1994 Mazda RX7 Efini Type RS from UK and Ireland - Comments

Nothing yet.

Unbelievable performance, bags of power

through every gear.

Stunning looks, I turn just as many heads as a Ferrari in my 300 hp monster. The thing is nobody knows what it is.

Unbelievable handling considering the performance.

The only problem is ride quality - the RS version is a seriously hard ride. It is even stiffer than my old MR2 Turbo.

Actually they did make a rotary bigger than the 1.4, it's the Triple Rotor BEATS they call the RE.

I think the RX7 has two 1.3litre rotary engines, does it not? Each has its own turbo. So it's technically 2x1.3litre, but nobody knows what you're talking about when you say that, so most people just quote it as 2.6 litre.

They're incredible cars anyway - proper Porsche beaters. (I don't have one - a friend does.)

Two 1.3 liter engines is incorrect. The car has one 1.3 liter twin rotor engine with two turbochargers.

Mazda once made a 4 rotor 2.6 litre rotary engine which they used in a LeMans car. You can buy kits to make 2 1.3 litre 2 rotor engines into one 2.6 litre 4 rotor engine. There is a company in New Zealand which makes the kit to order.

Just so you know, you can put 3 turbos on a 1.3 liter rotary, and it's still a 1.3 liter. That will only change if you throw on the 3mm seals and then they said it's only 1.4 liter. No such thing as a 3.6 liter in a normal RX-7.

SORRY BUDDY

The 13B engine you have is roughly 1300cc. Two rotor assemblies, about 650cc each. Non turbo produces about double to 3x the power of a piston engine, perhaps that's why some people claim it is 2.6 or 3.9L or whatever...

2 stroke isn't quite right for the rotary. Each rotor executes the full four "strokes" in one rotation, intake, compression, ignition then exhaust. As opposed to the piston engine which needs 2 rotations to do the 4 strokes. That's why it puts out 2x the power for the displacement, cause it uses it twice as much.

Then because it's pure rotational motion there's very little vibration and inefficiency so there's more power output.

The older engines aren't very economical because they are designed for performance, not economy, as well as they throw out a lot of energy in heat so there is margin for performance.

The term "stroke"doesn't apply at all to the Mazda engine.

It is called "rotary" because it rotates only. There is no need to convert vertical motion to rotational motion because of the oscilating motion the rotor makes as it rotates in the chambers.

Also the 13b rotary engine displaces 1296cc with each complete revolution of the crankshaft divided between the two rotors in the motor, no matter what method you use to aspirate the motor so its roughly a 1.3 liter engine period.

Hey guys.

It's true that Mazda's basically produce a lot of 13B engines, but the 20B can also be found. If I were you guys, i'll start of building an engine with a 20B rotary. Rotary engines are good because they have small displacements and produce a lot of horsepower.

Did RX7 ever make a 2 stroke motor in the late 60s or early 70s?

Every Wankel rotary engine completes the 4 phases (intake, compression, combustion, exhaust). So none are "2 stroke". The shaft turning the rotors is called an eccentric shaft, not a crankshaft.

Jeez guys, stop being so anal about the cc's will you? Yes, the motor in this guy's RX7 actually has a capacity of 1.3 L. Yes, a rotary is roughly equivalent to a piston engine of twice the displacement. Now can we stop quibbling and get back to the car? Thank you.

The only problem with rotary engines is they produce much lower levels of torque when compared to standard engines.

Plus, when they break it's time to see the bank manager.

Wouldn't touch one.

Hi everyone... I have a 1994 RX7 with 48000 k... should I sell it or save it for future price appreciation? Advice please.

You should hang on to it. The market hasn't caught up with the true value of these gems, but it is adjusting. The total amount sold is low, and they will appreciate. I have a 94 R2 myself.