Does 500 rwhp make an FD more enjoyable to drive? (13b only)
Howard, what is your experience on track with 20b powered FDs? My contention is that the 13b is not well suited to track (or mountain road) use because the power delivery of a single turbo FD is simply too peaky/narrow and difficult to manage, regardless of what turbo(s) you're using. One of the guys from this forum I spoke to years ago with a well set-up single turbo said he simply couldn't compete with Porsches at VIR for this reason, and he sold the car.
It's not just the peak number, it's how the engine gets to that number....especially in light weight vehicles
It's not just the peak number, it's how the engine gets to that number....especially in light weight vehicles
If you think your car is too peaky/narrow to use effectively at the track, your probably not pushing the car hard enough and keeping the revs up.
thewird
Thread Starter
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
From: NC
30 YEARS OF ROTARY POWER
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: NEWMARKET,ONTARIO CANADA
I have seen him ( the Wired) race with others, for instance, he raced with a viper, a 997 GT3 and a twin turbo @ Mosport and at other tracks in Ontario. He has one of the fastest and well sorted RX-7 in the GTA area. Killer RX-7
Last edited by rx7rocks; Oct 31, 2010 at 01:27 AM. Reason: had to add details
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 538
From: Another state obliterated by leftists
Those rigidity numbers posted earlier only tell part of the story - they're the bending part, but what about the torsional? Convertibles can be great at one, but not necessarily the other, no?
By the way, when going from my 8 to the 7 in back-to-back drives, the chassis stiffness is night and day (i.e. the 8 feeling at least twice as stiff), and really makes the 7 - hate to say it - a bit antiquated, and has me wondering why they came up so short in that respect despite the fact that there's over a decade's time in one debut vs the other's. The year we bought the 7 I also took out a new NSX and thought its rigidity was a lot better than our cars, yet its #s on paper are supposedly very close. Go figure.
By the way, when going from my 8 to the 7 in back-to-back drives, the chassis stiffness is night and day (i.e. the 8 feeling at least twice as stiff), and really makes the 7 - hate to say it - a bit antiquated, and has me wondering why they came up so short in that respect despite the fact that there's over a decade's time in one debut vs the other's. The year we bought the 7 I also took out a new NSX and thought its rigidity was a lot better than our cars, yet its #s on paper are supposedly very close. Go figure.
Thread Starter
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
From: NC
http://hondas2000.org/item_details.php?ID=32
In order to achieve the desired level of frame stiffness, Honda engineers designed a new monocoque body with a centralized backbone frame for the S2000. This backbone tunnel is enclosed by the floor and runs down the center of the cockpit, between the driver's and passenger's seat. Large side sills provide additional strength. Diagonally braced front and rear bulkheads contribute to tying the frame members together into a strong beam-like structure that resists bending and torsional forces. Crossmembers running under the driver's and passenger's seat add additional stiffness.
The front and rear portions of the central frame and the side sills tie into diagonal braces (X-braces) at the rear of the cockpit and at the front cowl. These X-members connect directly to the front and rear suspension subframes.
Despite the front subframe's lightweight and compactness, its overall lateral rigidity is quite high. In addition, the engine mount structure has been designed so as to minimize the effect of lateral movement in the frame, when cornering.
The rear subframe is a three-dimensional structure consisting of hollow steel pipes that connect the rear side members and floor tunnel to the upper and lower arms of the rear suspension. A deep-section, rear crossmember ties the beams together and anchors the rear of the differential.
The front and rear portions of the central frame and the side sills tie into diagonal braces (X-braces) at the rear of the cockpit and at the front cowl. These X-members connect directly to the front and rear suspension subframes.
Despite the front subframe's lightweight and compactness, its overall lateral rigidity is quite high. In addition, the engine mount structure has been designed so as to minimize the effect of lateral movement in the frame, when cornering.
The rear subframe is a three-dimensional structure consisting of hollow steel pipes that connect the rear side members and floor tunnel to the upper and lower arms of the rear suspension. A deep-section, rear crossmember ties the beams together and anchors the rear of the differential.
By the way, when going from my 8 to the 7 in back-to-back drives, the chassis stiffness is night and day (i.e. the 8 feeling at least twice as stiff), and really makes the 7 - hate to say it - a bit antiquated
Last edited by no_more_rice; Oct 31, 2010 at 02:00 AM.
30 YEARS OF ROTARY POWER
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: NEWMARKET,ONTARIO CANADA
Hay, No More Rice, have you ever been in a well sorted out Rx-7 with a good single combo suspension set up? If you have, you would be agreeing with me. RX-7 all the way 100%
FYI, I don't run street tires at the track either, I run 275 Hoosier R6's. Also, my car is setup more for the track, then it is for the street. For example I run 900 pound springs on the front and 1000 pound springs on the rear.
If you want me to prove it, come to Mosport next year and bring your production Porche of your choice. If you can keep up or even outrun me, I will gladly pay for your track day here. You can even put track tires on if you'd like, won't matter.
thewird
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
Road and tracks professional driver in a 997 GT3 on the VIR Grand E course was timed at around 3.02 on michelin cup tires which are basically the equivalent of hoosier R6s. My FD on staggard 2 year old toyo r888s ran a 3.00 with a passenger in the seat in traffic. Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHw6gEWWZYM
With non staggard wheels on R6s along with no passenger or traffic conservatively speaking it has 2.57 in it.
My FD is making no more than 350 rwhp more like 330 and weighs 2800 with me in the seat. It's a fairly well sorted track car but could be lower and run a front splitter etc....
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201588
Any car can be fast around a road course *if* you put the money and/or time into it. The main thing about a GT3 is that it's great "out of the box". Yes, you pay for it... However for someone looking for a great track car which can be driven on the street and not turn a wrench getting it there; that would be a GT3 without a doubt. What it takes to turn an FD into a track beast makes it not so much fun on public streets, not that it can't be done...
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
For the record it looks like professionally driven GT class cars (gt3 cup cars) run low 1.20s at mosport and well driven GT3 997s run similar times to the wirds so his car is indeed as fast as a 997 GT3.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
Any car can be fast around a road course *if* you put the money and/or time into it. The main thing about a GT3 is that it's great "out of the box". Yes, you pay for it... However for someone looking for a great track car which can be driven on the street and not turn a wrench getting it there; that would be a GT3 without a doubt. What it takes to turn an FD into a track beast makes it not so much fun on public streets, not that it can't be done...
Would I rather own and drive a GT3 of course but the FD is a good choice for us poor cheap bastards who want to go fast in a car that's just as fun or questionably more fun to drive.
The overall bang for the buck in the FD is in a class by itself.
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,279
Likes: 728
From: Florence, Alabama
based on my FD ontrack experience (four Ferrari Club of North America events at Brainerd) which is admittedly thin compared to my real racing experience (22 SCCA NAT seasons) i enthusiastically second everything theweird posts in 162 and 170.
i really haven't spent alot of time on relative chassis rigidity... i do know how the FD works ontrack, and i know why. it is the suspension, weight & weight distribution. almost 2 degrees negative camber gain on bump. i could go on. and on. and have. see my thread in the suspension section for the details... bring your lunch as there are 743 posts.
if you want the why just read post one.
getting back to the end result. the FD is a track monster if properly setup and Fritz is so right about what you need to blow just about anything away. when i did the 4 Ferrari Club deals my car had a Pettit motor which was very close to stock w stock turbos. i did run racegas. i ran 15 psi. in four years not one car at the event touched me. and this is at Brainerd which has a 6000 foot straight. the years were 2000-2004.
Vipers, Corvettes, Porsches, Lambos, Ferrari Cup cars on R tires... the car that gave me the closest run was a 944 Porsche w a neat 4 point rollbar and a monster KKK turbo. initially, there were a couple spots on the track where he could make time on me. i readjusted my camber and in the next session his car sort of (very) slowly shrunk in my mirror.
which makes the point that alot of going fast is about balance. the 944, like the FD, is a front engine rear drive car which is the easiest setup to drive fast. front engine rear drive cars are happiest at approx 54% rear weight. the 944 located the gearbox in the rear to that end. (my FD has 53% rear weight) 911 variants suffer from 60+% rear weight w a great deal of it behind the rear axle!
bad polar moment = hello Armco.
speaking of polar moment, during that same event there was a tricked out 911
(i lump them all together as there are a zillion varieties) that was a number of ticks behind my car and the 944. we elected to pass on the final sunday session and the 911 apparently felt he could run just a little faster... after a couple of laps he didn't re-appear.
he ended up in the woods outside of turn two. which is flat fast (120+). just the spot you do not want to screw up. he did walk away though his car was close to a total writeoff.
part of going fast is having a chassis that will talk to you and tell you where you are when you are near the limit. high polar moment muffles the talk.
lap times should not be about, "do i feel lucky?" if your car seems to have a mind of it's own you have the wrong setup.
fast laps are also about brakes. here again thewird is 100% correct
"Stock brakes do not belong on the track"
put any pads on stock sized FD front rotors and i will be out of brakes in one lap. the stock rotor mass might work for a Miata but not the FD with it's immense speed through the corners. if you get along w your stock front rotors you aren't anywhere near going fast.
this is not to say you can't have one of the best days of your life w your stock braked FD... there is nothing wrong w not being the fastest guy on track. in fact, as the fisherman like to say it is better to have fished and lost than never to have fished at all.
back more to the thread's theme i just want to make one comment about 500 real SAE hp...
i find the more you hp you have the less you tend to use it on the street. (maybe that's a good thing) the FD w 500 is just so fast there becomes less places to use it. of course a boost adjustment can pretty much solve that problem.
"overall bang for the buck in the FD is in a class by itself. " agree. thanks Mazda for the FD.
hc
i really haven't spent alot of time on relative chassis rigidity... i do know how the FD works ontrack, and i know why. it is the suspension, weight & weight distribution. almost 2 degrees negative camber gain on bump. i could go on. and on. and have. see my thread in the suspension section for the details... bring your lunch as there are 743 posts.
if you want the why just read post one.
getting back to the end result. the FD is a track monster if properly setup and Fritz is so right about what you need to blow just about anything away. when i did the 4 Ferrari Club deals my car had a Pettit motor which was very close to stock w stock turbos. i did run racegas. i ran 15 psi. in four years not one car at the event touched me. and this is at Brainerd which has a 6000 foot straight. the years were 2000-2004.
Vipers, Corvettes, Porsches, Lambos, Ferrari Cup cars on R tires... the car that gave me the closest run was a 944 Porsche w a neat 4 point rollbar and a monster KKK turbo. initially, there were a couple spots on the track where he could make time on me. i readjusted my camber and in the next session his car sort of (very) slowly shrunk in my mirror.
which makes the point that alot of going fast is about balance. the 944, like the FD, is a front engine rear drive car which is the easiest setup to drive fast. front engine rear drive cars are happiest at approx 54% rear weight. the 944 located the gearbox in the rear to that end. (my FD has 53% rear weight) 911 variants suffer from 60+% rear weight w a great deal of it behind the rear axle!
bad polar moment = hello Armco.
speaking of polar moment, during that same event there was a tricked out 911
(i lump them all together as there are a zillion varieties) that was a number of ticks behind my car and the 944. we elected to pass on the final sunday session and the 911 apparently felt he could run just a little faster... after a couple of laps he didn't re-appear.
he ended up in the woods outside of turn two. which is flat fast (120+). just the spot you do not want to screw up. he did walk away though his car was close to a total writeoff.
part of going fast is having a chassis that will talk to you and tell you where you are when you are near the limit. high polar moment muffles the talk.
lap times should not be about, "do i feel lucky?" if your car seems to have a mind of it's own you have the wrong setup.
fast laps are also about brakes. here again thewird is 100% correct
"Stock brakes do not belong on the track"
put any pads on stock sized FD front rotors and i will be out of brakes in one lap. the stock rotor mass might work for a Miata but not the FD with it's immense speed through the corners. if you get along w your stock front rotors you aren't anywhere near going fast.
this is not to say you can't have one of the best days of your life w your stock braked FD... there is nothing wrong w not being the fastest guy on track. in fact, as the fisherman like to say it is better to have fished and lost than never to have fished at all.
back more to the thread's theme i just want to make one comment about 500 real SAE hp...
i find the more you hp you have the less you tend to use it on the street. (maybe that's a good thing) the FD w 500 is just so fast there becomes less places to use it. of course a boost adjustment can pretty much solve that problem.
"overall bang for the buck in the FD is in a class by itself. " agree. thanks Mazda for the FD.
hc
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
based on my FD ontrack experience (four Ferrari Club of North America events at Brainerd) which is admittedly thin compared to my real racing experience (22 SCCA NAT seasons) i enthusiastically second everything theweird posts in 162 and 170.
i really haven't spent alot of time on relative chassis rigidity... i do know how the FD works ontrack, and i know why. it is the suspension, weight & weight distribution. almost 2 degrees negative camber gain on bump. i could go on. and on. and have. see my thread in the suspension section for the details... bring your lunch as there are 743 posts.
if you want the why just read post one.
getting back to the end result. the FD is a track monster if properly setup and Fritz is so right about what you need to blow just about anything away. when i did the 4 Ferrari Club deals my car had a Pettit motor which was very close to stock w stock turbos. i did run racegas. i ran 15 psi. in four years not one car at the event touched me. and this is at Brainerd which has a 6000 foot straight. the years were 2000-2004.
Vipers, Corvettes, Porsches, Lambos, Ferrari Cup cars on R tires... the car that gave me the closest run was a 944 Porsche w a neat 4 point rollbar and a monster KKK turbo. initially, there were a couple spots on the track where he could make time on me. i readjusted my camber and in the next session his car sort of (very) slowly shrunk in my mirror.
which makes the point that alot of going fast is about balance. the 944, like the FD, is a front engine rear drive car which is the easiest setup to drive fast. front engine rear drive cars are happiest at approx 54% rear weight. the 944 located the gearbox in the rear to that end. (my FD has 53% rear weight) 911 variants suffer from 60+% rear weight w a great deal of it behind the rear axle!
bad polar moment = hello Armco.
speaking of polar moment, during that same event there was a tricked out 911
(i lump them all together as there are a zillion varieties) that was a number of ticks behind my car and the 944. we elected to pass on the final sunday session and the 911 apparently felt he could run just a little faster... after a couple of laps he didn't re-appear.
he ended up in the woods outside of turn two. which is flat fast (120+). just the spot you do not want to screw up. he did walk away though his car was close to a total writeoff.
part of going fast is having a chassis that will talk to you and tell you where you are when you are near the limit. high polar moment muffles the talk.
lap times should not be about, "do i feel lucky?" if your car seems to have a mind of it's own you have the wrong setup.
fast laps are also about brakes. here again thewird is 100% correct
"Stock brakes do not belong on the track"
put any pads on stock sized FD front rotors and i will be out of brakes in one lap. the stock rotor mass might work for a Miata but not the FD with it's immense speed through the corners. if you get along w your stock front rotors you aren't anywhere near going fast.
this is not to say you can't have one of the best days of your life w your stock braked FD... there is nothing wrong w not being the fastest guy on track. in fact, as the fisherman like to say it is better to have fished and lost than never to have fished at all.
back more to the thread's theme i just want to make one comment about 500 real SAE hp...
i find the more you hp you have the less you tend to use it on the street. (maybe that's a good thing) the FD w 500 is just so fast there becomes less places to use it. of course a boost adjustment can pretty much solve that problem.
"overall bang for the buck in the FD is in a class by itself. " agree. thanks Mazda for the FD.
hc
i really haven't spent alot of time on relative chassis rigidity... i do know how the FD works ontrack, and i know why. it is the suspension, weight & weight distribution. almost 2 degrees negative camber gain on bump. i could go on. and on. and have. see my thread in the suspension section for the details... bring your lunch as there are 743 posts.
if you want the why just read post one.
getting back to the end result. the FD is a track monster if properly setup and Fritz is so right about what you need to blow just about anything away. when i did the 4 Ferrari Club deals my car had a Pettit motor which was very close to stock w stock turbos. i did run racegas. i ran 15 psi. in four years not one car at the event touched me. and this is at Brainerd which has a 6000 foot straight. the years were 2000-2004.
Vipers, Corvettes, Porsches, Lambos, Ferrari Cup cars on R tires... the car that gave me the closest run was a 944 Porsche w a neat 4 point rollbar and a monster KKK turbo. initially, there were a couple spots on the track where he could make time on me. i readjusted my camber and in the next session his car sort of (very) slowly shrunk in my mirror.
which makes the point that alot of going fast is about balance. the 944, like the FD, is a front engine rear drive car which is the easiest setup to drive fast. front engine rear drive cars are happiest at approx 54% rear weight. the 944 located the gearbox in the rear to that end. (my FD has 53% rear weight) 911 variants suffer from 60+% rear weight w a great deal of it behind the rear axle!
bad polar moment = hello Armco.
speaking of polar moment, during that same event there was a tricked out 911
(i lump them all together as there are a zillion varieties) that was a number of ticks behind my car and the 944. we elected to pass on the final sunday session and the 911 apparently felt he could run just a little faster... after a couple of laps he didn't re-appear.
he ended up in the woods outside of turn two. which is flat fast (120+). just the spot you do not want to screw up. he did walk away though his car was close to a total writeoff.
part of going fast is having a chassis that will talk to you and tell you where you are when you are near the limit. high polar moment muffles the talk.
lap times should not be about, "do i feel lucky?" if your car seems to have a mind of it's own you have the wrong setup.
fast laps are also about brakes. here again thewird is 100% correct
"Stock brakes do not belong on the track"
put any pads on stock sized FD front rotors and i will be out of brakes in one lap. the stock rotor mass might work for a Miata but not the FD with it's immense speed through the corners. if you get along w your stock front rotors you aren't anywhere near going fast.
this is not to say you can't have one of the best days of your life w your stock braked FD... there is nothing wrong w not being the fastest guy on track. in fact, as the fisherman like to say it is better to have fished and lost than never to have fished at all.
back more to the thread's theme i just want to make one comment about 500 real SAE hp...
i find the more you hp you have the less you tend to use it on the street. (maybe that's a good thing) the FD w 500 is just so fast there becomes less places to use it. of course a boost adjustment can pretty much solve that problem.
"overall bang for the buck in the FD is in a class by itself. " agree. thanks Mazda for the FD.
hc
You seriously have no idea how good an FD is
Road and tracks professional driver in a 997 GT3 on the VIR Grand E course was timed at around 3.02 on michelin cup tires which are basically the equivalent of hoosier R6s. My FD on staggard 2 year old toyo r888s ran a 3.00 with a passenger in the seat in traffic. Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHw6gEWWZYM
With non staggard wheels on R6s along with no passenger or traffic conservatively speaking it has 2.57 in it.
My FD is making no more than 350 rwhp more like 330 and weighs 2800 with me in the seat. It's a fairly well sorted track car but could be lower and run a front splitter etc....
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201588
Road and tracks professional driver in a 997 GT3 on the VIR Grand E course was timed at around 3.02 on michelin cup tires which are basically the equivalent of hoosier R6s. My FD on staggard 2 year old toyo r888s ran a 3.00 with a passenger in the seat in traffic. Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHw6gEWWZYM
With non staggard wheels on R6s along with no passenger or traffic conservatively speaking it has 2.57 in it.
My FD is making no more than 350 rwhp more like 330 and weighs 2800 with me in the seat. It's a fairly well sorted track car but could be lower and run a front splitter etc....
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201588
I can't remember the last time I had some alone sessions at Mosport, there always seems to be someone with helmet in hand in the pit area wanting a ride >.<
thewird
Thread Starter
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
From: NC
Anyway, he talks like a punk, so I have a hard time taking him seriously. A real racer doesn't talk about "making fools of" other cars and similar jr. high windbag nonsense.
I was actually talking to one of the guys at Flying Lizard Motorsports a few weeks ago(before the season was over) and they said their only advantage over the Ferrari's, BMW's, and vettes was their braking. In every other aspect they were slightly slower. They attributed winning the drivers championship(again) to smart driving and great pit work.
By the way, when going from my 8 to the 7 in back-to-back drives, the chassis stiffness is night and day (i.e. the 8 feeling at least twice as stiff), and really makes the 7 - hate to say it - a bit antiquated, and has me wondering why they came up so short in that respect despite the fact that there's over a decade's time in one debut vs the other's.
~S~
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,837
Likes: 3,234
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
I was actually talking to one of the guys at Flying Lizard Motorsports a few weeks ago(before the season was over) and they said their only advantage over the Ferrari's, BMW's, and vettes was their braking. In every other aspect they were slightly slower. They attributed winning the drivers championship(again) to smart driving and great pit work.
by contrast the ESR (sports racer) cars are usually faster, but they break when they hit bumps
in the 2009 25, the ESR in the picture was fast enough to be in the lead early on, but they hit a bump and broke the chassis in the middle of the night, and our non vtec honda beat it by over 60 laps. and our car had its share of problems too
Fritz... You say, "of course I would rather own and drive a 997 GT3". Why? Its not at all clear to me that a well set up FD is not as fast or faster and for similar or less dollars. As I see newer cars coming out, I notice that much of the advances have been in computer assists and not in suspension geometry. No doubt the FD does not have the aid of the newer computerized traction control, but its suspension was and remains the peak of the art. I don't think there are many, if any, modern sports cars with a more advanced suspension design than the FD. Howard points to the 2 degrees of negative camber pickup through the arc of travel, as a case in point.
If you want to further improve the FD's handling, you can get one of the more advanced aftermarket computers that offer a variety of traction control systems. If you are saying the Porsche cabin is a nicer place to steer from, you need to drive my car... Just as you can make the FD's drivetrain strong enough to compete with the Porsche on the track, you can redo the interior to be as nice as well.
Also, in regard to everyone's favorite Porsche, I haven't driven the newest one, but all the 911's I have ever driven require such a different and unnatural driving style that I find it less appealing than the best front engined rear drive cars. You really can't drive them through the corners. You use the phenomenal braking to late brake in deep and then stop. You then accelerate out hard, which works incredibly well with the engine located behind the rear axle. Not my cuppa tea. Now, I know they've softened a lot of that behavior over the years, but anyone who has never driven a Porsche will still find this unsettling. Its not as bad as the older Porsche's counterintuitive mid corner behavior where you have to accelerate harder to tighten your line and cannot let off without risk of spinning.
I modified and keep and drive my car, because I like it more than anything else, although I do love my E30 M3 almost as much... I wish more of you had a chance to drive my naturally aspirated 20b car. I think it would stop anyone from wanting a GT3.
Gordon
If you want to further improve the FD's handling, you can get one of the more advanced aftermarket computers that offer a variety of traction control systems. If you are saying the Porsche cabin is a nicer place to steer from, you need to drive my car... Just as you can make the FD's drivetrain strong enough to compete with the Porsche on the track, you can redo the interior to be as nice as well.
Also, in regard to everyone's favorite Porsche, I haven't driven the newest one, but all the 911's I have ever driven require such a different and unnatural driving style that I find it less appealing than the best front engined rear drive cars. You really can't drive them through the corners. You use the phenomenal braking to late brake in deep and then stop. You then accelerate out hard, which works incredibly well with the engine located behind the rear axle. Not my cuppa tea. Now, I know they've softened a lot of that behavior over the years, but anyone who has never driven a Porsche will still find this unsettling. Its not as bad as the older Porsche's counterintuitive mid corner behavior where you have to accelerate harder to tighten your line and cannot let off without risk of spinning.
I modified and keep and drive my car, because I like it more than anything else, although I do love my E30 M3 almost as much... I wish more of you had a chance to drive my naturally aspirated 20b car. I think it would stop anyone from wanting a GT3.
Gordon
Gordon,
Unless its somewhere I have already missed can you post some pics of your interior. Thanks.
Brad
https://www.rx7club.com/members/gmonsen-1180-albums-ancient-one-s-naturally-aspirated-3-rotor-141/
Thank you sir. We have similar thoughts. I am looking at doing a diamond pattern in the centers of the seats (tan) and covering the dash, doors and plastics in leather. Black parts maybe black suede, but I am up in the air on that one. Still in the works of my plan before starting this winter.
Sorry for going off track.
Sorry for going off track.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: Texas
i got my FD somewhere at 380-400whp @ 15psi boost (havent dyno'd numbers are guesstimation). its single turbo and i still enjoy the car greatly. i never rode in a twin turbo FD before but i can see why guys prefer the twins because of that quick response. it hasnt become less user friendly to where its unbearable just a bitch to start when its cold.
anyway so far havin the car the way it is with coilovers and more race-like set up hasnt detracted the experience for me. after getting my car tuned this past summer (thanks BDC!) it drives really nice in regular traffic and under boost is pretty much demonic out there.
i guess to answer the topic's question its a matter of preference. i understand what i got, its not a luxury car by any means nor is it meant to give me the comfort on the move like my DD does when i go to work/class. if im gonna drive my FD its going to be invigorating, raw, and give me my andrenaline fix. if i want to just cruise, the car can do it too and i dont mind feeling every bump on the road. i can relax and just drive the car normally, but the DD of course is more suited for that. i know my car's not in the 500whp club, but its heavily modified beyond stock so that should count for something (which includes an alky control AI kit).
anyway so far havin the car the way it is with coilovers and more race-like set up hasnt detracted the experience for me. after getting my car tuned this past summer (thanks BDC!) it drives really nice in regular traffic and under boost is pretty much demonic out there.
i guess to answer the topic's question its a matter of preference. i understand what i got, its not a luxury car by any means nor is it meant to give me the comfort on the move like my DD does when i go to work/class. if im gonna drive my FD its going to be invigorating, raw, and give me my andrenaline fix. if i want to just cruise, the car can do it too and i dont mind feeling every bump on the road. i can relax and just drive the car normally, but the DD of course is more suited for that. i know my car's not in the 500whp club, but its heavily modified beyond stock so that should count for something (which includes an alky control AI kit).