# mazda rx8



## Guest (Apr 20, 2012)

thinking of buying an rx8, can anyone give me advice on them etc:thumb:


----------



## Th3Doctor (Feb 2, 2010)

Very thirsty from what I've read. Good car tho


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

don't bother...save your money...

it's an ok car, but has a real problem in that is doesn't do anything well, and wants to be everything.... it fails...

here is my report on mine

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=3085885&postcount=73

a really pointless car IMO

:thumb:


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

The 192 and 231 are quite a bit different to drive

192 trades power for torque, the 5 speed box in the 192 tends to be sweeter than the 6 speed in the 231

Earlier models with leather had hard backs to the front seats that are severely prone to scratches as are the alloy look rails running down the centre of the cabin

FSH is an absolute must, I'd advise a compression test

Get the engine warm and see if it restarts easily - if it doesn't then walk away 

Good cars - very misunderstood by those who do not have any experience of them but even allowing for that the RENESIS engine can be fragile if not looked after sympathetically

As Cueball alludes to - they are neither a sports car or a GT car and economy can be awful


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Those engines are designed to revved. They do last when driven right. I've seen one on the 120k miles. 
Save some more and by an mps if wanting to stick with mazda


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

mps is just as bad with fuel though.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

True True bit he can't be to bothered about that wanting a rx8. I think just Bout everyone knows what there like!


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

get an rx7 instead  there is one in town and it looks like something from the future lol


----------



## Laurie.J.M (Jun 23, 2011)

If you're worried about fuel economy it's not the car for you, certainly not for everday use, 25 mpg at the most is what I've heard and it's in the highest tax band. It's looks good and the engine's really nice with a fantastic sound and with the suicide doors it's quite practical.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

^^ have you actually owned one!?!?

the engine sounds s***te... it sounds like a washing machine!! :lol:

:thumb:


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

The Cueball said:


> ^^ have you actually owned one!?!?
> 
> the engine sounds s***te... it sounds like a washing machine!! :lol:
> 
> :thumb:


disagree, think they sound great, probably because there so different


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

:lol::lol::lol:

each to their own, but honestly....

:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Laurie.J.M (Jun 23, 2011)

The Cueball said:


> ^^ have you actually owned one!?!?
> 
> the engine sounds s***te... it sounds like a washing machine!! :lol:
> 
> :thumb:


I haven't owned one but I have driven an RX8 R3, If my washing machine sounded like that on the spin cycle I wouldn't complain .


----------



## GJM (Jul 19, 2009)

Few known issues, can't remember them all, shockers, ball joint issue, starter motor, think these were maybe recalls, certainly the ball joint problem.

Bad for engine mounts too


----------



## Hardsworth (Apr 12, 2012)

there are better cars on the market for the money


----------



## robz (Apr 18, 2006)

Th3Doctor said:


> Very thirsty from what I've read. Good car tho


I've heard this two and know a few who sold them due to this. Need shares in BP to run it!


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Did someone say 25mpg fuel consumption???? You must've been using fuel magnets & a sail to get that!

In the 2 years of owning mine, I don't think I ever got above 20, possibly even 19mpg, and that included motorway runs.

I liked mine a lot, but it essentially was a second/fun car for me and at the end of it all it just wasn't special enough to make me yearn to drive it. So I sold it :lol: I couldn't say it was a bad car at all.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

absolute bag of ****e engine, if they'd fitted a conventional 2.3 fitted to the Mazda MPS's i'd have had one in a heartbeat as i think they look lovley, have a great driving position, and are reletivley cheap oh and of course RWD. but that engine, what were they thinking! Re desigining the wheel springs to mind.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> absolute bag of ****e engine, if they'd fitted a conventional 2.3 fitted to the Mazda MPS's i'd have had one in a heartbeat as i think they look lovley, have a great driving position, and are reletivley cheap oh and of course RWD. but that engine, what were they thinking! Re desigining the wheel springs to mind.


Conventional = heavy and gutless. I agree with cuey though, it's another car that is a compromise, like the m3 was.

If you want something sporty, buy an elise/exige, if you want something practical, buy a saloon/coupe.

