9th Aug 2006, 13:25
I am a little confused by terms like "sports car","explosively fast", and "15-second quarter miles" in reference to a non-turbo RX-7. I had one, and it was so slow you needed a CALENDAR to time it thru a quarter mile. I used to be embarrassed by old ladies in aging Pintos beating me away from stoplights. I traded mine for a Mustang. THAT is a sports car. What the appeal was of the early RX-7's was I'll never know. I bought mine under the delusion that it was a sports car. Only later did I discover that it was really a glorified golf cart.
31st Aug 2006, 18:33
I am the proud owner of an '89 Rx7. It has 117,000 miles and still runs like a champ. It has plenty of acceleration and down shifting while cornering only adds more fun to the experience.
Some people don't seem to understand the fact that if you do not wind out the gears in small engine cars, it will be difficult to utilize the power available. This car does not red line until 8,000 r.p.m's.
I have had some clutch problems as well as losing the drive shaft at 40 mph, which was a very interesting experience, to say the least. But all in all, my car is solid, reliable and fun, with the exception of the flooding issue, which can be fixed by putting the pedal to the metal if it will not turn over.
A 1989 Mazda Rx7 is not the fastest car in the world, or was it designed to be. But how many cars can you buy for $2,400 and drive it 140 mph without shaking to death. This cars beauty is in the eye of the beholder, But I will tell you I am happy to own my Rx7!
3rd Sep 2006, 22:21
The only way I could have ever got my RX-7 up to 140mph was to tow it behind my Pontiac. At 100mph it shook and rattled so bad it was impossible to go any faster without it disintegrating even if it would have gone faster (which it wouldn't, it topped out at 100). Getting the revs up doesn't help any if it takes half an hour to wind up. Slow??? DEFINITELY. I'll never have another even if they are giving them away. It had to be the worst, most over rated car I ever had the misfortune to buy. I'd never even look at an RX-8. They should save the rotary engines to use in lawn mowers or golf carts or something.
22nd Oct 2006, 00:09
I know a guy who lived in Germany for three years... he had a nonturbo RX-7 and said it reached 142 MPH... and I easily believe him. Just because you got a junker FC with the front end out of alignment, and don't know how to shift, doesn't mean that FCs can't do 130+... jesus, grow a brain. Do you really think that EVERYONE IN THE FREAKING WORLD is conspiring against you to trick you into thinking that the FC can go over 100Mph? My 88 Bonneville can do 104 mph... and it only has 150HP... My dads FB can go over 100mph too... "in 4th gear" he says.
Actually, no, stay away RX-7s. Please, keep driving your Mustang... and don't EVER touch an RX-7 again.
29th Oct 2006, 20:08
Hi I'm a 14 year old boy starting to look into first cars. My wealthy uncle owns a 1989 Mazda RX-7 and I have always been interested in it and rx7s in general. The only upgraded I think he has done would be some kind of fancy exhaust. For my first car I want nothing, but speed. This car is currently in storage and nobody will drive it, but they are selling it soon. Can someone tell me what kind of performance this car would have? I would really appreciate it ill check back soon.
12th Nov 2006, 09:04
My 7 is an 85. It will do 115 MPH. When I bought it, it was slow. Do the following mods: Free up the exhaust flow and install a lighter flywheel and grippier clutch. It is now very quick and much more a sports car than heavier, more powerful cars.
18th Nov 2006, 10:43
I’m 19 years old and just today got into my first RX-7! It’s a 1989 non turbo, but with all the optional extras. Manual with cruise control; It’s the best of both worlds! I got air in the break lines so I can’t push the higher speeds without a runway to stop! should be fixed in a couple of days. I can’t wait to explore this car’s capabilities, though I’m still scared of it!
21st Feb 2007, 16:15
The ideal performance upgrade for the RX-7 is a 4.0 Ford V-6 (or even a 3.0, or an earlier 6 is more powerful than the stock RX-7 engine). It requires some cutting and specially fabricated motor mounts, but it is an awesome performer and much more reliable than the problem prone rotary. The entire drive train from the Ford will work with a bit of cutting and a re-built, spliced driveshaft. Having owned one with the rotary I don't really recommend trying to make do with them. Mine required constant attention to keep it running.
24th Mar 2007, 20:30
Putting a Ford V6 into a RX7 makes as much sense a putting a 13B into a corvette. What makes the RX7 unique is the rotary engine. If you don, t want an engine that you have to rev or want a a lot of torque get yourself an iron block push rod motor. If you insist on an engine swap the LS1 has a lot more power and a lot of people have done it.
29th Mar 2007, 23:33
The rotary is a very good engine if one knows how to take care of it, and while it will not produce much above 700 horsepower in 2 rotor (13B) form, it will definitely put out a very reliable 300 with the right modifications. The 3rd generation (FD) model is very single purpose, and that purpose would be a speedy one, so it is not suitable for those who need luxury or utility. However if one wants a good auto-X machine/track car that can be daily driven, or even just a weekend driver or canyon carver, an FD makes perfect sense. While the other models of 7 (FB and FC) handle just as well, without modifications they can be slightly underpowered. All in all watch for engines with above 80,000 miles that have not been rebuilt, because the apex seals are apt to break soon, and a good rebuild costs around $3,000 depending on shop and amount of things replaced.
18th Jul 2007, 14:07
I have an RX7 1988 and I too noticed a little coolant on the dip stick. I had it run under several pressure tests, and there are no signs of internal leaks. I was losing coolant through a heater hose. One guy commented that it could be condensation, so get it checked out, but I hope it's not a sign of an engine rebuild.
I love my RX-7. I'm going to fix it up and keep it. This is the car I wanted since 88, and now I have it! Go to www.myspace.com/resejhordanmusic to see pictures of it now, and soon it will be painted, re-topped and a new exhaust, which brings me to my question. Is it necessary to have 3 converters on the car? I don't want to shell out 600 in catalytic converters, plus the headers and pipes.