172 vs. RX8 (230)

[AndyWilde]

How would these two compare?

Andy

 

[ForceIndia]

There's not much in it. The RX8 pulls away @90+. Lovely cars.

 

[AndyWilde]

thought it would be pretty close

 

[.Ben.]

I really like the RX-8. Shame they've not managed to sort the thirst for expensive oil and poor fuel consumption issues.

 

[Cooksport]

Had one for 2 weeks, raced against my mate in his trophy (remap and exhaust), the trophy absolutely handed it too me.

The rx8 was rubbish, for speed.

Comfy tho.

 

[ForceIndia]

I really like the RX-8. Shame they've not managed to sort the thirst for expensive oil and poor fuel consumption issues.

True, but given the money you can pick them up for, I'd go for one.

 

[Poopensharten]

True, but given the money you can pick them up for, I'd go for one.

And 800 litres of oil

 

[OLR]

and full rebuild at 65,000 miles

 

[LouisQ]

'Engine of the year' for a year...

 

[theduck]

RX8 is a dissapointment imo. New RX7 will be a winner if it happens though.

 

[ForceIndia]

Great to drive though!

 

[JoedotwasT5phy]

and full rebuild at 65,000 miles

Thats just hear say mate.

 

[Cliotoby]

Thats just hear say mate.

Exactly, someone hasnt respected the engine in the slightest in that case.


Lacking in torque isnt hearsay though !!!

 

[mat-nos]

speed wise/fun factor thers prob not much in it up to the speed limit but the rx8 is a tad more practical for passengers but will cost a fortune to run in fuel, oil, tax, insurance and servicing.

very different cars though.

 

[Slammed172]

I like them a lot, sound good too. Only driven one once though, was a fan though.

 

[Poopensharten]

Exactly, someone hasnt respected the engine in the slightest in that case.


Lacking in torque isnt hearsay though !!!

Same is said about the 1*2's though!

 

[theduck]

Has same amount of torque as a 197 give or take a lb

 

[Cliotoby]

Same is said about the 1*2's though!

1*2's dont have much torque either.

 

[luke2405]

my mate has an rx-8 I get past him fairly easy with a standard cup. Lovely looking car though especialy when its going sideways lol

 

[AndyWilde]

Is that the 230 your friend has??

 

[chris_p]

Has same amount of torque as a 197 give or take a lb

rx8s are pretty heavy though...saying that the 197 is no posh spice.

I do like the looks of the rex, but it has a very poor engine, fact.

Bearing in mind Ford own mazda you would have thought they would have put a better engine in there, 2.5 turbo would have make it a cracking car.

 

[Poopensharten]

1*2's dont have much torque either.

Yeah thats what i said? :S

 

[gaz44]

A friend of mine has a 230 and it's a stunning car but the engine (for me) is just pointless. The amount of £'s it costs him on fuel (avg 19mpg) and oil is pretty rediculous for the performance. I'm sure they are fun to rev the nuts off but four adults in the car and the performance disappears! It needs a nice straight six or something.

Versus a Clio...not much in it!

 

[pritchard182]

172 is alot lighter so id say 172 mabe

 

[gaz44]

172 is alot lighter so id say 172 mabe

They have almost identical power to weight figures.

 

[Inferno]

speed wise/fun factor thers prob not much in it up to the speed limit but the rx8 is a tad more practical for passengers but will cost a fortune to run in fuel, oil, tax, insurance and servicing.

very different cars though.

I thought the tax was cheap as it's a 1.3 or something?

 

[172RT]

Rx8 is probably easier to get off the line being rwd

 

[pritchard182]

They have almost identical power to weight figures.

:quiet: thwt the 172 was lighter whooops

 

[gaz44]

:quiet: thwt the 172 was lighter whooops

It is lighter but the Mazda has about 50 more hp.

 

[gaz44]

I thought the tax was cheap as it's a 1.3 or something?

The emissions will be poor though.

 

[mat-nos]

I thought the tax was cheap as it's a 1.3 or something?

£405 a year, even for the less powerfull 192 engine, which is a bit crap tbh

 

[gaz44]

£405 a year, even for the less powerfull 192 engine, which is a bit crap tbh

Agreed. Seems a bit pointless imo.

 

[Kneel]

speed wise/fun factor thers prob not much in it up to the speed limit but the rx8 is a tad more practical for passengers but will cost a fortune to run in fuel, oil, tax, insurance and servicing.

very different cars though.

more practical for passengers? really? When I looked at an RX8 you'd have to have no legs to fit in the back seats...

 

[mat-nos]

more practical for passengers? really? When I looked at an RX8 you'd have to have no legs to fit in the back seats...

same space as a clio, i had the rx8 seat back in my driving possition and the mrs sat behind me and she was quite comfy, said had the same space as the clio we sat in 20mins previous, so there for more practical with the 2 extra doors??!!!

i really like the rx8 but i would just hate paying anything more than £215 for a years tax on a car, add that to the fuel/oil/servicing it would need. it would have been cheaper to keep my golf gti as i needed to make monthly cut backs at the time of looking at these hense why i got the clio gt and not an rs 200.

 

[marky-f1]

i had a 231 slightly moded before the r27 completly different cars to compare although both rev happy cars i still miss the beep at 9.5 k and its funny use think its so expensive to run i get about 80 more miles to a tank now than with the 8 so not to bad but the rx8 was definetly quicker to 60 and to the 153 mine got to on the speedo with ease imo and was so much fun with traction control off! Rip RX8

 

[realnumber 1]

i had a 231 slightly moded before the r27 completly different cars to compare although both rev happy cars i still miss the beep at 9.5 k and its funny use think its so expensive to run i get about 80 more miles to a tank now than with the 8 so not to bad but the rx8 was definetly quicker to 60 and to the 153 mine got to on the speedo with ease imo and was so much fun with traction control off! Rip RX8

Yeah but the r27 is s**t on fuel too, lol.

 

[gaz44]

i had a 231 slightly moded before the r27 completly different cars to compare although both rev happy cars i still miss the beep at 9.5 k and its funny use think its so expensive to run i get about 80 more miles to a tank now than with the 8 so not to bad but the rx8 was definetly quicker to 60 and to the 153 mine got to on the speedo with ease imo and was so much fun with traction control off! Rip RX8

Compared with a 172, it is a lot more expensive to run.

 

[jonnyboy]

I have an RX8 at the moment. Would agree that the engine is pointless its my main bugbear with the car. Its not that quick and you only even start to think about any kind of power at about 5k. It revs to 9.5k but the delivery is so linear that it never really feels all that rapid although you look down at the speedo and your doing 90 without any fuss.

However it does make up for these shortcomings the seconds it rains. Turn the TC off and the chassis has half a chance to be played with properly. The diff is awesome and the steering nice and quick.

Basically if they'd put a 2.0 turbo lump in it the car would be a classic. Screw the minimal weight advantage!

 

[kev182cup]

my mate had 1 for a while they aint as fast as a rs as i proved to him. and the engines dont even last 65k, his lasted to 45k and he never abused it,rebuild cost 4k or summit which mazda paid for. nice interior though.

 

[OLR]

Thats just hear say mate.

I thought it was a know fact the engins need a re build round the 65k-75k
Some thing to do with carbon particles becoming trapped between the seal and the casing, jamming the engine and requiring a partial rebuild.
"It was common for very early Mazda engines to require rebuilding after 50,000 miles (80,000 km)"

Might not be the same now, but the engines haven’t changed much design wise in 12-15 years[FONT=&quot][/FONT]