Nateness

iTrader: (7)

I've been kind of lurking RX7 forums for a while now, trying to soak up as much as i can learn and i'm at the point where im close to selling my MR2 to buy a FD, but im also a little on the fence about it.

my current MR2 is highly modified, with the last version of the JDM turbo engine and is currently making roughly 230+ rwhp.. I love to drive touge type roads, though i do not "beat" on my cars.. I garage keep my cars and personally do routine maintanence often.

I was thinking of getting into FD's because they seem like a very nice and refined car, and since im getting to the point where i am spending large sums of money on my cars, i was wondering if i should change platforms from the MR2 to the FD.

Im wondering if anyone has any opinions on either the MR2 or FD? haha hopefully someone has something to say about the FD here... = )

djfamousa

The FD is a special car as you may already know. I've never had more fun driving a car before so I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

TracyRX7

If you like the MR2 get on the Lotus Elise waiting list and you'll have nice and refined along with similar but improved handling characteristics to your MR2. You'll also get the refinement of a new car and keep the bulletproof reliability of a Toyota motor (the Elise as you probably know runs the same motor as the Celica GT-S).

The FD is somewhat refined but the interior has many issues you'll spend time overcoming especially if you buy a '93. The clips that hold many of the platics pieces in place are now 11-13 years old and have become brittle. Almost every FD out there has at least one of them broken/loose (like the switch for the rearview mirrors, the passenger side window switch). The '93 interiors have issues with the plastic coating peeling and not looking very good after doing so. The R1/R2 seats fade, the Touring Leather seats all wear very bad on the driver side outside edge bolster (since you rub it pretty good every time you climb in/out of the car). You'll gain more space with the FD. I can fit 2 sets of golf clubs and a passenger still in the FD (though it is no Suburban, and if golf isn't your game, well you can fit enough luggage for a week(end) vacation for 2).

Exterior wise the body style of both the MR2 and the FD have held up very well. As with a car of that age you'll need a new paint job in almost all cases if it is still original. The Vintage Red seems to have the worst fading problems, YMMV.

For driving the MR2 and FD are distinctly different. The MR2 is a VERY twitchy, well balanced MR car (as you well know I'm sure). The FD is almost as twitchy, but very distinctly FR. In the MR2 where gassing the backend around results in a spin, the FD will allow you to get away with it through proper counter steering. They both accelerate, brake, and corner very well (this is what happens when Lotus or Mazda design a chassis). The FD has more potential to make HP and go faster than the MR2 due to a stronger aftermarket community and more research done on the platforms.

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

Thanks for the responses so far. Haha... i wish i was rich enough to afford the elise, but the FD seems to be a nice "next step" up.

How do people deal with the interior issues of a 93? can you just swap in a 94 or 95 interior later? ah... the clips... haha i know your guy's pain on that one.

I do love the feeling of the MR2... it is very nimble for it's weight... i play with the likes of miatas often. haha... though the MR2 can make you very nervous in the rain on highways... So the FD is twitchy too? or is that your way of saying nimble? = ) In the MR2, you have to start braking earlier into the apex of a corner, but you can get on the gas pretty hard once you're clear of the apex. Is this different with FD's?

In terms of balance, how would you rate the FD to the MR2? haha.. i have so many questions, but thanks everyone for being patient.

SpeedKing

iTrader: (4)

Check out this article:

http://www.fd3s.net/magazine_article...article02.html

The FD more or less owns the MR2 (and most everything else) in all categories.

scotty305

iTrader: (2)

This thread reminds me that I need to drive an MR2 turbo someday.

I wouldn't call the RX-7 twitchy, unless you modify the suspension without knowing what you're doing. It's not nearly as nimble as a Miata at 2nd & 3rd gear speeds, due to the weight difference. It's a ton of fun anyway, and the handling will be more forgiving than the MR2. In the RX-7, you'll only get surprised by oversteer if you stab the throttle mid-corner, or go in way too hot because you're not used to driving cars with this much power.

I'm no MR2 expert, but I think you'll be able to fit wider tires on the FD: I've got 245's all around, on stock suspension & wheels, no rubbing problems at all.


