Erz

If I were to get a 2nd gen rx-7 to race around the race tracks, would a modded turbo rx-7 or modded N/A rx-7 be better? And also which series would be best, the series 4 or series 5? Thanks

tinvestor

I think this all depends on class and checkbook so for a starter you should run an S5 and be careful when you mod it to keep withinthe class you want to be in

If your talking fun only get a turbo

ah screw it get the turbo either way more fun and like I said classes keep it competitve anyhow

Node

iTrader: (1)

get a series 4, theyre cheaper and lighter

also try to find a sunroofless model if possible, but thats not a huge deal, just a small one.

seems that most rotary racecars are non-turbo, but that is because they didnt produce turbo rotaries until later on.
the n/a's are dead reliable and can be beat on forever and ever as long as you keep em cool.

maybe check out the race car section of this forum. there are quite a few people w/ FC racecars.

Carl Byck has a very high horsepower turbo second gen. may want to search for his threads about his car. Seems that it took a lot of effort to produce a reliable turbo car that doesnt lose tons of power after a few laps from heatsoak of the 3 cooling systems, air oil and water

-Ben Martin

90WhiteVrt

Go turbo! It's going to be faster and can still be reliable if built and maintained properly.

tinvestor

if you go turbo get a reverse vented hood and heat soak will be much less of an issue.

tinvestor

Bobby beach is in Auckland and makes a really nice hood shipping cant be too bad fron NZ to AU

Sideways7

iTrader: (7)

It all depends on what you want to do. You would prob want an s4 because they are lighter to start with. Suspention is null because you would replace it all, and engines dont matter too much as you would most likely want a new engine to race with. Make sure it is a 5-lug with vented brake rotors, though.
If you just want a car to race with and spend as little money as possible, get an NA. The previous owner of mine tracked his regularly (and destroyed 944 NAs, I might add) with nothing more than about a grand on suspention and about a grand on exhaust and intake, plus Hawk blue/black pads. It had around 190k on the clock when he started racing it, so age isn't a problem if you have a motor thats in good shape. The stock rad and oil cooler was sufficient for cooling and the pads kept fade at bay. An added benefit is that this will also make a good autocross car.
Now the best car for going fast on a track is obviously a turbo. Node made a very good point about reliability, though. I'm no expert, but I would think you would need at the very least a bigger rad and a front mount to do well. It would be beneficial to have a fresh engine with the appropriate oil mods for sustained high-rpm operation as well.

Black91n/a

There's many more options for real racing (more classes, more competition) with an NA. As for the weight, the shells weigh about the same when stripped out, so the most important thing to consider when shopping is to get the best shell (no sunroof if possible, NO rust). Everything else can be changed. You can bolt in whatever engine, brakes, suspension, rear end, etc that you want, but you can't easily solve problems that come up with a rusty car (they'll keep coming up). For the SCCA ITS class (most popular place to race an FC) the reccomendation seems to be to get an S5 for the better motor, as they have no problems beating the minimum weight, so ballast must be added, so any weight arguments are pretty much academic then.

For a track car (not racing, HPDE's) that's also a street car then it's more or less up to personal preference and budget as to whether NA or Turbo is better for you.

Sideways7

iTrader: (7)

I should clarify that s4's are lighter when maintaing a usable interior for street driving.

Gene

iTrader: (1)

Doing a turbo HPDE fun car gets expensive fast. It took me a while and a bit of money, but the setup I arrived at is working well so far:

S5 Turbo II

K2RD (R.I.P.) suspension kit which is KYB AGX struts, and their homebrew coilovers, (350lb front, 225 rear, I think) front camber adjusters and rear pillow ball mounts, and a center rear camber bar.

AWR Rear camber adjusters for individual wheel camber adjustment, which is important if the rear suspension isn't perfect.

Autopower rollbar from I/O Port.

Corbeau clumban seat on driver side.