It's even too low at stock height for me to get up the drive.


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

m1pui said:


> I liked mine a lot, but it essentially was a second/fun car for me and at the end of it all it just wasn't special enough to make me yearn to drive it. So I sold it :lol: I couldn't say it was a bad car at all.


Exactly this, brilliant cars, great fun to drive hard on a twisty A-road, but too expensive to run to justify the rest of the time. Brilliant cars though, and I would have another!



jay_bmw said:


> absolute bag of ****e engine, if they'd fitted a conventional 2.3 fitted to the Mazda MPS's i'd have had one in a heartbeat as i think they look lovley, have a great driving position, and are reletivley cheap oh and of course RWD. but that engine, what were they thinking! Re desigining the wheel springs to mind.


You win the prize for the guy who's missed the point of the rotary. No other engine making over 200bhp is as light and compact. So compact the RX-8 is technically a mid engine car. The engine is tiny, mounted very low down and far back, to the turn in and balance is fantastic. The RX-8 wouldn't handle like it does if it was fitted with a 2.3L turbo'd four pot otto cycle engine.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

You win the award for failing to realise that the majority go pop @ 60k , the engine gets flooded if you start them twice in quick succession

If they are so good why haven't you got one?


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> You win the award for failing to realise that the majority go pop @ 60k , the engine gets flooded if you start them twice in quick succession
> 
> If they are so good why haven't you got one?


Look after them properly they last a lot longer than 60k, the biggest servicing failing is people not changing the coilpacks, leads and plugs every 40k. They don't use any where near as much oil as the internet says, they use less oil than a E39 M5. I never had a problem with flooding, but then I understand the cause. I sold it when I needed something that did 45mpg.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Jem said:


> You win the prize for the guy who's missed the point of the rotary. No other engine making over 200bhp is as light and compact. So compact the RX-8 is technically a mid engine car. The engine is tiny, mounted very low down and far back, to the turn in and balance is fantastic. The RX-8 wouldn't handle like it does if it was fitted with a 2.3L turbo'd four pot otto cycle engine.


The thing is, an exige has quite a light engine, handles better than the rx8, even has more power.

The point of the rotary engine was the wide rev range and power for an na engine was uncomparable to a same sized conventional engine.


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

RisingPower said:


> The thing is, an exige has quite a light engine, handles better than the rx8, even has more power.


You can't compare an RX-8 with a Exige, the Exige is nigh on half the weight and has no back seats, or much unessential interior at all. Epic cars though:thumb:


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Jem said:


> You can't compare an RX-8 with a Exige, the Exige is nigh on half the weight and has no back seats, or much unessential interior at all. Epic cars though:thumb:


I was comparing weight, engine, handling.

For me the rx8 tries to be something it's not, either way, my key point was, weight of engine vs power output is about the same, if not better on the exige, because the rx8 is na, the exige charged.

I don't understand compromise in a car, either you get one or t'other. I wouldn't want 4 people in a light car. That makes it completely pointless as a light, sporty car. Heavy interior bits for the same reason.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

Jem said:


> Look after them properly they last a lot longer than 60k,


Thats my point though, you shouldnt 'have' to look after them any other way than you normally look after a car. I don't particuarly look after my car engine wise but it doesn't get any problems.

I can see i'm not going to win though as you'll probably have some clever response so never mind


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> Thats my point though, you shouldnt 'have' to look after them any other way than you normally look after a car. I don't particuarly look after my car engine wise but it doesn't get any problems.


In an ideal world that would be the case, but the Renisis is not a normal engine. Sparkplugs in rotary engines have to be recessed to allow the apex seals to pass over them. This is of course not ideal as you would prefer the tips of the spark plug to be sitting proud into the combustion chamber. Consequently RX-8's have two plugs per rotor and require a good strong spark, hence changing the coils and leads at 40k is a good idea. If you don't you can get the rotary equivalent of bore wash from the un-ignited fuel causing the engine problems RX-8's are famous for, and killing the cat in the process.

