and either 232 HP (manual) or 212 HP (automatic) versions. Transmissions include a 6-speed manual and 6-speed Sport automatic, except the R3, which is manual only. No turbo version is offered on the new RENESIS rotary engine (perhaps the engineers learned from the bad experiences of the former ones). Yet I found the new engine, by sports car standards, to be somewhat underpowered (more on that below), and, while I obviously did not have the car long enough to measure oil consumption, auto-test magazines report that long-term RX-8 tests require more oil to be added between changes than with most of today's cars. They got into the habit of carrying extra oil around in the trunk because you never knew when it was going to be needed (in fact, somewhat like a two-stroke engine, a small amount of oil is needed in a rotary, because of valve and combustion chamber design, just to keep the engine going, apart from normal lubrication). And, with EPA mileage ratings of 17 City/ 22 highway, the rotary's classic thirst for fuel (remember, this is only a 1.3L engine) is still there to some extent, even without a turbo in this new design. So is the emission performance......while meeting most basic state and EPA standards, I still don't see and super-low-emission versions of this engine on the spec sheet. And, of course, only time will tell how much more durable the new RENESIS engines will be than their predecessors, especially with those all-important apex seals.
Of the four versions, I chose the base Sport manual-transmission version to review, for several reasons. First, the Sport version, starting at only 26K, seems reasonably-priced. Second, the higher-priced versions, though with more equipment, don't offer any more drivetrain benefits...it's the same engine and transmission either way. Third, the Sport version, with less equipment than the others, was probably the lightest, which, all else equal, adds to performance, although that can, of course, sometimes be offset with chassis/brake/tire differences on the more expensive cars. Fourth, a manual-transmission clearly fits the spirit of this car more than an automatic, even in our dense washington, D.C.-area traffic. Fifth, I didn't see any R3 models or automatics in stock, so Mazda probably doesn't plan to sell many. And, Sixth, all manual-transmission cars get an unusual carbon-fiber driveshaft..........I wanted to see how that affected divetrain feel.
Despite the limitations of the rotary engine (and its silky, turbine-like smoothness and incredible ability to rev cancels out some of those weaknesses), I think this car may be headed for classic/collector status. An investment in in one today, though not absolutely certain, could likely reap some nice benefits at classic auto shows maybe 15 or 20 years down the road, especially if well-preserved and kept in mint condition. Why? Basically, because this is the only production rotary-engine car in the American market, and I think the days of the rotary engine, at least here if not in other countries as well, are limited. Thanks to new, more stricter CAFE vehicle mileage and emission rules set to take effect in several more years (cars, for example, will have to average well over 30 MPG), I don't see how the rotary engine, with its inherent limitations, can meet those new standards, even with state-of-the-art rotary engineering. A hybrid gas-electric rotary might work for mileage, but there is still the emission problems, and no manufacturer that I know of, including Mazda itself, is working on a gas-electric rotary hybrid. So, as I currently see it, the RX-8 (and surviving older RX-7s) could easily end up becoming relics of history, and of value chiefly to collectors and those who value older classic designs. Of course, parts for a rotary engine, being a unique design, are not cheap NOW, and if they are discontinued, will be even harder and more expensive to get.
One thing, in particular, on my test car, was rather strange.....the tire specs. The brochure and the web site make it clear that P225/45R18 Bridgestone hi-performance tires come on the base Sport version (verified by the tires on my car). But, when I went to check the tire pressures manually like I always do before a test drive (this is very important to get the intended ride/handling), the ubiquitous label on the door jamb had all the required tire info/vehicle weights/load ratings, but didn't include any tire PSI's. This was odd, because PSI's are almost always on the doorjamb sticker (they are required by Federal Law). I stared at and examined the stickers as carefully as I could, but simply could not not find any English (non-metric) system recommended tire pressures on them. Nor could I find a spare tire of any kind (or a compressed-air Fix-a-Flat bottle) in the trunk...a sure sign of run-flat tires. Yet the literature in the brochure, on the sticker, on Mazda's web site, and even on the tires themselves didn't have that run-flat designation on them (perhaps I just didn't look close enough). None of the RX-8's on the lot had Owners' Manuals in them where I could double-check, either. So, I just checked the PSI's myself, saw that they were a reasonable 35 all around, and decided to do the test-drive that way. I figured that if they weren't correct, it would trigger the now-standard automatic tire pressure warning systems that come on all new cars. The test-drive was successful, and I didn't see any warning signs. I'm thinking that maybe somebody at the factory, on the assembly line, accidently stuck on some non-U.S. tire-spec labels on the doorjamb instead of the proper American-spec ones. I pointed this out to the Mazda people there......maybe there will be a recall if it turns out that was the case.
