mazdaman1

0-60

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a base model 1987 RX-7

It has no mods

from 0-60mph is it 7.0 or 8.0 or7.5 or faster

I think it gets 7.2sec from 0 to 60mph.


Is that right?

OverDriven

7.9 seconds i believe.

-Joe

RotaryWeaponSE7EN

iTrader: (6)

I think its more towards 7.4, depends on the driver and how well the car runs....compression, etc......blah, blah blah.

ajsuper7

ive pulled an 8.1 with a stock s5, 9.3 with stuck 5th and 6th ports cloged shut, and with a few mods (catback, bonez cat replacement, msd ignition, and a cone filter) i pulled a 6.4. this is n/a btw. i concider that pretty good for a mildly modded s5 n/a. this was using a gtech, all multiple runs at the same place and these are the averages. though the gtech is not the best indicator it does show a definite improvement. this was on a stock clutch too, so i have no doubt with a better clutch i could of had that down to low 6's 0 to 60. even though a 1/4 mile is best to judge i find 0 to 60 a good indicator of what the car can do around town, i mean there is so much traffic in houston its hard to get past 60 or 70 and expect to live thus i stick to taking (slow) cars out at stoplights. btw i believe for the 6.4 run i had taken the spare tire out and a few other small things i didnt need.

koukifc3s

iTrader: (3)

its around 8 for a stock one

totallimmortal

yup through some exhuast and intake on her and she'll open up alot, those were my only mods when i ran a 15.2 in the 1/4 mile. Not sure what my 0-60 was tho but it's an 86 base, very light at 2500 pounds on the scale at the track

ddub

No... You are all a little off there. People think way too much, sorry to say, of the n/a rx7's. It is NOT that fast stock, end of story. Here are the stats of an 86-87 base model rx7

Obtained from C&D
0-60: 8.5
1/4 Mile: 16.5


And does anyone actually search? There is a new thread at least weekly about "how fast is my n/a rx7" or "what can i beat in my rx7!" or "my n/a rx7 is so fast but it has no mods, how come?" etc etc etc. It really gets annoying to have to read these all the time, especially since most the time people post false info.

ajsuper7

^ exactly, i keep hearing how n/a's are so hard to get into the 14's with but im sure i was close, with the times i was running on my gtech and the cars i had beaten. im not saying na's are fast at all in the scheme of things but compared to stock id say it was very surprising what the right mods can do for these cars.

ajsuper7

oh also take into account that houston is at sea level and in many cases below so it is an ideal location to run. these results are not going to happen to all cars and in different locations. i happened to have a car in great shape with excellent compression and just about any mainteince a person could do was done to it. also i dont weight that much and i usually run my times with less than 1/4 tank of gas. so my times are done in ideal situations, many variables can throw things off.

coldfire

iTrader: (1)

i ran a 0-60 of ~8.7 seconds. this was in the wet, with a passenger, my auxilary ports were only opening at 5500rpm, and it is a S5 with a S4 motor, but i had a pretty low tank of gas. so i think low 8s is not unreasonable...

IaMtHeRuThLeSs1

its 7.2 in a stock well running s5...the s5 has 20 more horses so expect a s4 0-60 to be around 7.8-8, depending on the driver

Molotovman

iTrader: (49)

S5 also has more weight. I read that a s4 base runs like a 7.9 with stock everything. So, lightly modded with a good driver, and good compression, I'd vote a 7.5 0-60. Anyway, who wants to dragrace, it's the track that matters, it's what our cars were designed for.

coldfire

iTrader: (1)

again agreed^
threads like this are USELESS

you want bragging rights in a straight line? go get yourself something that has at least 8 of those bouncing cylinder thingies. or maybe just six, but it has to be forced induction, behind you, and have 'Porsche' written on the top

ddub

Totally wrong! S5 has more power, but the extra weight causes it to be the same quickness as the S4. Both S4 and S5 will run the same 0-60's and 1/4miles stock, or at least very close.

coldfire

iTrader: (1)

yup, so me having an S4 engine in an S5 should put me at an even greater disadvantage^
so if i can manage to run 8.7 with all that **** going against me, i'm sure at least a second faster is easily attainable in stock form (under good conditions, for car, driver, and weather)...

koukifc3s

iTrader: (3)

The magazine I have says 8 sec 0-60. It's from when the FC came out and tells all about the car.

I found some links and their source is Mazda itself:
http://www.fasterfords.com/mazda/rx7.htm

http://www.lemmings.com/mark/rx7specs.htm

http://www.rx7.voodoobox.net/infofaq/rx7specs.html

hmmm... 7.2 for S5 n/a?

ddub

Those links are so full of ****. I'd like to see any stock n/a rx7 run low 15s, bullshit. The stock n/a rx7 runs low to mid 16's, I don't believe any of those for a second.


Those turbo times seem really fucked up too. The TII's ran low 15's maybe high 14's stock.

koukifc3s

iTrader: (3)

haha i know they seemed sketchy to me too but yea
so I guess they're from low to mid 8 sec

ddub

Pretty much. Unless a fairly large group of people with stock cars, n/a and turbo, completely stock can prove to me otherwise. I've just read and seen too many n/a and turbo cars that are stock or very lightly modded run 16-17's.

Molotovman

iTrader: (49)

I believe mazda tests are on the actual mazda japan RX-7 page, I can'tr remmeber though, i want the link!

grinder

just to shed some light on this ...

i have a stock 1990 TII ( apart from the main cat has been removed )

my first time on the strip showed these times

1st Run - 15.98
2nd Run - 16.45
3rd Run - 15.87
4th Run - 15.34
5th Run - 15.57
6th Run - 16.17
7th Run - 15.07
8th Run - 15.23

not sure if it will help you solve the argument though

BlackIceGuitar

I don't put much belief behind most sites on the internet. I've seen them say 0-60 was a low as 6 seconds and as high as 12.

ddub

Since your best run was a 15.07 with an average of 15.71 (granted it seems you could have had a better average with more consistent/better driving/launching since you WERE able to get it down to 15.07) maybe this will show the n/a guys that they ARENT running mid to low 15's stock.

Any stock n/a that thinks he/she is running mid to low 15's, go to the track and report back your times, please...