TT Rx7
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
From: Hawaii
BTW for those who love and own RX7's or just like them in general, don't misunderstand any of my posts.
I for one, if I had a choice, the time and funds to own a decent FC or FD I would. The RX7 line has IMHO followed the ideal theory behind making a really well balanced car. I for one don't believe that raw power determines how awesome a car is. It is however nice to know that the FD can pull 11's and 10's down the quarter mile... that is impressive no matter how you look at it.
I'm old school but I believe in a very light car with good footwork, strong brakes, good weight distribution and a broad power curve and the extra bite at higher revs. The FD has proven to be perhaps the best balanced super car that Japan has ever produced.
I for one, if I had a choice, the time and funds to own a decent FC or FD I would. The RX7 line has IMHO followed the ideal theory behind making a really well balanced car. I for one don't believe that raw power determines how awesome a car is. It is however nice to know that the FD can pull 11's and 10's down the quarter mile... that is impressive no matter how you look at it.
I'm old school but I believe in a very light car with good footwork, strong brakes, good weight distribution and a broad power curve and the extra bite at higher revs. The FD has proven to be perhaps the best balanced super car that Japan has ever produced.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
From: Mechanicsburg
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Artguy
[B]LMAO....Im out...he doesnt have to make me seem like one...thats exactly what I was doing...the s2000 is like a little brother to the fd...sometimes ya gotta give it noogies to keep it in its place.
[B]LMAO....Im out...he doesnt have to make me seem like one...thats exactly what I was doing...the s2000 is like a little brother to the fd...sometimes ya gotta give it noogies to keep it in its place.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,686
Likes: 0
From: kuwait
this is getting way out of hand! i never knew the rex7 guys r that diffensive! 
stop the arguing please , u r all car enthusiasts here , and should have respect for each other........
SHIRI......please if you hate the s2000 so much , why do u come to s2ki?
stop the arguing please , u r all car enthusiasts here , and should have respect for each other........
SHIRI......please if you hate the s2000 so much , why do u come to s2ki?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Derry
Where am I contradicting myself here? If you are referring to the N/A FD issue then if you re-read my post, I've already mentioned that it was my crude way to set a point across why an N/A car shouldn't be compared to one that's boosted. That's the only reason why I even brought it up.
Yes it is a problem, the focus here is on fuel economy and why the rotories have a reputation of being gas hungry suckers despite it's small displacement. Mazda engineers always knew that the fuel economy could be improved but they couldn't solve that with the early rotaries which had both peripheral intake and exhaust ports, and the later models with one side intake and peripheral exhaust port.
EGR does play a big role in controlling emissions, no argument there but the overlap found on the pre-Renesis engines has nothing to do with EGR. Many people have already argued about this but the simple fact of this is that Mazda didn't engineer this overlap to happen. If they could have eliminated it like they did with the Renesis, they would have, but obviously the modification couldn't be done without a complete redesign of the engine.
To keep things simple, EGR simply recirculates some spent gases and introduces it with the fresh A/F mixture to keep hydrocarbon emissions down. Naturally, spent gases are harder to ignite and results into something similar to increasing the octane in fuel. However in the earlier rotary engines, too much spent gases would re-enter the combustion chamber and makes it much more difficult to ignite the intake charge even with the dual spark plugs. This is why Mazda at the time had no other choice but to enrich the incoming A/F mixture with a higher fuel content to help with a more complete combustion.
I guess you and me were partly wrong. I was wrong that the Renesis has some overlap and you were wrong in that the Renesis has less spent gases carried back to suction cycle. So the reasons why the side port was moved was :
1. Eliminate overlap.
2. Increased port area = more breathing.
3. EGR-like operation to reduce emissions.
Great discussion. It's rare that both parties learn something in an internet argument.
You don't know me so don't talk about what I've owned. Originally, I wanted to go ahead with my project FD but it got time consuming since I worked 2 jobs at the time and my debts made investing in the RX7 very expensive. A friend of mine wanted to get his hands on one but couldn't get one at a fair price. The previous owner told me that he upkept the car but had no receipts to prove it, plus the car didn't look like it was well maintained. I really didn't care since I was planning to squeeze about 350hp out of the car and keep it reliable enough to be a daily driver. After having it sit in my garage for almost a half a year, my friend offered me a fair price and payed me for all of the parts I put on the side for it at the price I got them for.
