FC3S_Fenix

I just wanted to know if N/A rotary engines are more efficient and last longer than the turbo Rotary engines...

SonicRaT

iTrader: (6)

Yes, an N/A engine will usually outlast a Turbo counterpart. More efficient depends on what we're talking about. Fuel? Yes, they're better on fuel!

Ouch, that poll is a bit difficult. N/A is better for mileage, and cheaper to maintain. TII's have an infinite ammount of potential over the N/A though.

FC3S_Fenix

What about TI's... do they have potential? And what kind of potential do they have that differs from the N/A?

Also I am not getting any help in the tech support so I'll just post this here...

I am about to purchase a 1988 fc3s (the car I have always wanted) at 140k miles. Everything works on the car, but it has a "hot start problem." I was wondering if this purchase was worth it for 2000 dollars. Also I would like to know what the "hot start problem" is all about, and how I would come upon fixing it.
-The car MIGHT need an engine rebuild also... mabe, and I was wondering how much it would be to bet a Turbo 13b motor rebuilt. Also, how much it would be to buy a whole new 13b motor.

Thanks for the help.

SureShot

Too many variables.
Best power/weight - turbo rotary.
Best longevity medium high performance - NA rotary.
Best gas mileage (todays technogy) pistons.

The renesis has equalized most of this.

InGroundEffect

If a N/A rotary is rebuilt before 200,000 miles on a street car then something is wrong and it was not taken care of.

If a Turbo rotary is not rebuilt before 100,000 miles on street car then somebody took exceptionly good car of the engine and most likely never drove it hard.


My 2cents

Syonyk

o.O You've rolled one car, and burned another car, and you want a FC? They do have an annoying tendency to burst into flames if certain things are neglected.

Have you considered getting a cheap Civic to knock around in for a while? RX-7s are *not* what I would consider a cheap car to maintain. They can be quite reliable, and there are people on the forum who have FCs that are VERY reliable, but they've also put $1000s into the car replacing things that are worn out. The newest FC is 14 years old, and most of the ones for sale are around 18 years old.

It's really a case of "Fast, cheap, reliable. Pick two." The FC, even the NA, is still decently quick, so "Fast" is already selected. You get to pick between cheap & reliable.

-=Russ=-

Andrew.

iTrader: (4)

Personally- na, more reliable, lasts longer, etc etc but lock this thread, this topic screams flame war.

Aaron Cake

iTrader: (1)

There are three things in this thread that don't go together: highschool, RX-7, and cheap. I think the best advice given is to buy a beater car that you don't care about. The RX-7 is a completely different animal from anything you have ever experienced.

Eternal_Gamer

iTrader: (10)

Don't ever buy an Rx-7 without having a DD. Let's face it, the 7 is a sports car, and its best to be what it is. Did I mention the gas prices are soaring. I don't know about over where you are at, but here in Fresno, California, its 3.17 at chevron for 91. Avg is 3.25 and like $55 for a tank that gives you 16mpg at the most. Its not fun either when your 7 breaks down and you have nothing to drive to work and school. I have a Miata, and a 7, so I don't go that road again. If you hate hondas get a miata. My miata gives me 23+ mpg and $29 for a tank of 91. :]

Eternal_Gamer

iTrader: (10)

I forgot:

NA - More reliable but not as much as a piston
Turbo - Stomps and crushes the NA in every aspect of performance

FC3S_Fenix

I am not trying to show anger in any way, but first you don't know how many cars I have been through and what I do with my life. All of my friends are into racing and I also practice every weekend at a track (On private land) with all sorts of cars. Please do not say the rx-7 is a car that is to much for me. That is your own personal opinion about the car, but not me.

This car is also not going to be a daily driver. I have another for that. (2004 Jetta GLI)

Therx7ist

if the cars not going to be a daily driver then your question is somewhat silly. you have a daily driver so why buy a non turbo rx7? you will only wish you had bought a turbo. The things that make a turbo less attractive to some, are of little consequnce to you. Gas mileage? drive the jetta. Breakdowns? Drive the jetta. Longevity? Who cares, you hang around with car guys, you'll fix it. Buy the turbo, you'll never look back. BTW I own a N/A and I'm in the middle of swapping to a TII motor. In the 7 years I've owned it, I've always wished it was a turbo

MazdaTed

I second that opinion. I too have a 91 miata, but I have an 89 vert.

FC3S_Fenix

Thank you. That helped. The thing is with the longevity and the gas mileage is that I don't have much money "yet." So gas and maintainance is still somewhat of an issue.

Also, I am definetly getting an RX-7 fc3s. So don't talk me into getting another car. (Not directed towards you Therx7ist)

Therx7ist

It's all a question of money. Thats usually the most important factor. For 5 grand you can build a car that will smash most of the cars you will ever encounter. 1000-2000 for a TII and then 3000 for a great rebuild and some intake fuel and exhaust and you will slay people. If you put in the right time into acquiring the right car and doing a complete rebuild you will also obtain the longevity.

