2008 Mazda RX-8 GT review
22 Sep, 2008
37 Comments 
2008 Mazda RX-8 GT review & road test
Model Tested:
- 2008 Mazda RX-8 GT - $57,625 (RRP)
Options:
- None fitted
Stylish, quality, amazing grip and handling, well equipped
Notchy gearbox, firm ride, no torque, steering a bit slow
CarAdvice Rating: 
(3.5/5)
- Photography and words by Karl Peskett
The year 2003 brought a new sports car from Mazda. It had been years since the last version of the RX-7, and rotary fans were champing at the bit to see the latest RENESIS engine shoehorned into a lightweight, rear-wheel-drive car.
The RX-8 was brought forth with much fanfare and expectation. Five years down the track, and Mazda has freshened its halo car, with a raft of updates that aren’t immediately apparent, but certainly have refined it.
Stylistically, the original would have been a challenge. To bring it from concept sketch to full size clay model would have been fun. A geometric nightmare, to say the least, given the combination of straights, curves and angles.
Still, the finished result is rather good and the update to the 2008 model almost tones down some of the original feel, without having lost the RX flavour, making it more accessible to the everyday buyer. Sort of what Subaru did with the Impreza - but in a good way.
There’s revised front and rear bumpers, headlamps, and front quarter panels, but it’s more than a skin-deep change. The internals of the RENESIS rotary engine have also had a makeover, with things like the gas seal lubrication system being changed from a mechanical to an electromagnetic type.
The engine’s lubrication setup has also been revised, with an electric oil pump, rather than a mechanical unit, and rather than a mist of lubricant, the feed is now liquid. Baffles in the system have also been revised to eliminate oil pressure drop in hard cornering.
The final drive ratio has been shortened from 4.444:1 to 4.777:1, as well as a new six-speed manual gearbox based on the acclaimed MX-5 unit, althought that doesn’t stop it feeling a bit notchy though.
Thankfully, when we asked Mazda for its new RX-8 to test, it saw fit to send us a bright red GT variant. It’s a good thing, too, as it’s the “driver’s” version of the four-seat, four-door coupe. Well, that’s what the press release says, anyway.
However, we’re not a newspaper and we don’t just regurgitate press releases, so here’s how it drives.
Location: Home / Mazda, Behind the Wheel / ...
Rate Post: 
(6 votes, average: 4.17 out of 5)
Loading ...
-
Print it:
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:14 pm
no boost, no deal :(
(Report)
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Nice to see a Mazda on the pages again. It’s been a while!
Keep ‘em coming boys.
(Report)
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:39 pm
your right techno , strap on a turbo , give those cool looks some urgency .
(Report)
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I definitely agree with the idea of a turbo. I think if Mazda want to make a true ‘driver’s car’ with the RX-8, they need to go all the way with it.
Put the car on a diet, put lighter weight components where possible and then whack a big turbo in there. Actually a TT would probably work even better. The lack of urgency the whole way through the rev range would justify it IMO.
Of course if they need to raise the price too much they’ll then fall into a trap of who is going to pay that much for a Mazda, especially one that (as the article said) will likely have reliability problems.
(Report)
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:07 pm
They don’t need it to be a tein turbo. That’s just all marketing fluff. Single turbo techinology is far more advanced these days making most tt setups redundant. It’s already a light package compared to it’s competition with a perfect 50/50 weight distribution. They need to either hang a small turbo off it and produce 300hp. Or design a new triple rotor N/A producing 300hp. That would make the RX8 fun again. There is no smoother engine in the world than a rotary. Anyone who has driven one would know that. They like a rev and rev fast. Key ingrediant to any true sports car feeling is a nice revvy engine. The RX8 has it, just needs more ponies.
(Report)
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:09 pm
meant to say “twin turbo” not tein turbo lol
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 am
Kyle! Problem with a small single turbo: doesn’t quite fix the torque problem. Better off going for the twin turbo setup, for this particular application sequential is probably more beneficial. To be totally honest I don’t follow rotary engine designs much, so I can’t reply to your ’single turbo’ comment in this context, but in terms of engines in a V or even I6+ configuration, I would not argue with the BMW ‘35 engine that has soooo much untapped potential it just is not a laughing matter. Google Juicebox in the context of that engine and you will see some excellent numbers, some of them including mid 4 second runs to 100. I personally am an AMG man, but to see the numbers u can pump out with that engine is just WOW. That said AMG are the torquiest engines i’ve ever laid eyes on. Something Mazda, being Japanese, may not understand…. Its a gutless revvvvvbox. As most Ricer cars are.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 am
“However, we’re not a newspaper and we don’t just regurgitate press releases, so here’s how it drives.”
