respect_the_rotor

Im looking into buying an fd and was wondering if the later versions of the 13BREW (the ones built after '95) are more reliable than the ones built from '93 to '95. I previosly owned an non-turbo fc (S5) and loved how I could hit the 8K redline constantly without worry. Any help or links would be appreciated. Thanks.

Mahjik

iTrader: (1)

The engine core is the same. The components around it changed but not a whole lot. If reliable is something you need, look at a 4-door sedan. If you want a pure sports car and everything that comes with it (including maintenance), the FD is for you.

RoninX

...simply beautiful.

SomeGuy_sg

http://www.rx7.net.nz/newrx7.htm

You can read up about the later 13B-REW engines there ...

weaklink

that was some great reading, thanks!

oneflytrini

iTrader: (1)

:

jimlab

There is a pure sports car without the maintenance. It's called a Z06.

1987RX7guy

iTrader: (3)

Its not 10+ years old yet. Wait a while.....

Xeros

FOR SURE HAHAH! Because we all knwo just how well an american car lasts.....

oneflytrini

iTrader: (1)

That would be a nice battle, a 99' FD against a Z06.

TT_Rex_7

A pure sports car has leaf springs in the back?! (Besides the upcoming Z06)

-Alex

RoninX

"it may only have leaf springs but so did Charlton Heston's chariot, and look at the fun he had!"

jimlab

Thanks for the laugh, guys. Usually you'd have to go to a backwoods tavern (or the Lounge) to find this much ignorance and misinformation in one place.

John Magnuson

Instead of coil springs like the FD the vette uses a transverse leaf spring. So yes... it does have a "leaf springs" but it's not anything like the leaf springs you see on old cars or trucks. It's actually a nice system. I prefer a coilover but saying that the vette is bad because it has "leaf springs" means you either don't understand the vette suspension or you're just looking for any excuse to make it look bad.

Section8

iTrader: (6)

This is what I was thinking. I love my FD, but you can't argue with the performance abilities of a Z06 if you've had ANY experience with one.

jimlab

A composite monoleaf spring, to be exact.





Not to mention having the ability to raise or lower the car by about 2.5" for free...

TT_Rex_7

I just left it in a general term. I never stated that it was same suspension setup as a truck/suv. I also never stated that the setup is "bad." The whole point was since when did "pure sports cars" have a leaf spring setup in general?! I've owned a vette in the past and loved it, so in no way did I express any sort of an excuse to make them look bad. However, I don't feel that the corvette, or rx7 for that matter, are "pure sports car" icons.

-Alex

1SxyRXy

I wish i could afford a z06 instead of my fd

John Magnuson

The FD not a pure sports car? Wow you have tough criteria! Only into the classics?

TT_Rex_7

I said neither are an "icon" IMO. Well, atleast in the states. I'd prlly say that the rx7 is an icon in Japan. In the states, i'm not really sure what i'd consider a "pure sports car." I guess i'd have to say a Shelby 427 Cobra, and the Shelby Cobra coupe.

-Alex

Edit: You know what?! I probably WOULD have to say vettes are a "pure sports car" icon here in the states. I can't really think of any other cars like it when they came out. Granted the first model wasn't all that great, but from then on, they really progressed and set themselves apart. However, I do feel that they are missing certain aspects in what I beleive a "pure sports car" should have. The new C6 Z06 is taking care of that though!

jimlab

Since when does the arrangement or type of suspension have anything to do with a car being a pure sports car?

And for the second time, the Corvette does not have leaf springs. I find it difficult to take your opinion seriously when you don't appear to know what you're talking about.

Were you aware that the original AC Shelby Cobra had leaf springs?

So what else was in 1953?

With what? More horsepower? It's little more than a styling change away from the C5 Z06, with the exception of the engine. Is more horsepower all it takes to make it a pure sports car in your opinion?

TT_Rex_7

The arrangement and type of suspension has alot to do with being a sports car. Some suspension setups are better than others, and I wouldn't say that monoleaf setup would be the best. The corvette handles GREAT, but I think we can all agree that it could handle even better with minor changes.

It's not like a conventional leaf spring setup found on an SUV/truck, but it's still a leaf spring. You can call it the correct name, composite monoleaf spring, if you'd like, but it's STILL a leaf spring. It's even found in the name!

To be honost, I really didn't think about it. I know you have the option of an independent suspension with the replicas, so I took it for granite that it was an option from the factory. However, I feel that the Shelby is considered a sports car due to having the bare minimal accessories. You won't find an A/C, power windows, ect. ect. from the factory. Not sure if you can place those items in the replicas' though?!

Did they even have any other suspension setups besides leaf springs back then?!

I don't quite understand the meaning of that statement/question?!

I ment the statement to mean that the C6 Z06 is taking care of certain aspects that I feel the C5 is missing. Doesn't the Z06 feature a full independent suspension, and weight savings via carbon fiber hood and front fenders? I'd say that's taking a step forward from the C5 in making the car even better. As far as more horsepower, no, I'd say that the C5 has plenty of power as it is. However, more never hurts! I'd say if they took out the navigation, heated seats, power seats, and A/C, it'd definitly be considered a "pure sports car" IMO. I feel that a pure sports car should have the bare minimal of what's necessary, not leather seats, cup holders, ect. ect.

-Alex

1987RX7guy

iTrader: (3)

Really You want to compare cars with 100k miles to a new Z06 which costs over double the money than a USED FD, and most of the New Z06's have what? 10k miles on them if that!

Its not ignorance its reality and reasonable logic that a 14 year old design isn't going to be holding up as well as a brand new Z06 designed what? 3 years ago?

jimlab

Like what? No monoleaf spring?

So your definition of a true sports car has nothing to do with the suspension and more to do with having minimal accessories? So which is it?

You said the 1st gen. Corvette wasn't all that great. What are you comparing it to? Other sports cars from 1953, or today's sports cars? What's your basis for that statement?

Carbon fiber body panels and a Magnesium roof panel, but the 2004 commemorative Z06 had a carbon fiber hood, and all C5s, Z06 or otherwise, had "fully independent suspensions". All C4s too, for that matter.

Ah... a purist.

What's wrong with having a sports car with creature comforts? If your definition of having a true sports car is being uncomfortable and doing without things like power locks and windows, then you can have them.

jimlab

Wonderfully dramatic.

Many FDs still have far less than 100k miles on them, and the 2001 Z06s are now 5 years old and probably have plenty of miles of their own. Since the only real difference between a Z06 and a C5 Corvette is a few pounds (fixed roof) and the engine, you can start with the 1997 C5 Corvette, which is only a couple years newer than the last year for the FD, and would have plenty of miles by now. Let's compare apples to apples, shall we?

As far as purchase price, my 1995 PEP RX-7's sticker price was $41,400. With inflation, that's well into the high $40k/low $50k range. The sticker price on my 2002 Z06 Corvette was $49,600. Hardly a vast difference in price. Just because you can buy FDs for dirt cheap these days because the vast majority of them are in ****-poor shape doesn't make it an unfair comparison.

The C5 Corvette was on the design board several years before its release in 1997. A fair estimate is 2-3 years. So you were saying?