Topic: Used Vehicle Review: Mazda RX-8, 2004-2011

[Autos_Editor]

The only car still offered with a rotary engine, the RX-8 sports car is a 'high maintenance machine' with a so-so record of reliability, says Chris Chase.

Read More...

[initial_D]

After 2.5 years of owning a GT model, only complain is the car seats, not as supportive or comfy as it looks. The sports seats in my old E30 were better.

Would buy a replacment model if more HP is available, and better seats.

[2latecrew]

All enthusiasts should own a rotary once. Unfortunatley once will probaly be enough.

[gord_boyd]

I think the key highlight of my three year ownership was the composure and feel of the handling.
Recently in Car and Driver's "best Handling Cars" analysis with the science of handling, it beat 3 series
BMW in 8 out of ten categories.  For those prepared to take a chance with something so novel,
that report helped recall the joys of driving it.

[Erik]

Still one of the finest handling cars I have ever driven. A real gem of a sports car.

[Mike]

All enthusiasts should own a rotary once. Unfortunately once will probably be enough.

Ditto!  Although I think I could go back one day if the engine and car package were right.

After 2.5 years of owning a GT model, only complain is the car seats, not as supportive or comfy as it looks. The sports seats in my old E30 were better.

Really?  I found the seats to be very comfortable.  I did a 3000KM road trip in one over 4 days which included a 14 hour day on day 4.  I was more then comfortable.  I find my WRX seats worse.  I hear a lot of guys with the far more supportive RX-8 R3 seats complain they are uncomfortable on a long distance trip.

[Gardiner Westbound]

This is from the link Chris specified: For example, printed on Castrol bottles of 5W-20 weight synthetic oil, says "use only in cars used for short trips" and another 5W-20 Castrol bottle of non synthetic oil says "use only if required by the car manufacture". Otherwise, Castrol ,who sets the standard for excellent oil, does not recommend the use of 5W-20 oil unless directed to by the car manufacture or for short trips.

I have long wondered about the very thin motor oils some manufacturers are specifying, apparently to boost their EPA ratings a 10th of a mile per gallon. Years ago, when they built over-engineered, extraordinarily durable cars, Mercedes Benz and Volvo recommended owners use the heaviest single viscosity motor oil their climate would permit, 40W or 50W in the summer, 10W or 20W in the winter, 5W for Arctic conditions. When multiviscosity motor oils became available, with great hesitation and trepidation, they permitted 20W-50! Today's dainty, high tech, aluminum engines, although cast and machined much more precisely, are not nearly as sturdy as the cast iron lumps back then.

Most modern cars call for 5W-30 conventional motor oil. I'm not an advocate for the very thin synthetics or 5W-20 oil Ford and Mazda recommend for some if not all of their cars. I wouldn't buy a car with a turbocharged engine, but if I somehow wound up with one only then would I look at a European spec Group IV full synthetic motor oil - to cope with the greater stress levels.

http://forums.automotive.com/70/6210886/mazda/mazda-rx-8s-engine-failure-problem/index.html

[quadzilla]

I've only driven the RX-8 once and fell in love right away. Sadly this car doesn't meet my function test so it was never purchased. Better to have loved and lost than not loved at all.

[vdk]

I've had the pleasure of driving this car. And what a grin inducing machine it is, so nimble and eager to play.
By comparison the 3 Series feels like something an accountant would drive.

[Spec5]

Always liked the RX-7 and RX-8. Too bad they couldn't find a way to fit the Speed 3's engine under this hood.

[gotak]

Always liked the RX-7 and RX-8. Too bad they couldn't find a way to fit the Speed 3's engine under this hood.

Is the RX-8 a better handling car than the new generation speed 3? Cause I know used to be the RX-8 was slower in a straight line but supposedly faster in a corner. With the new speed 3 though the handling has improved a lot to the tune of a 72 mph slalom result on insideline vs the roadandtrack testing of the 09 RX-8 R3 doing 70 mph (of course could be different test). Anyhow certainly either the RX-8 needs a diet to make the most out of it's rotory or maybe a new rotory with more power Always a good thing.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

This is from the link Chris specified: For example, printed on Castrol bottles of 5W-20 weight synthetic oil, says "use only in cars used for short trips" and another 5W-20 Castrol bottle of non synthetic oil says "use only if required by the car manufacture". Otherwise, Castrol ,who sets the standard for excellent oil, does not recommend the use of 5W-20 oil unless directed to by the car manufacture or for short trips.

