Depends. If you count the 12A exhaust manifold or thermal reactor, the oil cooler, the flywheel, and the 12A's accessories, it's a crapshoot, probably in favor of the 5.0.

 

That car.. wow... Is all I can say. I give huge props to the clean looking install.. etc.. I do love the 5.0 engine. however.. the rims, hood, and tires have to go. With a different hood, nice rims, and MUCH nicer (wider, lower pro) tires it would be an amazing machine. Its a great car either way, but $25g's.. dayamn..

 

Thanks for re-enforcing my point Mar3.

 

Nice paint, nice polishing job, but that's about it. While I have nothing against a V8 powered RX7, that car is done all wrong. What really irks me is that the guy is obviously an idiot. He has no idea what he is talking about - I would bet $1000 cash that the car wouldn't even make close to 300 rwhp, let alone a claimed 400 hp. The Bud overflow can is stupid. The wheels/tires suck. I don't care for the Z28 cowl, either.

As for most of the comments on the first couple pages of this thread, they're almost as ignorant as the guy that built the car. The word "V8" does not make a car un-roadworthy, or incapable of handling, or getting shitty mileage, etc. While that particular car does in fact weigh a LOT more than 2200 pounds, it would be a fairly simple exercise to get a V8 powered RX to that weight. As Peejay mentioned, 5.0's (especially the later model ones) are VERY light for their displacement. A typical carbed 302 with no emissions junk will probably add *maybe* 100 pounds over a stock 12A. Aluminum heads drop almost exactly 50 pounds off of that weight. So...get a few more trick aluminum parts, a lightweight battery, and you're breaking even...with 3 times the power, better reliability, better mileage, and 100x the aftermarket.

Makes sense to me. I can understand the purists' point of view, to a degree, but I happen to live in the real world, where numbers count...and money doesn't grow on trees.

That car still sucks.

 

Not really. People who've done the swap report that ride height doesn't even change.

 

lol...talk about a diehard Ford fan in denial...

 

Hey, I just loaded and unloaded a 5.0 block into and from the hatch of my car today, by myself... Them suckers is small and light. I forgot how difficult it is to get the cam bearings out. Not out of the main webs, that part is easy... the hard part is extracting it from the hollow between the bottoms of the cylinders, and the lifter bore webs.

Ford made it a tiny engine when it was a 221, and a 302 is over a third more biggerful. We're talking seriously crammed for space. And Ford only made it a 302 because the "other manufacturer" was doing relatively huger engines and by '68 a 289 was friggin' PUNY, so they increased the stroke a whopping .13" (and shortened the rods .065"). Then they put Cleveland heads on it for putting the 0WN to Chevy's 302, and THAT would be the engine I'd like to see in an RX-7, or rather, the RX-7 chassis is one of the few worthy of such a cool engine.

 

Boldface originally posted by peejay

Hey, I just loaded and unloaded a 5.0 block into and from the hatch of my car today, by myself... Them suckers is small and light.

Man, you ain't foolin' no one....you're what? Right at 6' and 220+ lbs? I imagine you can lift your own weight over your head if you felt like it...



Ford made it a tiny engine when it was a 221, and a 302 is over a third more biggerful. We're talking seriously crammed for space. And Ford only made it a 302 because the "other manufacturer" was doing relatively huger engines and by '68 a 289 was friggin' PUNY, so they increased the stroke a whopping .13" (and shortened the rods .065"). Then they put Cleveland heads on it for putting the 0WN to Chevy's 302, and THAT would be the engine I'd like to see in an RX-7, or rather, the RX-7 chassis is one of the few worthy of such a cool engine.

Always good for some interesting Ford history, but, argh! Heavy old Cleveland heads? THAT would be a moose-strapped-to-the-hood effect...

 

No, more like 6'5 and 185 Probably 175 I cut my hair.


Oh boo hoo, I have an extra 50 pounds on the front end, the world is going to stop turning !!!!!!!!!

Granted, modern aftermarket Windsor heads can easily outflow any Cleveland head, but still, the *idea* is nice. I mean, why have a Boss 302 Mustang when you can have a Boss 302 RX-7? Why have a 289 Cobra when you could have a 289 RX-7? (Ever see the suspension on one of those things? YIKES)

Basically, we have a problem of convergence. The 1st-gen RX-7 has a really sweet chassis, on par with the finest RWD cars of the era. Fortunately (or unfortunately) it also has a rather technically interesting engine, and people lose sight of the fact that the chassis is great also. That is why I go apeshit every time people say "OMG d00d thats retarded the rotory is thew hole reason u buy an Rx7".

 

got a 74 amc javelin w/ a straight 6 and the auto tranny is locked so it only goes into drive but if ya want it make an offer lol

i'll take my black primer ragged out busted up 83 gs

 

Let's take it one step further and stick in an all-aluminum Falconer V-16 which won't weigh that much more and can kick out 900+ bhp while we're here...

 

I agree with Peejay on his thoughts

 

Can someone please post the actual weight of a 302 fully with all accesories and transmission, and the actual weight of a 12a with all accesories and tranny. I weighed a 12a with everything a while back and I think it was about 350lbs.

I think putting a v8 in a seven does kill the car, although I am not totally opposed to it, I thought of doing it myself. All that torque in such a light car is great. I bought my seven because it is different. I can go to Wal-Mart and find many mustangs, comaros, and hondas, but I will not find any RX-7's and if I do it is really rare. You know a car is common when two or three of the same body style and color appear on the same parking row. I love when people look at my car like "what is that" or when they say "I knew a guy who had one of those"