KillaKitiie

Look the tii is a great car but put 3k into any mildly quick car and stomp on other cars! Truth is a stock tii is not that fast its quick but far from fast stock.My na can stay right with my friends stock turbo 2. But this thread is not about what a turbo or a na can do modded. I specificely chose a na 7 becuase its cheaper to maintane,Has a stout engine,High redline and decent gas mileage and its the best handling car ive ever bought. imo

Andrew.

iTrader: (4)

next time your in socal, come and try to crush my na, handling or staright line

ddub

I'd have to say N/A. I'm getting close to $4k deep in my latest NA buildup with rebuild, port, standalone, new fuel setup, battery relocation, new exhaust, and the list goes on.

I'm hoping to have a 10k revving 220-230rwhp NA. There's a lot to be said about a high revving, fairly good power non-turbo, very predictable and very fun.

Syonyk

Ah. If you have a daily driver, I take back my previous suggestion. Normally a post like yours is someone looking for a '7 as their only car, which is usually a bad idea if you don't have the funding to keep it running.

For a cheap track car, I'd say stay with the NA. You can do a lot to it, and a 200 WHP NA isn't too difficult (though it requires porting, and possibly some sort of fuel control).

With a turbo, as you raise the power, you'll need a LOT of supporting mods to keep the engine safe. Fuel pump, radiator, boost controller, etc. It adds up quickly.

I think a built NA with a 5 lug swap (if needed) and good suspension would be an absolute blast on a track, and would probably be a better learning car. You won't have massive amounts of power to make you fast regardless, so you'll have to focus more on the ideal line and energy conservation, which will make you a better driver when you do get something with more power.

Plus, a built NA would be fairly easy to swap a TII drivetrain/engine into, later on when you have more money.

-=Russ=-

fcdrifter13

Dont end up like me. I bought my RX7 knowing it had a "wierd" motor in it. It smoked and to tell you the truth I thought it was valve seals. Ya ya funny to look at now and laugh but it wasnt then.

I went and picked up my car without doing reasearch of anykind. The only thing I lucked out on was it was a GTU. Back then I thought they all had the wing and five lug wheels. And that the only difference in the turbo body was the hood. So I picked it up after about 10mins of looking at it. The cost to start my RX7 lonly road was $800. Drove it home and probably pissed off the EPa because of all the smoke.

So I join this site and ask the question about my car smoking. Still thinking piston motor. They said fiddle with the OMP. WTH is a OMP i thought. Downloaded the FSM and bought a manual. Oh boy was I in for a shock.

After about a month running on 2 bad oil seals and a busted water seal it finally popped. I pulled the motor and tore into it. Oh yeah real smart there. Now I have just a pile of junk in my basement that once resembled a motor. Well All this happened after I bought about $4000 in NOS parts. Guy at the check out asks if I need a rebuild kit I say no Im good just a small oil leak with the OMP.

So here I sit now a Year later A shell with a ton of new parts and no motor. I refuse to sell the car. I think I have tried but then I got scamed and such and then I was like heck with it im keeping it. Hopefully getting my new motor in a couple of weeks from Felix(thanks by the way).

Now comes to the piont of all of this. Do your reasearch drive as many different cars as you can. Know as much about them as you possibly can. Hell I think some of the people on here that know the most dont even own a car. Like Ted. How can you know so much and have the time to post it on here. If he had one he would always be working on it. lol. j/k.

I am lucky though I drove my car about 20miles in the month it ran. And for some reason I never wanted another car. NA is the way to go for me I think i will end up owning both.

So its my vote for the NA reasonable HP can be achived and also reliably. The3 car will also be more responsive. THe turbo has its perks but for someone getting into a RX7 I would say NA all the way learn the basics blow it up rebuild, tweak, blow up again, rebuild with a huge port and ask as many questions as possible, Have an AWSOME na. Then move onto the turbo car and repeat. But just add boost and double the horse power. And repaet one more time and youll finaly understand why you got the car.

NA relialbe, responsive, cheaper to maintain.
Turbo, huge amounts of power not as reliable little more to maintain and upgrade, not as responsive.

rotary downshift

u asked if 2000 was to much ... ill just let everyone know that i bought a n/a 1988 with only 160k kmh on it ... for 1700 dollars ,,, i took it to a garage and it was fully certafiable but i had to bootleg the e test on account of the header punchout cat and 3 inch cat back system .... but 2 grand for a car with more than 150k on it .. i dunno ... depends ...

misterstyx69

iTrader: (142)

I've just got my first 7..an 1988 gx witha 13b n/a ..for about 2k I got the car and the insurance and the safety ..now comes the e-test which I feel it will pass with good results ..it runs and exceeded all the expectations of what I thought was going to be a total head-ache ..I did alot of research before I even got to drive my car and I feel like I came away with a good car ..worth every cent that I put down for it.As for the turbo guys ...you guys are a class of your own..with a need for power and love to get the most out of a car that has a fire-breathing heart can ony be described as multi-mod...anything can be done and it produces results ..sky is the limit it seems ..so ya while the n/a is a good little revvy powerhouse ..the turbo is the king of the ring!

KSROTARYFAN

What about a turboed N/A??? The best of both worlds.

SonicRaT

iTrader: (6)

I'll take that offer!

ddub

Then that'd just be considered turbo...