OK.........so let's take a look at the car in detail.
Model Reviewed: 2009 Mazda RX-8 Sport
Base Price: $26,435
Major Options: None
Destination/Freight: $650
List price as reviewed: $27,085
Drivetrain: RWD, 1.3L RENESIS Twin-rotor rotary, 232 HP @ 8500 RPM, Torque 159 ft-lbs. @ 5000 RPM, 6-speed short-throw manual transmission.
EPA Mileage Ratings: 17 City, 22 Highway
Exterior Color: Diamond Gray Metallic
Interior: Black cloth
PLUSSES:
Sport version reasonably priced.
Potential collector's item.
Handsome (IMO) rear-end styling.
Turbine-smooth engine.
Slick, well-designed clutch.
Slick, sporty, short-throw, but somewhat notchy 6-speed shift linkage.
Excellent, firm, right-now brake pedal.
Quick, sharp steering response.
Jittery but OK ride by sports-car standards; not uncomfortable.
Nice paint job.
Good exterior hardware.
Relatively easy entry/exit for a low-slung sports car.
Small, front-opening rear doors aid rear-seat access.
Full-length console has both front and rear flip-up storage compartments.
Well-designed trunk hinges.
Good front headroom and legroom in non-sunroof Sport version.
Well-designed/operating manual front seat adjusters.
Smart-looking silver "rotary" seatback inserts.
Clear, backlit tach/fuel/engine temperature gauges.
Good but not excellent stereo sound quality.
Slick-operating interior buttons, *****, and controls.
Good interior hardware and trim.
Nice, comfortable oval-shaped handbrake lever.
Well-finished trunk.
Good trunk size for a sports car....but a fairly small trunk opening.
Dealers apparantly willing to discount.
MINUSES:
Wimpy engine torque not up to sports-car standards.
Unique engine design means relatively expensive components and service.
Relatively high gas and oil consumption, especially for such a small engine.
Questionable long-term engine durability.
Annoying (IMO), flat, nasal-sounding exhaust tone.
Premium fuel required.
Unattractive (IMO) bulging front bumpers and headlight styling.
Cheap hood prop-rod.
Poor engine access underhood.
Annoying (IMO) digital speedometer inside the tach.
Lack of B-pillars in the body structure could compromise rigidity.
Rear seat useless for adults.
Too many dull colors and too few (7) exterior paint color choices.
High-mounted digital stereo readouts too far above the stereo buttons/*****.
Notchy shift linkage can miss some gear-slots.
Front seats (in the tested Sport version) a little narrow for wide torsos.
Base Sport version has no Keyless entry/start system.
Only one cloth interior color offered.
Spare-tire system amd tire specs unclear.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the car, the first impression you get is that it is a recognizable member of the Mazda family, especially in the front-end styling, which is somewhat similiar to that of the CX-7 and CX-9 (and the all-new 2009 Mazda6 sedan which is also on my review list). I've never been a fan of the way that Mazda did the front end of the current-generation RX-8, especially the bulging, swept-up front fenders. The rear-end styling, however, IMO, is more restrained, quite attractive, and handsome.......easily one of the car's best features. Considering that the car was built for relatively light weight, the exterior sheet metal is reasonably solid-feeling. Exterior trim and hardware is also well-done and seems of high quality. The paint, like on other Mazdas, is generally well-done....smooth, even, and glossy, with only a very slight trace of orange peel, but only seven colors are offered. Of these, there are two different blacks and two silver/grays. Only the velocity Red Mica and Aurora Blue Mica are classic bright sports-car colors....the sun-yellow of the past is gone. However, the White Pearl is always nice on any type of vehicle, sports car or not.
