1986 Mazda RX7 Reviews - Page 2 of 4

1986 Mazda RX7 not sure 1.3rotary turbo from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership1986
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 1.3rotary turbo Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.3 / 10
Distance when acquired67138 miles
Most recent distance67450 miles
Previous carMazda RX7

Summary:

Over all this car is sweet!!!

Faults:

I have had this car for about 4 months and so far nothing major has gone wrong. Although one of the lights got stuck up, but no major fix.

General Comments:

This is the best car I have ever had. I feel like I have to accelerate around turns because it handles so well. My interior is perfect and all the electronics all work. With all the complements a side I have heard that rotary engines are a big hassle. Problems such as apex seals breaking, carbon build up and coolant seals leaking and if any one out there knows what to do please give me a tip.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 19th January, 2006

1986 Mazda RX7 1.3b rotary from North America

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.3b rotary Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 1 / 10
Dealer Service marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.0 / 10
Distance when acquired50000 miles
Most recent distance70000 miles

Summary:

The car has incredible potential, but needs a lot of work

Faults:

Engine overheated at 50,000.

Master transmission cylinder went at 52,000 and at 70,000.

Secondary transmission cylinder went at 70,000.

Transmission started to slip at 65,000.

Seats were worn before I bought the car.

Rear struts had to be replaced at 53,000.

A/C never worked in the car.

Controller unit needed to be replaced twice during the 20,000 miles I drove the car.

Alternator needed to be replaced at 70,000.

General Comments:

This car has so much potential.

This car has decent acceleration for a stock car and it handles like a dream.

The cabin leaves much to be desired, with shoddy materials and flimsy plastics that break easily.

I still don't understand what the use of the rear seat is in the car. My sister who is 4 feet 11 inches can't even fit in the back.

The ride is very harsh, even though it is claimed more comfortable then the first and third generation cars.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th July, 2004

13th May 2009, 03:59

The tranny problems is more the fault of operators revving up past 7700 rpm... other than that your car seems fine... more like you're complaining about basic maintenance to me... I mean come on, why list the alty? If your apex seals were done then yeah... don't be so finicky about basics mate.

1986 Mazda RX7 1.3 rotary from Norway

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.3 rotary Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired150000 kilometres
Most recent distance180000 kilometres
Previous carMazda 626

Summary:

The RX-7 is the most fun car, the fastest car, and the most reliable car I've ever owned!

Faults:

No major problems with this car. Lots of small quirks one could expect of an 18 year old car, nothing worth mentioning.

Most of it fixed with 5-56 and a screwdriver.

General Comments:

I knew what I was getting myself into when I bought this car, for instance that I had to change the oil at correct intervals, be careful not to stop the engine when semi-warm (to avoid flooding), avoid overheating etc etc.

Even though I once seriously overheated the engine, causing a coolant leak, it ran fine (as long as I added coolant ALL the time) for 4000 km, most of the summer. I then decided to remove the engine and install a rebuilt, tuned engine, plus new gearbox, new exhaust, etc, before I killed the poor engine completely.

I installed a switch on the dashboard for the fuel pump, if the engine becomes flooded and won't start, I just switch off the pump, crank a couple of seconds and turn the pump back on, problem solved. Also doubles as anti-theft =)

Durability / Reliability: This isn't the same thing. I wouldn't use an unreliable engine in an airplane, and I guess that's why lots of airplanes have rotary engines.

Most people believe rotary engines and RX-7's are unreliable, but quite the opposite is true. With three main moving parts, how much can fail, except parts like the apex seals, which are parts exposed to lots of wear and have a limited life expectancy?

On the durability matter, I can agree that a poorly maintained and abused rotary engine won't last very long, usually around 130-140000 km before a rebuild is needed.

Anyhow, even though I meticulously perform maintenance on my RX-7, I push its engine to the limits and beyond on a daily basis, I have just been waiting for it to break down, but it never happened!

I'll never buy another car with a piston engine, if I do, it's because I'm going to install a rotary engine.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 8th April, 2004

28th Jun 2004, 10:56

Rotary engines in airplanes are considerably different than the RX-7 engine. Airplane rotary engines use ordinary pistons and cylinders arranged in a circle, while the RX-7 (Wankel) engine uses a rotor of sorts that is spun around, much different than an ordinary piston setup.

3rd Jul 2004, 17:05

Actually they do use rotary engines ie. WANKEL rotary engines in aircraft. They are excellent choices because of their power to weight ratios!

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 14 reviews