Does anyone else think the 99 front end looks bad
05-16-05, 10:30 PM
#26
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
Frequently my dad's stock-bodied R1 and my FD are parked next to each other in the driveway. There really is no comparison, functionally or aesthetically in my opinion. To each their own.....
05-16-05, 10:31 PM
#27
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GoodfellaFD3S
Frequently my dad's stock-bodied R1 and my FD are parked next to each other in the driveway. There really is no comparison, functionally or aesthetically in my opinion. To each their own.....
Car. I mean.
05-16-05, 11:05 PM
#30
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
Originally Posted by Fd3BOOST
The '99 **** sucks ***. The ''93 bumper is increasingly rare and way better to look at if you ask me. Trends suck. Im glad everyone else follows them.
05-17-05, 07:36 AM
#33
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paraphrased from the DMRH website
A common problem with the series-6/7 (92-98) was the intake setup. One duct would provide outside air to both intercooler and air box. When pushed, the airbox would suck all the available air leaving nothing for the intercooler. Intake temperatures would rise, and most owners would know "that fading feeling" after just a few minutes of hard driving wondering where all the power went. To solve this Mazda engineers separated the two intakes (in 99+) providing ductwork for the air intake at the letterbox slot in the license plate mount. The end result allows an 80% increase in intercooler airflow reaping obvious rewards.
Are you guys talking about genuine Mazda fronts or copies of it.
Regardless of how it looks it should make your cars run better (unless, of course, you have a FMIC)
A common problem with the series-6/7 (92-98) was the intake setup. One duct would provide outside air to both intercooler and air box. When pushed, the airbox would suck all the available air leaving nothing for the intercooler. Intake temperatures would rise, and most owners would know "that fading feeling" after just a few minutes of hard driving wondering where all the power went. To solve this Mazda engineers separated the two intakes (in 99+) providing ductwork for the air intake at the letterbox slot in the license plate mount. The end result allows an 80% increase in intercooler airflow reaping obvious rewards.
Are you guys talking about genuine Mazda fronts or copies of it.
Regardless of how it looks it should make your cars run better (unless, of course, you have a FMIC)
05-17-05, 08:09 AM
#34
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
Originally Posted by huskerdu
Paraphrased from the DMRH website
A common problem with the series-6/7 (92-98) was the intake setup. One duct would provide outside air to both intercooler and air box. When pushed, the airbox would suck all the available air leaving nothing for the intercooler. Intake temperatures would rise, and most owners would know "that fading feeling" after just a few minutes of hard driving wondering where all the power went. To solve this Mazda engineers separated the two intakes (in 99+) providing ductwork for the air intake at the letterbox slot in the license plate mount. The end result allows an 80% increase in intercooler airflow reaping obvious rewards.
Are you guys talking about genuine Mazda fronts or copies of it.
Regardless of how it looks it should make your cars run better (unless, of course, you have a FMIC)
A common problem with the series-6/7 (92-98) was the intake setup. One duct would provide outside air to both intercooler and air box. When pushed, the airbox would suck all the available air leaving nothing for the intercooler. Intake temperatures would rise, and most owners would know "that fading feeling" after just a few minutes of hard driving wondering where all the power went. To solve this Mazda engineers separated the two intakes (in 99+) providing ductwork for the air intake at the letterbox slot in the license plate mount. The end result allows an 80% increase in intercooler airflow reaping obvious rewards.
Are you guys talking about genuine Mazda fronts or copies of it.
Regardless of how it looks it should make your cars run better (unless, of course, you have a FMIC)
05-17-05, 08:42 AM
#35
Lives on the Forum
I think the '99 front is the only one other than stock that looks great. If I ever did a body kit I'd do the '99 front with the license frame shaved and the '99 wing. Other than that I will stick with my wingless base model with R1 lip 
The following users liked this post:
mkd (12-22-21)
05-17-05, 10:01 AM
#39
development
I would like it if I lived in a state that required front plates
I would like it if I was into body kits
I would want it if I liked FMIC
other than that, I don't like it. Rich's car looks good with it...nice rims and stock wing, Alan's car looks good with it...nice rims and no wing.
I would like it if I was into body kits
I would want it if I liked FMIC
other than that, I don't like it. Rich's car looks good with it...nice rims and stock wing, Alan's car looks good with it...nice rims and no wing.