I have long wondered about the very thin motor oils some manufacturers are specifying, apparently to boost their EPA ratings a 10th of a mile per gallon. Years ago, when they built over-engineered, extraordinarily durable cars, Mercedes Benz and Volvo recommended owners use the heaviest single viscosity motor oil their climate would permit, 40W or 50W in the summer, 10W or 20W in the winter, 5W for Arctic conditions. When multiviscosity motor oils became available, with great hesitation and trepidation, they permitted 20W-50! Today's dainty, high tech, aluminum engines, although cast and machined much more precisely, are not nearly as sturdy as the cast iron lumps back then.

Most modern cars call for 5W-30 conventional motor oil. I'm not an advocate for the very thin synthetics or 5W-20 oil Ford and Mazda recommend for some if not all of their cars. I wouldn't buy a car with a turbocharged engine, but if I somehow wound up with one only then I would look at a European spec Group IV full synthetic motor oil - to cope with the greater stress levels.

http://forums.automotive.com/70/6210886/mazda/mazda-rx-8s-engine-failure-problem/index.html

It might have something to do with tighter tolerances?  Closer fit between the piston/cylinderwall, tighter tolerances between the valve stems and the head, less space between the connecting rods and crank journals, etc.  It's entirely possible that the higher viscocity oils would be unable to get into and lubricate these tighter spaces.  Just like a lower viscocity oil would have a hard time lubricating parts with large gaps.

[Gardiner Westbound]

It might have something to do with tighter tolerances?  Closer fit between the piston/cylinderwall, tighter tolerances between the valve stems and the head, less space between the connecting rods and crank journals, etc.  It's entirely possible that the higher viscocity oils would be unable to get into and lubricate these tighter spaces.  Just like a lower viscocity oil would have a hard time lubricating parts with large gaps.

Good one! I hadn't thought of that.

Nonetheless the warning Castrol prints on its 5W-20 and synthetic oil bottles is concerning.

[initial_D]

After 2.5 years of owning a GT model, only complain is the car seats, not as supportive or comfy as it looks. The sports seats in my old E30 were better.

Really?  I found the seats to be very comfortable.  I did a 3000KM road trip in one over 4 days which included a 14 hour day on day 4.  I was more then comfortable.  I find my WRX seats worse.  I hear a lot of guys with the far more supportive RX-8 R3 seats complain they are uncomfortable on a long distance trip.

The bottom of seat cushion is OK, but the upper half of the seat back is rather uncomfortable, as in my upper back and shoulder is very tiresome at times after a long drive. Only feel this way in the 8, the seats in the CX-7, with less padding, is way more tolerable in the seat back.

The Recarros in the R3 is rather cheap, almost knock-off like.

[Black Hatch]

I thought I was just going to lurk in this forum but I can't help myself; I have to respond to this thread.

So I have the RX-8 as my daily driver for the past 2.5 years and so far I haven't had problems with it and its been a joy to drive and own.
http://www.autos.ca/forum/index.php/topic,59706.0.html

The RX-8 is meant to be driven hard; If driven timidly (as maybe with the automatic) its possible for the engine to have carbon buildup. The saying goes a redline a day keeps the carbon away. And what redline... ~ 10,000 rpm.
The RX-8 is forgiving in terms of handling and the clutch is neither heavy nor light and the short-throw shifter feels perfect. As I believe Snowy said in a long-ago thread, the centre of gravity is really low it feels like its right next to the shifter. The ride is neither firm or harsh and because of this reason its not bad as a daily driver.
The rotary engine sounds as TG puts it like a jet engine. Such a sweet purr sound to rev it. Of note I've always done the 10 sec hold at 3k rpm before shutting off the RX-8 engine; and never had any problems starting the car (minus the instance below instance).
I've flooded the engine once and it was really stupid of me because it was Monday morning almost -40 degrees outside and I forgot to plug-in/warm up the previous night. (An expensive $2k lesson learned)

After 2.5 years of owning a GT model, only complain is the car seats, not as supportive or comfy as it looks. The sports seats in my old E30 were better.
Would buy a replacment model if more HP is available, and better seats.