Of course you don't have to fork out for a cambelt change though, so that's a bonus! And they spit flames


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

I don't have to fork out for a cambelt either 

like i said, if they didn't have such a high maintainance engine i'd have one as i think thier lovely


----------



## Guest (Apr 21, 2012)

food for thought,im torn between an rx8 231,330 sport or a 2004 wrx scoob!


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

tys said:


> food for thought,im torn between an rx8 231,330 sport or a 2004 wrx scoob!


So basically you have no idea what you're after?


----------



## Guest (Apr 21, 2012)

a car to drive to work everyday that puts a smile on my face,but be able to put my daughters car seat in with ease aswell.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

tys said:


> a car to drive to work everyday that puts a smile on my face,but be able to put my daughters car seat in with ease aswell.


I don't think an rx8 is suitable for a child seat in the rear but I may be wrong ( guy at work swapped the rx8 for an audi because of kids)

More like a mazda mps would be suitable. Or the scooby.


----------



## Guest (Apr 21, 2012)

tbh im am leaning towards the scoob,i would like an mazda6 mps but ive only got 4k


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

tys said:


> tbh im am leaning towards the scoob,i would like an mazda6 mps but ive only got 4k


For 4k if you don't want it costing more to run, yes, maybe the scoob.


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

RisingPower said:


> I don't think an rx8 is suitable for a child seat in the rear but I may be wrong ( guy at work swapped the rx8 for an audi because of kids)


My 57 plate RX-8 had ISO-fix in the back.

Of the three suggested I'd go for the BMW 330i


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

Jem said:


> My 57 plate RX-8 had ISO-fix in the back.
> 
> Of the three suggested I'd go for the BMW 330i


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## msb (Dec 20, 2009)

Jem said:


> My 57 plate RX-8 had ISO-fix in the back.
> 
> Of the three suggested I'd go for the BMW 330i


Bm will be faster, more reliable and economical so no brainer really:thumb:


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Jem said:


> My 57 plate RX-8 had ISO-fix in the back.
> 
> Of the three suggested I'd go for the BMW 330i


Was it easy to get in and out? Just, my experience of an rx8 made it awkward for me to see that as being easy.


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

RisingPower said:


> Was it easy to get in and out? Just, my experience of an rx8 made it awkward for me to see that as being easy.


I never had kids in the back, but given the rear doors it would be a lot better than a two door car. A proper four door would be better still though, but only slightly.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

Whats this? RP ignorning people realising BM's are a good choice? Why you not reccomending the op buys Datusn cherry or somethin?


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> Whats this? RP ignorning people realising BM's are a good choice? Why you not reccomending the op buys Datusn cherry or somethin?


Bimmers are all rubbish, don't want that ****e :lol:


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

Suck my c**k :lol:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

RP your only saying they are rubbish because you cant handle the power so you decided on one of those Dacia things with a nissan badge and a renault engine


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

and blingggggggg wheels :lol:


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> Suck my c**k :lol:


Be careful what you wish for :argie:


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Grizzle said:


> RP your only saying they are rubbish because you cant handle the power so you decided on one of those Dacia things with a nissan badge and a renault engine


330s are gutless, tbh even an m3 isn't that quick 

Mind you, they make yours look like a horse cart


----------



## Guest (Apr 21, 2012)

to be honest i am a jap car nut ever since my mr2 and celica oh and my is200,if i could have a 350z i would.

i must admit i love the way jays car looks, which is strange as i have never liked bmw's until now.
i think the scoob may get my vote,5 doors,fairly rapid but the fuel may be a killer. althought i only do 5,000 miles a year.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

tys said:


> to be honest i am a jap car nut ever since my mr2 and celica oh and my is200,if i could have a 350z i would.
> 
> i must admit i love the way jays car looks, which is strange as i have never liked bmw's until now.
> i think the scoob may get my vote,5 doors,fairly rapid but the fuel may be a killer. althought i only do 5,000 miles a year.


