RX8 vs FC
03-01-07, 03:12 PM
#51
Originally Posted by Richter12x2
There's a whole lot less metal goes into that than there is in the stock NA intake manifold. :P I'm doing the turbo 6 port thing - I got my turbo LIM UIM in the other day and I'm like "Where's the rest of it? There's only half of it here!" 
Even just looking at the two, I'd say that the turbo intake with the intercooler included isn't THAT much bigger than the stock NA intake manifold (s4 is what I'm looking at) with the dynamic chamber and everything.
The turbo manifold without the intercooler looks like a lowercase c - the NA intake manifold looks more like a 2. You end up in almost exactly the same place coming off of the intercooler, so I didn't include it. In terms of design, it's pretty much just a wide spot in the intake path anyway.
Even just looking at the two, I'd say that the turbo intake with the intercooler included isn't THAT much bigger than the stock NA intake manifold (s4 is what I'm looking at) with the dynamic chamber and everything.
The turbo manifold without the intercooler looks like a lowercase c - the NA intake manifold looks more like a 2. You end up in almost exactly the same place coming off of the intercooler, so I didn't include it.
In terms of design, it's pretty much just a wide spot in the intake path anyway.
03-01-07, 03:20 PM
#52
Taste great, more filling
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, I never seperated mine - but that's one reason I'm psyched about going to turbo (other than the obvious increase in horsepower). I spent all this time on my last rebuild cleaning and painting my engine, making it look nice, and once it was in the car you couldn't see it because of the big honking intake manifold. You had to look under the dynamic chamber with a flashlight to tell it was painted, basically.
You had to look under the dynamic chamber with a flashlight to tell it was painted, basically.
03-01-07, 03:31 PM
#54
Rotary enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no one has yet mentioned traction control, which, no matter what you say, is a good thing to have when its icy out
also, the rx8 has ABS, theres nothing like being able to slam on the brakes and not worry about ending up all over the place
also, the rx8 has ABS, theres nothing like being able to slam on the brakes and not worry about ending up all over the place
03-01-07, 03:46 PM
#55
Taste great, more filling
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With good pedal control, no ABS > ABS. Which means no slamming on the brakes - just the gas pedal, you shouldn't slam on anything - gently and firmly squeeze on the pedals. You go faster by smoothly rolling on the accelerator and you stop quicker by smoothly applying the brakes. The only thing a true driver should stomp on is spiders and Honda Civics.
03-01-07, 04:33 PM
#57
Buildup Thread Encourager
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Richter12x2
With good pedal control, no ABS > ABS.
The ABS system found on the FC (and today's base model cars) is absolute crap and I'd get rid of it in a hearbeat.
The ABS system found on higher level cars modulate braking power on all 4 wheels individually, which gives you better braking power in a corner than a non-abs braking system.
Atleast I think that's true
03-01-07, 05:51 PM
#58
D1 Drifter Status
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento CA
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ABS is a good thing to have when its icy or rainy outside... and most people SLAM on the breaks in am emergancy, they dont mean to. but the only thought that comes into my mind right before i almost get into an accident is "****!" and what that means is usualy a very very quick and hard step down on my break pedal. im training myself off of this.. but face it.. even most people who say they dont do this, do its a reaction of panic
03-01-07, 05:57 PM
#59
Taste great, more filling
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Syncro
I disagree. That rule is mostly true, but there are exceptions.
The ABS system found on the FC (and today's base model cars) is absolute crap and I'd get rid of it in a hearbeat.
The ABS system found on higher level cars modulate braking power on all 4 wheels individually, which gives you better braking power in a corner than a non-abs braking system.
Atleast I think that's true
The ABS system found on the FC (and today's base model cars) is absolute crap and I'd get rid of it in a hearbeat.
The ABS system found on higher level cars modulate braking power on all 4 wheels individually, which gives you better braking power in a corner than a non-abs braking system.
