1993-1995 comparison
02-14-11, 01:55 AM
#1
1993-1995 comparison
Hey guys, I sold my fc and was considering getting an fd. Can't leave the rotaries haha too beautiful. Well my question is what were the changes made during those past 3 years? What does the 94 have that the 93 doesn't and vice versa. Same with the 95. I see a 94 one that I like, but I always preferred the 93 one. Can you guys compare the 3 for me? Oh I also have another question. I think I read somewhere that the US had 3 trims: Base, Touring, and R. I know the Touring has a sunroof and leather seats, but did the Base have a sunroof too? I'm looking for an R and that 94 fd i wanted doesn't have a sunroof so Touring trim is out. Is that Fd a Type R or could it be the base? Thanks soo much
Andrew
Andrew
02-14-11, 07:45 AM
#3
Yes, read through the stickys for info on the various models and equipment packages.
But know that at nearly 20 yrs old, alot FDs out there have had equipment swapped from others. As an example my own R1 is now equipped with factory cruise control...which it would NOT have had new.
But know that at nearly 20 yrs old, alot FDs out there have had equipment swapped from others. As an example my own R1 is now equipped with factory cruise control...which it would NOT have had new.
02-14-11, 08:32 AM
#4
This info is pretty widely availible.
Some of the stuff not always mentioned that I've come across is that the 94+ cars has an extra reinforcement in the rear (I'm pretty sure I'm right haha). Hopefully someone can confirm this as well. Everything else I can think of is mentioned everywhere.
Some of the stuff not always mentioned that I've come across is that the 94+ cars has an extra reinforcement in the rear (I'm pretty sure I'm right haha). Hopefully someone can confirm this as well. Everything else I can think of is mentioned everywhere.
02-14-11, 09:34 AM
#5
As many have said before, this is a thoroughly covered subject that is tedious for the forum members to answer. It is better to search things like this and find a writeup that has already been done. A simple search may have come up with this similar thread https://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generation-specific-1993-2002-16/my-rx7-r1-base-baffled-pics-inside-883207/
I understand that the search function isn't always simple, and can be time consuming. It does get easier with use though, so my advice it practice
Here is some info for you anyway. The year is the easiest thing to determine. It is readily available straight from the VIN http://www.xs4all.nl/~erix7/rx7vin.html but it seems that you already have this covered.
As Sgtblue stated, all the other features of the car could have been changed along the way. As you've found, the easiest way to tell if it is a touring is the sunroof because it cannot be changed. Apart from that, telling if it was an R2 or a Base gets a little more difficult. If there had been no modifications or swapped parts to the car, look at the seats. R1 seats are a cheaper alacantra knock off (suede appearance). If they are regular fabric, you've got a base. Truthfully a Base can be turned into a R2 clone very easily so if you are being told it is an original R2 and you are paying more money due to it, the only way to be 100% sure is to contact a local Mazda dealer and have them run the VIN.
I understand that the search function isn't always simple, and can be time consuming. It does get easier with use though, so my advice it practice
Here is some info for you anyway. The year is the easiest thing to determine. It is readily available straight from the VIN http://www.xs4all.nl/~erix7/rx7vin.html but it seems that you already have this covered.
As Sgtblue stated, all the other features of the car could have been changed along the way. As you've found, the easiest way to tell if it is a touring is the sunroof because it cannot be changed. Apart from that, telling if it was an R2 or a Base gets a little more difficult. If there had been no modifications or swapped parts to the car, look at the seats. R1 seats are a cheaper alacantra knock off (suede appearance). If they are regular fabric, you've got a base. Truthfully a Base can be turned into a R2 clone very easily so if you are being told it is an original R2 and you are paying more money due to it, the only way to be 100% sure is to contact a local Mazda dealer and have them run the VIN.
Last edited by He's On Toroids; 02-14-11 at 09:36 AM.
02-14-11, 12:39 PM
#6
No performance difference between the years other than the R1 model (93) have a stiffer suspension than the R2 (94, 95)). 94-95’s are essentially the same. Biggest differences that come to mind (aesthetically) between the 93 and the 94’s (95) are that the 93’s the tachs have a line at every 100 RPM while the 94’s are at every 500.
93
94-95
The interior of the 93 is smooth (and tends to flake) while the 94 is textured.
The tan interior on the 93 is quite extensive (IMO ugly) as it covers the seats, doors, headliner, rear bin and, carpet. Basically everything is tan except the dash and shifter console so it’s overwhelming (again IMO). On the 94’s the only thing that is tan is the seats and the carpet and IMO much better and quite nice.
93:
94:
The only thing that it would be a deal breaker for me is for the FD not to have a sunroof (so any R1, R2 models are out for me luckily those are lowest production numbers) or have it be automatic, other than that I can work with any year. But given how rare well maintained FD’s are these days I’d first look for the cleanest, well kept FD out there (with a sunroof ha ha) no matter what year it is.
93
94-95
The interior of the 93 is smooth (and tends to flake) while the 94 is textured.
