the thing is, if you put a super charger on a S2K and raced an rx7, it'd probably take the rx7 THEN they'd actually be equal since both cars would be super/turbo charged... You can't really compare a non-aspirated and aspirated car together.

 

I see what you're saying, but I find it funny since the 7 guys would say "That $35k S2k gets beat by our $15k 7," totally forgetting the 7 cost just as much new. I think you really need to compare $ (when new) to $.

And the problem with talking about the "stock 7 vs the stock s2k" is that only like 2% of the 7's are stock. You can add an exhaust and get 40hp in a 7...

I had a big fight with the 7 guys about the s2k and the 7 being super close stock, none of them would buy it. The problem is, the 7 guys think of "stock" as being "non-single turbo," so stock to them means only 350rwhp...

 

I love when 2 boards clash...

I have mad respect for the RX-7 though.

 

The RX-7 is a very nice looking and a fast car, but I'd rather have the dependability of the S2000. Ask some of them how many times their car has been in the shop. Those rotary engines are problematic.

Two totally different cars. If I wanted a fast car and did not care about reliability that much, I would have gotten a Supra TT and put in a T88 or T78. If you ever visit supraforums, you should see how many of them switch to a Supra TT.

Of course the RX-7, once super modified, is much faster than the S2000. I bought my S2000 b/c I wanted something somewhat quick and nimble, but I could count on EVERYDAY. Enough said...

 

Now I could be talking out of my ass here, but I love the 3rd Gen RX-7. So much so, that I would have bought one over the S2000 if I would have had the time to look for one that seemed like it was taken care of(my previous car was stolen and I needed a car) .

I don't think the RX-7s problems lie with the engines but with the turbos and their hoses. From my brief research, that always seemed to be the problems. Also, if you don't change oil in a rotary consistently they are also going to have problems.

ERIK

 

Can you say blown apex seals? I bet most of the 3G Rx-7 owners can. I had a 93 RX-7 and it was an awesome car, with very minor mods, low 13's was pretty easy. The car handled great and you didn't have to 'find' the power like you do in the S2000. However, there are some drawbacks to the Mazda. Aluminum body panels all around are great for saving weight but they dent when you look at them funny. The apex seals seem to be a common problem and those engines are one of the few that I know of that seems more sensitive than the F20C. All in all the Rx-7 is a great car and if you can find a used 3G in good shape for a good price, there's not much to compare it to.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by erik
[B]Now I could be talking out of my ass here, but I love the 3rd Gen RX-7.

 

The RX7 was one of my favorites when it came out. I followed it a bit, but could never afford one. Stock trim they ran 0-60 of 5.5 seconds, top speed of 155 mph. Not far from a stock S2000. All the ones I see anymore are usually modded. If not, its some older guy who's not into street/drag racing.

 

Yeah, I know what you mean. A lot of crap starts flying fast. It's worse on the 7 board than here; the price of the car at this point ($12-25k, depending) means a lot of young, hotheaded know-it-alls...unfortunately.

 

Also, I read somewhere once that the 3G RX-7 is the only production car ever to have the manual and automatic trim rated at identical horsepowere ratings.