The RX-8, among classic sports cars, is unique in not only having a rotary engine but two small, front-opening rear doors as well, similiar to some Saturn coupes. These, without question, help rear-seat access in a low-slung car like this, but the resulting lack of B-pillars in the body structure is, IMO, a cause for concern about a loss of body rigidity. Mazda claims that local frame reinforcements and built-in vertical door beams that act as a artificial B-pillars when the doors are shut make up for the inherent loss of body rigidity, but I'm not convinced. Though I haven't driven a high-mileage RX-8 to confirm it, it seems to me that a design like this could result in body flex and premature rattles, squeaks, and leaks, like it does on some Saturn coupes. Brand-new, however, on the test car, on the road I didn't notice any problems of this type (more on that below). General entry/exit to the front seat, however, even apart from the rear-access doors, was quite easy for a car of this type.......even with the car's relatively low stance, you didn't have to twist yourself like a pretzel to get in and out under the steering wheel.
UNDERHOOD:
Not one of the car's better points. The relatively lightweight hood lacks insulation and is held up with a hard-to-find prop-rod. Even given that this is the entry-level model for the RX-8, a car in this price range ($27,000) should, IMO, have hood struts. While the battery and some reservoirs are right up front behind the radiator, uncovered (on my test car), and easily accessable, the small rotary engine and manual transmission are placed WAY back, partially under the firewall. This is a common engineering practice among sports and sport-oriented cars; its purpose, of course, is to keep the car from being nose-heavy and make the center of gravity as close to the middle of the car as possible for optimum handling and braking. While it does aid in balanced handling and braking (one certainly cannot argue with that), it can make servicing and engine accessability a pain in the a**. You have to be an NBA guy to have a torso long enough to lean way back and reach the engine components themselves. And the car's relatively low stance doesn't help either....unless it is on a lift, that means bending over even more.
INTERIOR:
The interior, overall, is one of the car's best features....though there are a couple of annoying things. The RX-8 uses the same three-spoke steering wheel with the flip-switches on the spokes as many other Mazda vehicles, though there is nothing wrong with that.....it is a nice-looking and functional design, covered with nice-feeling and stitched black leather. The tachometer, fuel gauge, and temperature gauge are clear, simple, and backlit, with a nice electroluminescent white lighting in the daytime and red at night when you turn on the headlights (I myself much prefer the white). However, I found the digital speedometer, set in the lower-right-hand corner of the tach, rather annoying........I have never liked digital primary gauges. I also found the wide gap between the stereo-readout screen, high up on the dash, and the stereo buttons/*****, far below it, to be annoying as well....a number of vehicles have this, and it is not a design I like either, on any of them.
The rest of the interior, however, is well-done. All of the buttons/***** operate slickly and have a smooth, solid feel. The stereo sound quality is fine.....not the best I've seen, but better than average. Interior trim materials, while not lavish, are tasteful and of fairly high quality, although wood-tone trim is missing from all versions, and there is lot of monotone black (upmarket RX-8 models, of course, have leather and several different-colored patterns, some two-tone). Two large, smart-looking, silver triangular rotary-shaped trim logos are set into the backs of the front seats....recessed enough, of course, so that your back doesn't hit them. The seats themselves are fairly comfortable and have a nice grade of black cloth (the only cloth color offered), and the side bolsters, while accomodating, can be slightly narrow for wide torsos like mine.......but still not uncomfortable. The manual driver seat adjusters are well-done and operate easily and superbly...I didn't miss having power seats one bit in this car. And, since the standard Sport model doesn't have a sunroof, it was all the more easier to get the seat low enough for me and my ubiquitous baseball cap to fit under the ceiling withoug having to tilt the seatback. The parking-brake handle is also superbly done, with a comfortable, elongated oval-shaped grip and smooth, slick ratchet action. In back, while the small seats, of course, are not suitable for large adults, head and footroom, thanks to the design of the roofline, are OK for children and small adults......and the seats, of course, make a fine cargo shelf, made more easily accessable by the two small rear doors. Anyone who DOES manage to fit in back will have his or her own flip-up storage compartment built into the extended-length rear console.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The rear roofline, though not as raked in some other sports cars (and necessary to accomodate the 2+2 seating), does cut into the trunk opening some, shortening its size, but the trunk itself is large and roomy by sports-car standards, especially compared to the micro-sized cargo compartments you find on some small mid-engine cars. The articulated trunk hinges are quite well-designed, allowing you to flip the trunk lid up past vertical, actually tilting forward so you head won't bang into it (remember that this car sits lower then the average sedan).
