Only car I will ever buy in a Manual

[gtx510]

does anyone think that mazda should have put the 2.3L turbo engine into a the RX8 chassis? of course they'd have to call it something different
and then put the rotary engine into a smaller car? like the size of a Miata?
that would have helped with the whole power/weight problem
both car use essentially the same chassis...

 

[eljefino]

Mazda had rotaries in everything in the early 1970s, even station wagons. It didn't go so super.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: bigdreama

2 hours a day in bumper to bumper traffic?


Well, on a bad day. If I time it right, it's 30 minutes of b2b traffic and 20 mins of normal hwy speed, more or less, each way, 28 miles one way. But I'm not ready to give up my stick just yet. Only pondering the idea once in a while... I'm a huge control freak in general.

 

[gtx510]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
Mazda had rotaries in everything in the early 1970s, even station wagons. It didn't go so super.
yep, even pickups http://www.mazdarepu.com/
those repu's are fun to drive but i doubt it would make a good tow vehicle

 

[mpvue]

Originally Posted By: gtx510
does anyone think that mazda should have put the 2.3L turbo engine into a the RX8 chassis? of course they'd have to call it something different
and then put the rotary engine into a smaller car? like the size of a Miata?
that would have helped with the whole power/weight problem
both car use essentially the same chassis...

the RX-8 is the Mazda 'halo' car. it HAS to have a rotary. Mazda knows that its unreliable, and a gas pig, but it's special, exotic, etc. w/o it, the RX-8 isn't anything special.
the rotary aftermarket is what really impresses me, those guys are seriously dedicated. there are 3 and 4 rotor rotaries running around that sound incredible. search youtube for them.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: gtx510
does anyone think that mazda should have put the 2.3L turbo engine into a the RX8 chassis? of course they'd have to call it something different
and then put the rotary engine into a smaller car? like the size of a Miata?
that would have helped with the whole power/weight problem
both car use essentially the same chassis...

the RX-8 is the Mazda 'halo' car. it HAS to have a rotary. Mazda knows that its unreliable, and a gas pig, but it's special, exotic, etc. w/o it, the RX-8 isn't anything special.
the rotary aftermarket is what really impresses me, those guys are seriously dedicated. there are 3 and 4 rotor rotaries running around that sound incredible. search youtube for them.

+1
Well the RX-8 has a sort of practical body for a pure sports car and I'm sure some folks would like a version with a practical engine like the 2.3 turbo and then have a crazy turbo rotary for the halo car version. I wonder if a 4 cyl would even fit in the RX-8? I can't say I've ever looked under the hood of one.
I've seen a couple turbo RX-8 autocrossing and they are very impressive, with big power over a wide rev range.

As for the manual vs auto debate, I like manuals for their simplicity and the control you have over the drivetrain. Ever had an auto car that wouldn't idle? or idled too high? Easy to work around with a manual. For sporty driving a true manual is way better than most of the manually shifted autos to.

 

[Pesca]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
w/o it, the RX-8 isn't anything special.


Sport car (look, at least) but seating 4, RWD with a 50-50 weight ratio between front and rear => good handling.

If Mazda was doing a model without a rotary engine, I will surely buy one (mid life crisis car but still able to bring kids to school).

The rotary engine is too much trouble for me to jump into and the gas guzzling nature of the engine is a deal killer. But I am a big fan of this car.

They should do an electric version of it.

 

[Pesca]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I wonder if a 4 cyl would even fit in the RX-8? I can't say I've ever looked under the hood of one.


Me neither and it would probably be tight to fit normal 4 cyl (even more with a turbo). But I believe a boxer type engine could.

Anyone even try to?

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
If you take care of them automatics will last as long as/ longer than manuals.


With higher mileage used cars automatics are a huge gamble and ticking time bomb. Replacement cost will usually exceed value of vehicle.

Manuals are much easier to notice an oncoming issue as symptoms are obvious and can easily be felt of worn clutch, odd gear engagement, or noise. Automatics are a casino IMHO although odds are about 50 50.

 

[ALL_OUT_LS1]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
Mazda had rotaries in everything in the early 1970s, even station wagons. It didn't go so super.


rotary engine is a terrible design

 

[FL-400S]

I drove manual mostly or often for the first 15 years of my driving. I just sold my last manual and have 3 autos now. I dont miss it. I had my fun.

 

[caravanmike]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: rudolphna
If you take care of them automatics will last as long as/ longer than manuals.


With higher mileage used cars automatics are a huge gamble and ticking time bomb. Replacement cost will usually exceed value of vehicle.

Manuals are much easier to notice an oncoming issue as symptoms are obvious and can easily be felt of worn clutch, odd gear engagement, or noise. Automatics are a casino IMHO although odds are about 50 50.


i agree!! problems in higher mileage (auto) transmissions can easily mask themselves until you get the vehicle home and driving it for a week. you can easily get stung! mike

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: gtx510
does anyone think that mazda should have put the 2.3L turbo engine into a the RX8 chassis? of course they'd have to call it something different
and then put the rotary engine into a smaller car? like the size of a Miata?
that would have helped with the whole power/weight problem
both car use essentially the same chassis...


I think it would sell better. It's a great chassis but the rotary is too quirky for many buyers and it uses a lot of fuel for its relatively meager power output. An engine that revs smoothly to 9000 rpm and builds power the whole way is a lot of fun, but I don't think it has been a good investment for Mazda.

I think it would be cool if they provided a rotary option on both the RX-8 (or whatever it would then be called) and the Miata, but most buyers would probably want a regular engine.

 

[mjoekingz28]

Mazda had it right in 85, my favorite car and favorite rotary (had a 97 too). It was pretty much bare bones and light. It'd only do 100, but would chirp 3rd. They kept making the engine better and better, but kept screwing the car up more and more.

The 93-95 was their most awesome car as its styling is still ahead of its time today.

I agree putting the rotary in something fun like a Miata, not a family coupe pig like the RX-8. A 3000lb rotary is disgusting. [censored] how as technology evolves, cars get heavier when they should be lighter like sportbikes do.

A 79 RX7, btw, it was not light, but at 2350lb makes more sense than 3000+, especially when you're bragging about handling.