What do you guys think would win in a race? A 91 automatic nsx or a 6 speed rx-8? thanks
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
nsx vs. rx-8
- Thread starter NSX91
- Start date
Nsx
RX8 would spank it. Why not just go to the track and the lower time wins. These posts are getting repetative and boring.
Wheelman said:
Thats what i thought because the rx-8 has 159 lbs of torque and it makes its hp and torque at around 8100
The NSX has 252 HP, the RX8 238. I think the RX-8 might weigh less. It would be pretty close IMO.
I think the RX-8 stuffed with 4 passengers will spank a 2 passenger NSX.
The NSX has no hope.
The NSX has no hope.
NsXMas said:I think the RX-8 stuffed with 4 passengers will spank a 2 passenger NSX.
The NSX has no hope.
THe RX8 is not very fast guys. It would be lucky to do a 14 in the 1/4... but so would a auto NSX.
I know, I was being sarcastic...NetViper said:
I drove a RX-8 once, while my SUV was getting serviced. Walked next door to the Mazda dealership and took it for a spin.
Was not impressed... Thing looks like a turtle. Driving feel was not impressive. Loved the rotary engine, but you know the potential for issues with those engines.
I once owned a '91 NSX auto and a '93 RX-7. I sold the RX7 because it was so damn unreliable and fragile. I thought of it like a beautiful woman who could make incredible love to you once a month and then.... well you get the point.
It got so bad at one point, I wondered if the RX in RX-7 meant the medication you needed just to avoid going crazy when it broke down while on-lookers admired (and smirked) at your beautiful vehicle sitting idly on the road side awaiting yet another tow.
I now own an '98 NSX 6speed and the difference in acceleration from the '91 auto and the '98 is clearly noticeable-- also taking into account that the latter is a manual transmission.
Before buying my '98, I test drove a bright yellow Rx-8.
My initial impressions were less than complimentary.
I found the seats uncomfortable and too small-- I'm 6' and weigh 220lbs.
The head room was lacking for anyone over 5'10 unless you set the seat so far back you'd be unsafe.
As for performance, the RX-8 was no '93 RX-7. The twin turbo '93 was an incredible driving car when it worked.
And, let me add here, so few people, including Mazda service people (at some dealerships) wanted to work on the car or were qualified to do so voicing their own issues and concerns about working on the 3rd gen car.
As for acceleration, the Rx-8 lacked the explosive speed of the previous generation. Handling was what acceptible from a sports car-- nothing special.
Coming toward you, the Rx-8 looks OK. Once along side you--- it's profile looks like too many design engineers each did their own thing and integrated it into the final result. Perhaps the engineers had too many liquid lunches the day the final product was presented.
The NSX is so much more sophisticated and beautiful-- even after 15 years of wearing the same aluminum body.
Lastly, in a head to head RX-8 vs. '91 NSX auto, I'd say it would be a close contest. The NSX auto, even shifted manually, lacks some power, but once off the line would give the Mazda a run for the money.
Larry T
It got so bad at one point, I wondered if the RX in RX-7 meant the medication you needed just to avoid going crazy when it broke down while on-lookers admired (and smirked) at your beautiful vehicle sitting idly on the road side awaiting yet another tow.
I now own an '98 NSX 6speed and the difference in acceleration from the '91 auto and the '98 is clearly noticeable-- also taking into account that the latter is a manual transmission.
Before buying my '98, I test drove a bright yellow Rx-8.
My initial impressions were less than complimentary.
I found the seats uncomfortable and too small-- I'm 6' and weigh 220lbs.
The head room was lacking for anyone over 5'10 unless you set the seat so far back you'd be unsafe.
As for performance, the RX-8 was no '93 RX-7. The twin turbo '93 was an incredible driving car when it worked.
And, let me add here, so few people, including Mazda service people (at some dealerships) wanted to work on the car or were qualified to do so voicing their own issues and concerns about working on the 3rd gen car.
As for acceleration, the Rx-8 lacked the explosive speed of the previous generation. Handling was what acceptible from a sports car-- nothing special.
Coming toward you, the Rx-8 looks OK. Once along side you--- it's profile looks like too many design engineers each did their own thing and integrated it into the final result. Perhaps the engineers had too many liquid lunches the day the final product was presented.
The NSX is so much more sophisticated and beautiful-- even after 15 years of wearing the same aluminum body.
Lastly, in a head to head RX-8 vs. '91 NSX auto, I'd say it would be a close contest. The NSX auto, even shifted manually, lacks some power, but once off the line would give the Mazda a run for the money.
Larry T
I have RX8 but never driven AT NSX so can't say who win. RX8 is almost like the NSX where it doesn't have much power down low but it shines in the upper RPM (around 6K+ up to 9K redline).
Not a direct comparison with the NSX, but my friend has an RX8 6 speed and RSX Type S. He comments that his RSX Type S is faster.
Another friend was shopping for a sports car between the $20 - $35K price range. He drove the RX8, and he commented that the engine was very high reving and smooth, but not much power. He ended up with a new S2000, and commented that between the 2 the S2000 wins hands down in terms of acceleration.
If you want a "practical" sports car, the RX8 might be a good choice. For straightline perform? Well, you have many other alternatives.
Another friend was shopping for a sports car between the $20 - $35K price range. He drove the RX8, and he commented that the engine was very high reving and smooth, but not much power. He ended up with a new S2000, and commented that between the 2 the S2000 wins hands down in terms of acceleration.