While the rear seats don't fold down for extra cargo room (at least I couldn't find a release anywhere for them), they do have a pass-through feature for carrying long things as skis (though this is not a snow car by any means), fishing poles, etc... The trunk itself is well-finished and is covered in a nice grade of light gray carpet. I may be wrong on this (and someone correct me if I am), but I couldn't find any way to pull the floor panel up to get to a spare tire (there may not be one...see my opening comments above), though a small, detachable, hand crank is fitted into the rear wall, presumably for turning a jack. I also could not find a compressed-air-bottle (perhaps from a factory or shipping goof).
All in all, though, a well-done cargo area.........this is one of the roomiest trunks you will find on a classic sports car.
ON THE ROAD:
Start the small rotary up with a conventional transponder key and ignition switch on the side of the steering column (upmarket RX-8 models get Keyless Entry/Start), and it immediately fires up into a turbine-smooth (what else?) but not quiet idle.......the engineers gave it an audible exhaust tone, even at idle. Mazda's "Zoom-Zoom" ad campaign, however, left a good deal of that zoom out of this powerplant, especially at any kind of normal RPM. The engine, as mentioned previously, is only 1.3L, has an extremely narrow and peaky torque band, produces only 159 ft-lbs at 5000 RPM, and below that, is notably sluggish, even with the efficient 6-speed manual. Like the Honda S2000's VTEC conventional in-line four, it has very little torque at lower RPMs, a stratospheric 9000 RPM redline, the 232 HP (manual transmission) peak at 8500 RPM, and feels Granny-sluggish unless you wind it out like a motorcycle where the HP and torque peaks can then kick in. Since this was a brand-new car, I, of course, didn't red-line the engine, but since the engine didn't have pistons, I didn't hold it to the normal 4000-4500 RPM either like is usually necessary with a new car. There was little acceleration noted until about 5000 RPM (not coincidentally, the torque peak), when you then felt some push. I stopped at 5500-6000 RPM, not wanting to take it all the way to the 8500 RPM HP peak on a new engine. So, in a word, this car will move, but only if you really hammer it and persist....I would suggest quietly turning down any stop-light offers you get from big V8-engined performance cars. But, what the engine lacks in torque, it makes up for with an unmatched electric-motor smoothness.....one of the things, of course, that allows such a high redline. If it wasn't for the somewhat annoying and flat/nasal-sounding exhaust note that cuts in on acceleration (and the hood, remember, is not that well insulated), the engine is so smooth that you feel like you may be driving just that.....an electric motor.
The 6-speed manual transmission has an extremely well-designed clutch....light, precise, and engaging just about where you would want it...not too high or low off the floor. The engine is so smooth, however, and so low on torque at low RPM's, that you tend to give it a little more RPM's than normal while releasing the clutch from a stop, resulting in some clutch slippage. The shifter itself, with a "rotary" trim-shaped ****, has properly (for a sports car) short throws between gears and a generally precise and pleasant feel, though with a slight bit of notchiness that can cause an occasionally missed shift. Like I've said before in other reviews, I wish auto manufacturers would put lighted numbers on the dash for manual transmissions to positively identify the gear you're in before letting out the clutch, but few if any manufacturers do that. Ferrari has another nice, low-cost solution.....a gated manual shifter with visible slots, but is the only manufacturer that I know of who uses one.
