Pics for Nookiemonster as promised (The real use for an RX7)
01-23-2005
#1
The Wierdest and Funniest Mofo 7th Gen Has Ever Seen As Voted
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 7,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 317 
Pics for Nookiemonster as promised (The real use for an RX7) Ok if you like these pics than I would love one rep point please....
Thanks alot....
I posted when you asked if you should leave the site cuz you have a Mazda..
Anyways I like the RX7 but after these pics I blew and seized the engine....
OWNED
Thanks alot....
I posted when you asked if you should leave the site cuz you have a Mazda..
Anyways I like the RX7 but after these pics I blew and seized the engine....
OWNED
Last edited by _Viper_; 12-16-2008 at 09:59 AM.
01-23-2005
#3
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 304 Wow thanks for that...
I've seen my father's RX-7 do some crazy burnouts in parking lots also...
Do you still have that FC and what kind of work do you have done?
EDIT sorry I didn't read all the way to the bottom...so what happened after you blew the engine did you sell it?
I've seen my father's RX-7 do some crazy burnouts in parking lots also...
Do you still have that FC and what kind of work do you have done?
EDIT sorry I didn't read all the way to the bottom...so what happened after you blew the engine did you sell it?
01-23-2005
#6
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 304
Originally Posted by HorrorSkopes
dope!
rx7 > rx8
rx7 > rx8
The 8 makes more power than any of the FC's did stock. And it does it without turbos. It also has a side exhaust port design which has improved fuel economy and minimalized blowby. It's also got a simplified engine bay, not the rat's nest that the FD had. It doesn't have cooling problems, and it makes 238 bhp (AFTER EPA got their hands on it..down from 248, even down from 270 ish pre production) where the FD stock made 255 with sequential twin turbos. The ECU piggyback available from canzoomer puts the car back to where it should have been before EPA, and can tune it to make even more power. Think of it as the hondata for rotaries.
The 8 also has a 30% more riggid chassis than the FD did despite the lack of a B-pillar. It's more liveable on a day to day basis, and given equal drivers, has been argued to handle better than the FD. The FD has higher limits, and is alot lighter, but is VERY hard to drive. Average drivers on both will put out faster lap times with the 8. The 8 has a fairly pliant suspension, and accomplishes this, where the 7 does it with a punishing one. Put an equally stiff suspension on the 8, and guess what happens to handling arguments?
The FD's pros are that it's all aluminum and light weight. 255 hp stock, with the right tuning can make exponentially more...however nobody ever tunes them correctly because ricer's now have the money to afford a 12 year old FD, and blow it up. Looks, while subjective, the FD looks amazing especially for a 12-13 year old car.
The FC, well unless you're a rotary lover, doesn't have a whole lot going for it. It was obviously designed to look like a Porsche 944. The Turbo II's are easily modded, but like the FD, rely heavily on the tune to make reliable power. The FC handles no where nearly as well as the FD, and well, I've already covered the 8's handling.
Look, I love RX-7's, and because I'm a sentimental person, and grew up with them, I love them more than RX-8's. But this is for emotional and personal reasons. If you say RX-7's are better than RX-8's you better damn well specify why, and know what you're talking about when you do it. Because quite frankly when it comes down to it, the RX-8 is better than pretty much any incarnation of RX car to precede it, with the exception of the FD.
Everyone loves the FD so much, but as my father learned in order to have a reliable FD, you have to modify it with "reliability mods." They're awesome cars, but in the rotary community, FD has come to stand for "****ing Disaster." The sequential twin turbos were too complex of a setup, overheating was rampant, and vacuum hoses would dry rot and blow off, resulting in detonation. I guarantee that if any of you had first hand experience with one of these cars over the long term, and then had the same long term experience with an RX-8, you would choose the 8. Mainly due to hassle free driving, with 93% of the horsepower the FD had without the headache of sequential twin turbos.
I've posted vids of the turbo RX-8's...with proper tuning I'm quite sure the 8 will be just as much of a track star as the FD. And I'm sure that with improper tuning it will prove to be the debacle the FD was all over again.
Sorry for the essay, but some people just need to be schooled once in a while when they make a comment that holds no water.
Last edited by nookiemonster; 01-23-2005 at 04:44 PM.
01-23-2005
#8
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 304 Haha, thanks for the comment, but no I'm by no means a god. I still have alot to learn, and continue to try to learn as much as I can. My father, maybe. He's had RX-2's, RX-5's, an FC and his current FD. The only rotary offered in the USA my family hasn't owned is the Mazda REPU.
Sorry for the rant once again.