Atleast I think that's true
03-01-07, 06:04 PM
#60
Taste great, more filling
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by reatrdedspleen
ABS is a good thing to have when its icy or rainy outside... and most people SLAM on the breaks in am emergancy, they dont mean to. but the only thought that comes into my mind right before i almost get into an accident is "****!" and what that means is usualy a very very quick and hard step down on my break pedal. im training myself off of this.. but face it.. even most people who say they dont do this, do its a reaction of panic
03-01-07, 06:33 PM
#61
D1 Drifter Status
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento CA
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Richter12x2
Oh yeah, I got that - I intentionally don't follow as close as about 90% of the people I see on the highway. I've managed to get to the point where I get TO the brake fast and squeeze firm and consistently instead of romping on it. But with 5 cars, sometimes I misjudge and give it a quick whack initially. Which is definitely good for waking up passengers.
lol yeah... whenever i have to hit the break, it wakes up my gf pretty quickly.. **** it wakes me up pretty quickly too lol
03-01-07, 11:04 PM
#62
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Originally Posted by classicauto
So no one has ever ran faster then 15 seconds with a stock TII?? lol I guess I'm the first.....
If you want to compare modified cars, there are FEs running with 360 HP on stock internals
My statement wasn't to the thousandth of a second, its a rough comparison....but I guess if you lay out the numbers side by side its wrong. In reality though its close enough.
0-60= 6.5
0-100=18.2
quarter mile=15.1 @93.3 mph
Top speed=146
But the FE numbers (according to R&T) are:
0-60= 5.9
0-100= 16
quarter mile= 14.6 @96 mph
Top speed (electronically limited) 149.
So I guess I am missing how a car that is a half second quicker 0-60, two seconds quicker, 0-100, and a half second quicker and 2.7 mph quicker in the quarter mile, is only a thousandth of a second slower.
Maybe you were comparing the US spec FE to the Jspec InfiniIV- the fastest stock FC made in any market...
0-60 =6.5
0-100=N/A
Quarter mile =14.9 @94
Top speed (electronically limited)= 112
Hmm similar quarter mile, but again slower 0-60...
03-01-07, 11:32 PM
#63
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for info:
In 1989, Sports Car International magazine tested an FC Turbo and got the following numbers:
0-60 5.95
0-100 15.54
1/4 mile 14.53@96.5mph
Top Speed 140mph
Fastest I've ever seen.
In 1989, Sports Car International magazine tested an FC Turbo and got the following numbers:
0-60 5.95
0-100 15.54
1/4 mile 14.53@96.5mph
Top Speed 140mph
Fastest I've ever seen.
03-02-07, 12:36 AM
#65
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Originally Posted by TehMonkay
The only thing that bothers me about the 8 is the 4 doors, other wise it would probably be called an RX-7, but they need marketability, something that a 2 door sports car doesn't do as well now as it used to. Thats why I like 7s better.
03-02-07, 12:37 AM
#66
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Originally Posted by LI FC Greg
Just for info:
In 1989, Sports Car International magazine tested an FC Turbo and got the following numbers:
0-60 5.95
0-100 15.54
1/4 mile 14.53@96.5mph
Top Speed 140mph
Fastest I've ever seen.
In 1989, Sports Car International magazine tested an FC Turbo and got the following numbers:
0-60 5.95
0-100 15.54
1/4 mile 14.53@96.5mph
Top Speed 140mph
Fastest I've ever seen.
03-02-07, 02:40 AM
#67
Rotary Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It always amazes me that the car will build 96.5 mph within 14.53 secs, or 6.64 mph per sec averaged, but takes a FULL second to add 3.5 mph.... aerodynamics is a bitch.
BC
BC
03-02-07, 02:54 AM
#68
Si Bal Guh Juh!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My dad has an rx8, I took it for a drive and i wasn't too impressed. I guess I just expected it to be more powerful. I must be the only one that wasn't too impressed with the renesis.
kick015.jpg?t=1172825083
It's shiny, new, nice interior, corners really well.
It offers a refreshing change for rotor heads.
But personally, i would choose an rx7 of any generation over the rx8.
Rx7s are just the funnest to drive.
I like older cars thou:
The newer ones .. they get too... ballooned out , if you know what i mean. All extra junk added to them making them heavy pigs.
Shayla
kick015.jpg?t=1172825083
It's shiny, new, nice interior, corners really well.
It offers a refreshing change for rotor heads.
But personally, i would choose an rx7 of any generation over the rx8.
Rx7s are just the funnest to drive.
I like older cars thou:
The newer ones .. they get too... ballooned out , if you know what i mean. All extra junk added to them making them heavy pigs.
Shayla
03-02-07, 12:10 PM
#69
Originally Posted by Icemark
No going by stock numbers...