High five to Karl! Thats the spirit!
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 am
Kyle again: Sorry mate I got a bit off topic, but my main point was that the twin turbo setup can not only deliver more torque than a single, but in a flatter curve as well for better drivability (generally in sequential setup but parallel applications can find these benefits with enough engineering….). Anyhoo, yes, the RX-8 revs well. Very well. Haven’t driven one but have revved one. 3x better than the (latest) 350Z in terms of response. But no, the one thing that is missing from this engine is certainly not ponies, but a bit of oomph from a torque boost. 210 nm compares to an Astra Twintop 2.2. Not a claim to be boasting nor proud of….
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:14 am
Never been tempted by a rotory donk. Yes its pretty quick but it seems you have to thrash it within an inch of it life. Not for me i’d prefer a torquey donk anyday.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:23 am
no boost. no problems.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 8:35 am
Car Advice, I presume you are talking WRX in regard to Subaru made the impreza accessible but unlike mazda, ‘not’ in a good way. Um, you are wrong. The 2nd gen wrx was a technical quantam leap over the original. Better ergo, seats, engine, trans, noise suppress, quality, build, interior, but granted all with that look.
Anyway, mazda have done pretty well to sustain the rotary engine all these years and make a great chassis. You seem to have written the article having never driven a rotary before. There’s never any torque from an atmo one but like all good sports cars a rotary is only quick when your dedicated……….oh and you’d be an f***ing idiot to fall back on stability control over instinct in any corner. Stability control, invented to gamers alive in the real world.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:22 am
Funky but overpriced!
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:08 am
The fresh up has kept it in the sales race….great job Mazda
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:23 am
Cupid Stunt aka No Name..
Anyone who calls an engine a “donk”, is automatically admitting that they will only drive a Ford or Holden V8….so no need to tell us that you would never drive a car with a “rotory donk”
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:32 am
Actually Joe, Cupid Stunt is in England and he prefers small diesels.
Personally, I prefer to have a good amount of torque and not have to rev the ring out of it.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am
He lived in Aus for a while, must be where he picked up the term ‘donk’ ;-)
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:22 am
I have always been a fan of the Mazda RX8, it looks great, but, all show and no go…..
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
I think you’re being a bit harsh on this one.
My friend has Ltd Ed Rx-8 and I have been lucky enough to both ride and drive in it quite a bit. To my mind it fulfills multiple roles extremely well, and its many attributes aren’t diminished but the ultimate lack of supercar acceleration.
If you have small children, but want a sports car, you can still have one. Brilliant for those who aren’t prepared to pay big dollars for tarted up cheap hatches.
It’s a capable, comfortable cruiser, a genuine sports car with superb road holding, a quick car (without being seriously fast in a straight line) and it is a rotary. It is a different design of engine and it has to be driven as such.
Performance driving is a different technique, but it’s still a damn fine drive.
Personally I don’t like rotaries. Never have. Although they sound manic when on the boil, I don’t like the drone during everyday driving.
But it if it is your preference, it’s a fine car to own, no matter what the 0-100 times.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Awrsome car! All it needs is the right driver!
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I remember as a teenager going for a ride in a mates RX-2. Top speed 200kph came up in about half an hour just before the fuel ran out. With skinny 13″ tyres and dodgy handling it’s a miracle we’re still alive today.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Yes a nice car. had one for two weeks in 05. funny how the engine was the weakest link. A ‘normal’ two litre turbo would be sooo much better. the roatary is a dead end technology. I used a tank of fuel in 350 klms… thats pretty bad. and the performance was falcon like… good but when a car looks fast it should be.. plus i would need a new engine at 60,000 klm. I worked at a massive mazda dealership in Brisbane, not going to mention there name.. but they were lucky to sell one a month…
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Oh yeah a turbo.. nice to see some garage engineers here.
