I love my friends rx8. The handling is definitely better than an FC, and its much easier to take to the limits than an FD. (which allows for more fun on the street)

While in his car I like taking turns more. In my car I like just nailing the gas, and sometimes take the turns.
I think the older ones also feel faster partly because of the noise levels (the 8 is pretty darn quiet), and the higher tq of the turbo cars.

 

So If the 3rd generation is faster and the engine comply with the US emissions (they are still around), why the renesis wasn't built whith that kind of punch or even stronger? If the renesis is so effective in emissions standards, why it couldnt be built with more power. I understand that it is a lot of power even without a turbo. What I am trying to say is that they should have bulit the RX8 with all the goodies (handling,cornering, interior)like it has now plus an FI system that at least compares in power to the 3rd generation.

Thanks

 

Why, because the FD is a reliability nightmare. If you baby the hell out of it you might not have to replace the engine regularly. But with todays cars that's just unacceptable and I don't think Mazda wanted to run the risk of having the same problems with the FE as they did with the turbo FC and FD. Mazda needed to sell a good amount of RX-8s and make money on them, not have it be a failure like the FD was from a sales standpoint.


EDIT: The FD would not pass new car emissions standards and it's rumored that it would be rather difficult to get any turbo rotary to pass all the regulations we have today.

 

I don't know if those cars would be designated '96s. 95 was the last year for ODB-1 and Mazda couldn't get the FD to meet ODB-II, so I don't think they could have legally sold them as '96s without meeting the new standards.

 

I dont think the FC was reall bad.
It was the FD that gave them the real bad reputation.
And it was mainly due to the overly complex twin turbo setup, the uber crappy engine management and inadequate cooling system.

 

All the problems mentioned were all taken care of with later FDs in Japan...especially the twin turbo system, where Mazda was able to squeeze out more power ( 280 hp for the 2002 models).

too bad OBD-II came into play when it did, because we might still have the 7 here in the US with all the wrinkles ironed out.

oh well.

santino

 

The 3rd gen is not that bad. It is more complex than previous models. People were being careless with the engines/mods. In all honesty if you do reliability mods to an FD and make sure it is boosting properly your motor will last.

 

this is very true...the horror stories about FDs and blown engines were mainly from inexperienced people who did not do enough research before modding their cars.

i did my research and spoke to rotary specialists for a good 2 years before doing anything to my FD.

santino

 

We had a track day last weekend, where I was able to beat two FD-s on a straight/slalom combined course by a big margin. I assume we all were civil (e.g. not race) drivers.
So not assuming I'm a better than average driver, the 8 gave me a definite advantage.
Later on on the oval speed track, the FD easily pulled from me.

All this underlines what others said, the 8 has an easily accessible handling advantage but way less raw power.

 

The 8 has no handling advantage over a 3rd gen rx-7. dont let me point out the FD is still in superstock against the Z06, 911TT, Viper, etc.

What the 8 has is the ability to give the driver a high sense of security or confidence. Owning both cars I can say that I can handle my rx-8 better than my rx-7. That doesn't change the fact that the 3rd gen Rx-7 has FAR, FAR, FAR higher limits than the rx8.

Take two pro drivers, put one in the rx-8, put the other in the FD and the FD will rape the rx8 like there is no tomorrow.

Put two average drivers and I could give the nod to the 8 under most circumstances. That still doesn't change the fact that the FD handles better.

 

the biggest thing going for the RX-8 against all the RX-7s is AGE.

there is something to be said about having ALL NEW components all working together to achieve maximum performance

 

That doesn't say much about the 8 if that is the "biggest" thing it has going for it.

I am an FD owner and have driven all three generations of the RX-7 as well as the 8. This is my observation of how the 8 stacks up.

The first generation RX-7 (FB) is a quick, well handling car that is an absolute blast to drive. It handles well and is easy to control around turns. These still compete and win in many SCCA class events which says alot for a 25 year old car competing against new machines.

The 8 most closely resembles the second gen NA RX-7 is substance, concept, and drivability. Second gens are great handling cars and are known for being reliable cars. When they were introduced they were bigger and more bulky then the first gens.

The eight has mirrored this concept by being bigger and bulkier then its predecessors while still handling well and having performance and reliability (so far).

The 8 is no FD and it never will be. The 8 was designed to compete with the BMW three series and does rather well at it. It is however, much like the BMW, a sports sedan while the FD is a sports car.

 

Man, if there are 2 cars that I always look for when scanning the used-ads, they would have to be the '93-'95 FD RX-7 and the MKIV Supras from '93-'98.

In the Baltimore area, FDs are around, but many have been dogged. I really didn't think of the FD as a daily driver when it first came out...not because of its engine or reliability, but more because of its body and construction. Those aluminum panels are light, but fragile and they are next to impossible to repair...I believe most dealers just replaced 'em rather than deal with fixing 'em. So, it's really rare to find a FD that looks good...too many people here bought the car and didn't know what kind of commitment it was going to take to keep it up.

In all, I think the MKIV Supras may have been the best cars to make it out of that era...that engine was super-robust and could be tuned to develop MASSIVE power (SCC mag has reports of several with 700+HP!). The Supras seemed to be more livable as a daily driver because it was a bit more reliable and more durable overall. The only problem is, every time I see an ad for one of these beauties, they usually have had these huge body kits and outrageous paint and graphic schemes plastered all over them. Some of these Supra owners took "The Fast & The Furious" look a bit too far!

