Closet Gas Hogs

[1sty]

The RX-8 being 1.3L is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Its not a legitimate comparison to anything but other rotaries of which there are none. Typically cylinder engines are DRASTICALLY different and any measurements between technologies should be done on more important factors like, Weight, Output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity. All things that a Rotary sucks at compared to similar vehicle's piston engines.

There is no benefit to this in the whole of the car if it has dog s*** torque output and weak gas millage to boot.

If its more efficient, reliable, and powerful; give me a 7.0L engine!

 

[Donas64]

My name is Antoine and Yes...I used to be a pistonoholic.

lol...I'm a fan of all sorts of engines but recently I've become a big fan of Mazda's rotary-based powerplants because I finally put aside all the misconceptions I had about rotaries...then I was able to try and understand the true nature and purpose of a rotary engine.

What turned me into a rotary fan is not only the engines but the MAZDAS they came and come in...From the Cosmo Sports to the Eunos Cosmo and the iconic FC & FD...All these models were created with such passion and drive fueled by Mazdas excitement and love for the rotary engine!

All those factors make owning a Mazda rotary something really special and just plain FUN!

Now for all this talk of torque...A lot of high-perf piston engines these days USE TURBOS especially 4-6 bangers...while the RX-8 is a NA beast!

If you removed the DI & Turbo from these modern 4-6 bangers, they would make a lot less tq & hp and loose some mpg in the process when you factor out the DI.

I think if you took the smallest Honda engine (which is 1.5L maybe?) and beefed it up to produce 240-250 crank hp NA...First of all, it would not be very streetable and I doubt your MPG would be anything but HORRIBLE...plus you would probably need to run race gas...However...The RX-8 has a 1.3 liter that can pump out the same amount of HP in STOCK form and is totally streetable without the need for race gas...Plus the rotary is so much more of a true performance engine than many 4-6 bangers...It revs super high and is super smooth!

Imagine adding DI and a Turbo to the Renisis! I'm sure the upcoming 16x won't be a slouch!

Before I ramble on forever...I would like to add that I'm also a big fan of torque and in my case...3 rotors and two turbos provides more low-end hp/tq than you can shake a stick at from only 1.9l which is still fairly small!...and for the record...I'm getting pretty decent mpg...

I do agree that the cars the rotary is mated to do add a lot to the appeal. The RX-8 is like a finely honed scalpel, not doubt. How much power is that cosmo of yours putting down these days anyway? Is it your daily driver?

 

[Donas64]

The RX-8 being 1.3L is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Its not a legitimate comparison to anything but other rotaries of which there are none. Typically cylinder engines are DRASTICALLY different and any measurements between technologies should be done on more important factors like, Weight, Output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity. All things that a Rotary sucks at compared to similar vehicle's piston engines.

There is no benefit to this in the whole of the car if it has dog s*** torque output and weak gas millage to boot.

If its more efficient, reliable, and powerful; give me a 7.0L engine!

the man's got a valid point.

 

[ZoomZoomH]

(headshake

 

[Donas64]

(headshake

but seriously though, I'm a fan of the rotary and love RX-7's and 8's. I believe the engine and the tech will only get better.

 

[Roywhitep5]

rx8s are fun

 

[Antoine]

The RX-8 being 1.3L is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Its not a legitimate comparison to anything but other rotaries of which there are none. Typically cylinder engines are DRASTICALLY different and any measurements between technologies should be done on more important factors like, Weight, Output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity. All things that a Rotary sucks at compared to similar vehicle's piston engines.

There is no benefit to this in the whole of the car if it has dog s*** torque output and weak gas millage to boot.

If its more efficient, reliable, and powerful; give me a 7.0L engine!

lol...1.3L indicates its size and capacity which IS relevant just as an engine's weight, output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity are...I think your obvious hatred for rotaries is based on a lot misinformation and a lack of understanding about the disadvantages of a rotary engine...for which there are just as piston engines have disadvantages.

I'm by no means an experienced rotary enthusiast but I know enough to say that your claims are totally exaggerated...To say that a rotary engine "sucks" at Weight, Output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity compared to a piston setup is not only untrue but it shows how much you don't know about rotary engines.

That said...I'm not interested in turning this thread into a all-out rotary Vs piston flame fest...I love both types and I think you should reevaluate your understanding of piston-less engines.

Zoom Zoom

I do agree that the cars the rotary is mated to do add a lot to the appeal. The RX-8 is like a finely honed scalpel, not doubt. How much power is that cosmo of yours putting down these days anyway? Is it your daily driver?

I haven't dynoed the Cosmo yet but assuming it's healthy and with the addition of the Autoexe intake and Mazdaspeed exhaust...I would estimate around 330-350hp at the crank with stock turbos and boost level (5-7psi).

With proper tuning via an EMS system and slight increase in boost...The 20B TT setup should easily pump out 400hp - 420hp at the wheels...on a conservative tune! The torque output on the 20B should follow the HP fairly closely which would make for a hellva power combo! (2thumbs)

It would make a fun daily driver but I take the train to work so I drive it on the weekends and when I have free time...although it's totally streetable and can handle any normal road conditions

 

[ForceFed]

Our tC is a GAS HOG....Under 20MPG's in the city out of its tiny 2.4
Who says toyotas get great fuel efficiency.