The current design of the car (RX8) isn't the problem. It's the design of the new engine that's posing as the problem. The new innovation of implementing all of the new improvements actually takes up much more room under the hood especially near the exhaust section where the turbo would normally sit. Don't take my word for it, take a good look under the hood of one and you'll see what I mean. I'm not so sure if anyone can claim that it's impossible to put a turbo, but it's not as easy as the previous gen rotaries.
You don't own an FD or has access to it every day. You'll see how cramped it is in the exhaust part of the engine where the turbo is located and you'll see what I mean. It took me 3 hrs just to change a downpipe. And there is always solution to those kind of problems. Make the port runners a bit longer so the turbo sits forward(single turbo). That's what Greddy does with their big single turbo kits.
The reason why Mazda keep it NA is to increase reliability(you heard horror stories about the vacuum rat's nest) and simplicity. Hell, my 87 NA FC kept going at 140k miles until I sold it two years ago without missing a beat.
[QUOTE]this is getting way out of hand! i never knew the rex7 guys r that diffensive!
Banned
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
From: Tokyo
Back up what? Most of what I've stated so far isn't speculation, except for the part where I used a crude example of comparing apples to apples (in that particular example, I meant N/A vs. N/A)
I think you are misunderstanding me here. For someone who has had 2 RX7s (or Fx'ers), surely you could have put the RX7 in a better light than what you originally stated. As you know, the S can never ever compare to any TT, period. Why are people still arguing over this?
For what it's worth, I don't think you have any room to state how facts are backed up especially when your theory regarding who started the high revving motor scene in Japan was proven wrong to begin with. Since I wasn't aware of who the pioneer of the Japanese high revving engines were, I kept quiet then I think carrrnuttt posted that old article about the first "S" models. I'll admit, you almost had me there.
Honda was not the first, but it was surely the first to command a ridiculously high rev from an extremely weak engine. All the other companies had some decent power in their cars, perhaps that was why there was far more successful.
The digital dash layout of the AE86 that you posted is new to me as I've never seen that layout here. Around that same timeframe, Chrysler came out with the Laser that also had some kind of digital dash also, but I can't recall what it looks like in detail. For me, that was the first production car I've seen to have such an instrumentation and the name "Laser" at the time stuck in my mind.
Quite frankly, I don:t really care who was first with this or that. All I'm saying that the S is not a forerunner in anything, it is not as innovative as some people think it is. Its a great car, but it has all the technology borrowed from yesterday. Even the 280zx had digital dashboards (they were a fad during the 80s anyway).
BTW SHIRI, what do you drive? Have you really worked on a rotary engine before or owned an RX7 before? Just curious.
I have 3 cars, GTR, Z32 and a Suzuki. I have never worked on a rotary engine before, as I don:t really like them. I don:t like the sound either, but that is my personal opinion. Like I said earlier, the RX7 is to be respected (although sometimes I am prone to give it as much s%&& as the S
)
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
From: Little Rock, AR/ Ft Worth, TX
Originally posted by Artguy
Id hate getting beat by every c5 midlife crisis bastard on the road if i had an s2k....
Id hate getting beat by every c5 midlife crisis bastard on the road if i had an s2k....
Oh- and leave the POS AE86 out of this discussion, eh? I had one. It is, in EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE WAY, inferior to the 1st Gen RX7. Period. That car, in a nutshell, SUCKED.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: boston sucks
lol...well you are one of the few...i wanted a vette too...wanted one since i was nine years old...but in cali all the guys in vettes are gold watch wearing mustache having flabby midlife crisis bastages.
its a stigma....
so i went with my fd...but i still like vettes...especially the z06...if i had it to do over again Id have waited and picked up one of those...but alas...Im happy...still fast as fukk and lookin good too.
j
its a stigma....
so i went with my fd...but i still like vettes...especially the z06...if i had it to do over again Id have waited and picked up one of those...but alas...Im happy...still fast as fukk and lookin good too.
j