05-17-05, 10:54 AM
#41
You guys are nutz. The plateless '99 is the best front end on the planet for this car. It's what Mazda should have done rather than tacking that brick on the front of it.... and the signal lights and larger openings are huge improvements. I just can't understand folks who say it looks "weird" without the plate brick. That's like saying a person looks weird without a horn coming out of their forehead... it's just completing the lines that SHOULD have been there before they tacked the box on. I guarantee you it was styled without it first, and then it was added later.... and it looks like it.
05-17-05, 11:45 AM
#43
2/4 wheel cornering fiend
Since this whole thread has been centered around opinions on the '99 front end's appearance, I thought I'd interject something more factual: Although the oil cooler openings are much larger on the '99 front end (which is undoubtedly a good thing), the radiator opening is actually smaller. Despite initial outward appearance, the height of the opening is only taller by 5mm or so, but it's over an inch shorter on each side. Does this make any difference to the radiator cooling aspects? Probably not, since it is an OEM design, after all. But I'm just wondering if anyone with a 99-spec front end out there who tracks their FD at HPD events has noticed any differences.
05-17-05, 12:15 PM
#44
Mazda's literature, and my observations would disagree... it's at least as large, if not a bit lager. Its a different shape, so it's larger and smaller in different places, but you can clearly see the left over plastic from to the OE nose in my picture... it's about the same width, because the interior space between the frame rails is only about that wide anyway, but its much thinner along the bottom, and is an improvement. Plus you can remove the subtray on the underpanel, and it appears to offer better flow to the lower part of the radiator. That subtray basically moives the the floor of the underpanel up significantly to meet the OE nose.
I've got them both in the garage.
I've tracked the car, and the temps were at least as stable if not better, and that's with as-yet unducted oil coolers. Remember also, that additional oil cooling (which this nose should provide in abundance) makes a significant difference in water temps.
I've got them both in the garage.
I've tracked the car, and the temps were at least as stable if not better, and that's with as-yet unducted oil coolers. Remember also, that additional oil cooling (which this nose should provide in abundance) makes a significant difference in water temps.
Originally Posted by Kento
Since this whole thread has been centered around opinions on the '99 front end's appearance, I thought I'd interject something more factual: Although the oil cooler openings are much larger on the '99 front end (which is undoubtedly a good thing), the radiator opening is actually smaller. Despite initial outward appearance, the height of the opening is only taller by 5mm or so, but it's over an inch shorter on each side. Does this make any difference to the radiator cooling aspects? Probably not, since it is an OEM design, after all. But I'm just wondering if anyone with a 99-spec front end out there who tracks their FD at HPD events has noticed any differences.
05-17-05, 12:20 PM
#45
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the 99 front end, but minus the lip, it looks dumb. I guess I'm alone in wanting that plate holder section, I actually like that too - less hassle from the cops.
05-17-05, 01:02 PM
#47
If the only two options for an opinion on the '99 front are 'bad' and 'good' then I can see how some might think it looks bad. If you allow for people to have a much wider opinion then I'd say few people would say it looks bad. There are some truly bad looking body kits for the FD, and the '99 is not one of them.
The license plate holder on the '99 does look slapped on, but if you have to have a front plate, the location is better than the '93 front because it blocks less of the radiator opening. If you don't need a front plate the '99 design is much cleaner without it.
Myself, I'm partial to all of the Mazda developed noses. I would say the GTC and '99 are the best, and the OEM (with R1 lip) is one step below those. I went with the GTC so I could get more air to the rad/oil coolers/intake/intercooler for track duty.
The license plate holder on the '99 does look slapped on, but if you have to have a front plate, the location is better than the '93 front because it blocks less of the radiator opening. If you don't need a front plate the '99 design is much cleaner without it.
Myself, I'm partial to all of the Mazda developed noses. I would say the GTC and '99 are the best, and the OEM (with R1 lip) is one step below those. I went with the GTC so I could get more air to the rad/oil coolers/intake/intercooler for track duty.
05-17-05, 03:28 PM
#50
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Coatesville, PA
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the '99 looks alright, i'd prefer the stock '93 style though.
If you cover up the popups & imagine the turnsignals as the headlights, reminds me of the rx-8.
If you cover up the popups & imagine the turnsignals as the headlights, reminds me of the rx-8.