 

[Rally Ninja]

You got to PAY to play...That simple...especially with a rotary...you want mpg...get a toaster Toyota or Honda and join the masses.

Learn to live a little and get a rotary

Yeah Just get an accord.......faster than the RX8 and better MPG too!

 

[coolmazda5]

Yeah Just get an accord.......faster than the RX8 and better MPG too!

LOL, or a bicycle .

Fuel economy is not on the priority list of an RX-8 owner so is not really relevant. Family haulers, freight, public transport I would say yes, but Rotaries, nope.

 

[Donas64]

Our tC is a GAS HOG....Under 20MPG's in the city out of its tiny 2.4
Who says toyotas get great fuel efficiency.

Yeah, the tC weighs like 3 tons so I Can believe that. Just kidding about the 3 tons but the tC is no xB

 

[Donas64]

Yeah Just get an accord.......faster than the RX8 and better MPG too!

low blow! But accord doesn't handle as well and it looks like it was styled by someone with commitment issues.

 

[Antoine]

(mswerd)

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

When the CX-7's were first coming out, I was reading on the forums how the MPG was terrible on the car. So, I basically said "if i'm getting low mpg, better be with a high hp car" and got the Trailblazer SS. Unfortunately, i've never been an SUV guy and can't stand driving one other than the fact it's got amazing straightline power. I'm converting to a more practical and easily affordable mindset.

(The Saab 9-7x aero is the same as the SS..12/16 sucks..I hate it)

 

[ZoomZoomH]

how can you hate the RX-8 when it's used in such awesome way

http://media.***********.com/picture/mikeyp/poster91451001.jpg

 

[Donas64]

When the CX-7's were first coming out, I was reading on the forums how the MPG was terrible on the car. So, I basically said "if i'm getting low mpg, better be with a high hp car" and got the Trailblazer SS. Unfortunately, i've never been an SUV guy and can't stand driving one other than the fact it's got amazing straightline power. I'm converting to a more practical and easily affordable mindset.

(The Saab 9-7x aero is the same as the SS..12/16 sucks..I hate it)

so you're not happy with the purchase of your SS? Why didn't you go with a big wagon like a V70R from volvo or an S6 Audi avant or something? Or a Dodge magnum SRT8? That seems like it would have worked out better for ya.

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

It's not so much that i'm unhappy with the purchase. It was my first SUV, and I was trying to be open minded about it. But i've always enjoyed a car better. The SS is fast, it's fun, it handles surprisingly well on on-ramps, but I literally get disgusting gas mileage and I almost never smash the gas. I make small commutes back and forth to work and get about 210 miles to the tank. 22.5 gal tank = $65+ gas bills. Plus, mine's a lease. I found someone to take me out of the lease and i'm going to get into (what I consider) a much better vehicle like the ms3.

Before the SS, I had a 05 GTO m6 and that had to be lemoned out. So i've been going through some tough car times for the past 3 years heh..

 

[socket7]

The RX-8 being 1.3L is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Its not a legitimate comparison to anything but other rotaries of which there are none. Typically cylinder engines are DRASTICALLY different and any measurements between technologies should be done on more important factors like, Weight, Output, efficiency, reliability, and longevity. All things that a Rotary sucks at compared to similar vehicle's piston engines.

There is no benefit to this in the whole of the car if it has dog s*** torque output and weak gas millage to boot.

If its more efficient, reliable, and powerful; give me a 7.0L engine!

(blah)(blah)(blah)

You haven't driven an RX-8 have you...

/18mpg and proud of it
//comparing a vette to a car that costs $22k base, PRICELESS

 

[1sty]

(blah)(blah)(blah)

You haven't driven an RX-8 have you...

/18mpg and proud of it
//comparing a vette to a car that costs $22k base, PRICELESS

(jerkit)

Yes I have and there is nothing special about it. Not compared to its competition in that price segment. We all know the 22K base is a joke, even less power and an auto...nice. That also takes into account the rebates as appleid to a base model 07. For a manual 08, list is $29K. That is Evo, STI, and 350 land.



And an engine's displacement inherently means nothing.
It does not translate directly to any worth while statistic so again, what the hell good is a 1.3L if its gets tooled on by its competition?

For $22K give me a Mazdaspeed3. Then at least you wont have to make excuses about how your "sports" car gets tooled on. Oh thats right, its AMAZING on the track.....BS.
1. No its not
2. If a car can not compete in the real world, not a friggin closed circuit road coarse (although even there it is nothing impressive) then it does not complete period. Car and Driver's Quote:
"On the track, the Mazda couldn't make up for its woeful lack of torque and posted the slowest time around the circuit."

 

[Silver Ecstasy]

I think the remarkable and respectable thing about GM is the fact they continue to generate horsepower and good MPG. The Vette is a perfect example of that.

Of course, not every one of their vehicles can maintain that same amount of high MPG, but hey they do a great job.