Danno

For styling, I like the S2 much better than the RX8. Part of the 'disposable' nature of Japanese cars is in response to their consumer market. The Japanese consumer expects a brand new car every 2-3 years with absolutely zero carry-over from the previous generation. To do so would mean death to sales for sure. That's why you don't see cars with skin-jobs being passed off as new like the '78 Fairmont that's re-invented as the latest and greatest Mustang every year. That's also why the Mustang handles like crap and needs all sorts of gimmick fixes like the Steeda and Griggs upgraded rear-ends for the solid axles.

"I have not driven an Rx8. I had a TT rx7 though, and the handling of that car was seriously impressive. The magazines claim the Rx8 handles better. If so, it may be a challenge for an S2."

The RX-7TT just gives me fits at Laguna Seca. I've had them pass me up the straights, insides and outsides of corners everwhere! That was the reason I went for the Huntley MAF-4/Turbo-2 upgrade on my 951. Even then with 280-300rwhp, they were getting away from me. So then the suspension upgrades, and big fat wheels and tires... etc.

One thing the RX7 had better than the 951 was the suspension geometry. At the absolute limit, the 951 is a handful to drive, can't drift it smoothly. But I love the way the RX-7 feels as it's breaking over the limit. Smooth, controllable, kinda like it's saying, "whoops, got in over your head, eh? Let me fix that for ya!".

If the RX8 improves on the RX7, then it'll be a tough contender for sure. Robby, I'll try to dig Willow Springs times for you. Planning on sub 1:30s this year! Derek who? That guy's a ******!

Robby

Accord w/240HP stock? Are you sure on this? That sounds really high to me- I didnt think the V6 was even that high & it's really slow compared to what one would think- part mihgt be the auto tranny being the only one available though...

As for the looks of it, the RX8 DOES look much better in person- I have to admit that I REALLY did NOT like it when I saaw pics of it, but, when seeing it in person, it's much better- STILL not as nice looking as an S2 though, but...

Also, that sounds ridiculous about all the RX 8 issues already- bad deal there...

Robby

Danno- didn't expect to see you at this time... I'm good & sick right now- going to go back to sleep in a minute- I'll get w/you soon- sounds cool on the WS times- I'm just taking things from magazine tests, which usually gives decent apples to apples comparisons- the RX7 does have the susp advantage though- like theM3's & Supras, etc- hard to beat that, ESPECIALLY for a street car... Our cars are INCREDIBLY well composed for a non-multi-link, but, when compared to a good multi, like E36 M3, etc, they really have a TOUGH time...

bloodraven

well....i do have to say that I think you all are CRAZY for not liking the looks of that car (j/k though)...I do however LOVE the way it looks, but I also like the SSR....eh...i like cars that are over stylish...

loonyjuice

Suicide doors on cars made by budding kamikazies!

I also prefer lazy power to screaming *****-out zing. A friend of mine summed up the rx8 perfectly. "All wind and no ****".

ljd-924SE

what excites me, is the upcoming mazdaspeed RX-8, which is supercharged to make up for the power issues. not that a supercharged RX-8 even comes close to a 951, IMHO.

Robby

I don't know man- these newer cars are getting pretty impressive- tough to beat from a street car perspective anyway- the mutli-link susp has come a LONG way & was already beyond what the 951 could ever do- not that we don't do well w/what we've got & not that we can't hang w/multi-link on the track, but, on the street, it gives cars impeccable manners w/excellent ride quality, while still being able to stay FLAT in the corners. E36M3 is a PRIME example.

The chassis themselves have gotten MUCH better too- by comparison, we're driving flexi-flyers. Noise & vibrations have been almost eliminated (I would LOVE to say that about my car) even in hatchbacks (which will always be more rattle-prone than sedan/coupes), etc...

The RX8 is featured in a group test in R&T this month- I wanted to check it out in the super market, but, was too sick to read it, PLUS, didn't want to get my germs all over it when someone else would eventually buy it- what a nice guy I am, huh? Maybe if OTHERS were that way then I wouldn't be sitting here going broke in continual misery, bored off my ***, writing 10page long RL replies... It hurts to fu**ing breath dammit!