RCI Harneses

Stock wheels with Kumho Ecsta V700 tires all around, in 225/45 16

Carbotech panther plus brake pads all around

El cheapo flat brake rotors from Carbotech. Slotted are a waste of money unless you're using the wrong pad and glazing them, and drilled just crack faster while providing no measurable benefit.

SS brake lines

SPA Design dual oil/water temperature gauge

Autometer boost gauge

Racing Beat SS braided oil cooler lines

A/C delete

Manual steering rack

Rear speaker towers gutted (makes a great storage place for misc. small things)

CF radiator panel thingie

Battery relocated behind passenger

Fluidyne aluminum radiator, stock fan, stock thermostat. Water wetter added.

And of course, the engine and its supporting cast:

Street port, with hardened stationary gears, and better bearings, 2mm stock seals, 3rd gen corner seals, assorted other goodies I don't remember offhand.

Lightened flywheel with stock pressure plate and a 6-puck disk

1600cc secondaries

Walbro fuel pump, rewired

SS fuel lines with aeromotive FPR and fuel filter

Microtech ECU to run the sucker

Stock turbo and IC for now

Apex'i N1 single tipped grapefruit launcher/muffler

In track-ready trim (all fluids aboard, 1/2 tank of gas, my 165lb body in the driver's seat, all junk removed) it weighs 2933 lbs (or 2768 without me, which is similar to a stock 3rd gen), and when we got done corner weighting it, it was nearly perfectly distributed, within 10 lbs.

At the moment it's tuned pretty conservatively, at only 8lbs of boost, which makes 213RWHP.

Sideways7

iTrader: (7)

what happened to them, anyway?
I forgot about the flywheel. A lightened flywheel is a good idea if you are already doing something like the clutch. A good seat is also a near neccesity for the track. I have one made by NEX that I like a lot. I think it was pretty cheap, plus it only weighs 11 lbs.
Edit: Well, it looks like they discontinued that seat. Oh well.

Gene

iTrader: (1)

They went out of business, apparently.

wrankin

Thank you for pointing this out.

Once you gut them, there is very little difference in the weight of the S4 and S5 chassis. From a track perspective, the S5 has the advantage of the higher compression rotors.

One of the reasons that there are more N/A racecars at least here in the states is that many classes (esp. the big amateur ones like SCCA IT and Production) don't allow forced injection. If you want to race door-to-door, find out what your options are with your local sanctioning bodies. If you just want to run open lapping and timetrial type events, then forced induction may to the way to go.

Try and find a clean chassis - one without a sunroof - it will give you a better platform to build from. Better yet - try and find an already built track car for sale. You can usually find good deals during the off-season costing half of what you would spend building it up from scratch. If you are really interested in building your own car up, do it as your second race car, not your first. Trust me on this, I've been down that road. Along with many others

I have an FD which I have tracked in the past, and now I also have an N/A FC as a dedicated track vehicle (which I bought already built). The FC is a lot of fun, but I will have to admit it does not have as much of that "oh-my-gawd-this-is-insane-fast" feeling that the FD gives. On the other hand, the FC is cheaper to drive and maintain and I would rather spend my money on tires, brakes and track time rather than more bolt-ons.

Good luck,

-bill

vhold

If you're talking SCCA-style road racing, it always seemed to me that the way the classes were set up that NA's were more competitive in their respective classes.

Back when I was going to a lot of SCCA regionals it alweays seemed to me that there were always very competitive NA's in the IT (Improved Touring) classes.

It's been a few years though, I don't know what the situation is now.

Certainly I imagine running an NA would be much cheaper.

wrankin

Well I believe our original poster was from Australia, so I don't know how they do things down under. From what I have seen and read, they do have some very cool racing. :-)

FCs were doing very well in ITS until the BMWs arrived and became the instant overdogs. The SCCA is proposing a class above ITS (called ITR) where the BMWs (and lots of faster, more modern cars) will run. If this happens, then the FC may again be competitive.

-b

Gene

iTrader: (1)

Oh, I forgot to mention, it's a lot cheaper to buy someone else's well sorted out track car than it is to build your own. But, it's a lot more fun to build your own and sort it out yourself.