Looks like RX8 hp rating is getting revised down
08-22-2003, 10:07 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Danville
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Free maintenance (during the warranty period) and a 500 dollar debit card.....not too bad if one was looking into the RX-8 as a simple commute car, and wasn't interested in the performance.........
08-22-2003, 10:09 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by blue2k2s2k
Free maintenance (during the warranty period) and a 500 dollar debit card.....not too bad if one was looking into the RX-8 as a simple commute car, and wasn't interested in the performance.........
Free maintenance (during the warranty period) and a 500 dollar debit card.....not too bad if one was looking into the RX-8 as a simple commute car, and wasn't interested in the performance.........
08-22-2003, 10:32 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a hypothetical question... if I buy a RX8 by this coming tuesday, get the letter etc from Mazda and return it within 30 days (say 25 to be safe) does Mazda have to pay me back the price of the car + tax and license? If it's a loan through Mazda do they pay the premium on the loan during the duration it was open?
Just curious.
Just curious.
08-23-2003, 04:44 AM
#26
Registered User
This is hilarious, first the miata and the mustang, and now this. Ford/Mazda is the biggest joke. Your sporty cars are supposed to be a Halo for the rest of the lineup, but with Ford/Mustang they make an anchor.
What did they rate it? 250hp? And now they are rating it at 238hp but because they have a 5% error rating it can really be 225hp (now because they re-rated it).
Mazda wants to sounds like they are in the right because of their 5% error margin. They should try to do it the other way around by under rating their hp a little.
For example (I've never heard the BMW's were rated low), but I've seen a 330Ci with 225hp and weighing 200lbs more than the RX-8 being tested faster than the RX-8.
I'd say it's better to be safe and under rate your hp and not have to worry about this type of fiasco. I'd say it's safer to assume the RX-8 has 225 hp.
08-23-2003, 04:57 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rochester
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rai,
I agree with you on all counts. The hp rating should be a lower bound (say, minus one std deviation?).
But I have heard that BMW underrates their hp figures. I think I've seen it mentioned here that they dyno high, and certainly their performance numbers appear to bear this out.
I agree with you on all counts. The hp rating should be a lower bound (say, minus one std deviation?).
But I have heard that BMW underrates their hp figures. I think I've seen it mentioned here that they dyno high, and certainly their performance numbers appear to bear this out.
08-23-2003, 05:09 AM
#28
Registered User
Well I never heard it, but the M3 also sounds low 333hp to me while it's not much slower than a 375hp C5 while weighing a good deal more. I always figured it was gearing because the M3 is a gas guzziler while the C5 is not.
08-23-2003, 06:22 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by rai
[B]
For example (I've never heard the BMW's were rated low), but I've seen a 330Ci with 225hp and weighing 200lbs more than the RX-8 being tested faster than the RX-8.
[B]
For example (I've never heard the BMW's were rated low), but I've seen a 330Ci with 225hp and weighing 200lbs more than the RX-8 being tested faster than the RX-8.