2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

is n/a fast

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:26 PM
  #1  
Antonio_bigbob's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, Canada
is n/a fast

i got a question. is a 1987 rx7 non-turbo decently fast.
like, i mean, can it take most 4 bangers???
i know that it is nothing compared to the TII, but compared to other cars, is it pretty fasst.

like i mean 240sx's, civics, etc. ??
thanks, ne info would be aweseom
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:29 PM
  #2  
AbecX's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
From: /dev/mustang
Thumbs up

Yeah, it can run a low 16 second timeslip if its perfectly tuned and you launch good. Most civics run 16.9's. Get you a 50 shot of nitrous and take out them v6 mustangs!
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:29 PM
  #3  
rico05's Avatar
WTB S5 N/A FC
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,778
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx
Yes, most 4 cylinders will fall to the wayside. I (with my S5 and full exhaust, clutch, weight reduction, opened aux. ports) could run with older Trans Ams.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:31 PM
  #4  
SoloIIdrift's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
From: Rochester, NY
low 15's high 14's are pretty easy with some mod's and weight reduction.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:32 PM
  #5  
Antonio_bigbob's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, Canada
sweet

i get too many different answers

but on a 1987 rx7 non turbo, how many horsies does it have????
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:35 PM
  #6  
wpgrexx's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
From: not in winterpeg anymore
Originally posted by AbecX . Get you a 50 shot of nitrous and take out them v6 mustangs! [/B]
man, v6 mustangs suck *** guy. with a completely stock na fc u should spank a v6 mustang, and most civics. I was watching some show on speedvision, some guy had a newer civic(don't know which motor) and he upgraded fuel rails injectors, intake and exhaust, he dynoed it and it had like only 98 lbs of torque, the worst part is, the stupid guy was super happy with those numbers.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:38 PM
  #7  
KNONFS's Avatar
B O R I C U A
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,482
Likes: 36
From: VA
Originally posted by AbecX
Yeah, it can run a low 16 second timeslip if its perfectly tuned and you launch good. Most civics run 16.9's. Get you a 50 shot of nitrous and take out them v6 mustangs!
You are joking?!? right?!?!?

Actually a modded NA can hang (maybe beat, once every blue moon ) a stock 5.0L, the V6 aaare a joke, seriously!!
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:39 PM
  #8  
CrackHeadMel's Avatar
Learned alot | Alot to go
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,232
Likes: 0
From: Rotaryland, New Hampshire
Lol, i have an electric boat motor that puts out half that in ft/lb
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:41 PM
  #9  
KNONFS's Avatar
B O R I C U A
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,482
Likes: 36
From: VA
Re: is n/a fast

Originally posted by Antonio_bigbob
i got a question. is a 1987 rx7 non-turbo decently fast.
like, i mean, can it take most 4 bangers???
i know that it is nothing compared to the TII, but compared to other cars, is it pretty fasst.

like i mean 240sx's, civics, etc. ??
thanks, ne info would be aweseom
Well watch for those Honda 1.6 DOHC and Acura 1.8 DOHC, also watch those NEONS 2.0L DOHC, 2.5RS Subaru, and probably the Nissan 240 too!

It is not like they are going to rape you in a drag race, but it might be VERY close
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:47 PM
  #10  
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver / Brandon
Nissan 240's are slow... at least the newer ones.. my buddy has like a 1992 or a 1994 im not sure... And i work him good, its not even funny by how much... I dont even have lsd, and i have the automatic gears (switched it to standard)..and still he has no chance.. althought my streetport probably helps... lol
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 03:59 PM
  #11  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
LOL... i bet i coulda taken a V6 stang when I was running on one rotor.

Now i'm taking down the big boys (V8's) in my N/A

You're '87 N/A has 146 ponies and should easily take down most V6's and I4's.... Dont listen to AbecX, the only stangs beating you will say "GT" or "5.0" on the side...
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 04:22 PM
  #12  
wpgrexx's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
From: not in winterpeg anymore
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dre_2ooo
[B]LOL... i bet i coulda taken a V6 stang when I was running on one rotor.

dude if you think that is funny, read the other post where some dude told me a v6 mustang will kill an na rx7. single vs.dual exhaust thread
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 04:47 PM
  #13  
kemozabi's Avatar
.....shhh hes coming.....
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: Sacramento, CA
i have nothin done to my 86 and i can beat most stock v6 mustangs and rs camaros. except the newer mustangs are pretty quick. only things ive tried and lost againt are mustang gts and a '90 300zx. i kno how to pick my battles
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 05:34 PM
  #14  
relvinnian's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
"Fast" is relative. If all you aspire to beat are cars than run 14 or slower, than you will be happy with an N/A. Otherwise, no.

To me N/As are slow. To the stock Z06s that destroy my T2, I'm sure my car is considered slow to them.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 06:21 PM
  #15  
kenny's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio

Last edited by kenny; Jun 24, 2002 at 06:25 PM.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 06:26 PM
  #16  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
nice red "x"
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 06:29 PM
  #17  
kenny's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by dre_2ooo
nice red "x"
Nice **** in the mouth.



Originally posted by dre_2ooo
Now i'm taking down the big boys (V8's) in my N/A
Care to try me? It's only an El Camino. How fast can it be?
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 06:39 PM
  #18  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
I'm talking about STOCK mustangs.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 07:07 PM
  #19  
kenny's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by dre_2ooo
I'm talking about STOCK mustangs.
I envy you.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 07:17 PM
  #20  
AbecX's Avatar
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
From: /dev/mustang
I was talking about the 99+ Mustangs V6's, the older ones had like 140hp

I'm not trying to flame any of you guys, but some of ya'lls claims about beating cars with twice as much hp and torque is just insane.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 07:55 PM
  #21  
rxspd's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
From: Chatt., TN
Originally posted by AbecX
I was talking about the 99+ Mustangs V6's, the older ones had like 140hp

I'm not trying to flame any of you guys, but some of ya'lls claims about beating cars with twice as much hp and torque is just insane.
how do you consider 190hp in the newer mustangs twice as much as 160hp in s5 n/a's???

I think twice as much would be 320hp.
I dont think the 30 extra horses is gonna make up for the weight differance anyways, remember over there in the dualvs.single post when you were saying 20 hp was nothing.
Wtf are you thinking?
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 08:04 PM
  #22  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
LOL.... so true!
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 08:32 PM
  #23  
DCmina's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, California
my stock 89 is plenty fast for me.
and once I'll get my full exhaust, I'll love my car even more.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 10:12 PM
  #24  
wpgrexx's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
From: not in winterpeg anymore
Originally posted by AbecX
I was talking about the 99+ Mustangs V6's, the older ones had like 140hp

I'm not trying to flame any of you guys, but some of ya'lls claims about beating cars with twice as much hp and torque is just insane.

again, this kid is stupid, he obviously knows very little or nothing about rx7's. Is it just me or is there a new trend starting for people that don't even own or have a clue about rx7's coming on this forum just to talk ****.
Old Jun 24, 2002 | 10:57 PM
  #25  
Node's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 3
From: Stinson Beach, Ca
Originally posted by fuzzi
Nissan 240's are slow... at least the newer ones.. my buddy has like a 1992 or a 1994 im not sure... And i work him good, its not even funny by how much... I dont even have lsd, and i have the automatic gears (switched it to standard)..and still he has no chance.. althought my streetport probably helps... lol
Take a look at your mods list, you have no cats, an intake, and a streetport on a new engine, you should whoop him nicely.

BTW they only had vert 240sx's in 94 in the US. I think 89-93 for 180sx/s13 style, and 95-98 for S14 style.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:33 PM.