Handling is pretty much what you would expect from a Mazda sports car, especially one with such a light engine/transmission assembly located back at the firewall for a good center of gravity. Though there was a slight bit of initial understeer, steering response was quick, the front end went right where it was pointed, and there was almost no body lean. Power-steering feel from the electrically-boosted unit, while not quite up to BMW standards, was far better than the average Japanese-designed car, especially an electric-power steering one. Some noise from the suspension, Bridgestone high-performance tires, and fairly lightweight body construction was present, as was to be expected in a car of this type, but wind noise, despite the limited sealing effectiveness of the lack of B-pillars at the small rear doors, was well-done. Ride quality, though definitely on the firm side as in any sports car, was not uncomfortable.....despite the firmness over bumps, I could ride in this car for quite awhile and probably not have a sore back, even on small bumps. Like previous RX-7 sports cars, however (see my comments in the opening section), I would avoid rough roads and potholes if possible.
Brakes were another one of the car's best features, and, here again, the lightweight construction and good center of gravity helps out. The pedal had a BMW-firm feel, with virtually no sponginess, good responsive action, progressive modulation, and, fortunately, none of the pedal-spacing hang-up problems that some vehicles have for my big size-15 shoes.
THE VERDICT:
This is, in many ways, a unique and cult-sports car if there ever was one. It is, to this day, the only production car in the American market with a rotary engine, the only sports car of its type with the two rear half-doors for easier access, the only car of its type (perhaps?) with such a roomy trunk, and while cosmetic, the only car I've ever seen where parts of the interior trim actually matched the shape of the interior of the engine (a gimmick, of course, but nevertheless a nice interesting styling feature). It offers a turbine-smooth powerplant, quick, agile sports-car handling, a usable back seat as long as full adults don't ride back there, reasonably easy entry/exit for a sports car, good front seat room (without the sunroof), and BMW-feel brakes. It also has a delightfully easy-to use clutch and generally good shift linkage. The Sport version is reasonably-priced........but upmarket versions, of course, can run quite a bit more.
But, like with all cars, you must take the minuses with the plusses. The way-back placement of the small engine underhood make for difficult access. The lack of B-Pillars will (maybe) cause premature weakening of the central body structure. The engine needs much more torque, especially at low RPMs, to be a true sports car. The annoying digital speedometer needs to be tossed out and replaced with an analog one to match the other primary gauges. The stereo readouts need to be with the pertinent controls.....not way above them. Both gas and oil consumption, with the rotary engine, is substantially higher than average. And Mazda sorely needs to clarify the tire specs....what I found on my test car was, IMO, unacceptable.
And, if you do decide to sign on the bottom line for one, consider keeping it awhile and taking pristine care of it, despite the expense of some of the engine and other replacemant parts. While there is no way to know for sure until the time actually comes (and I don't want to make any false predictions in advance), I feel reasonably certain that Mazda rotary-engined vehicles will become classics simply for their uniqueness, and some auto collectors will, in time, pay for the priviledge of owning one.
Last edited by mmarshall; 08-12-08 at 11:10 AM.
08-12-08, 11:09 AM
#2
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great review and quite accurate. I traded my 05 RX-8 for my Lexus. For pure driving fun, hard to match... in traffic or empty road no other car I've ever owned could work the road as well.
TERRIBLE mileage and power + cold road surfaces made for tough all-year car here in WI. Back seats actually weren't the worst, but not very adult friendly. Never had an issue, but burned oil (rotary) and any cold weather water on roads made dangerous driving, snow was almost impossible even with snow tires. That being said, I do miss it, but my Lexus was overall a much more enjoyable car....
TERRIBLE mileage and power + cold road surfaces made for tough all-year car here in WI. Back seats actually weren't the worst, but not very adult friendly. Never had an issue, but burned oil (rotary) and any cold weather water on roads made dangerous driving, snow was almost impossible even with snow tires. That being said, I do miss it, but my Lexus was overall a much more enjoyable car....
08-12-08, 11:16 AM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks. 
The BMW 3-series will also put a smile on your face, handling-wise....and they have more torque at lower RPM's.
