hayhayman

Me and my grandfather have just began to look at his 1978 Mazda rx7 and I'm wondering if this engine will fit. The Mazda is bone stock.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/JDM-Mazda-Co...10116#viTabs_0

7aull

iTrader: (2)

Short answer is "yes". The Auzzie lads (and perhaps some of our Puerto Rican bruthas) are the most adept at stuffing one of these into older chassis like the SA. With some bias I will say it would be a shame to muck up a bone-stock early RX7 with a big mod, unless of course, the original engine is toast.
Not to say it would be easy. The electronics needs alone of a 3-rotor would give me nightmares!
But if you pull it off, man, be sure to flaunt it here! would be something to see (and drive!).
Best of luck
Stu Aull
80GS
Alaska

Jeff20B

iTrader: (13)

And now the other side of the coin. You two won't be able to pull it off. Stick with a 12A. Life will be easier if you do.

Would you like to drive it within your grandpa's lifetime? Stick with the 12A. And that's coming from someone who did a 20B install in a 1st gen. It takes a long time. In the end I didn't much care for it so I pulled it, sold it and swapped in a 4 port 13B. That was over a year ago. Just yesterday I swapped an S5 turbo back on with a boost prepped Nikki. It's a lot better and very refined compared with NA and night and day easier than any 20B related stuff.

I had plenty of experience with rotaries. You two are noobs. Took me a long time and ultimately I was not satisfied. Much happier with an easy 2 rotor. Still thinking about it? How long do YOU think it will take?

hayhayman

What engine swap would be the "easiest"? Or most bang for your buck. Also thanks for all your inputs!

Cookboy

iTrader: (10)

A nice 12a would drop right in.

hayhayman

I have a 12a already and I think it's pretty nice. 131,000 miles. Should i turbo it or buy 13b??

Cookboy

iTrader: (10)

How many miles have you put on the car? I'd drive it til I was very familiar with it, during which time I might renew bushings, ball joints, and such. It's generally better to have a solid platform before looking for more power.

If your exhaust is stock you can free it up and get some good power. Carb mods will get you more. A lighter flywheel will feel like more, as will a 4.77 rear.

If I want to go fast in a straight line I drive a different car.

hayhayman

not a lot my grandpa bought it back in 2009 and then kept in his barn til just now. Seems pretty good for a 1979 car that hasn't been started in 5 years!

t_g_farrell

iTrader: (1)

That 12A is barely broken in. Keep it and make the car a solid driver before considering swap.

Maybe it time you post pics up of this car or it never happened

hayhayman

haha fine after work I'll upload some pics !

wankel=awesome

just put a bigger carb on it and get the RB dual exhaust.

You can modify the stock nikki for a ton more airflow for the same effect as buying a bigger carb.

I'm pretty in love with my QFT 450 carbie tho. I drove it 40 miles yesterday on 1.2 gallons of gas (mixed driving) and it packs wayyy more punch and throttle response than the factory nikki.

Maybe if youre feeling it you could go Efan with it too, its a noticeable difference in the time it takes the engine to spin up.


You can make a fun little car without doing any engine swap at all on it. With just a carb and exhaust, and a good tune youl'll be quicker than a lot of newer "sporty" cars.

t_g_farrell

iTrader: (1)

I'll have to call B.S. on that, 33 mpg, really?

My hogged out nikki got 30mpg on the stock primaries but I'm sure it was really lean
and not making full power.

hayhayman

Could anyone link me to a thread about the engine parts? I'm not very familiar with older cars let alone rotary. Thanks

wankel=awesome

Mines also running very lean, on the edge of dangerous. It seems to get extremely good MPG if you dont exceed 60 MPH. On the other hand, I did another longer trip to Wilkes Barre yesterday, and cruised at around 70-80 the entire way. Used about 5 gallons of gas for 115-ish miles. Mine has been tuned with dual sensor LM2 wideband though, so I actually can confirm just how lean it is.

And I continue to do trips, and then fill it up to log data with it, because my fuel sender is going.

My normal light driving is getting me 27-ish. My heavy driving where im actually in my secondaries and and cruising fast, its doing somewhere around 22. My timing is stock, but im running MSD coils and boxes.

I think my 33 mpg was just a case of everything being perfect and me not putting my foot down, but only time will tell how consistent it really is.


Further, before experimenting with this carb and new emulsions design from QFT I probably would have called bullshit too. The newer billet blocks signal much harder, allowing you to run smaller jets. And they feature adjustable restrictions everywhere. But I'd say its on par with the nikki fuel consumption wise, because im barely kissing the gas pedal to cruise. It actually tires my foot to drive for so long with such light pressure under my foot, and me kinda holding it up so it floats there.

And on my nikki, its the opposite. Cruising and getting up to cruising speeds quickly almost always had my foot down more to make the same power. I honestly think they are close with the nikki pulling slightly ahead if they are both tuned properly.

DivinDriver

iTrader: (15)

Uphill/downhill, & headwind/crosswind/tailwind can make some difference on long drives.

My mileage heading from home to Vegas is notably lower than the mileage on the return trip, by several MPG.

Vegas is about 1200 feet higher in elevation then is home, but there's also a number of steep upgrades (couple up over the 5000 ft line) on the outbound leg that are the same height but less steep on the return trip.

Long hard climbs going out, long downhill stretches going back. Big difference on how hard the engine has to work.