Mykl

I must give much props to the FC, especially after driving the WRX around a lot. The car brakes and turns considerably better than the WRX. After driving them back to back it doesn't feel like the WRX wants to turn, it pushes a bit, but the FC is better balanced and just dives in the direction you point the wheels. It's also considerably more responsive, but the difference here may be in the rubber I have on the ground, P6000's vs. RE92's (crap).

Overall the old n/a FC is still a very competent sports car, and on a tight twisty road it could easily hang with a WRX, stock for stock. Only problem is that when the roads get straightened out a bit the n/a FC just doesn't have enough juice.

The brakes in the WRX feel incredibly mushy and vague. Another nod to the FC, the brakes are nice and firm, and more linear. Another bonus with the FC is that it doesn't have ABS, while the WRX does (blah).

With some tweaking the WRX can easily become a monster, but stock for stock I imagine a Turbo II could easily keep pace.

I've grown to appreciate the more upright position in the WRX, although it still feels nice to slip into the low-slung seats in the FC.

RarestRX

Yo,


Don't sell it Mykl! Ditch the AWD Bitch! *snicker* Just kidding, but it's cool that you have compared the two. Not bad for an 11 year old car!

KS
1989 GTUs "I'm keepin' mine until I get bored!"

Mykl

Should the convertible be sold, it will be replaced with another RX-7 as quickly as possible.

I like the 'vert, but I want a coupe. Not sure which generation I'm going to go for, but an old GTUs is near the top of the list. I've also thought of picking up an FD with a busted motor and restoring it. If the RENESIS proves to be worth a **** I think it'd be awesome to have one in an FD.

I haven't given up on RX-7's, I just needed something a bit more daily driveable. The WRX fits that perfectly, plus it's a pretty damn quick little car. That means any RX-7 I get will be able to have as much downtime as needed to get her up to perfect shape.

I know I haven't been around here much lately, but I've had quite a bit of stuff to do lately. I should be able to hang out here more often and keep an eye on the place.

Felix Wankel

You should buy my FB

bigt

I am looking to buy a convertible here in the next few months. Do you want to dangle a deal in front of me that I can't refuse

vaughnc

The Turbo II gives plenty of juice. The turbo's so stinkin efficient it's like adding a shot of 60ft/lbs of torque to the powerband. Even at low rpms the TII accelerates better than the vert.

Haven't driven a GTU-S so I can't compare the 2 powerbands.

screamin' demon

there is no way a stock t2 can hang with a wrx. maybe autox but i only saythat cause ive never been in a wrx through an autox course and i know the 7 is deadly when it comes to twisties. but as far as accerlation is concerned no way. the wrx doesnt have wheel spin to speak of so even a shitty driver can make her get up and go. dont get me wrong i do love rx's but i ll admit that stock for stock wrx's will spank any STOCK t2.

FEDREX

I killed one on the freeway 2 weeks ago with a bad turbo running about 7psi.
My turbo's getting worked on now - had pieces missing from the turbine tips, bad bearings just generally shot. Back on the road Thursday...

BOOSTD 7

Taken from Belvi's Performance Numbers v1.3 in the General Auto forum. It's pretty close, definately not a spanking however. I've seen quite a few mags put the GT-X's a few ticks faster than these numbers.

1990 Mazda RX-7 Turbo II 6.3 14.9
2002 Subaru Impreza WRX 5.7 14.4

Mykl

I'm not really talking about drag racing. Although the WRX will probably have an edge up until about 90 mph the Turbo II will probably walk away when you get over 100. Fourth and fifth gears aren't very potent in this car and the stock boost tapers off too much near redline, 8psi versus 14 psi in the meat of the powerband, a boost controller will fix this though. That and throw in the brick shape of the car and you don't have much of a high speed brawler.

My best run in the car so far is 14.9, however, keep in mind that I was trying to be very easy on the car. If I wanted to beat the **** out of the car I'm sure I could run mid to low 14's. I'm hitting a track day at Little Talladega in March, I'll see how well she does there.

bigt -- $4000 and it's yours. eMail me if you'd like details. myklbw@bellsouth.net

Felix Wankel -- One of these days I'll have to drive up there and check the car out.

Pouya

Mykl,
Why don't you favor ABS?

bigt

Email sent

Felix Wankel

Anytime.

Mykl

It makes it difficult to get a feel for the braking limits of the car. One second you're fine and then the computer kicks in and takes control away from you, something I find more difficult to recover from than by simply locking the brakes on a non-ABS car. After playing with the ABS on the WRX I'm certain that I can recover more quickly and efficiently without it.

I have a serious disliking for any computer system that gets in the way of my foot and the wheels. Computer controlled traction systems included, like the ones you would find on most high end sports car like the NSX, Corvette, Porsche's, etc.

If I can't drive fast without computer controlled brakes then I certainly have no business driving that fast in the first place.

I plan on installing an ABS switch on the WRX, so I can shut it off when I don't want to use it.

fastrotaries

I have an 89TII and a 02WRX and the WRX will spank any stock N/A FC sorry, but it's a fact. the wrx isn't perfect, but it's the most well rounded vehicle in the states i think. If someone supposedly "smoked" one then they couldn't drive. The WRX ran a 14.26 and it's bone stock. However it's not for everybody since it's REAL EASY to bog the car off the line and get poo-poo times. Revving the motor and dropping the hammer will probably do wonders for the drive train. SO, you do this double clutch thing, something, that i can't really get down. but when done right it works. No matter what performance though. The RX-7 simply rules becuase it has no pistons.

Agent_D

iTrader: (2)

of course the WRX will spank any N/A FC in a straight line lol, n/a fc is at 146bhp and the WRX is at 227bhp with AWD get a T2 and take some weight off and you have a different story though

Mykl

Nobody was comparing the WRX to an n/a FC in terms of acceleration, a buddy of mine and I already did that test and the WRX beat the convertible soundly. This wasn't even from a stop, it was getting on the interstate after picking up my FC from the dealership. Not like that wasn't to be expected. We were comparing the WRX to turbo FC's, from a roll a stock turbo FC should have a good chance.

I was talking about handling, and twisties. Stock for stock I feel that an FC (n/a or turbo) should be able to compete, but I'm not sure how things would match up if you ditched the RE92's on the WRX for some good rubber.

You're right about the car being well rounded. It's easily the biggest performance bargain out there right now. The beautiful thing is that the car has tons of potential. $1500 = 40 whp

vosko

iTrader: (4)

ummm two of my friends have brand new WRX's. one has the HKS hiper Ti catback. anyway i drove with my GTU with both of them on the highway the other night. needless to say they beat me by about 5-6 car lengths 80-130mph BUT my car is slow. i would of assumed to get spanked real bad like nowhere in sight my gtu only has headers,hiflow cat, and intake and doesn't run 100%. just wait till i race them with my FD or newly acquired T2 :p

i have RE92's on my GTU they aren't great but they have lasted 30k miles of burnouts, donuts and handle decently for an OE tire