Mazda engineers have worked for decades on the rotary engine's apex-seal durability and gas/oil consumption, with only limited success...some oil use is inherent in the rotary's design.
Wet/snow/ice traction has always been an issue with front-engine/RWD sports cars, especially with high-performance tires. Most of them are marginal, at best, in those conditions, and many are next to worthless...........that's why I, myself, drive a Subaru.
I traded my 05 RX-8 for my Lexus. For pure driving fun, hard to match... in traffic or empty road no other car I've ever owned could work the road as well.
TERRIBLE mileage and power + cold road surfaces made for tough all-year car here in WI. Back seats actually weren't the worst, but not very adult friendly. Never had an issue, but burned oil (rotary) and any cold weather water on roads made dangerous driving, snow was almost impossible even with snow tires.
Wet/snow/ice traction has always been an issue with front-engine/RWD sports cars, especially with high-performance tires. Most of them are marginal, at best, in those conditions, and many are next to worthless...........that's why I, myself, drive a Subaru.
Last edited by mmarshall; 08-12-08 at 11:23 AM.
08-12-08, 11:21 AM
#4
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... VERY disappointed in what I'm seeing on the Audi A4online price estimator. Rep told me during my drive last week MAX was $42K... the same car I drove priced over $49K... more 
If it weren't for the new front the new TL-SH would be at the top. Of course, I walked the lot at BMW and not a single 3-series jumped out at me. It's gotta perform, but look good as well....
08-12-08, 11:28 AM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Don't start me on the "car to choose" rant again...... VERY disappointed in what I'm seeing on the Audi A4online price estimator. Rep told me during my drive last week MAX was $42K... the same car I drove priced over $49K... more
If it weren't for the new front the new TL-SH would be at the top. Of course, I walked the lot at BMW and not a single 3-series jumped out at me. It's gotta perform, but look good as well....
... VERY disappointed in what I'm seeing on the Audi A4online price estimator. Rep told me during my drive last week MAX was $42K... the same car I drove priced over $49K... more If it weren't for the new front the new TL-SH would be at the top. Of course, I walked the lot at BMW and not a single 3-series jumped out at me. It's gotta perform, but look good as well....
OK....no need to rant. I was just refering to the 3-series handling and steering feel, that's all. They have always impressed me with their handling as sedans.....comparable to may sports cars. But, as you note, both they and many Audis are a questionable dollar value in what they cost.
That was one thing nice about the RX-8 Sport I looked at. It was priced at 27K........very reasonable, IMO, though it obviously lacks some of the equipment of the upmarket RX-8's.
08-13-08, 05:06 AM
#6
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK....no need to rant. I was just refering to the 3-series handling and steering feel, that's all. They have always impressed me with their handling as sedans.....comparable to may sports cars. But, as you note, both they and many Audis are a questionable dollar value in what they cost.
.
.
08-13-08, 06:20 AM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Are you interested enough in a C63 AMG that you want a formal review? I did an E63 AMG review a couple of months ago, and was strongly impressed with the engine's torque and the ride/handling combination, but I thought the transmission had more gears than it needed (which adds needlessly to costs), and many of the controls were too complex. It was also a huge chunk of money.....$94,000. You can get a real nice 335i for half of that.....and the 335 has a wonderful driving feel.
Last edited by mmarshall; 08-13-08 at 06:34 AM.
Trending Topics
08-13-08, 07:08 AM
#8
Good review MMarshall imo the RX-8 is too much a ladies car i think all the Madza are for ladies. Have you done a review on the New Maxima the peopl I have Talked to said that it Is the Maxima of old which is a good thing.
08-13-08, 08:55 AM
#9
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to go the C63 AMG route, fine, but check out the BMW M3 and 335i before you sign for a Mercedes...or, if you want something slightly bigger, a BMW 550i. I think, for the money, the 335i is a heck of a car for what it costs....drive one and see what you think of it. If you have to deal with wet or slick roads regularly (I see you are in WI), many BMW's also come in xi AWD versions, too.........I don't think that Mercedes AMG do.....Mercedes, as far as I know, restricts the 4Matic models to non-AMGs.
