Old RX7s

[Chris71]

Hello again!

The search for a fun car continues! (although I am very tempted by an MX5)

But one other question - what are RX7s like?

I'm particularly interested in the early wedge shaped ones (mk1 and 2?) but have to be honest, I don't really now anything about them other than the fact they're rotary powered RWD. Any idea what the performance figures were and if a 15 year old rotary engine will still do that? I know the handling of the later RX7s is supposed to be good, are the earlier ones similar?

Chris

[JOHNSTON]

sure the very first ones arent rotary engines, dont quote me on that tho

[madazrx7]

ALL RX7s are rotaries, in fact all Mazda RXanything are rotaries.
The first generation SA22C(series I, II, III) was 79-85 so at least 21 years old now. I have had several (road and race), getting hard to find a good one now, sold a real gem a couple of years ago. Would like to get another as a track toy to put a 13B turbo in. These were the lightest and simplest RX7s.

2nd gen FC3S(series IV, V) 86-91 was the Porsche 944 stylee. Had a S5Turbo road car, now have one for track days/ sprint events. Considerably heavier and bigger than the first gen. Nice "GT' car.

3rd gen FD3S (series VI, VII, VIII) 92-02, the best of all. True 2 seater with fantastic engine and handling.

Tim

[bint]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm I would love an RX7 - 3rd gen - test drove one and that was it - I was in love. But at about 12mpg I couldn't afford to run it then. Now however........ Hmmmm

I don't know anything about the older ones, but the 3rd gen need an engine rebuild (rotor tips get worn) at about 60 - 80k depending on how the car's been driven - a compression test will let you know if it needs it or not. It will set you back about £2500 but the great thing about these cars is that once it's done it shouldn't lose any more value if it's properly looked after. They really are turning into a bit of a classic.

Bloody good cars IMHO.

[Xaero]

RX stands for Rotary eXperimental. So all RX car's are rotaries as it's in the name.

[wadeski]

How good are the FCs compared to the FD?

Both are gorgeous but i have a real thing for the boxy FC...a turbo is really appealing for once a week use.

But what are they like now they are 15 years old?

[iaint]

bint said:

But at about 12mpg I couldn't afford to run it then.

If an rx is returning 12 mpg then it's either on track (in which case they aren't really pushing it enough - expect 7-8mpg) or it's badly tuned.

See the other current thread for my comments...

Even when mostly standard the worst I got (heavy traffic in london and caning it combined) was 17mpg. Now it's modded I get better economy, go figure!

[mave]

I'd love a very early series 1 (with the smaller rear lights) as an everyday alternative to my series 3. The life expectancies of the series 1 and 3 are similar at ~60K miles between rebuilds, whereas the N/A series 2 is maybe 100K. Not sure about the series 2 turbo. You could probably regard the handling of the cars as slightly better than their Porsche equivalent of the time; series 1 vs 924, series 2 vs 944, series 3 vs 968. Series 1 was 0-60 in 9.2s, 110-130bhp, 120mph, 1005kg.
Take a look at mazdarotaryforum where there are specific forums for each series.

[david beer]

I had a Turbo 2 as a company car !! It did over 90k in two 1/2 years, never missed a beat until i left it standing for 3 weeks, lost compression ! If it had been towed to start, they say the tips would of "flown out" and been fine again. I had a new engine fitted, but thats a long story, didnt pay ! A mate of mine also had one and if he started the car and turned off the engine within 2 mins, it would do the same, never did it after discovering it and went on until he sold it and simply told the new owner not to do it.

[vixpy1]

I have one..

Bleedin fantastic!