If you want a "practical" sports car, the RX8 might be a good choice. For straightline perform? Well, you have many other alternatives.
- Joined
- 22 September 2005
- Messages
- 1,215
Ive test driven a Rx-8 personaly and i have nothing but great things to say about it besides one thing. The lack of Power. The thing is an absolute dog and i think any nsx would beat it, although i havent driven an auto nsx i would still have to give it up to the nsx. On another note a buddy of mine test drove a rx-8 and have his borther in law follow him is his mazda mx-6 V6 with just i/h/e and the mx-6 walked all over it. He ended up going accross town and buying a Lancer Rally Art (not OZ) this was the same car we lined up against the type r and it killed it 5-5 times..... Those rally arts scream for a mivec 2.4l
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
bang for the buck vs. refinement/precision
In 1998, for the summer I drove a '91 NSX automatic. And in the past two years, I've had a few opportunities to drive the Mazda RX-8 (both 4spd. A.T. & 6spd. M.T.) a handful of times.
I recall the '91 NSX auto' was faster than the RX-8 M.T., albeit 'slightly. I believe 0-60 times for the NA1 A.T. NSX are generally 5.7-6.2s. For the RX-8 4spd. A.T. & 6spd. M.T. they are generally 8.0-8.5s & 6.0-6.5s, respectively.
The handling characteristics, taut feel, and overall experience of the NSX automatic are by far superior to the RX-8. The RX-8 though presents an excellent value for styling, options, technology, etc'... when compared to other import entry-level sports-coupes (ie. Solara, Accord coupe, Beetle) and sport-cars (ie. Mini, RSX, 350Z, Eclipse, Celica, Tiburon, etc'...). I don't classify the RX-8 w/ the S2000, Miata MX-5, MRS, etc' as that genre is moreof import entry-level roadsters; a different experience & niche.
In 1998, for the summer I drove a '91 NSX automatic. And in the past two years, I've had a few opportunities to drive the Mazda RX-8 (both 4spd. A.T. & 6spd. M.T.) a handful of times.
I recall the '91 NSX auto' was faster than the RX-8 M.T., albeit 'slightly. I believe 0-60 times for the NA1 A.T. NSX are generally 5.7-6.2s. For the RX-8 4spd. A.T. & 6spd. M.T. they are generally 8.0-8.5s & 6.0-6.5s, respectively.
The handling characteristics, taut feel, and overall experience of the NSX automatic are by far superior to the RX-8. The RX-8 though presents an excellent value for styling, options, technology, etc'... when compared to other import entry-level sports-coupes (ie. Solara, Accord coupe, Beetle) and sport-cars (ie. Mini, RSX, 350Z, Eclipse, Celica, Tiburon, etc'...). I don't classify the RX-8 w/ the S2000, Miata MX-5, MRS, etc' as that genre is moreof import entry-level roadsters; a different experience & niche.
i've driven my friends RX-8, it is a little short in the power department, but the chassis design feels alot better than the previous RX-7. its a shame though because if this car was closer to the 270 hp range NA, or even 260 hp (turbo), i think it would easily give similarly priced cars alot of trouble in corners and straights
RyRy210 said:
stock vs stock RX8 will beat RSX type S in every single category. except from 5-60MPH roll. I copied and pasted from Clubrsx.com
From C&D:
RSX-S
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.6 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.9 sec @ 95 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 136 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 181 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
RX-8
Zero to 60 mph: 5.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.0 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 7.2 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.6 sec @ 96 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 145 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 145 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
but RX8 will have tough time with RSX with RH and hondata.
nsxtcy85 said:
I am with you. I think the car looks good. It is very practical for a sports car. BUT that motor just plain sucks. It has no TQ, no remote feel of acceleration. Get rid of the rotary and throw the motor in the new Mazdaspeed 6 in there and you would have a much better car.
AndyH said:
Obviously his comments are based on his driving feel. Not from numbers. I've sat in both cars, and all I can say is that when I sat in the RSX-S, I get pushed back into the seat more than the RX8. Then again, this could be due to the RX8's lack of low end grunt.
I can speak the same thing for my NSX. It doesn't feel as fast as my Porsche, but the magazine numbers say otherwise.
My buddy who got the S2000 over the RX8, and my friend who says his RSX-S "feels" faster than his RX8, met up for coffee with me last night.
One of these cars is not like the others,RyRy210 said:
My buddy who got the S2000 over the RX8, and my friend who says his RSX-S "feels" faster than his RX8, met up for coffee with me last night.
One of these cars just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which car is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?
AndyH said:
that guy with the rsx can't drive then. I walked rx8's with my type-s when I had it... both from a stop and from a roll.. the type s's top end is definately fun.
the rx8 is a big disappointment as far as I am concerned :frown:
redshift said:
bahahaha
In 2004 I test drove manual RX8 and Manual 350Z and there was no comparison. I bought the Nissan. In 1998 I test drove a 1994 NSX auto and couldn't belive how slow the car was. Please tell me there's a huge difference between the manual NSXT and Auto NSX, more then the HP numbers suggest?
There is a huge difference. :wink:blavenia said:
blavenia said:
if there was no difference then i think alot more of us would have autos.
OneRedNSX said:
I think it's the other way around. The RX8 is very hard to launch fast due to lack of torque. So maybe the guys that you raced can't drive
Last edited:
