jimtieri

I own a 1993 VR R1 with 40k miles. The car is basically stock, with the exception of a PWR aluminum rad and a aluminum AST replacement. I've done a bunch of maintenance stuff, i.e., belts, hoses, synth in gear boxes, stereo. The car runs great, basically, and I know it came from a good home. My question is I have an opportunity to get a '94 R2 that is completely stock with 40k miles for trade and some $$$ (maybe $5k). Any thoughts?

rynberg

The only difference is a slightly softer suspension, along with the minor 94 year upgrades. If you have a clean, good running car, I don't know why you would want to change.....

KaiFD3S

iTrader: (37)

just keep your car.....no point in changing...unless your getting it for the passenger side airbag

adam c

iTrader: (2)

How long have you owned your car? If you have had it for a long time, then you know how it has been treated and maintained.

Why will you get money from the trade? Is the other car in poorer condition than yours? How long has the other owner had the car?

If you are convinced that the cars are equally maintained, and both are in in similar condition, I would do the trade, and take the extra $5K. I think the 94 is a slightly nicer car ....... if everything else is equal.

alberto_mg

Keep your car. At least you know what you got.

jimtieri

I would have to pay money, not get money back. I've owned the car for almost 3 years, and bought it from a couple in their fifties that babied it. I'm 42, and want to keep it forever-that's why I'm wondering if it would be worthwile. It's my 3rd rx-7- I've owned a 1st gen and a 2nd gen.

95R2-89TII Ground Zero

Biggest difference is the R2 suspension, the difference in ABS, dual oil coolers, and the fact that the 93 paint sucked. Keep your car.

FDNewbie

iTrader: (10)

I'm w/ the other guys about at least you know what the problems are in the car you currently own. If that's not an issue, however, I'd def. go for the 94s. Better paint, better texture, some minor impovements (that didn't necessitate recalls), plus, it's got one less year of abuse on it haha. Oh and everyone and their grandmothers goes for 93 R1s to paint 'em CYM. The 94 R2s, there were only 156 of each color made (red, black, and silver)

95R2-89TII Ground Zero

The 95R2, there were only 16 silver and 18 black.

FDNewbie

iTrader: (10)

And 18 red.

But I didn't bother w/ that cuz a) I'd NEVER modify one of those, and B) I'd never be able to find one lol

areXseven

iTrader: (1)

...............
93-R1 Model - Manual Transmission
Competition Yellow Mica 350
Brilliant Black 638
Vintage Red 1177

Total----------------------------> 2,165


94-R2 Model - Manual Transmission
Silver Stone 83
Brilliant Black 156
Vintage Red 156

Total-------------------------> 395

jimtieri

Paint's not an issue-it was painted by original owners as part of a Mazda fess-up. Seems Mazda knew the paint sucked, so in some instances (mine) they repainted the car. My paint is great for an 11 year old car.

alberto_mg

if you have to pay money for it, then its probably not worth it.

if you want to invest in something, try stocks, house, education...

Nick13B

94' and up had more durable interiors then the 93's

MAVrick

keep your car, it is obviously a good one. Spend the $5k on a downpipe, air box, PFC and maybe some new suspension

lopedl

iTrader: (1)

Keep your car, because you know it, and on top of that If both cares are in fairly the same shape I don't think the 94 is worth an additional $5k on top of yours.

SVT Squasher

I have to agree. 5k for a unknowm factor (being knowing your car -v- not knowing the other) just isent worth it. If you have a great running FD I would keep like that. What more would you want?