I am knew here but wouldn't want to offend anyone even if I wasn't. I looked at gen 3 RX7s, especially 93s, and found them to be way more expensive than I imagined. If I'm not mistaken, they ran about $35 to $37K new? Most of the ones I found owners are asking around $18K+. I had looked at some 2005 Nissan 350Zs for around $10K so the RX7 prices caught me off guard. I undertand supply and demand so is that it? They're are so few and everyone wants one? Thanks for answering what is probably a dumb question.

 

There are very few unmolested or unwrecked ones still left. Rollers can be had for 5-6K or for 10K you
can get a decent project car. Anything thats minty, low miles and original will go for upwards of 15K.

It didn't help that they used em in the F&F movies as well, so that caused a lot of wrecked and wasted
FDs right there.

 

the nice ones are expensive, because making a beat up one nice is tragically expensive.

the FD also has a lot of wear parts, so used parts are usually a no go, because if it broke on your car, then it broke on every other FD. the other thing is that for the most part Mazda is the only parts supplier.

if you want an example, the headlight lids are wear parts on an FD. they need to be replaced periodically, and there are no used ones because they are all broken. Mazda sells em for about $75 each, and there are cheaper aftermarket, but they won't fit right, and won't last as long.

 

I too am new to the RX-7 scene. I was also so surprised when I saw the going price for FD's. I live in the outskirts of the SF bay and haven't even seen one on the streets since I have been interested in RX's. I've seen salvaged titled highly molested FD asking for 20+ on CL. Crazy for a 20+ year old car. Then I tell myself would that be great to own one.

 

I had a red RX7 like yours (don't sell it) and I used to live in the Bay area. For everyone else, wow, now I totally get it. I have a rusty 68 Dodge Charger I'm restoring (yeah, like them too) and man are they expensive. They raced and crashed so many its hard to find one in any kind of good shape...cheap. You guys helped as now I get it. Wow. On to gen 1s.....

 

and to make you scratch your head further ... price an RX8 lol

 

Along with rarity and desirability, also keep in mind inflation; A 1993 dollar had the buying power of about $1.64 in today's dollars - - so that $37k car would have cost the equivalent of $60,000 in today's dollars.

FD's were very expensive cars when new. I remember when they came out, and realizing on my salary at the time as a systems engineer I was not going to be buying one short of a lottery win.

My boss at the time (VP of Engineering) bought a showroom-new one & gave me a ride in it, as I was daily-driving the SA at the time. Freaking rocket ship in comparison.

 

To confuse me more, according to the 1984 owners manual and brochures I have on the gen 2 and gen 3 cars, the gen 2 is longer and wider??? I had gen 1s and one gen 2 and could have sworn the gen 1 was the smallest. But they are bigger than the gen 3?

 

yep! at one point i had a 76 Rx3, 82, 87 and 94 Rx7's in the driveway at once, and i was surprised to notice that the Rx3 was longer than the 1st gen, by quite a bit. this led to some shuffling and the FD is the widest, but its the shortest. the Rx3 was the longest, narrowest and the tallest. the FC is kind of in the middle, its shorter than the 1st gen, by a tad, but its a little wider.

the difference is mostly that the bumpers get better integrated as the cars get newer, so the Rx3 has huge bumpers, the FD has small ones

 

You bring a great point of inflation and just what your dollar buys these days. So looked to see what a Corvette went for in '93. About the same price as the FD. Not sure what a corvette goes for now but I'm sure a base Vette is somewhere around $60K.

 

I noticed a long time ago that my SA is very nearly the same length as my 350z... but the Z is considerably wider. And several inches taller.

 

it much be some kind of crash safety thing, but new cars are TALL. the easy one, i suppose is the Fiat Challenger, the 21st century version has like a foot of extra space between the rocker panel and the belt line vs the 70's version.

the funny one is some Ford sedan, the 500? taurus? the #2? i saw one pull up next to a mini van and the sedan is taller...

or the other funny one is the mercedes G class, my friend has one, and i call it the battleship, as its the same color, turning circle, etc, and i wanted to take a picture of it next to something to show how big it is, and as it happens, this pic was next to a toyota highlander, and the toyota dwarfs the mercedes.

 

It is, yes.
Raised rollover safety standards made A-pillars thicker, rooflines taller and encouraged an arch shape to them to provide higher strength without adding as much weight.

