Speaking from someone who has a 400hp sports car. 99 C5 corvette. I still condiser my 160hp rx7 vert a sportscar. It has 2 doors and is pretty unpracticale. It handles well in corners and can give some cars a run. I've had 2 10th Anv turbo's 2's and had a great time with them but I can still have fun in the sun with my Vert

 

Ever ridden in an easy 14 second 4x4? It might change the way you look at your FC ....I would like to check it out though, it sounds pretty decent, it doesn't sound like its your average n/a...
I am at high altitude so quarter mile times are bit skewed, if we could test all of our vehicles at the same altitude , it would be more comparative.. 14 seconds is pretty damn good for an n/a, thats what most 3rd gens run here..I have g-teched my tII, with wimpoid shifts on a new clutch, mid 14's, but over 100 mph trapspeeds, If I were totally to abuse it, I would think I could get a better time out of it , my n/a does a glacial 17.00 in the quarter with 80 mph trapspeeds, thats at almost 4000 feet above sea level. I am about to go t04e on my TII, so some 12's should be in the near future....
My n/a is going to end up turbo'd, I am not going to chase any more of the regular mods for it, I will have enough parts leftover from the t04 project to boost the n/a, 5 psi manifold pressure should do wonders for it, I have the turbo bug, so now everything has to be turbo or I won't be happy, I love boost, I can't help it..Max

 

i can sort of see the maxima. ive never raced one of the new ones but i know that theyve got a lot of weight to lug around and arent as aerodynamic as our cars. but yeah, camaros, mustangs, and civics. i also forgot to mention eclipses (most kinds). as for the suped up civics, look at what they need to compare to a stock N/A. and even then ive given some riced up civics a good run and in some cases a good ***-kicking. (thats on the roll, as a cruddy automatic my off-the-line acceleration stinks). and for the guy asking about the Borla, i dont think that your question was directed at me but it sounds pretty decent, alost like stock but deeper and slightly louder. the construction is good but the tips are about 2 1/2 inches shorter than the stock tips so they are hidden by the bumper.

 

only 4000?? lol im at 6000

 

Uhh... you don't want to mess with the new Maxima. 255hp, 6spd manual, limited slip.... And they don't weight THAT much. Mine only has 160hp / ~180ft/lbs torque. Like I said you would have my old Maxima... but it would be a lot closer than you would imagine.

Camaros and Mustangs even with the V6 should be beating you straight line... and we won't even talk about the V8 model... Civic should be easy to beat unless it has mods...

Take care,

 

You guys are going to be pissed, but as an older enthusiast, one who grew up on true sports cars, I have to go the other way. The RX7 isn't a sports car in any of it's flavors, NA or Turbo. It's a GT (that's why it ran in GTU.. notice the letters in the name? Grand Touring Under 2.5 liters). The FIA and SCCA classify it as a GT, not a sports car (otherwise it would run in a Production class at SCCA, and the FIA equivalent). as someone said, it isn't speed that is the measure of a sports car. As soon as you put a fixed roof on a sports car, it becomes a GT. MGB sports car: add roof, and it's the MGB GT. Note the name. Ferrari 250 GTO? Not a sports car (says GT right in the name to let you know). Ferrari 268 SP of the same year? Sports car, and says so in the name (the S stands for Sports and the P tells engine location). Taking the roof off a GT doesn't necessarily make it a sports car, either. Look at teh Ferrari 365GTB/4 Daytona and the topless version, the 365GTS/4 Daytona Spyder. Or the Ferrari 250GT California.

Marketing brochures? Like the ones that call the Miata a roadster, even though it has roll up side windows and weather sealing? The Miata is a traditional sports car. IN fact, tomes like Sports Car International have called it the "quintessential sports car."

The RX7 is a fabulous GT, and one of the worlds best perfomance cars. On a personal level it can be compared to and raced against sports cars, and enjoyed in much the same way. But, like the 911, it is not a sports car (look at the designations of the racing Porsches, too. GT1, GT2, GT3... think about it.)

Oh, neither Mustangs nor Camaros were ever sports cars, either...

Yeah, I hard line on the definitions, because without definitions words become meaningless. And we can't have sports cars become meaningless, or suddenly start saying sedans are sports cars.

 

V6 camaros and mustangs beating a n/a FC in a straight line??? Maybe a series 4 stock for stock, but the mustangs/camaros are hella slow.

When my car was bone stock, I beat a 98 Firebird V6 8 times in a row. The cop didnt like that very much though... Good news is that me and the guy driving the firebird only get verbal warnings. Damn I was lucky, I could have lost my liscense, being only 16 at the time.

 

You have to remember, with two cars that turn low 16s-high 15s in the quarter under best conditions, you likely weren't going fast enough to be much of a danger.

 

Thanks for reminding me how slow my car used to be...

Oh well, I making up for it now.

 

You and your car seem to be the exception rather than the rule. Also, keep in mind he is driving an automagic....

Take care,

 

Lol! Still, it could be worse: at least the cop knew you were racing. I remember back in the dark days, when I was first learning to drive, I had a 2 liter Pinto race car (good autocrosser, just slow) and one night I lined up against a friend in his later Pinto at a stop light. Light went green and we both hit it. I was slightly pulling on him, but we were both holding up traffic behind us. I got in front and pulled over to let the cars behind us go by, and the first two were state patrol... the third was a sheriff. Obviously they couldn't even tell we were racing...

