i tried SOO hard to understand that....

 

here ya go...

 

G D H S F

 

[QUOTE=79rx_7]Magazine test aginst 4 other cars, it beat all of them in accel test. QUOTE]

As I said in a previous post the US got the slow versions of the Gen 1. The car tested was the 1981 German market RX-7 SDX model which had a 12A engine producing 115hp and 112lbft. In addition it had the rear end spoiler which reduced Cd drag to 0.32, compared with the US FB of 0.34, which according to Mazda was equivalent to 5hp. So it was equal to a 20% improvement in power over the US FB as fuel consumption and emmission control was not a problem.

The fuel consumption figure of i6.7 litres per 100km is horrifying, around 15mpg!

 

what are you doing in the 1st gen section

 

What cars can a 1st gen run with and beat, stock vs stock. either 12a or 13b engine. I want to see a whole list here.



iv beatin a 4wd turbo eclipse in a straight line through 3 gears then had to slow down
my cars relitivly stock

 

Try your math again. 16.7L/100 KM is about 17 mpg, not 15. That is quite the difference considering MPG readings are not linear. The difference between 50 and 70mpg is very little, while the difference between 15 and 17 is actually quite a bit. This is the main reason why L/100KM is the most accepted way of measuring fuel mileage.

 

`

Yes, dreams do nor count,lol.
I've seen alot of these claims. You have to take in consideration the following facts.
Was the other person really even trying. Alot of times these guys in the other cars do not put the pedal to the metal. Why? Either they don't want a ticket, you are trying to race them in a school district or they just don't like to race.
This thread is useless. As others have stated the car was not built for racing, especially 1/4 mile. It is just a good all around fun car to drive. For it's time it had good acceleration especially the Se's. But more so it is known for it's handling capabilities in stock form.

 

i wasnt lookin for 1/4 times, i just wanted to see what exactly the car has stock. i have yet to rip my car on the roads and have no clue what its capable of doing so i wanted some other cars to compare. like. please tell me it can atleast stay with the nissans 240sx. just ideas to what other cars fall into the same catogory you could say

 

A model t

 

oh so you have a friend with a 240 and hes talking smack, and your afraid to race, unless you know youll win....you wont.

 

Rex's are SLOW. Get a mullet, get a big block, and get a Camaro. Or a '78 Nova like me.

Kev (It might be hillbilly, but it does run 11's!)

 

Actually, my research has shown that the 84-85 RX-7 GSL-SE's were the fastest na RX-7's built...

Faster then a :

87 BMW M3
88 Porsche 944S
75-82 Corvette's
80 Ferrari 308
93 Mustang GT (Auto)

 

actually if i recall its a 75 but im not positive. not my car its my buddies. either way stock that car is quick and there is no chance an anywhere close to stock 1st gen will win

like i said my spec killed a tII

 

 

I wonder what was wrong with the Mustang....... LOL

 

My 15mpg figure was an approximation to show how bad the RX-7 was compared with the other cars.

Wearing my mathematical hat. 1 US gal=3.875 litres,1 mile=1,609 m; thus 16.7 litres= 4.3097gals and 100km=62.1504 miles; by extension 62.1504 miles using 4.3097 gals gives 14.4210mpg

However, if you use Imperial gallons the consumption was 17.3205mpg. The majority of members on the forum use US gals[16.6 gals per tank], this is why I converted the German data to it.

I fully agree l per 100km is the best way, but people to the south of you get confused. The above figure looks dreadful as I use just 8 on the highway and 10 around town.

 

Or the S4 N/A with a hood scoop that 2cute keeps boasting about.......loln't

 

[QUOTE=Dougster]Actually, my research has shown that the 84-85 RX-7 GSL-SE's were the fastest na RX-7's built.]

I agree it was the fastest na RX-7 with 16.3 second 1/4 mile and topspeed of 126mph. In comparison the GT figures were 15.3 and 145mph. Kitten v Tiger!

The problem with comparison data is the initial results depended on the ability of the driver and the condition of the press car. I have driven some review cars which were decidedly tired, but I also know of at least one factory producing sportscars which gave tweaked cars to motoring magazine reviewers.

While I can not comment on all the cars listed, my experience with Porsche was the 924 was marginally slower, the 944 marginally quicker than a GSL-SE. In practice 944s tended to be driven harder than a 924.

 

what factory was giving out tweaked cars to magazine reviewers?

 

Where did you get this from Fantasy land magazine.

 

According to this... http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
A 93 Geo Storm GSi would eat a stock 12a Thats just sickening! But who cares, its a Geo. JEEEEHOOOO!!!

 

Happy Birthday!

Unfortunately, I can not publically state which factories I know tweak their cars before serious reviews. Another legal practice is to handpick components with the optimal tolerances to put together 'stock' competition cars, commonly called selective blueprinting. My experience is you can get up to 20% more power. In some events checking is very tight. One well known make was disqualified from winning a major European rally because the headlight bulbs were non standard!

Sometimes cars have a potential weakness if seriously 'tuned', one model had head problems so in cars earmarked for performance there was a special run to avoid cracking. A slight variation in alloys can make all the difference even with identical tolerances. On the other hand remember Henry Ford, when a car broke down he was just as interested in what survived in case it was over engineered and there could be cost savings by lower specs for that part.

An example of how easy it is to get improvements is, there was no outwards noticeable difference between 12A engines, but on RX-7s built in the same year the output ranged from 101 to 116hp according the the market.

 

Well... I have beaten every Honda aside from the S2000 around here. Integras unless it is an RXS-s. V6 Mustangs. Family Sedans... unless it's an SHO Taurus or any form of Cadillac or modern Buick.

 

What a savage kill list


To the thread starter: Set your sights on any of the above listed prey.