I think that means only 1.5 years because you don't drive the RX-8 in the winter 

After 2.5 years of owning a GT model, only complain is the car seats, not as supportive or comfy as it looks. The sports seats in my old E30 were better.

Really?  I found the seats to be very comfortable.  I did a 3000KM road trip in one over 4 days which included a 14 hour day on day 4.  I was more then comfortable.  I find my WRX seats worse.  I hear a lot of guys with the far more supportive RX-8 R3 seats complain they are uncomfortable on a long distance trip.

The bottom of seat cushion is OK, but the upper half of the seat back is rather uncomfortable, as in my upper back and shoulder is very tiresome at times after a long drive. Only feel this way in the 8, the seats in the CX-7, with less padding, is way more tolerable in the seat back.
The Recarros in the R3 is rather cheap, almost knock-off like.

Strange because I feel the opposite; found the upper back of the seat comfy and the lower part of the seat a little uncomfortable.

Always liked the RX-7 and RX-8. Too bad they couldn't find a way to fit the Speed 3's engine under this hood.

Is the RX-8 a better handling car than the new generation speed 3? Cause I know used to be the RX-8 was slower in a straight line but supposedly faster in a corner. With the new speed 3 though the handling has improved a lot to the tune of a 72 mph slalom result on insideline vs the roadandtrack testing of the 09 RX-8 R3 doing 70 mph (of course could be different test). Anyhow certainly either the RX-8 needs a diet to make the most out of it's rotory or maybe a new rotory with more power Always a good thing.

I don't think you could removed much more weight on the RX-8 short of removing the rear passenger compartment. The speed3 (with turbo) engine is too large to fit in the small engine bay of the RX-8. Probably could turbo-charge the RX-8 to get more power at the expense of a higher fuel cost. In regards to the newer RX-8 (2009+) having a poorer performance than the older RX-8 (2004-2008) it could be because of  the shift-points changed on the updated RX-8 to give it a "better" fuel economy. 

As Careener says the RX-8 is still a looks fresh since its introduction.

Damn.
Loved it when I looked at the pics on my phone. Love it even more on my computer.
Best looking car out of Japan in close to 20 years.
Where do I sign up???

(from the Scion Dimension thread)
Hey wait... the more I look at the Scion Dimension, its front looks almost like the RX-8!!! Copycat!   
(RX-8 is better looking than the Scion especially the rear )

Anyways the RX-8 is awesome coupe sedan extended-cab sports daily driver car.
Everyday I feel excited after a long day's work because of what awaits me for the drive home.

[Arctic_White]

One (of four) of my all-time favourite cars, and i would love to own it one day.

Looks are excellent; handling even better.  I can live with the dismal fuel economy.

As someone mentioned, every enthusiast should own a rotary at least once in their life.

[initial_D]

I think that means only 1.5 years because you don't drive the RX-8 in the winter.

Took it out this week, with snow on the driveway, should count as winter driving. 

Only out on 9000KM since I bought it.

[Arthur Dent]

I think that means only 1.5 years because you don't drive the RX-8 in the winter.

Took it out this week, with snow on the driveway, should count as winter driving. 

Only out on 9000KM since I bought it.

I must have missed that - congrats on the Rx-8!!! 

[Mozeby]

Always liked the RX-7 and RX-8. Too bad they couldn't find a way to fit the Speed 3's engine under this hood.

Agreed.  The rotary was a leaky bucket.  It would never reach it's potential because there were too many negatives and only a few positives.  A small turbo 4 (like the Speed 3's) would be pretty close to the same weight, and make way more torque which the RX-8 sorely lacked, and be more reliable and efficient.

[2latecrew]

One (of four) of my all-time favourite cars, and i would love to own it one day.

Looks are excellent; handling even better.  I can live with the dismal fuel economy.

As someone mentioned, every enthusiast should own a rotary at least once in their life.

I said that and I did own a 2nd gen RX7. I also drove the 1st Generation model on more than a few occasions. Live axel and 100 hp engine and all.

There is nothing like a rotary for spinning it to redline. The ligh weigth made for wonderful handeling cars. BUT they ate oil like a two stroke and drank fule like a V8 despite having the torque of a 50 cc morotcross bike. One of the worst winter cars I ever owned. hard to start in the cold, prone to flooding and the light wight and rwd made teaction an adventure.

I think If I were to own one as a toy I'd love to find a 1st gen one .