Are you interested enough in a C63 AMG that you want a formal review? I did an E63 AMG review a couple of months ago, and was strongly impressed with the engine's torque and the ride/handling combination, but I thought the transmission had more gears than it needed (which adds needlessly to costs), and many of the controls were too complex. It was also a huge chunk of money.....$94,000. You can get a real nice 335i for half of that.....and the 335 has a wonderful driving feel.
Are you interested enough in a C63 AMG that you want a formal review? I did an E63 AMG review a couple of months ago, and was strongly impressed with the engine's torque and the ride/handling combination, but I thought the transmission had more gears than it needed (which adds needlessly to costs), and many of the controls were too complex. It was also a huge chunk of money.....$94,000. You can get a real nice 335i for half of that.....and the 335 has a wonderful driving feel.
So how about this: Best AWD sport sedan or coupe (some back seat space), has to be a machine with somewhat decent mileage... under $100K....
08-13-08, 09:40 AM
#10
Lexus Champion
mmarshall, nice review.
As a current owner of a 2006, I can say your review is fair and a pretty good assesment of the RX-8. So far, I have put about 18,000 miles on the car so I can honestly chime in on experience.
It is a really exciting car to drive. You're right when you say it lacks torque. Off the line performance in the first 2 seconds is unimpressive, but once the car gets going, it truly comes alive. I believe this car was really designed to be driven at 70-90% capacity.
A few things about your dislikes with the car: 1) Digital speedometer. It does take some getting used to. I really think it's much better than a regular analog speedometer. 2) Spare tire. The car doesn't come with one. Mazda does supply a fix-a-flat kit. The optional spare is mounted under the rear deck in the trunk. 3) Front end styling. Of course this is subjective, but I think it's the best angle of the car. 4) Checking oil levels. I check every other fill-up and add maybe 1/4-1/2 a quart. Not a big deal since I take care of my vehicles, but definitely a consideration if you don't know anything about car maintainance and want something as carefree as a Honda or Toyota. 5) Gas mileage. Yes, it stinks. I'm averaging 16mpg on premium.
So far, I really enjoy the RX-8. It certainly is quirky and a very uncommon sight on the roads today. Judging by the poor sales figures from Mazda, I can see why. It may be a classic/collector car one day and it will certainly be quite affordable as resale values for RX-8's are pretty poor.
The comfortable seating for my 11 year old son in the rear was one of the reasons I bought the car. When I pick him up from school, all of the kids comment on how cool the car is. I guess the unique styling is appreciated by his classmates.
As a current owner of a 2006, I can say your review is fair and a pretty good assesment of the RX-8. So far, I have put about 18,000 miles on the car so I can honestly chime in on experience.
It is a really exciting car to drive. You're right when you say it lacks torque. Off the line performance in the first 2 seconds is unimpressive, but once the car gets going, it truly comes alive. I believe this car was really designed to be driven at 70-90% capacity.
A few things about your dislikes with the car: 1) Digital speedometer. It does take some getting used to. I really think it's much better than a regular analog speedometer. 2) Spare tire. The car doesn't come with one. Mazda does supply a fix-a-flat kit. The optional spare is mounted under the rear deck in the trunk. 3) Front end styling. Of course this is subjective, but I think it's the best angle of the car. 4) Checking oil levels. I check every other fill-up and add maybe 1/4-1/2 a quart. Not a big deal since I take care of my vehicles, but definitely a consideration if you don't know anything about car maintainance and want something as carefree as a Honda or Toyota. 5) Gas mileage. Yes, it stinks. I'm averaging 16mpg on premium.
So far, I really enjoy the RX-8. It certainly is quirky and a very uncommon sight on the roads today. Judging by the poor sales figures from Mazda, I can see why. It may be a classic/collector car one day and it will certainly be quite affordable as resale values for RX-8's are pretty poor.
The comfortable seating for my 11 year old son in the rear was one of the reasons I bought the car. When I pick him up from school, all of the kids comment on how cool the car is. I guess the unique styling is appreciated by his classmates.