1/ the bonnet would melt (it has ’shock cones’)
2/ fuel consumption would change from bad to terrible
3/oil consumption would go to 2 litres per thousand klms
3/ emissions would not pass euro 5
4/ price (and insurance) would surpass evo money..
Mazda aust made one in kingsgrove sydney. Mazspeed head office. Hiroshima laughed…
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
one of the boys at work has one bought new last year - looks sweet, but we give him heaps that he has to change gears 5 times to get to 100 in 6.5 secs. What surprised us all is that the rotaries chew oil like anything - about a litre every 4 tanks of petrol, and that is for a brand new car.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Pious - they use heaps of oil to begin with, but less as they bed in.
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Forget the turbo idea, just add another rotor and make it a 3 rotor!! Imagine a 20B Renesis!! More power, more torque and not as much more fuel consumption as a turbo version!! Plus it would sound so much better… Just listen to any www.pacperformance.com.au street or drag car with a 20B 3rotor engine!!
(Report)
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:06 pm
I like this car, but have always found it a disappointment following on the heels of the RX-7. The RX-7 was and still is an awesome car. The RX-8 is too “real estate agent” to be a hard out sports car.
DanMan, I wouldn’t say rotaries are a dead end technology wise. Extremely light and small package with high power outputs. Main problem they’ve always faced is one of lubrication.
(Report)
September 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
good on Mazda for sticking with something unique…
(Report)
September 24th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Well why is lubrication such a problem? Thats like saying death is caused by a lack of oxygen.. Yes Chatter marks are a problem but the biggie is thermal efficency.. Everything leads on from there. Basically there are more advantages to pistons, more of the time, for most people…
there is a reason why no one else has followed..
(Report)
September 24th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
The reason others haven’t followed was the apex seal problem. Nothing to do with thermal efficiency. Go back to your dinosaur-age piston engine and don’t knock the rotary engine, which is the only new engine of the 20th century!!!
(yes I’m a die hard rotary fan and will gladly beat you and your piston engined car any time!! see you at the track!!)
(Report)
September 27th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Mazda are using the rotary for their hydrogen fuel trials because they’ve found its better than a piston engine, hardly redundant technology.
(Report)
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:06 pm
They should have put some racing inspired trims on the inside such as Carbon Fibre. and why not a fake rollcage in the back like 2 carbon fibre bars behind the back seats ?
like the Porsche GT3RS !
(Report)
October 6th, 2008 at 10:33 am
As an owner of an’04 RX8 I would say this to you people out there that knock this car - Morons.
My 04 gets me looks everywhere I go. I dont feel like a bogan (as one does in an import) in it, nor a pretentious brand owner(euro dross). It handles better than anything I have driven under 100k (and that’s a fair bit in my line of work) but is not a car that relies on it’s 0-100 or 1/4 mile times to achieve the result. It’s the whole package. For those who complain about the lack of torque…buy a V8. I’ve never been left feeling like it needs more power (on the road or the track) as the balance is perfect and believe me, if you saw me in your taillights on a twisty road, you wont be getting away in anything too quickly.
I have driven a turbo’d version, a supercharged version and a ecu tuned version and can say that turbo’d RX8 is unbalanced, a supercharged version or an ecu re-write is a much better proposition.
It’s a different car to drive than what most people expect and doesnt reward hamfisted WRX/HSV drivers in any way whatsoever.
The funny thing is that half of the afore-mentioned ‘knockers’ of this car have never even driven one.
So please…stick to your Excel’s with WRX bonnet scoops or SV6’s with the badges removed.
