Thanks for taking those pictures for us. I now owe you 5 bucks, cause I am not going to buy it now.

Kinda let down about the Z getting 3rd place. I think it is in part to the fact they tested the base model. As tested price was almost $10k less than most of them.

Before my purchase of the Z, I drove a couple RX-8's and was not terribly impressed. Steering and tranny felt very nice I guess, but I still bought a Z. Motor seems weak compared to the Z, but I guess for a 1.3L its doing pretty well for itself.

The fact that the TT even placed better than the Z is a wonder. FWD and no clutch. Guess that must speak wonders about the rest of the car. I must go drive one now and figure out if C&D is right about it being better than the Z. I for some reason doubt I will be more impressed.

 

Bwahahahaha, the gotta have it, and other lame C&D factors, strike again. The slowest car in group wins their hearts, even with a host of complaints.

Hmmmm, is Mazda paying C&D a little too much?

 

On that note, my 5,400 lb Armada has a chance at beating the mazda in the 1/4. Pathetic for a sports car.

Oh wait, C&D was doing the test, so it must be the drivers. I guess they find average Joe, and make him a professional driver.

 

Padded armrest? Mines a plastic cubby door.?

 

My armrest is padded. Look again.

They are referring to the door, I'm sure.

 

Wow, RX-8 has a backseat and that makes it better. Haha.

How about the fact that unless your like 5'2", 100 lbs, you will have trouble fitting. Or the fact that the way they designed the dash (with all those pretty chrome plastic rings and lines) you can't change out the radio. Or the fact that the engine is anemic and the only thing that saves it is the weight and balance of the car.

Oh well. All that matters is we love our cars. They can keep their overpriced Volkswagen's and Mazda's. There's a reason they were selling the RX-8 for $5-6k under MSRP -because NOBODY WANTS ONE!!!

 

lol rx-8 disappointment!!

 

Man I love C&D but this is kinda sad. The RX-8, although it handles like a champ, has a ****ty interior! On their long term test they had TONS of problems with the engine. It's obviously the slowest and costs more than the Z. But they still GOTTA HAVE IT?! Sheesh

The Z "lacks refinement" but is the lowest priced car and went damn fast. Just ghey if you ask me..

 

C&D editors are a bunch of sponsor butt kissing, well, you know.

They had to make some BS factor adjustments, so the slowest car could win.

I've driven a few RX8's. They handle well, but I lost the fun to drive factor when I put my foot down, compared to a Z..

 

I noticed that. There are 2 brand new RX-8's at my local dealer for $24,000. They say the price was dropped because they are '06 models and they are trying to get rid of them. Hmm...6 months later and they are both still sitting up there. No '07 models to take there place either.

I guess the same Z's have been sitting at the Nissan dealer for the past several months too, but they are asking $35+ for all of those.

 

You have to love 'estimation' acceleration numbers.

 

I'm sorry but I have a huge problem with the RX-8 coming in first place and C&D pointing rating system. How in the hell did they give the RX-8 a perfect 20 points out of 20 points for performance when it pretty much came up lame in every performance category. It straight up was 2 damn seconds off the pace of the Shelby in the track portion, the same shelby in which they stated felt like a 10 year old pick up truck. Well that 10 year old pick up truck blastd the RX-8 around the track. Why was the gotta have it score so high for the RX-8 when they even stated that the RX-8 is starting to get old, and what the heck is so gotta have it about a car that does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 15.0@93mph, a stock RSX Type S could walk that car. Oh the Mazda handles like a champ, really , in comparison to who? A Toyota Camry? That awesome handling sure didn't help it any bit on the track portion. I have to admit the interior is nice and sporty, but it's no leaps and bounds above the others and Mazda uses a lot of cheap materials. Also how in the hell is a car with a measily 159 lb/ft of torque so fun to drive . I've driven a comparable car, a S2000 and I tell you having to shift so high in the RPM range just to have some inkling of a feeling that your driving a performance car is absolutely no fun. I thought my EVO lacked a little low end power, but drivng a S2000 is like WHOA, I thought I was driving a f*cken base Civic for awhile until I really drove hard. Also they comment how the 350Z has no back seat, but did they actually sit in the back seat of the RX-8, I would feel sad for anybody sitting in the RX-8 back seat and I wouldn't be surprised if feelings of claustrophobia over came them. Then look at the price, usually I would have thought the RX-8 would have easily won the price category, but nearly $35,000 for a RX-8, you got to be out of your flippin' mind. Who the hell would pay that much for a RX-8??? I've always had respect for C&D and have been a subscriber for two years, but I think I wont be renewing my subscribtion, probably switch to Motor Trend or Road and Track.