If you want to compare modified cars, there are FEs running with 360 HP on stock internals
Okay.. stock numbers to stock numbers... the absolute best numbers I could find for a stock (when new) US spec FC are:
0-60= 6.5
0-100=18.2
quarter mile=15.1 @93.3 mph
Top speed=146
But the FE numbers (according to R&T) are:
0-60= 5.9
0-100= 16
quarter mile= 14.6 @96 mph
Top speed (electronically limited) 149.
So I guess I am missing how a car that is a half second quicker 0-60, two seconds quicker, 0-100, and a half second quicker and 2.7 mph quicker in the quarter mile, is only a thousandth of a second slower.
Maybe you were comparing the US spec FE to the Jspec InfiniIV- the fastest stock FC made in any market...
0-60 =6.5
0-100=N/A
Quarter mile =14.9 @94
Top speed (electronically limited)= 112
Hmm similar quarter mile, but again slower 0-60...
If you want to compare modified cars, there are FEs running with 360 HP on stock internals
Okay.. stock numbers to stock numbers... the absolute best numbers I could find for a stock (when new) US spec FC are:
0-60= 6.5
0-100=18.2
quarter mile=15.1 @93.3 mph
Top speed=146
But the FE numbers (according to R&T) are:
0-60= 5.9
0-100= 16
quarter mile= 14.6 @96 mph
Top speed (electronically limited) 149.
So I guess I am missing how a car that is a half second quicker 0-60, two seconds quicker, 0-100, and a half second quicker and 2.7 mph quicker in the quarter mile, is only a thousandth of a second slower.
Maybe you were comparing the US spec FE to the Jspec InfiniIV- the fastest stock FC made in any market...
0-60 =6.5
0-100=N/A
Quarter mile =14.9 @94
Top speed (electronically limited)= 112
Hmm similar quarter mile, but again slower 0-60...
03-02-07, 12:26 PM
#70
Taste great, more filling
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, being 1/2 second apart in the quarter doesn't exactly equate to total domination on the actual road. You're talking about a difference of 2 whole seconds getting to 100 mph, and you're probably not cruising much faster than that. :P My 132hp Neon will keep up with a TII going 100 mph on the highway. It just takes me a minute or two to catch up.
You're talking about a difference of 2 whole seconds getting to 100 mph, and you're probably not cruising much faster than that. :P My 132hp Neon will keep up with a TII going 100 mph on the highway. It just takes me a minute or two to catch up.
03-02-07, 12:47 PM
#71
Originally Posted by n.houstonrx7
dude if you like fc's forget the rx8 and go and buy this
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...7540557&rd=1,1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...7540557&rd=1,1
03-02-07, 01:07 PM
#72
The Extremist
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bridgewater, Nova Scotia
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My simple take on things.... You can't argue with newer technology, the 8 is much more refined, simple as that..
But on the other hand, if you take a TII for example, and upgrade it to match the 8, you're likely to have alot more fun with it. I say this because of the fact its a near 20 year old car and chances are you're going to beat on it alot harder than a brand new car!
My $0.02 anyway.
But on the other hand, if you take a TII for example, and upgrade it to match the 8, you're likely to have alot more fun with it. I say this because of the fact its a near 20 year old car and chances are you're going to beat on it alot harder than a brand new car!
My $0.02 anyway.
03-02-07, 01:13 PM
#73
53.6%/46.4% - Crap!
Something I haven't seen brought up, I went to the auto show in Cleveland last night and sat in the RX8, all I can say is wow.
Not wow as in so nice (it was nice) but wow as in why do I have to sit with my head at a 90 degree angle so I don't touch the headliner. I then lowered the seat completely and reclined it, but my hair was rubbing on the headliner.
I could never see myself owning one, how could I wear a helmet when I go to autocross? I fit much better in the FC, I never notice my head touching the headliner and I am pretty sure I could wear a helmet in there. (I'm 5'10").
Not a performance thing but a random sidenote I felt like adding.
Not wow as in so nice (it was nice) but wow as in why do I have to sit with my head at a 90 degree angle so I don't touch the headliner. I then lowered the seat completely and reclined it, but my hair was rubbing on the headliner.
I could never see myself owning one, how could I wear a helmet when I go to autocross? I fit much better in the FC, I never notice my head touching the headliner and I am pretty sure I could wear a helmet in there. (I'm 5'10").
Not a performance thing but a random sidenote I felt like adding.
03-02-07, 01:15 PM
#74
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,831
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,846 Posts
Originally Posted by Icemark
that is what I thought until I got one... now I think the little back doors are one of the coolest features as I use them all the time for putting and getting things out of the rear seats.