The tan interior on the 93 is quite extensive (IMO ugly) as it covers the seats, doors, headliner, rear bin and, carpet. Basically everything is tan except the dash and shifter console so it’s overwhelming (again IMO). On the 94’s the only thing that is tan is the seats and the carpet and IMO much better and quite nice.
93:
94:
The only thing that it would be a deal breaker for me is for the FD not to have a sunroof (so any R1, R2 models are out for me luckily those are lowest production numbers) or have it be automatic, other than that I can work with any year. But given how rare well maintained FD’s are these days I’d first look for the cleanest, well kept FD out there (with a sunroof ha ha) no matter what year it is.
Trending Topics
02-14-11, 08:12 PM
#10
Personal preference, but I wouldn't want a sunroof regardless.
02-15-11, 06:48 AM
#14
Truly close to stock is always good IMO for a new owner. The FSM will be your bible and you won't have to guess at what a previous owner did. As long as you understand that most FDs experience a coolant seal failure at around 100,000 miles. Replacement of some pillow-ball bushings will be overdue as well...if the current owner hasn't dealt with them.
02-15-11, 10:00 AM
#17
120K miles has been done. But, as stated before, it is rare. If it is 120K on an original engine, it is likely a great find. The rest of the car is probably in great condition too. But, I'd expect to have to replace that engine quite soon. Only one way to know for certain, get a compression test done.
02-15-11, 10:40 AM
#18
I bought my car in 1998 from a dealership and it was 100% stock and I mean 100%. Now my 94 was built sometime in 92 (I forget the month I think it was Nov), and there is no question in my mind it’s a 94. From the registration, vin, dash, tach, window switch, interior color, UIM all are 94 style. Oh yeah even the seatbelt, as the passenger side seatbelt on the 93’s are freaking weird. WTF was up with that? Why did mazda do that? whatever…
02-15-11, 11:23 AM
#19
Yep. These aren’t perishable items so they get built in advance to a certain model year’s specs and then go sit somewhere. Haven’t you ever been to a dealership and seen next years model already for sale and it’s like august… I remember seeing FD Rx-7’s in mid 1992 and as you know there are NO 1992 Rx-7’s.
I bought my car in 1998 from a dealership and it was 100% stock and I mean 100%. Now my 94 was built sometime in 92 (I forget the month I think it was Nov), and there is no question in my mind it’s a 94. From the registration, vin, dash, tach, window switch, interior color, UIM all are 94 style. Oh yeah even the seatbelt, as the passenger side seatbelt on the 93’s are freaking weird. WTF was up with that? Why did mazda do that? whatever…
I bought my car in 1998 from a dealership and it was 100% stock and I mean 100%. Now my 94 was built sometime in 92 (I forget the month I think it was Nov), and there is no question in my mind it’s a 94. From the registration, vin, dash, tach, window switch, interior color, UIM all are 94 style. Oh yeah even the seatbelt, as the passenger side seatbelt on the 93’s are freaking weird. WTF was up with that? Why did mazda do that? whatever…
Albeit mine is imported from Japan.
-Geoff
02-15-11, 11:54 AM
#20
^^Fine in the states.... happy? lol...
Edit- no wait even though the topic of conversation is well understood I must clarify before someone who somehow got a JDM 92 into the states chimes in. There are no 92 fds that where sold by mazda corp
Editx2- Oh no wait let me clarify that once again: By Mazda corp it pertains to Mazda USA
Edit- no wait even though the topic of conversation is well understood I must clarify before someone who somehow got a JDM 92 into the states chimes in. There are no 92 fds that where sold by mazda corp
Editx2- Oh no wait let me clarify that once again: By Mazda corp it pertains to Mazda USA
Last edited by Montego; 02-15-11 at 12:01 PM.
02-15-11, 12:00 PM
#21
I just found this pretty funny Montego, as Im the exact opposite. I wouldn't buy an FD with a sunroof, so its all bases or R packages for me haha.
The only thing that it would be a deal breaker for me is for the FD not to have a sunroof (so any R1, R2 models are out for me luckily those are lowest production numbers) or have it be automatic, other than that I can work with any year. But given how rare well maintained FD’s are these days I’d first look for the cleanest, well kept FD out there (with a sunroof ha ha) no matter what year it is.
The only thing that it would be a deal breaker for me is for the FD not to have a sunroof (so any R1, R2 models are out for me luckily those are lowest production numbers) or have it be automatic, other than that I can work with any year. But given how rare well maintained FD’s are these days I’d first look for the cleanest, well kept FD out there (with a sunroof ha ha) no matter what year it is.
02-16-11, 08:38 AM
#23
If I'm not 100% if this is the only way, but, if the redline is different on the gauge it could be an automatic gauge cluster. Which would say to me that it is potentially an auto to manual swap. and that would open up all sorts of questions about the quality of the swap, etc. My auto is red starting 7K, (like the 94-95 gauge cluster shown above) the Manual should be red starting 7.5K (like the 93 shown above) make sure you look at this because it could be a big clue if it doesn't correspond.