08-13-08, 09:44 AM
#11
Pole Position
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My daughter used to sit in back and imitate the gear shifts... anytime driving around town kids would say "cool car"....
08-13-08, 09:54 AM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "ladies" car (I don't go for stereotyping). The RX-8, though a little low on power, certainly handles and stops like a serious sports car. And, yes, Miatas are quite popular with females, but I see enough men driving them too........in fact, one of CL's male moderators owns one, and loves it.
I do plan an upcoming review of the new Maxima....exactly when, I don't know. I'm still waiting for the 2009 Acura TL and the Hyundai Genesis V8 to arrive....I have a number of requests for both. If the new Maxima becomes available in the meantime, however, I'll do it ASAP.
imo the RX-8 is too much a ladies car i think all the Madza are for ladies. Have you done a review on the New Maxima the peopl I have Talked to said that it Is the Maxima of old which is a good thing.
I do plan an upcoming review of the new Maxima....exactly when, I don't know. I'm still waiting for the 2009 Acura TL and the Hyundai Genesis V8 to arrive....I have a number of requests for both. If the new Maxima becomes available in the meantime, however, I'll do it ASAP.
08-13-08, 10:14 AM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Another superb AWD sports sedan to consider, however, is the Infiniti M45X....around 60-65K. Drive one and I don't think you will be disappointed.
08-13-08, 10:35 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
People don't always agree with my conclusions, but my reviews are exactly what my impressions are...no more, no less.Have you had to add a lot of oil, between changes, in those 18,000 miles? Auto magazines doing long-term RX-8 endurance testing sometimes carry a quart or two of oil around them in the trunk...then it's right there when they need it. (Never mind....I see you answered that question below).
It is a really exciting car to drive. You're right when you say it lacks torque. Off the line performance in the first 2 seconds is unimpressive, but once the car gets going, it truly comes alive. I believe this car was really designed to be driven at 70-90% capacity.
As it was a new engine, I didn't take it to the 8500 RPM HP peak (232). The car's relatively light construction and small, light engine, of course, decrease the burden on it somewhat.
A few things about your dislikes with the car: 1) Digital speedometer. It does take some getting used to. I really think it's much better than a regular analog speedometer. 2) Spare tire. The car doesn't come with one. Mazda does supply a fix-a-flat kit. The optional spare is mounted under the rear deck in the trunk. 3) Front end styling. Of course this is subjective, but I think it's the best angle of the car. 4) Checking oil levels. I check every other fill-up and add maybe 1/4-1/2 a quart. Not a big deal since I take care of my vehicles, but definitely a consideration if you don't know anything about car maintainance and want something as carefree as a Honda or Toyota. 5) Gas mileage. Yes, it stinks. I'm averaging 16mpg on premium.
Low gas mileage just seems to be a fact of life with rotaries. Engineers have worked on the problem for decades, but the way the combustion chambers and ports are designed (and the high RPMs these engines run at) means more-than-average fuel consumption, even without turbos and a small displacement.
And another thanks for the spare tire explanation.
My test car was a mess in this area....as I noted in the review, even the tire PSI sticker on the door jamb appeared to be the wrong one.Digital primary instrumentation is something that, like the I-Drive/MMI-type of controllers, is just something that I have never "gotten used to" as you phrase it. I disliked them from Day One and still do. Some things, though, I eventually DO get used to....but they will not be among them.
The comfortable seating for my 11 year old son in the rear was one of the reasons I bought the car. When I pick him up from school, all of the kids comment on how cool the car is. I guess the unique styling is appreciated by his classmates.
I can see another reason why you chose the RX-8 here.......those two small rear doors, of course, make it easier for Junior to climb in and out of the rear seat.
Any squeaks/rattles/leaks from around those two rear doors in the 18,000 miles? As I noted in the review, the body rigidity from the lack of B-pillars on those doors was one of my concerns. Even brand-new, the 2 front doors don't have a solid closing "thunk" when they shut on the rear ones.
Thanks again for your input.
Last edited by mmarshall; 08-13-08 at 10:46 AM.
08-13-08, 10:54 AM
#15
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
