Besides being cheaper to buy and replace.

 

i see less 2nd gens than i do third...
thats about it, usually the next generation is better but this cant be proven ex eclipses exc. worse and worse every time

 

Why do you ask, i say you should just research it.

BTW: IMHO, nothing, the FD is far superior to the FC but that doesnt mean i'd trade my FC straight across for an FD though.

 

U see a Fc, it doesnt look super powerful, so it is sort of a sleeper with its 80's look. You see a FD, its quite obvious. I believe the FC is a little lighter. Can't think of much. Mazda really did a good job upgrading the rx-7 to the FD. Is the handling better in a FC or FD? I haven't driven the FD to know.

 

yeah,,, of course u cant trade for a FD straight across,,, you have to add in 8000 just to amke the trade fairly even....

 

Dammit, those were the only two reasons I could think of.

Oh wait! The FC is generally easier to work on in it's stock form, that has to count for something, right?

 

need more like 16000 to make anything even with the FD guys!!!

 

Yeah usually a car gets better with age........but dude made a point about about eclipses and you gotta throw Chevy trucks into that equation as well.........

 

I....I touched one at a junk yard...I almost creamed my self

 

Odd... I've seen a few FCs and FBs but I've NEVER seen an FD on the street. The only FD's ive seen have been at RX7 meetings and auto shows.

 

u never seen an FD in Miami?????? are u serious? do u go outside much??? anyway i read that FC's last longer engine wise

 

FC's are cheaper to repair, cheaper insurance, and more reliable than FD's.

That and there's no need for a single-turbo converstion on a TII

 

FC are LARGER inside.. I can't even sit in an FD without having to turn sideways to fit my shoulders into the car. if your a big person, height/width/girth.. the FC is the way to go. and you can make the FC into just about anythng you want as well. I've got one that's being updated all push rod suspension you'd be hard pressed to get that done in an FD without extreme mods to the body to get it to fit and work.. the FC IS the work horse of the rx7 community. it's like the turbo beaver or DC-3 of the rotary world.

 

dont forget
fc- avalible in a 4 seater, N\A and a convertible model...
fd-nope....

 

For the rest of us that don't live in H town You see FBs and FCs a lot more than the FD.

The FD is much lighter than the TII.

I think the best advantage to the FC is you have a lower chance of getting a STD...cause we all know the FC won't get you laid

 

.. lol don't say that in japan.. the built FC's there get more girls around them then I could count.. maybe plain old everyday beat upFC won't but then again almost no car fromthe late 80's in that kind of shape will get you laied.. "ohhh look here's bob in his New Yorker.. "

 

The engine in a FC N/A will last you a lot longer.
And the car will cost you about 16k less.

 

maybe for some of us....but not all of us

 

And will also be 4 seconds slower in the 1/4 mile. j/k

 

I don't call maybe 200 lbs. of weight difference "much lighter".

The FC has larger front openings in the bumper, and this allows for better cooling up front.


-Ted

 

Down here in new zealand an fc will get u laid easy as. But fds are absolute ****, but then again in nz anycar with a rotor is regarded as king of the road. lol

 

Very funny. FD's are rare.

 

rare? uhhh, no...

i prefer the styling of the FC over the FD anyways but that is just me. both can be equally as fast with some work but the FC will generally cost as much in the long run due to parts costing more on the FC than the FD.

 

Although FD handles marginally better than FC due to quicker steering and more precise wishbone suspension , I like streamlined Fc body style and larger car with good storage due to hatch back. FD is small and designed for racing. Still, there are only a few current sports cars that handle better than FC.

I recently test drove a new Mustang in a large parking lot by putting it through several tight turns and maneuvers - I found it much less agile, light imprecise steering and less flexible compared to FC due to heavy weight (3500 curb lbs.), long wheel base, engine not located behind front axle, inferior solid rear axle and suspension.

Only current/new rear-drive or all wheel drive sports cars under 30K that equal or exceed all features of FC are RX8 (no hatch back) and Nissan 300Z (small interior space, heavy and ok handling). Based on following specs (skid path, sallom, braking), FC handling is equal to both RX8 and 300Z.

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

Frankly, for the money, I challenge anyone to find a all-around sports car with following:

Streamlined exterior design
Precise accurate steering
Excellent agile handling
Roomy with hatch
Midship engine placement
50/50 balance
low curb weight
flexible body
high mod ability
efficient interior dash design
Excellent front/rear view
Unsprung aluminum suspension,
Power assisted steering with good road feel
FC NA engine will go over 200K miles with no overhaul - my 1988 FC has 235K miles and pulls strong with low vibration.
Rear wheel steering
coil ignition

Recently, I had opportunity to buy a clean 1995 FD with rebuilt engine for $7K - I declined offer based on previously stated reasons.

 

I like the Fc better because its older. It's just that bad get beat by a car from the 80's. third gens are too common for show cars also. Id still cream if i got one. *shrugs*