 

A buddy of mine used to have an 81 Datsun 210. The model with the "BIG" 1.5L carb motor. We broke out the G-Tech to see what it would do 0-60... but unfortunatly we couldn't get a 0-60 run because it completed the 1/4 mile first!

 

didnt know that the new maximas were at 255hp. thats a ahame that a sedan can have that much power. but like i said, my off the line stinks, but that'll change as soon as i put a 5-speed in. my mods are sort of picking up the slack for that. 215rwhp is impressive, how much did that cost you? also as for the v6 stangs and camaros i can beat 'em while on the move and i can hold with the v8s (except the cobra and SS obviously) but it also comes down to driver skill.

 

I totally see where you are coming from and you make a valid point, but I believe the traditianal defanition of the term "sports car" is out dated. I believe that time has changed the term to mean more of what the first and third gen RX-7's are. I believe that calling them GT cars is not very acurate because a GT is more of a touring car that combines performance and luxury. I mean think about it, would you rather drive across country in a 3000gt VR4 or a 3rd gen? The VR4 will be much more comfortable and fun on a long cruise up the cost but I would rather be in the 3rd gen on the track.
The reason I dont consider the 2nd gen a true sports car is because the more performance oriented 2nd gens(T2's and GTU's) tend to also lend themselves well to the GT title.
I consider the 1st and 3rd gens to be more grassroots,bare essential true sports cars.
I think Mazda is right to call the Miata a roadster. Even though it is, in definition, a "sports car",I feel that the title should be used to classify cars such as the RX-7, lotus Elise, and other bare essental cars that are purpose built for performance. A car that is as much at home on a twisty track as it is on the open road.
I don't think the RX-7 should be classified with cars like 300ZX. Yes the 300 is a nice, fast, and handles well but it is a true GT. Being a car enthusiest, If you where in the market for a RX-7 would you consider the 300ZX or the 3000GT? I wouldn't. Even though they where classed the same they just arent the same kind of car.
So where doe's the RX-7 fit? By definition It's not a sports car. But it's not quite a touring car either. It's somewhere in between. I think we should give the Miata's and like cars to the roadster title and reserve the sports car title for cars like the RX-7. I believe we,as the general public, have pretty much already done this. Except that some people still confuse GT cars with Sports cars(the new definition).

Just FYI the 1st and second gen RX-7's do race in E-Production in SCCA. I work on a race team where we race both an ITA car and a EP car. Both 1st gens.

Mike

 

Would this be consider a sports car??

It's got no roof.

 

Maybe its a Sports Touring.

 

althought viper7 saying he can beat those cars in his auto sounds funny, he is not bullshitting, on the roll the auto is pretty damn quick, but starting from the line is absolutely pointless. i beat 5.0 mustangs constantly in my auto as long as i was on the roll, from the stop they could kill me badly, but on a roll it was cake, and i wont even talk about v6 rustangs and camaros and firebirds, slower than hell, i can take them by 3 car lengths in my 86, ahhh the wonder of 5.12 gears

 

Well, teh 2nd gens do run in EP now. They used to run in GT2 against the 944s and in GTU (lending the name). SO they were designed as GTs. I remember being at Sears Point when the original Akai Imsa GTU RX7 was running in '83, so the first gens (which were the continuation of the RX3 line: both were called Savanna in Japan, right?) were also designed as GTs, in the mold of the original 240Z. The 3rd gen runs in GT2 and GTS2, along with T1 (Touring 1), so it's obvious that they are considered GTs by the people who invented the term.

Ever been in a Ferrari GT, like a 250 GT SWB or 275 GTB? Pretty basic, raw cars, with really only one reason for being: road racing.

As for Mazda calling the Miata a roadster, it still has roll up windows, so the body style is convertible, not roadster. Since people in the automotive industry still deal with true roadsters (like the '33-34 Ford roadster and '32 Highboy) in new form and in restoration circles, it's still a commonly referred to bodystyle.

I appreciate the fact that modern cars work better than the older ones, and true sports car performance is available in more versatile cars like the RX7s. But you can still get that purpose built performance, at home on the road and twisty track, from a Sentra, which I would never call a sports car. Same for teh BMW 2002 turbo, which is all the car was built for from the factory. Still a sedan, even if the performance and reason for being was motorsports.

I don't think the definitions are outdated. I think the cars in the categories have gotten more capable. We live in wonderful times, to have this wide choice in cars that are very capable, with basic sedans that can outperform what used to be top sports cars, and sports cars and GTs that are well above that AND still useable on a daily basis.

 

Hey pd-day,


Now that's what I'm talkin 'bout!! Would love to build a street legal rex like that. Oops, almost got a boner.

 

thank you. someone sees my point.

 

I get better throttal(sp) responce from my N/A w/ leaky injectors than I did from my 5.0 'stang?? Anything that comes stock with an auto adjusting suspension deserves the right to be call a sports car, or anything with near 50/50 weight distrobution. (If you don't have the auto adjust suspension the RX7 is still a sports car in many respects)

 

Not having the AAS makes it a better sports car. That **** is just some luxury **** that hardly ever works.

 

i haven't been really following this thread,
but

u add a turbo to a FC and that makes it a sport car??
what kind of FXCK up theory is that?

 

My car is a sports car, **** anybody who says otherwise.

 

uhm, the auto adjust had sport suspension and cushy luxury suspension. The non adjusting where just all time sport suspensions...so in many respects the ones with 50/50 cushy/sport suspension are still sports cars in many respects :-D