As far as the 350Z, I wouldn't look to much into a 13.7@104mph, I mean that is a pretty good time and yes some 07 350Z owners will get faster times, but if you go to a lot of drag strips like I do you know that most won't beat that time. They clearly said that the 07 350Z was indeed a much quicker car than all previous 350Zs and I would be happy with that. I mean a stock 350Z was neck and neck with a factory tuned Mustang GT and that is pretty impressive in my book. I know the 350Z could potentially get faster times, but so could have all the other cars. The 350Z did extremelly well in my book and got robbed by the C&D staff. The 350Z is now I believe finally living up to it's true potential as a performance car, if I didn't just love the bolt on power I can get with my EVO IX and I do need a back seat with space, I would be sporting a 07 350Z no doubt.

If I had my choice the Z would have been in a close race with the Audi TT for first place, the RX-8 as the top finisher is just a shame.

 

Never mind the back seat in the RX-8, has anyone sat in the back on an Audi TT? Thats just flat out impossible.

That test was lame. It gets more and more obvious that magazines are funded by some certain automakers, because actually if they are not, then the writers are just flat out crazy!

Yea Mazda's are flying off the shelves. Thats why you can still find any 06 Mazda leftovers still. I heard of certain dealerships getting rid of Miata leftovers for as little as $16000. Thats rediculuos. Its on miata.net forum.

 

Remember the G has a shorter FD ratio than the z. The 07 z gets to 72 MPH in 2nd gear!!! The z would have a better 0-60 and 1/4 mile with a shorter FD. The hard-core drag folks could tell us how much of an improvement this would make...

 

Theres know way a 500 hp car goes quarter mile in 13.7

 

Correct me if I am wrong (the links are dead now, and I don't have the issue), but the Shelby GT has 330 hp. Its the Shelby GT500 (supercharged), that has 500hp. I think the stock Mustang GT is at 300hp.

The Mustangs are kinda fat too (3500+lbs), which doesn't really help them in the quarter...

 

Yeah it was a sports car comparo but the fastest sports car didn't win
They said Z was the fastest around the track

They should've said it was a sissy contest.

And the exterior styling? They rated the TT and the RX-8 higher? Whatever.

Anyway, the Z will continue to outsell the TT and the RX-8, and prolly COMBINED and that's what counts.

 

Yeah you were right. The test was with the regular Shelby GT with the 330 lbs tq and 303 hp. How many mustangs do they make? I see so many different kinds of GT's around town. It is crazy. There is a really nice GT 500, white with blue stripes around here though, and it looks quite amazing.


I agree with you 3000ways. I don't understand how the rx8 was the most fun to drive when they also say is 100 hp short of a sports car or whatever. You would think that contradicts itself. I also didn't like how they were saying that the interior of the Z was so bad. In the test, didn't they use the bare base model Z?. If all the other cars were purchased for around 35k, why not spend the money to get a GT model Z with some nice interior and amenities. The seats in the Z weren't even leather! But, that's just my opinion, I guess I'm a little biased . But, I definitely don't think the rx8 should have won by that margain, no way.

 

i saw the mag today, Z got 3rd place 4th being mustang

 

exactly what im thinking... its just like edmunds.com, Z performed better, did better lap time, did faster 0-60, they even called it a raw sports car. however the RX8 won because of its practicality and more refined interior, and the ability to seat 4.... wtf??? the title of the article from edmunds by the way was SPORTS CAR SHOOTOUT.... not sports car practicality shootout.