Don't humor that crazy foo! :doublesho:doublesho:lol:


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

RP Y u jelly bro

Cheers TYS


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

RisingPower said:


> 330s are gutless, tbh even an m3 isn't that quick
> 
> Mind you, they make yours look like a horse cart


lmao, yours must be worst than mine then

E46 isnt that quick, E92 M3 is awesome.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Grizzle said:


> lmao, yours must be worst than mine then
> 
> E46 isnt that quick, E92 M3 is awesome.


Nah, mine's like a jet compared to your horse cart 

E92 m3 isn't awesome, it doesn't sound great, is even heavier than the e46 and isn't that quick either.


----------



## Alex_225 (Feb 7, 2008)

I've always thoer, ught the RX8 is the kind of car you buy with your heart not your head.

Yeah they have problems but they have bags of character and by all accounts they are a shed load of fun.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

RP's in denial about his secret fetish for bimmers, i bet he has pics of em all over his bedroom N SH IT.


----------



## msb (Dec 20, 2009)

RisingPower said:


> Nah, mine's like a jet compared to your horse cart
> 
> E92 m3 isn't awesome, it doesn't sound great, is even heavier than the e46 and isn't that quick either.


Lmao, one of the biggest negative comments about the 350z when it came out was it was heavy and felt it, which is quite ironic when passing comments about the m3's, also my old e36 used to wipe the floor with 350z's so can't see that a e46 or e92 would be any different


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

msb said:


> Lmao, one of the biggest negative comments about the 350z when it came out was it was heavy and felt it, which is quite ironic when passing comments about the m3's, also my old e36 used to wipe the floor with 350z's so can't see that a e46 or e92 would be any different


I didn't get the 350z because it competed in performance with an m3, i got it because it was more reliable, cheaper to run, the rasp from the m3 got on my nerves and you really felt the weight shifting in the e46.

Also, the zed whilst heavy, isn't as heavy as the e46, which in turn isn't as heavy as the e92. None of them are track cars, apart from maybe the e46 csl, they're all heavy and underpowered.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> RP's in denial about his secret fetish for bimmers, i bet he has pics of em all over his bedroom N SH IT.


Only yours with you in it :argie:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

RisingPower said:


> I didn't get the 350z because it competed in performance with an m3, i got it because it was more reliable, cheaper to run, the rasp from the m3 got on my nerves and you really felt the weight shifting in the e46.
> 
> Also, the zed whilst heavy, isn't as heavy as the e46, which in turn isn't as heavy as the e92. None of them are track cars, apart from maybe the e46 csl, they're all heavy and underpowered.


50kg between the 350z and E46 M3 and 180kg between the 350z and E92 M3

BMW's have more HP though depending on your year of 350z can be as much as 120hp

I'm sorry but a 350Z is not going to out do an E92 M3

Your a dreamer if you think that.


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

And then the RX-8 is 120kg lighter than the 350Z


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

RisingPower said:


> Only yours with you in it :argie:


Something can be arranged if nessescary, we can work on an exchange basis, what would you like me to wear?


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Jem said:


> And then the RX-8 is 120kg lighter than the 350Z


And an elise is 300kg lighter than that.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Grizzle said:


> 50kg between the 350z and E46 M3 and 180kg between the 350z and E92 M3
> 
> BMW's have more HP though depending on your year of 350z can be as much as 120hp
> 
> ...


No **** sherlock 

Do you think I bought the 350z because it was quick?


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

jay_bmw said:


> Something can be arranged if nessescary, we can work on an exchange basis, what would you like me to wear?


Just a g string.


----------



## jay_bmw (Jan 28, 2010)

Ok same to you, try & get your rim in too


----------



## Jem (Aug 10, 2007)

RisingPower said:


> And an elise is 300kg lighter than that.


And a Honda CBR is 550kg lighter than that.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

RisingPower said:


> No **** sherlock
> 
> Do you think I bought the 350z because it was quick?


I dunno, you always make out its the fastest thing ever and your more experienced with cars and handling than anyone on this earth...


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Grizzle said:


> I dunno, you always make out its the fastest thing ever and your more experienced with cars and handling than anyone on this earth...


Nah it's just faster than your penny farthing is all  Yes, i'm a driving god and you're just a cheap hoe


----------