Viper, what trim FC did you have? It looked like it was in fairly decent shape. Those are very safe cars by the way, if it wasn't for airbag safety laws, they'd still receive 5 star crash ratings.
Sorry for the rant once again.
Viper, what trim FC did you have? It looked like it was in fairly decent shape. Those are very safe cars by the way, if it wasn't for airbag safety laws, they'd still receive 5 star crash ratings.
01-23-2005
#10
Registered!!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: So Cal
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by nookiemonster
Which RX-7 are you talking about? The only RX-7 that was ever better than an 8 was the FD3S, and in some arguments, it's not even THAT much better.
The 8 makes more power than any of the FC's did stock. And it does it without turbos. It also has a side exhaust port design which has improved fuel economy and minimalized blowby. It's also got a simplified engine bay, not the rat's nest that the FD had. It doesn't have cooling problems, and it makes 238 bhp (AFTER EPA got their hands on it..down from 248, even down from 270 ish pre production) where the FD stock made 255 with sequential twin turbos. The ECU piggyback available from canzoomer puts the car back to where it should have been before EPA, and can tune it to make even more power. Think of it as the hondata for rotaries.
The 8 also has a 30% more riggid chassis than the FD did despite the lack of a B-pillar. It's more liveable on a day to day basis, and given equal drivers, has been argued to handle better than the FD. The FD has higher limits, and is alot lighter, but is VERY hard to drive. Average drivers on both will put out faster lap times with the 8. The 8 has a fairly pliant suspension, and accomplishes this, where the 7 does it with a punishing one. Put an equally stiff suspension on the 8, and guess what happens to handling arguments?
The FD's pros are that it's all aluminum and light weight. 255 hp stock, with the right tuning can make exponentially more...however nobody ever tunes them correctly because ricer's now have the money to afford a 12 year old FD, and blow it up. Looks, while subjective, the FD looks amazing especially for a 12-13 year old car.
The FC, well unless you're a rotary lover, doesn't have a whole lot going for it. It was obviously designed to look like a Porsche 944. The Turbo II's are easily modded, but like the FD, rely heavily on the tune to make reliable power. The FC handles no where nearly as well as the FD, and well, I've already covered the 8's handling.
Look, I love RX-7's, and because I'm a sentimental person, and grew up with them, I love them more than RX-8's. But this is for emotional and personal reasons. If you say RX-7's are better than RX-8's you better damn well specify why, and know what you're talking about when you do it. Because quite frankly when it comes down to it, the RX-8 is better than pretty much any incarnation of RX car to precede it, with the exception of the FD.
Everyone loves the FD so much, but as my father learned in order to have a reliable FD, you have to modify it with "reliability mods." They're awesome cars, but in the rotary community, FD has come to stand for "****ing Disaster." The sequential twin turbos were too complex of a setup, overheating was rampant, and vacuum hoses would dry rot and blow off, resulting in detonation. I guarantee that if any of you had first hand experience with one of these cars over the long term, and then had the same long term experience with an RX-8, you would choose the 8. Mainly due to hassle free driving, with 93% of the horsepower the FD had without the headache of sequential twin turbos.
I've posted vids of the turbo RX-8's...with proper tuning I'm quite sure the 8 will be just as much of a track star as the FD. And I'm sure that with improper tuning it will prove to be the debacle the FD was all over again.
Sorry for the essay, but some people just need to be schooled once in a while when they make a comment that holds no water.
The 8 makes more power than any of the FC's did stock. And it does it without turbos. It also has a side exhaust port design which has improved fuel economy and minimalized blowby. It's also got a simplified engine bay, not the rat's nest that the FD had. It doesn't have cooling problems, and it makes 238 bhp (AFTER EPA got their hands on it..down from 248, even down from 270 ish pre production) where the FD stock made 255 with sequential twin turbos. The ECU piggyback available from canzoomer puts the car back to where it should have been before EPA, and can tune it to make even more power. Think of it as the hondata for rotaries.
The 8 also has a 30% more riggid chassis than the FD did despite the lack of a B-pillar. It's more liveable on a day to day basis, and given equal drivers, has been argued to handle better than the FD. The FD has higher limits, and is alot lighter, but is VERY hard to drive. Average drivers on both will put out faster lap times with the 8. The 8 has a fairly pliant suspension, and accomplishes this, where the 7 does it with a punishing one. Put an equally stiff suspension on the 8, and guess what happens to handling arguments?
The FD's pros are that it's all aluminum and light weight. 255 hp stock, with the right tuning can make exponentially more...however nobody ever tunes them correctly because ricer's now have the money to afford a 12 year old FD, and blow it up. Looks, while subjective, the FD looks amazing especially for a 12-13 year old car.