Anyway, from what I understand, the RX8 really only lacks in HP/TQ- a supercharger would help that- we already know what that rotary can do when turbo-charged 3rd Gens were as easily modded as 951's- AAMOF, there are probably more RX7's out there w/>400HP than 951's. The TT spool-up was FAST & the car's were LIGHT- too bad they didn't keep refining the RX7 (even worse Porsche didn't keep refining the 944!) losing the pop-up headlights for one thing- save a little weight, etc- THAT would be great for the 944 too, although I think they LOOK great & am not sure about getting rid of them...

I'm not saying the RX7 (OR RX8) is BETTER than a 951, but, they are better in many ways for a STREET car- faster than a stock Turbo S & just as easy to add 50-100 extra HP- RX7 could shed ~50-75lbs & easier & MUCH CHEAPER, than from a 951, &, they were already >200lbs lighter to begin with... Also, TORSEN w/nice tranny, etc, BUT, they REALLY could have used a nice 6-sp- not sure about the gearing, as I'm not sure what their actual redline was...anyone? I know it was higher than 951- I'm thinking ~7500(?).

I've often thought about getting one (was actually keeping my eyes open when I bought the 951, as well as VR6 Corrado...) & modding it- I wonder if any places go to SINGLE Turbo when modding, like 4th Gen Supras(?)- would be cool to simplify & save some weight (from the front although they're already 50/50), etc. Their first few ads showed ~4.5 for 0-60, but, were slightly optimistic- most ran ~5.2, but I THINK I ONCE saw a 4.9- SUB 14's @ 1/4- I've definately seen as low as 13.8 & worst of ~14.0- this beats ALL 944 Turbo S tests- CONSISTENT 14.2. I remember a hair <25.0 for 0-130- Turbo S runs 0-120 in ~22.1- never seen 0-130 for ANY 951. I DO remember R&T test w/968 taking just >35 for 0-130 & THAT'S w/the beneficial short-*** 968 gearing. Turbo S should be ~29.0 or a hair better. RX7 ALSO has lower Cx AND lower FA, so, more high-speed potential. RX7's were fast- of course, I REALLY REALLY like my 951 interior & the RX7 is NO comparison IMO.


Unfortunately, the 3rd Gen RX7s biggest prob was ironically it's rotary engine. When Mazda originally sent 3rd Gens here, they did NOT take the proper methods to make sure that their US dealers were knowledgeable AND/OR equipped to work on the cars. This led to a lot of problems that could EASILY have been fixed or avoided altogether instead of sometimes causing catastrophic engine failures. The results for some cars (& owners) were disastrous- like 20K-25K mile failures, etc- detonation was DEADLY to them- even the slightest bit... I don't know TOO much about all this, BUT heard it all through several mechanics who have actually worked on them, one a dealer mechanic, so I know there's some truth to it- I don't know the extent. The cars weren't really supposed to be ALL that tough to maintain, but, by the time many of the kinks were ironed out, it was too late.


Anyway, I said, earlier to imagine how incredible the 3rd Gen RX7 could have become had Mazda kept developing the line... Well, imagine if Porsche had kept up the 944 series & put the same effort into it that they did for the 911 line(!?) They were doing well w/the 968 & had turbo charged it, etc- imagine if they had gone on to give it a nice multi-link susp & REALLY worked on it all over, like the 912-911-930-964-993-996, etc... IMAGINE 40YEARS of 924/944/968 development!!!


Anyway, sorry for the book- I'm sick- been taking medicine- nothing better to do than sit here & ramble over a keyboard w/random thoughts- the RX8 may pan out to be a cool car- hopefully they'll iron out any kinks, QUICKLY, & we can get a 300-350HP/TQ forced induction version that can be modded like the RX7.... might be a very nice street car- IF you can stand the styling- personally, for a street car w/a little more practicality (the whole purpose of the rear doors) I would rather have an Audi S4- TTV6- NOT V8- as for a personal car for a daily driver, I think, despite all I've said about the RX8's possibilities, I'd rather have a really nice S2- ESPECIALLY if it was a convertible... I'll have to drive an RX8 soon- actually, there are a FEW cars I need to get out & "test drive" since I haven't done that in a long time...

ljd-924SE

robby,

you speak the truth, good man. i am also quite impressed with our rotary friends. it's just that in my old age (22 y/o), i've become quite stubborn and particularly resistant to the notion that anyone could ever assemble a more desirable package in a sports car.

then again, accompanying the 944 turbo in my not too distant future garage will be a 964 turbo just in case some young, whipersnapper with a mazdaspeed RX-8 needs a lesson.

as you may have guessed, i'm not even sure that my beloved moniker porsche has really improved upon the 965 with the developments of the 993TT and 996TT. man, i'm gettin old and stubborn.

