I drove the s2k twice before making my mind up to buy my Crossfire. There were three things I didn't like about the s2k.

1. It looks like a chick car to me. Just my opinion, of course.
2. It is VERY small on the inside, and I'm not a big guy. I felt cramped driving it.
3. You have to hit about 6k rpm to really get the performance out of it. I felt as though I had to really pound it to hit the top speeds. But, having said that, I did find it responsive.

In the end I bought the Crossfire because I fell in love with it on the first of three test drives. (Took my wife on the second and my son on the third.) It just feels like luxury to me. I have no regrets at all about my purchase.

Here's an interesting note: My son is a fan of the s2k, although he does love to drive my Crossfire. Anyway, he visits the largest s2k forum, among others, on a regular basis. He told me that people on there ***** constantly about their s2ks not being fast enough and lacking power. So I guess it's not just the Crossfire owners complaining about that with their cars.

 

OK, CoupeGirl, you HAVE you tell us what happened to that poor S2000!

 

In general, all autos get better milage than manuals these days because the computer knows the most effective time to shift.

 

THanks alot guys. You've been very helpful. I am very close to pulling the trigger on a 2004 6-sp XF w/38k miles here locally that they want 12.5k for. That sound like a good deal?

Three questions. The SRS badge/button on the driver side door is missing. Does this mean anything? Or did some numbnut just pull it off? I know the autocheck/carfax on the car comes back totally clean. It was a one owner/lease vehicle, which so many of the XF 2004s seem to be right nwo that are for sale on used lots.

The shifter **** looks worn/corroded or something. How much would that cost to replace.

Finally, what kind of maintenance items are big ones on the XF? I know like on a honda prelude, the timing belt/pump were big, and if you didn't get it done befoer the belt broke, it would bend the valves and you would be looking at a huge repair bill. Anything like this on the XF? Is it an interference engine?

Also, I was looking on a site that listed cost of repairs for the XF, and it all looked normal except shocks/struts, it listed those as costing 5000.00 to replace, is that right??? Thats almost half the cost of the car!

Thanks again guys, I might be driving an XF soon

 

The engine runs off a timing chain. The only big maintenance items are fluid changes and tires.

By they way, if you're, generally speaking, unable to spend $800 to $1000 on tires every 30k miles, then don't buy the Crossfire. This car takes enormous 18" and 19" low profile tires. Read: NOT CHEAP.

That site was probably Consumerguide (now howstuffworks). The XF doesn't use struts. Shocks could cost whatever you're willing to pay for them. My recommendation is to buy Koni sports for ~$680 on all four corners when you need new shocks. Probably even cheaper for cheap, off-brand shocks, but why you'd want to use them on a sports car, I have no idea.

$5000, that looks like a typo to me. $500, maybe.

 

I remember cross-referencing road tests by one of the auto magazines....same mag tested both the RX-8 & a 6-speed Limited X-Fire....to my recollection the X-Fire beat the RX-8 in every category....0-60, 1/4 mile, Top Speed & Lateral Gs. A friend of my son said he ave 18 MPG in his RX-8. That's almost as bad as the 78 Vette I drove for 10 years.

Also, I suspect the 6-speeds are getting worse MPG cause the people that buy 6-speeds (me) are probably more prone to drive enthusiastically....after 4,000 miles I'm ave about 23.5-24.2 MPG.....best tank = 26.1 , worst was 22.2 .

 

Every mag that I have read has shown the RX-8 as about .5 seconds faster than the XF. However, if the test you read was using the auto RX-8 the HP drops from 238 to 197. I am sure an AT RX-8 is slower than the XF. Also you will find a wide range of 0 to 60 time for the RX-8 for this reason and also the fact that you must know how to drive this car to get the most out of it. It is a high RPM low torqure engine. Read the numbers off the C&D web site. They have a long term test on the RX-8. I drive both often back to back and I can tell you the 8 is faster of the line and around the curves. Don't get me wrong, I also love the XF. But, it is a different type of car. It curses very well, gets much better gas mileage, still maintains a sporty feel and has a lot more torqure. The XF has more of a luxury car feel by far. The 8 has a very perscise feel to the steering and response is much faster to steering input than the XF. You must keep the rpms up on the 8, between 5 and 9 k to get the hp out of it. Also the 8 has one of the best gear boxes that you will ever shift. Both are great cars!