The FC, well unless you're a rotary lover, doesn't have a whole lot going for it. It was obviously designed to look like a Porsche 944. The Turbo II's are easily modded, but like the FD, rely heavily on the tune to make reliable power. The FC handles no where nearly as well as the FD, and well, I've already covered the 8's handling.
Look, I love RX-7's, and because I'm a sentimental person, and grew up with them, I love them more than RX-8's. But this is for emotional and personal reasons. If you say RX-7's are better than RX-8's you better damn well specify why, and know what you're talking about when you do it. Because quite frankly when it comes down to it, the RX-8 is better than pretty much any incarnation of RX car to precede it, with the exception of the FD.
Everyone loves the FD so much, but as my father learned in order to have a reliable FD, you have to modify it with "reliability mods." They're awesome cars, but in the rotary community, FD has come to stand for "****ing Disaster." The sequential twin turbos were too complex of a setup, overheating was rampant, and vacuum hoses would dry rot and blow off, resulting in detonation. I guarantee that if any of you had first hand experience with one of these cars over the long term, and then had the same long term experience with an RX-8, you would choose the 8. Mainly due to hassle free driving, with 93% of the horsepower the FD had without the headache of sequential twin turbos.
I've posted vids of the turbo RX-8's...with proper tuning I'm quite sure the 8 will be just as much of a track star as the FD. And I'm sure that with improper tuning it will prove to be the debacle the FD was all over again.
Sorry for the essay, but some people just need to be schooled once in a while when they make a comment that holds no water.
.
01-23-2005
#11
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 304
Originally Posted by HorrorSkopes
FD3S is god to the rx8. Twin Turbo, lightweight, track car, handles like a dream and FUN TO DRIVE.
The car is a blast, and yes is twin turbo, lightweight, and handles like a dream, but wtf are you talking about when you say "track car?" Any car can be called a "track car." Do some reading on the RX-8, and everyone calls it "fun to drive" and technical data (like I've already pointed out to you) shows the RX-8 as being a better handler than the FD3S, although this is still the topic of heavy debate in the rotary community.
I'm sorry, but twin turbo IMHO is somewhat of a detriment to the car. It worked really well for a short period of time, but if you plan on driving the car daily, they're too finicky of a setup and not reliable at all. Most FD owners pull them and install a single turbo setup. Not only that the Renesis makes 93% of the horsepower the 13B-REW made without any kind of FI.
For all reasons I pointed out, mainly reliability, the RX-8 is a much more enjoyable ownership experience. And you still have failed to give substantial reason to why the RX7>RX8. I love the FD for weekends and track days, but I would be miserable driving it daily.
Originally Posted by HorrorSkopes
Rx8 (IMO) is just a pretty car.
I don't ever remember the 13B-REW at any point in time receiving awards for engine design. In fact, I can show you magazine articles where the FD3S got dogged. I don't entirely agree with the article, but the FD never received as much praise from the automotive press as the 8. The Renesis, got international engine of the year in 2003.
If I didn't know any better, I would read my posts and think i hated the RX-7, and that's why this arguement is starting to tick me off. I love the RX-7, even more than the 8. But the fact of the matter is, the 8 is superior in more ways than one to the 7, and the 7 is superior in some ways as well. However, the 8 in general, is a much more well rounded capable car than the 7 ever was.
If you plan on keeping a rotary powered vehicle for the sheer fact of insane amounts of power (resulting in very little reliability) then the FD3S is for you. But this really defeats the purpose of the RX-7. The RX-7 was designed to attack corners and turn out good lap times, as was the RX-8. The 8 does this with a much more compliant ride, and with back seats, and more reliability.
Last edited by nookiemonster; 01-23-2005 at 06:06 PM.
01-23-2005
#13
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 304 Yeah, the thing about the 8 is that it's a bit too heavy, but if you're up on rotary history at all, the RX-8 makes more power stock than the turbo FC did. I think everyone was just expecting it to exceed the FD's power, but all things considered the 8 is probably the best rx car to date.
01-24-2005
#14
Registered!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 I had an 82 RX7 with 12A or b engine can't remember that thing was smokin, I could burn out non stop, till I took my foot off the gas, then I bought an 86 RX7 looked a lot like the one above, it was quick but much heavier than the first one, I didn't like the 2nd Gen as much but it did have the 13B in it.
01-25-2005
#17
End Bringer
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Fort Fatima, Florida, US
Age: 40
Posts: 6,254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by nookiemonster
Have you driven one? I will tell you, that it is so rough and harsh, that after ten years of ownership, my father won't drive the car anymore. It hurts his back too much, and this is a guy who plays tennis every afternoon.