(Report)
October 17th, 2008 at 5:42 am
^^ Fenno is right on the money. I didnt even consider an RX8 b/c of the low tourqe rating of 160lb/ft, I mean that seemed low like a Honda S2000 with its 138lb/ft. But you know what once the tires stop spinning and you are moving it is horsepower that takes over and moves you down the road. Back to the Honda, Yes it revs to 8000rpm but as a piston engine it sounds like its going to implode at those rpms and takes longer to rev up past 7k than the rotary. The rotary is so smooth it feels the same at 3000rpms as it does at 9000rpms its just louder, it only has 3 moving parts after all. At 5.9 sec to 60 and a 14.2-14.4 in the 1/4 mi. this car is not slow and once you hit a turn this car leaves everything in its price range. I also drove the Nissan 350Z w/ a S2000 but niether had the combination of handling, ride, interior quality, exterior style, and overall smiles per mile the RX has. The 350 has no sunroof, the S2000 no hardtop and niether has rear seats and both cars hurt my kidneys over large bumps. I can live with the extra second it takes me to get to 60mph vs. alot of other cars but would find it harder to live with the day to day trade-offs and shortcomings of any other car in its class when it comes to refinement, handling, interior and exterior looks. There is nothing else like the RX out there, hats off to Mazda.
(Report)
October 21st, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Rotaries are designed and meant to use a little engine oil, that will NEVER change, it is not a fault of the car or engine.
“ALL Show and No GO”???UHH…
Top Gear UK had a 2004 RX-8 time their track in 1 min 31.08sec, the same as a BMW M3, Nissan 350Z, Holden V8 Monaro.
Yes, it is not blisteringly fast in a straight line,BUT, it out handles every car in its price range and better than many so called exotics.
The RX-8 has a Brilliant RWD chassis, and is value for money, even today (2008) there is still not a sports car that comes close to it with features and OVERALL performance.
BTW, You will never see a factory Turbo rotary again, just remember the extra $6000.00 it would add onto the price.
The 13B RENESIS is only 28HP down on the last 13B REW RX-7 twin turbo.
If the RX-8 was 200 kilo’s lighter it would be the fasted twin rotor made by Mazda.
(Report)
October 28th, 2008 at 10:06 am
DanMan said as follows:
Oh yeah a turbo.. nice to see some garage engineers here.
1/ the bonnet would melt (it has ’shock cones’)
2/ fuel consumption would change from bad to terrible
3/oil consumption would go to 2 litres per thousand klms
3/ emissions would not pass euro 5
4/ price (and insurance) would surpass evo money..
Mazda aust made one in kingsgrove sydney. Mazspeed head office. Hiroshima laughed…
Well Danny, I’d suggest before slagging off others you acquire some knowledge of your own. I know of quite a few turboed RX8s and to answer your assumptions:
1/ Um, no - although some fit a vented bonnet, plenty have retained the stock bonnet with no heat damage, including track use.
2/ Funnily enough, some haven’t noticed any change in fuel consumption in regular driving. And despite reports to the contrary, even stock this car is only marginally thirstier than other cars with similar performance (unless you pay megabucks for Porsche technology, etc).
3/ The oil consumption remains pretty constant and is no trouble for those of us who don’t mind checking our car’s fluid levels regularly. After a while, it just becomes a habit and isn’t expensive. I use about 250mls per 1000kms.
3/ All the turbos I am aware of have been engineered and registered for street use. Go cry to the greenies about anything else.
4/ Pretty much line ball with Evo money and for that you get a car which is much more liveable day to day and ten times better looking, not too mention better interior quality…the Evo does one thing well, the RX8 does many.
As for the Mazda Aust version, they had their own reasons for doing it but couldn’t mount a strong enough business case in Australia’s small market. Happens to a lot of skunkwork cars. Doesn’t mean it can’t work.
Short answer to others - don’t write this car off if you haven’t driven one. 10 minute test drives in suburbia also don’t give too much away about it’s strengths. And does anyone still believe 0-100km/h straight line times are the last word on performance? That’s fine for bogans talking about HSV’s/FPV’s in the local pub but enthusiast drivers look for a whole lot more than that when it comes to choosing a car…
(Report)
October 28th, 2008 at 10:57 am
‘3/ emissions would not pass euro 5′
This is still true… and the real deal killer for mazda.
Yes but the thermal load under bonnet would still cause issue’s…
Yeah my bad. I only sold 18 of these in my career with mazda (GP mazda and Centenary mazda in Brisbane) and had a Winning blue RX8 for 2 months with a nice HYMEE exhaust system which i drove down to Kingsgrove in Sydney in to tour the head office and meet Allan Horsley and chat about all things petrol…
I DONT talk about things unless i am aware of ALL the facts. Amazing yes, but i actually am a jack of a few trades… and a master of same…
(Report)