Raised side-impact safety standards (and the conflicting requirement of lighter vehicles for better economy) caused the door panels to be taller and windows shrank, providing protection up the shoulder line for most people - - that's why it became either uncomfortable or impossible to rest your arm on an opened windowsill on most cars today; and why many supposed "performance" cars (Camaro, Charger, Challenger, etc) end up with a higher waistline than an old man with his belt pulled up around his nipples.

Now we've got the euro-safety standards leaking into American car models also sold there, in particular the "Hood Hump" which is designed to improve pedestrian survivability by giving a crumple zone in front of and above the engine. Look at any domestic Ford model and it's pretty obvious.

Ironically, many of these supposed safety features have reduced driver visibility so much that they are increasing the likelihood of the very accidents they are trying to make more survivable.

Safety is important, but bureaucrats will continue to demand improvements in any regulatory scheme far past the engineering optimum, or even common sense... because without new and tighter standards to regulate and create, they're out of a job!

 

So the moral of the story is stop buying new cars and keep the old ones on the road.

 

lmao, you have hit the nail on the head. you can tell the cars that are really well engineered for crash tests vs really badly, as the bad ones are like tanks with viewports, and the good ones are still cars that you can see out of.

my parents have a Volvo XC60, and you can see out of it just fine, the belt line is higher than it would have been in the 80's, but not by a lot.

all of this is in contrast to my 1971 Mercedes, which had a low belt line, and small pillars so the driver could see as close to 360 degrees as possible. in 1971, accident avoidance was one of the principals, which in 2014 we seem to have given up on

 

FDs never really depreciated. The low point for a running car was maybe $10k.

Look at BMW 1Ms. They're going for $50-75k. Low production, people didn't really buy them new, and desirable used.

If you want crazy, look at E30 M3s. I've seen them as high as $120k. I remember when they were $15k and I thought that was crazy high.

 

last time i went to the historics, the E30 M3 was front an centre in BMW's tent, as it is the best BMW EVAR! they even had it restored to a period original style, it looked like it had just come out of a chop shop.

the Mazda tent, has the 787B, 787A, a 4 rotor FC, and usually a 60's Cosmo, among others. the Mazda stuff runs and goes around the race track.

 

Lets face it, the FD's are cool, no doubt about that....But they are a far cry from what the RX7 started as, maybe why they didn't sell well and killed the rotary for a while. There are still plenty of 1st and 2nd gens still out there waiting to be restored. Do us all a favor and rescue one of those. We'd love to see it when you are done and you'll get lots of help along the way.

 

Yep, I'm getting a gen I RX7. Yes I am. I'm hooked on these cars again and am already planning on more, saving everyone I can. After I traded the 2009 370Z, I went through withdrawal having had a 2-seater since 79'. I looked at used Porsche's, Datsun 280Zs, maybe another 370 again (too many csc problems) and realized the rotary is the best bang for the buck, looks like a sports car, looks like a race car, can be customized from stock to a super car, the rotary is unique, the people who have them really know what they are doing and it all made perfect since once I decided to go back to Mazda.

 

Looks like Larry has found the Key to Happiness.

 

Yes, thanks to Ray Green who got me on the path of Rotary Heaven, I am about to return to the fold. My son is even interested in one and is one of my younger brothers. You all are making converts right and left.

 

I think you're going to like that light beige SE Larry, from what I've seen it looks like it has great potential.

Welcome to the Club!

 

I see high prices but I'm not seeing them sell. Are they really selling for crazy prices or have people gone stupid with their pricing?

 

Both. Seriously. I have seen SAs in the $7-8K ask that take a few rounds of ebay to sell, sometimes.
OTOH THIS SA went up last year at a $9K start and went for almost $13K with 72 bids (some repeaters no doubt). I credit a fabulous presentation and just close-enough to "very Nice" to make this work. But haven't seen it repeated since…
Was it the color? Nope. Have seen some nice Solar Golds easily as good go for $5k. But 18 professional-photographed images and LOTS of details made this one tough to resist.
But like all specialty cars its just a question of time. I still think you can get a great SA for $4-6K if your patient, and quick to act when it comes along.

Stu Aull
80GS
Alaska

 

i think this will be a bigger trend going forward. we've reached this point, where the older cars are better to drive* and look at. plus they don't have all the invasive electronics, and stupid fripperies (why does my car need to be on twitter?)

but a new car is new.

so the solution, is to just make a new old car. you can already buy body shells for the MG's, mustangs and camaros, i predict someone will offer these (and maybe more) as a turn key

*older cars tend to be more involved and interactive to drive, IE they need more driver, this is fun. a newer car will usually perform better in the measurable ways