The car is a blast, and yes is twin turbo, lightweight, and handles like a dream, but wtf are you talking about when you say "track car?" Any car can be called a "track car." Do some reading on the RX-8, and everyone calls it "fun to drive" and technical data (like I've already pointed out to you) shows the RX-8 as being a better handler than the FD3S, although this is still the topic of heavy debate in the rotary community.
I'm sorry, but twin turbo IMHO is somewhat of a detriment to the car. It worked really well for a short period of time, but if you plan on driving the car daily, they're too finicky of a setup and not reliable at all. Most FD owners pull them and install a single turbo setup. Not only that the Renesis makes 93% of the horsepower the 13B-REW made without any kind of FI.
For all reasons I pointed out, mainly reliability, the RX-8 is a much more enjoyable ownership experience. And you still have failed to give substantial reason to why the RX7>RX8. I love the FD for weekends and track days, but I would be miserable driving it daily.
A pretty car that tied the BMW M3 around top gear's test track.
I don't ever remember the 13B-REW at any point in time receiving awards for engine design. In fact, I can show you magazine articles where the FD3S got dogged. I don't entirely agree with the article, but the FD never received as much praise from the automotive press as the 8. The Renesis, got international engine of the year in 2003.
If I didn't know any better, I would read my posts and think i hated the RX-7, and that's why this arguement is starting to tick me off. I love the RX-7, even more than the 8. But the fact of the matter is, the 8 is superior in more ways than one to the 7, and the 7 is superior in some ways as well. However, the 8 in general, is a much more well rounded capable car than the 7 ever was.
If you plan on keeping a rotary powered vehicle for the sheer fact of insane amounts of power (resulting in very little reliability) then the FD3S is for you. But this really defeats the purpose of the RX-7. The RX-7 was designed to attack corners and turn out good lap times, as was the RX-8. The 8 does this with a much more compliant ride, and with back seats, and more reliability.
The car is a blast, and yes is twin turbo, lightweight, and handles like a dream, but wtf are you talking about when you say "track car?" Any car can be called a "track car." Do some reading on the RX-8, and everyone calls it "fun to drive" and technical data (like I've already pointed out to you) shows the RX-8 as being a better handler than the FD3S, although this is still the topic of heavy debate in the rotary community.
I'm sorry, but twin turbo IMHO is somewhat of a detriment to the car. It worked really well for a short period of time, but if you plan on driving the car daily, they're too finicky of a setup and not reliable at all. Most FD owners pull them and install a single turbo setup. Not only that the Renesis makes 93% of the horsepower the 13B-REW made without any kind of FI.
For all reasons I pointed out, mainly reliability, the RX-8 is a much more enjoyable ownership experience. And you still have failed to give substantial reason to why the RX7>RX8. I love the FD for weekends and track days, but I would be miserable driving it daily.
A pretty car that tied the BMW M3 around top gear's test track.
I don't ever remember the 13B-REW at any point in time receiving awards for engine design. In fact, I can show you magazine articles where the FD3S got dogged. I don't entirely agree with the article, but the FD never received as much praise from the automotive press as the 8. The Renesis, got international engine of the year in 2003.
If I didn't know any better, I would read my posts and think i hated the RX-7, and that's why this arguement is starting to tick me off. I love the RX-7, even more than the 8. But the fact of the matter is, the 8 is superior in more ways than one to the 7, and the 7 is superior in some ways as well. However, the 8 in general, is a much more well rounded capable car than the 7 ever was.
If you plan on keeping a rotary powered vehicle for the sheer fact of insane amounts of power (resulting in very little reliability) then the FD3S is for you. But this really defeats the purpose of the RX-7. The RX-7 was designed to attack corners and turn out good lap times, as was the RX-8. The 8 does this with a much more compliant ride, and with back seats, and more reliability.
kids these days think turbo in a car automatically makes the car fast. don't even waste your time trying to talk to them, because they think otherwise. my friend owns a fd and he enjoys it, i have yet to ride in an fd nor a rx8 and i am sure they are both very capable vehicles. but if i have to pick a rotory, i think i will go with an fc, they are soooooo good looking imo. maybe i should invest in a fc and put the new renesis in it, bwahahaha!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Honda Civic Forum
Replies
Last Post
ricer_em2
Mechanical Problems/Vehicle Issues and Fix-it Forum
2
05-11-2016 08:09 PM
AffliictiioN
General Automotive Discussion
12
09-16-2015 02:21 PM
