• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

5.0L V8 vs Rx-8?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dkhl
  • Start date Start date Sep 4, 2004
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
First Prev 3 of 3

jaketuff

Member
Apr 29, 2003
159
2
19
Westchester, NY
Sep 5, 2004
#41
  • Sep 5, 2004
  • #41
Icepick said:
Dude, step away from the crack pipe. The RX8 would be left WAAAAAY behind.
Click to expand...

RIGHT after the whole frame twists from the HUGE increase in torque!!!

JOUT
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Sep 5, 2004
#42
  • Sep 5, 2004
  • #42
It's true Ray - there are 10's of thousands of street rods out there running 'mustang II' based front suspensions.

JOUT - the RX8 has a MUCH stiffer unibody than a stock fox body; it would cope with V8 torque without near as much flex as the stock Stang exhibits. More a function of how much better the industry has gotten in the last 10 years at producing stiffer unibodies than any deficiency with the Stang - it's just an older design. The SN94/95's are much better than the Fox bodies in that regard.
 

Ray III

New Member
Feb 10, 2004
586
0
0
fixin Boomhower's John Deere in Troy, NY
Sep 5, 2004
#43
  • Sep 5, 2004
  • #43
I can twist the frame of my car with the parking brake and the almighty 2.3L Hi-Po
 

jaketuff

Member
Apr 29, 2003
159
2
19
Westchester, NY
Sep 6, 2004
#44
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • #44
Michael Yount said:
JOUT - the RX8 has a MUCH stiffer unibody than a stock fox body; it would cope with V8 torque without near as much flex as the stock Stang exhibits.
Click to expand...

True, design has gotten better stronger/lighter - but I don't see an RX8 taking well to 300 lbs-ft. in stock chassis form. Ah well, we will never know for sure - or will we???? I imagine a lighter motor TT application would do all right, but the physics of more wieght from a v8 couldn't work that well in the RX8.

.02
OUT
 
S

Sicarius428

Active Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,085
5
49
Sep 6, 2004
#45
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • #45
The nice thing about the 1.3 liter is you can pull it out by yourself and carry the whole motor to the bench to work on. There are only a little over a dozen parts to it. The balance and overall weight of the rx-8 is supurb. Whatever torque the engine lacks can be made up in gearing which Mazda did a decent job of. In 2006 or 2007 the rx-7 is suppose to be coming back probably on a similar platform. A rear wheel drive car with the weight of a civic with 280+ hp is a pretty damn good contender. But we will see...
Kevin
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Sep 6, 2004
#46
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • #46
jaketuff - "True, design has gotten better stronger/lighter"

While better, stronger is true, lighter isn't. True - unibody cars can be equally stiff, or stiffer than their full frame counter parts and be lighter. But over the years the main reason the unibody cars have gotten stronger is because they've gotten heavier. The new Stang is gonna top 3600 lbs. easily. The Porsche's and Corvettes are pushing 3300 lbs, as is Subaru's 'compact' WRX STI. The Rx8 is relatively small to be pushing into the low 3000 lb range. The extra structure is necessary for the stiffness needed to overcome tougher noise, vibration and harshness criteria that all manufacturers build to these days. And because of that, the Rx8 would cope with the same amount of torque with MUCH less flex than a Fox body - one of the original flexi-flyers.
 
D

dkhl

New Member
Aug 22, 2004
101
0
0
Sep 6, 2004
#47
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • #47
All I wanted to know if it would go FASTER.. lol

My friend just thinks its faster overall, I don't think hes too smart however... the 5.0L weighs roughly the same as a RX-8, has more torque stock, less horsepower obviously..

I wouldn't doubt 1/4 mile times would be faster, I believe he just thinks the ability to rev to 9000 rpm is actuall a good thing.. lol imagine dropping the clutch at 7k rpm.. say bye bye to clutch.
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Sep 6, 2004
#48
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • #48
Excerpts from Car&Driver's latest test of the car - which was a comparison between the Cobra (yes, 390HP version), the Infinity G35 Coupe (big brother of the Z car) and Rx8. The Rx8 won the test - the Cobra came third. No doubt the Cobra was much quicker, but subjectively, they preferred the Rx8 over the other 2 cars. As you can see, the Rx8 is capable of accelerating as quickly as a stock 5.0L fox body; handling, stopping, top speed - not even close - the Rx8 gets the nod.

"Not only does the RX-8 turn into corners with a fluid linearity, but it also continues to respond accurately even as the cornering forces build at higher speeds. The car is so securely planted that you feel confident leaning on its tires as you corner ever harder. In the RX-8, that means leaning on its rear tires because the suspension has a very neutral balance.

Achieving this communication and responsiveness at low limits is not so hard, but the RX-8 does it at 0.91 g, a considerable margin beyond the cornering capabilities of these two competitors. Its transient handling is similarly superior. And the RX-8 is the best stopper of this bunch. Despite these handling advantages, the RX-8 was the slowest on the racetrack, and that's because of a shortage of midrange grunt in its rotary engine. Peak power is decent at 250 horsepower, but it's developed at 8500 rpm. Torque, however, is a mere 159 pound-feet—down 111 and 231 pound-feet on the two other cars—and it comes at 5500 rpm, which is nearly as high as the others' power peaks. Think Honda S2000 power band, and you get the idea.

To get the most out of this car, you must be willing to use its 9000-rpm redline and maybe even the 500 additional rpm to the engine's rev limiter. As usual with rotaries, that's no hardship. The engine gains rpm so smoothly and freely that a tone sounds at 8500 rpm to warn you that the redline is approaching.

With the help of an 8000-rpm clutch drop and the engine buzzing like a flock of angry hornets, the RX-8 scooted to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds at 96 mph."

If you want to read the whole article -- http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=4346&page_number=1
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
First Prev 3 of 3
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Electrical Foxbody wiring harness 2.3 to v8 swap
  • Foxbodyjake
  • Mar 23, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
24
Views
694
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Apr 13, 2026
Foxbodyjake
F
J
2004 Mustang 3.8L V6 vibrations above 65 MPH and differential leaks
  • joeybuddy96
  • Mar 16, 2026
  • SN95 V6 Mustang Tech
Replies
16
Views
538
SN95 V6 Mustang Tech Tuesday at 2:38 PM
joeybuddy96
J
Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
784
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
Engine Distributor Interchange List
  • Wayne Waldrep
  • Jun 21, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
11
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Friday at 4:58 PM
Noobz347
Forced Induction Total Timing under boost
  • Dontknowchit
  • Aug 27, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
2
Views
323
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 28, 2025
Dontknowchit
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?