Robby

I have never been in a 964- I've SAT in 993 & 996- ridden in 993, but, not TT. I've driven a late 80's 911Turbo- which one was that? '88? I liked them a lot- I didn't care for the 964 as much, BUT, since I've never been in one- what makes you like it more? I'm just curious BTW- not ragging you or anything. I really like the 993's & have always been curious if the 996 is really a better car or not- they really aren't any faster- they are supposed to be better street cars, but, again, I'm not sure- I would LOVE to be able to test both back to back- I like the 996 in it's own right- IF I had to pick ONE 911 out of ALL of them, I'd probably go crazy- actually, I'd probably go for a 959, but... They were REALLY heavy, actually, despite the kevlar body panels, etc- I'm just not sure- the first stick I ever drove was a '74 targa- that was in ~88- I LOVED it- nothing like the cars we're talking about, but, it was a REALLY COOL FEELING car & it was STILL pretty fast for what it was. I would really like to know a little more about the dif b/t 993&996TT's & how they measure up- susp, accel, FEEL, etc. The 996TT seems to brake worse- they're distances- every year it seems the 911 has longer stopping distances- actually, I THINK it the 964 that was stopping from 60 in ~105ft- they take ~120ft now- not nearly what one would expect- especially w/all this HUGE rotor q/4-piston caliper crap- BMW, Audi, & even Mercedes aer beating them regularly w/sub 115's... Everyone says that by 100 or so, the Porsche would outbrake them all, but, the few tests I've seen haven't really shown that- I would love to line up a REALLY good braking 951 against a few of these & see how they'd all stop from 150. AAMOF, I need to check my car now w/my new susp & pads, etc... I got 123ft a year ago & was NOT impressed at ALL... NEW 951S was ~122, so... w/33/5 bias valve, drilled Zimmermans, SS lines, Dunlop SP8000's, etc, I would THINK I would do a LITTLE better.... anyway....

ljd-924SE

robby,

first of all, i'm ashamed to admit that i've never driven any of these, i've only sat in each of them. and i'd have to drive all three before a purchase decision would ever be made.

you're definately on the right track with the weight concerns. correct me if any of this is wrong. we'll take a '94 964 turbo vs. '96 993 tt vs. '00 996 tt.

964 - 3200lb - 355hp - 385ftlb
993 - 3500lb - 410hp - 400ftlb
996 - 3400lb - 420hp - 410ftlb

so, what these numbers tell me, is that the later cars gained 200/300 lbs but not a tremendous amount of power, and a minimal amount torque. i understand the later cars are ultimately quicker and more capable, but i'm willing to trade that and their luxurious refinements for the completely raw, visceral feeling of the 965. i believe my friends dad described the 965 best as "terrifyingly fast." these are the kind of sources i base my opinions on. when you can see the expression on a persons face, who does have experience with the vehicle. i'd never seen an automotive enthusiast react to the 993tt or 966tt with such intensity.

i wonder if excellence or anyone else has ever done an article directly comparing these three cars. now, that's would be a good time.

Luis de Prat

They did. It was called the 968. Problem was, "German refinement" priced itself out of that category of the sportscar market leaving less expensive Japanese models to meet the demand.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Our 944/944S2/951 cars are old cars. They're bordering on classic status if not already in that category. It's just no comparison to pit them against Mazda's latest and greatest.

OTOH, I maintain that I welcome you to compare contemporary RX-7s to our cars and see how age has treated them. Our Porsches were built to different standards before the company revamped and started building 25,000 Boxsters a year.

Robby

Good points guys- but, as for the 944 thing- I meant, consider what could have been had Porsche developed the 968 up till today- that would have added another 9yrs of developement...

The way you put it ljd, you've made a pretty good case for the 964's... I'd have to drive htem all before deciding too- unfortunately, it's difficult for most people to EVER have the CHANCE to drive those cars- there are just too few & they're WAY out of most people's leagues...