Still, the FDs and the turbo MKIVs are scorchingly fast rides...anything short of something with a ZR-1/Z-06 or 911 badge would have a hard time staying close to these two. I still want one...or both!! :D

Arvin

 

Not to mention you can't find a base model automatic MKIV supra for under $15,000 or a turbo one for under $25,000. Talk about holding value, some of the nicer ones (60k miles or less) fetch $30,000-$40,000. I don't know who is paying that much but someone is. An unmodified Turbo model is pretty much impossible to find. MkIV supras, on the whole, seem to be in better condition than FD's, maybe that says something about the owners?

 

If I were to build an autocross car I would not consider anything other than a 1st gen RX-7. They handle tight turns better than anything else, they are light, quick, and a complete blast to drive. I couldn't think of any production car at any price that would be more fun to drive under 60mph. An FD would make the best track car, while the 2nd gen and RX-8 provide good performance mixed with some practicality for the street.

 

That's true on both counts. The Mark IVs have incredible value considering the ammount of miles and wear put on them. But, again, I think it boiled down to how robust the entire package was when it came out of Toyota's factory.

I actually looked at a MarkIV Turbo m/t that was fairly clean and had original bodywork, but the owner had done so many engine mods that I couldn't be comfortable owning such a highly-tuned car...let alone begin to work on it myself should something go wrong! He bought it used from a Toyota dealership for $38,000, estimated that with engine, suspension, exhaust and electronic mods it had a value of $75,000...and was asking $50,000!

Damned if he didn't sell it for $52,000 a week later...

Arvin

 

The Mark IV isn't on topic, and stock for stock an FD is faster.

 

I use to have a 93 FD and the 93-98 Supra's were the only vehicles I hesitated to challenge--same with LS1s--mainly because stock for stock the cars are pretty well matched; but most of the ones on the street are not stock. They respond well to cheap mods; Basic Power Upgrades (BPU). Supras can pick up a lot of horsepower from intake/exhaust/and boost controller--RX7s can too; but it is that much more expensive because of the rotary's sensitivity to heat and boost creep.

 

Sorry, ive been away from the forums.

I made the mistake on speaking from my point of view. On a general consensus, it is a very quick car and highly capable even aganist some of the best of whats offered today.

But based on my first experiences with them, I had underestimated my FC or what seemed more likely to me, overestimated the FD in terms of outright acceleration.

 

White Comet, your FC is pretty heavily modded so I certainly would expect it to compete well with a stock FD or even a lightly modded one. Turbo IIs are pretty damn quick cars without what you have got there. That should in no way lead you to underestimate an FD's performance, especially when compared to just about any car produced up until the last few years.

 

BTW, that is complement to your car. It sounds like it is very well put together.

 

White Comet
from your sig, the work on your FC would make the acceleration of an FD (stock or lightly modded) seem to be less than what you expected.

But--there is always a but--stock vs. stock, it would be a different story. or even similar mods done to each car.

anyways, sorry if i seemed to be attacking your comments.

take care

santino

 

I didnt intend to come across flaming the FD. My initial investment coming into the RX family was on the FD before I got into my FC.

As far as stock, you're right, it'd be an uphill battle. Although I have raced FDs with the nearly the same mods (intake, full exhaust, i/c, ecu), I managed to get away, more or less due to the weight difference since my car didnt start as a turbo II and I've taken some measures to continue reducing weight

Thanks for the compliment though. I look forward to running into some local RX-8 owners sooner or later.

 

Ok you guys, yes in stock form 1st, and 2nd gens can easily get beat by both the 8 and 3rd gen but my '85 GSL-SE can't be beat by some modded 8's and 3rd gens. My 7 has the factory 3rd gen twins modified to push out 20psi max. I have the lowest compression rotors which are 8.5:1 from a 2nd gen, i think the year is the '86. The whole motor has been cryo-treated,including housings and rotors and has an AEM ECU. right now i have an erebuni body kit, and wrap around rear spoiler. 15"x8 1/2 " Weld rims in rear with Mickey T's, 15"x6" welds in front with mickey t's. custom made suspension with camber plates, and modified coilovers which are TEIN N1's. The rotor housing have been painted black and the side housings have been polished. right now the car is still in the tuning process but as of 2 months ago, since i dont have much cash after the motor work, her last dyno run netted 483.2 RWHP and 450.6 lb/ft of torque before tuning and was running on 93. my tuner, friends, and I guestimate the power after the tuning to be around 550rwhp on 93 and close to 620-640rwhp on C16. my 7 also has a 6point rollcage for body rigidity. but until she gets 2,000 miles on the clock and being tuned she will not see any revs above 5k or touch the track. this is my baby and she is so beautiful with the body kit and rear wing. as soon as i can i will post a pic of my '83 drag car that went to Puerto Rico for a Mazda of Japan car show that restricted the cars to only Mazda cars and rotary powered cars. I won 1st class in best motor, execution, highest RPM(widely known as highest acceleration), and best 1st gen RX-7 drag car. the show happened in summer of 2003. that show was a blast. Oh yeah my drag car revs all the way to a 13K shift point on the 5 speed jericho. my best time on her is a 7.23@ 166mph. You guys do not want to mess with my stable of 7's!

 

cptpain, built first gens are always impressive, I would love to check yours out. Sounds incredible. No one who has a brain is claiming that their cars (whichever generation) is going to be faster than cars that run in the 7's. We pretty much understand that we can't hang with race cars. Originally we were really only talking stock and then the normal bolt ons.
BTW, what do you think of the AEM ECU. Is it the one they came out with for the 3rd gens or is it custom? Just wondering, I am running the PFC, but was looking into the AEM. I decided on the Apexi setup because of the commander as opposed to needing to pick up a laptop for the car.