 

Speaking of which, for a manual Limited XF, what RPM range do most of you shift at during normal driving? What about if your trying to do a fast 1/4 mile or 0-60? I know on a vtec/honda, your sweet spot is in the higher RPMs, around up to 8k.

 

Shift at 4500 rpm for quick acceleration.

Normal driving, I shift at 2000 rpm.

 

I just looked up that long term test, and I must say their "starting" numbers for the RX-8 are among the slowest I've ever seen for that car while the numbers at 40,000 sound more appropriate. Check HERE for a post I made recently comparing the performance of the RX-8 and Crossfire based on Road & Track Magazine's testing of both cars. The similarities are striking, and R&T test numbers for the RX-8 are on par with C&D's 40,000 mile numbers. The Crossfire was notably faster through the slalom though, and it should be noted that test numbers for the Crossfire were taken on a considerably hotter day. My earlier post links to the R&T test data panels for both cars.

 

The test shows the cars are very close. I aqree, they are close but I feel as far as ture sports car handling the RX-8 is the better car in that it is more communitve as to were you are with how the car is approaching it limits. I am not saying that the XF is not capable, it is! However, to me, you hit the limits with little warning but that is the case with many cars. For the average Joe, the RX-8 will let you push the limits easier with less risk of lossing control. As for the test they are on 2 different tracks with possibly 2 different dirvers. The temps can also account for the higher slalom time as will tires. Also, since the XF is listed as a V8 on the engine specs I am not sure how accurate the test is? LOL. Like I said I love the XF and RX-8. They are both great cars but they have a totally different feel. I just thru the 8 as a suggestion since they can be found at about the same price as the XF and are fun to drive like the XF.

 

Car & Driver's numbers for both (both 6 speed manuals)

X-Fire RX-8
0-60 6.5 6.5
5-60 6.9 7.5
0-100 16.1 18.0
1/4 mi 14.8 (96) 15.0 (93)
lat G 0.91 0.92
70-0 161 158
top speed 151 ? (somewhere else low-mid 140s)

Once you get past about 80 X-Fire starts to really pull away.

 

OK, looked at R&Ts PDFs....so they give the edge to the RX-8 & C&D gives it to X-Fire.....temps-altitudes, -ect. It would be a great race.....I suppose if I could have gotten a loaded brand new 07 RX-8 for
less than $23K with a Lifetime Powertrain Warranty....I would have considered it also...??

 

Chris, Without a doubt, with the heavy discounts that can be had, the XF is the best sports car value on the market. You have got to love the MB chasis with the Chrysler skins. The cars is a ture modern classic.

 

Crossfire Base, Ltd or SRT6, All the Way!!!
Best Damn Bang for the Buck, Hands down!
"Try it, You'll like it"!
SF

PS I'm somewhat Bias.

 

I owned and autocrossed an RX-8 before I bought the XF.

They are somewhat similar in performance capabilities, but have a very different feel. In "normal" driving, the XF feels faster because of its big low-end torque advantage. When driving each to the limit in a straight line, there's little difference on the stopwatch, but a big difference in the feel.

Once the road ceases to be straight, the RX-8 is a clear winner...better steering, better F/R balance (and I would guess a slightly lower CG, given how low that tiny rotary sits vs. where our big V6 is), and lighter overall (at least comparing base to base), and a great LSD. There are good reasons that the RX-8 is in a significantly faster stock autocross class than the XF.

 

I have a six speed and live in a rural area and I got 29 mpg out of every tank last summer. Somehow I managed 30.5 on one tank. I shift at 2,500 rpm most of the time

 

That's amazing, I drove like an old fart for one tank....just to test & only got a hair over 26......was any of that driving at 70-80 on major highways....or was it all 50ish rural?

 

I tried to shift at 2500 y'day...it was nearly impossible for me.

 

If your not buying an srt6 go with the s2000. Dont buy a FWD POS Acura.

Yes im being judgemental. Yes ive owned all 3 cars your looking at.