Don't take my word for it, test-drive everything you think you might be interested in. Your tastes may differ. In Washington, I'd advise looking into a Subaru because AWD is a ton of fun in the rain. I've heard from a few reliable sources that the WRX is going to be getting a 2.5L turbo powerplant for the '06 model year. That will make the current 2.0 turbo models cheaper to buy used, or you can get the latest greatest thing if you've got the cash.

-scott-

cruiser

To save up ?

No way, no way...

seafordguy

Do some searching on this site for reliability issues in the FD. That should be a key issue in this purchase. You will find that reliability can be a significant problem in the FD. There are very few FD's that have got more than 100k on the odomoter that are not on at least the second engine and most of them did not come real close to the 100k mark. There is lots of information out there with respect to what to look for when purchasing a 3rd gen RX7 including a lot of info in the FAQ section. Start there - it will really aid in your decision.

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

haha no.. i know full well the RX7 takes up the same or greater sums than what i've already spent so far. Trust me, im no stranger to droping in new engines that cost in excess of $4,500 in parts alone = )

Its true that you can stick much wider rubber on the RX7 than the MR2... 225's will rub in the front of a MR2, though the rear can take a little bit bigger.. 255's seems to be pushing it.

As for reliability... where im going to college.. there is very little need for a car, so i was intending to have whatever RX7 i purchse to sleep in my garage for about 6 or more months outta the year. But, i've also got a backup vehicle to use for when my main car is down...

As far as i can tell.. the main advantage that the MR2 has is it's stout engine... the 3SGTE is a monster.. however... the overall advantages of the RX7 seem to eek out a lead as far as i can tell so far.

Thanks for all the opinions so far... i'd love to hear more = )

NobleForums

What year is your MR2?

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

1991 chassis
1993 JDM GT-S engine/tranny/suspension

NobleForums

Ah, nice. I had a 91 before selling it and buying a Noble M400. Those MR2's are loads of fun. The 93 did get the safer suspension, that did not have the tendancy to toe-out the rear when hitting a bump mid-turn. With the typical upgrades and a good alignment setup, they handled very well. I personally like the initial turn-in on mid-engined vehicles, especially on DOT-R tires.

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

yah, the turn in is very nice... i upgraded to the 93 suspension cuz my JDM engine clip came with it, and the car was VERY easy to rotate with the 91/92 rear suspension... i've encounted much less snap oversteer tendancies with the longer rear control arms.

I wonder how many people daily drive their FD's?

PhoenixDownVII

I don't think the idea of paint fading, interior parts needing replacement, and "old age" stuff should come as any surprise to you....My '91 Turbo Mr2 had more problems inside and out than my current mint 94 FD.

My Mr2 had 98k when I bought it, my Fd has 60k on original motor/turbo's.

The performance stock vs. stock is marginal, the FD has such a "presence", given it's fairly better looks (Front end on my Mr2 looked too froggy, and overall too "toyota") and Mazda inspirational design. Much more rare too.

Once in the seat, the FD looks tons better, gives me more confidence through turns, and is plain faster (but go figure, it was more expensive and has more HP).

It's definitely an "upgrade" IMO, however the only thing that changes is further finicky-ness of the reliability issue. Both cars need TLC if they are old and show it, both cars are light and handle great but are capable of crazy things once they lose traction, but the FD has the edge in overall performance, looks, unique powerband, and yadda yadda..

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

haha awesome review... do you think you can elaborate more on the "unique power band" statement?

I like that part about more confidence in the turns... seriously, to drive the MR2 hard, you have to either have ***** made of cryo treated alloy, or be a little on the crazy side... or fearless =P

alberto_mg

keep your car. do lots of drugs er i mean don't do drugs. bang lots of chickies. get a real job and then play with an FD.

j/k (kinda) but do whatever your wallet affords you. last thing i wanted in college was more bills.

PhoenixDownVII

Well what's more unique than a Rotary? My Mr2 was a simple I-4 + Single turbo. The FD is a sequential twin turbo system attached to a Rotary engine, it's a world apart.

I had my Mr2-T at 14psi too, it was cool, but it just didn't fulfill my upmost needs.

The few things I miss about my Mr2 (I should say Mr2's, I had an NA MKI as well) is how I *didn't* care about them enough and drove them everywhere (My turbo got 22-25mpg)...

PhoenixDownVII

Good advice. The FD is not an investment, it doesn't appreciate, so don't invest time/money you don't have on it. It is really a toy, still a car, but a toy. If it's going to put a strain on your spending your FD will end up like 75% of the others that aren't taken care of and then blamed for their failures...

You should aim at only being in debt to things you can't avoid like insurance, or things that appreciate like Real Estate...

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

oh man... i feel like some poor bum with these comments. lol if i wasnt prepared to spend this kind of money, then i would deffinently stick with the MR2.. it just seems that after the several thousand dollars i've put into my MR2, i could have put them $$$ to better enjoyment/use out of a FD.

No car is an investment, you always lose money, if you dont realize this, then your heads in the clouds = )

Im looking for a driver's car, and im hoping to find that in the FD, the MR2 is good, but im hoping to push the edge even further here. Hopefully i can find success here....

cruiser

Looks like you have it all figured out. I'd say go for it.

I test drove NSX, 300ZX and some others. And none of them made me go "whoa" on the test drive expect my beloved FD I was sold.

mindance

funny.. you're looking to go from an MR2 to an FD, and I'm looking to go from an FD to an MR2. The reason is because of the costliness of the FD. FD engines only last beyond 100k on a fluke, and usually they don't even make it that far. Not only that, but there are so many other things that can go wrong with them. I love my FD to pieces, but it is far too expensive and troublesome to own for my purposes. i get about 12-15mpg (this seems typical), required high octane fuel, insurance is very high, and on top of that there's the costs of repairs.

It's not just the money that makes me consider buying another car, though. I've got the cash at this point in my life. It's just that it makes me nervous wondering when the next problem is going to come up with it.

On the flip side, I can't think of a more enjoyable car to drive than an FD. Nothing I've sat in feels the same. It's a thing of beauty. If money were not an object, I have no doubts this is the car I'd want. Right now I would rather take a step back to something less tempermental and less stressful to own. Plus I've never owned a mid-engine sports car -- I'm curious what it'll be like.

mindance

the MR2 they tested was the n/a version.
i wonder what the results in lap times would be like if they'd tested the Turbo MR2?

Narfle

iTrader: (16)

mmmmmmmm, yes but no. "fluke" meaning a well built and well maintained engine. Rx7's are secifically engineered. changing one part compromises the engineering of the rest. if you start from scratch and build your car youll be fine but if you start with a stcok or near stock car and start upgrading you will pop an engine or two.

Nateness

iTrader: (7)

the MR2 turbo is a whole different car than the n/a version... handling, power, response are all different. the n/a motor falls off in powerband at around the 5k rpm range... my particular set up holds to 7k+ rpm..

Mindance, if you're interested in a trade.. i have some cash on me i can offer with my MR2 if you want a moderately tuned MR2 that gets 20mpg in city w/ frequent boosting and has freshly replaced components all around, non interferance motor anyone? = )

- Nathan
Ryoga_6@yahoo.com

SlingShotRX7

IMO: alot of problems with FD's are caused by the owners.
People bought FD's and started freeing up the exhaust and intake.
adding Boost controllers and upping the boost.. then ASK:
" Do i need a ecu/ems"

Im one of those people that got 130K+ miles on my original FD motor
with intake, SMIC, DP, and CB.. I still believe my motor popped because
i got a bad tank of gas from Mobil.

Anyways.. There are FD's out there making 400RWHP on Twin turbos.
and 400-600++ with single turbo conversions. its not uncommon to see
500rwhp 10second FD, that is very very streetable.
If you are a DIY er and can turn a wrench.
the 13B-REW isn't as complicated as many think, im sure you can handle it.
many have.

To compare a FD to a MR2 any year or turbo in Looks is a NON comparison.
Im sorry, the FD is one of the best looking, most beautiful cars ever produced.
You should see how my FD gets oooooo's and aaaaahs all over the place.
in a 12 year old car. Granted it has a mazdaspeed body kit and rims.
Everytime, someone asks " is that a viper" " is that a S2000" "is that a Porsche"
I respond " don't insult my car like that"

Mr2's are nice and all but, they aren't on the level of FD's, Supras, 300Z's, Vettes.

oh yea one last thing. Granted the interior wears, so do exteriors. But what
doesn't?? You can't expect anything to be weathered for over 10 years
and be perfect. IMO: the interior isn't as bad as people say. ones that do
whine about it must. of never bought/owned a domestic built in the USA car
in the late 80's and 90's.

goodluck on what ever choice you make