Just to clear things up on the price, it was 18k after (insanely high California) tax and lic fees. The car itself was around mid 16k.

 

The engine sounds like it will need replacing in the next few thousand miles, and the tranny doesn't sound like it is in great shape. You also mention that the exterior isn't so hot (dings and poor resprays).

I would walk away from this car for sure. This car is worth no where close to 18k. To put it in perspective I bought mine for 13k (56k on chassis, 1k on engine/turbos), the exterior and interior were also in great condition.

Read up on the FAQs a bit more, and find a trustworthy local shop that will look over the car for you before you buy it.

My advice: walk away.

 

Trickshot, all I'm claiming is that as far as I know, there was a problem with the apex seals in the engines of some '93 3rd gen purchasers. And apparently, at least ONE '94 RX7 purchaser .

I even recall (when taking the car in for regular maintenance after having clocked 100K+ miles on the odometer) the head of the Service Dept. at Brandon Mazda (I'm in central Florida, near Tampa) asking me whether I was having trouble getting my RX7 started(?!!). Of course not.......well, not at the time he asked me; so I'm guessing they/Mazda was aware of the problem...they just made no official statement....you know...like most companies wanting to avoid litigation.
There were a few "maintenance recalls" as well, but these weren't blasted across newspapers and tv either; just a letter to purchasers from Mazda Corp. of America.

Again, I have a '94, so all of this didn't come to light until my car experienced the symptoms....and again, it was at approx. 160K miles.

It's at that time that I found out, not only from a few local 3rd Gen RX7 owners I came into contact with, but on the WWW, there was a constituent (I have no idea of the number of course) of other 3rd Gen RX7 owners reporting the same apexseal/engine problem.

I did a Yahoo search just now (just try "apex seals" + 60K), and I actually found one of the websites I came across "back in the day" where 3rd Gen RX7 owners were discussing this very topic: http://www.fd3s.net.. I don't think it's still owned by the guy that started it...this is just a page dealing with the apex seals and questions answered and debunked.

So maybe I should qualify all this by saying it was common knowledge to anyone experiencing the apex seal problems that '93 and some '94 3rd gens were more prone to apex seal failure at approx. 60K miles.

I seem to have opened a can of worms , but I assure you, I'm not making it up, I love my 3rd Gen 7 (will post some recent pictires in the appropriate thread once I get another R1/R2 front spoiler soon), and I actually thought I was helping someone who might want to investigate if the original engine is still in the car, to look into having it checked.......maybe by getting a compression test done.

Sorry if I've offended anyone...or led anyone to believe I'm an RX7 ogre or something. Was just trying to help.

 

moconnor, conncerning design changes, I have no idea. I simply assumed (and yes, I know what they say about that word), that if the company was aware (& they were..see my long previous reply to trickshot) of any type of reliability problems in the first production runs of their totally redesigned flagship model..the '93s, surely they would address these issues before the next model year.....all things being equal.

 

I'll try to be as gentle as I can. Quite simply, your post and claim regarding apex seal failure at 60k miles in '93 models falls into the category of misinformation and hearsay. The clear implication of your post is that there was some sort of design or manufacturing flaw in the '93 apex seals. I think anyone knowledgeable about FD engines will bear me out on this......there was no such apex seal design flaw.

You've taken certain half baked web info and unclear statements by someone at a dealership and conflated them into an erroneous conclusion.

Now, if you want to talk about FD engine failure at 60k miles that's a different story. A number of people have noted such a pattern. But to pin it on faulty apex seals in '93 model cars, as you have, is erroneous. The simple proof of this is that, to the best of my knowledge, there was no change in apex design or manufacture after '93.

If you want to discuss 60k mile FD engine failure you have to investigate # 1 coolant seal failure, and # 2 detonation. Look at these two areas and you'll be much closer to the truth regarding the cause of FD engine failures. Even then you'll run into a debate as to the causes. Bad maintenance? Over modification? Bad gasoline? Hard water in your coolant mix? Boosting before the car is fully warmed up? The list goes on.

3rd Gen RX-7's have a bad reputation when it comes to engine longevity. We don't need to create new myths or spread misinformation on this subject.

 

It is interesting that your experience re: engine life is different from some of us. Your story comes from the crop of original owners who were in the warranty period. fd3s.net (formerly scuderiaciriani.com) is an interesting study since some of that info was collected from that time period.

Trickshot, you seem to address this subject as factual with a right and a wrong. Conclusions based on statistics will never lead to fact.

Apex seals do wear and get less tough with age. However, the current body of knowledge leads one to believe that with proper care the apex seals will last longer than that as long as there are no episodes of detonation.

My impression (and that's all it is) is that many original owners did not take sufficient care of the car. Mazda didn't help any by allowing 87 octane gas, etc either. Maybe they drove the car very lightly and had carbon buildup problems. (Corner seals show up on the compression test too - and Mazda dealers never tore down engines to see what exactly happened to each engine). So many owners care are what we now consider rough. Maybe under those conditions the apex seals did tend to fail around 60k. It is true that the seals have not changed.

The current theories on engine life/failure here have been collected from owners who mostly used non-Mazda sources for diagnostics and rebuilding. Of course, many failed engines are caused by increasing power and rebuilding and tuning mistakes - so the average rebuild nowadays is a vastly different picture than before.

Dave

 

Huh? Statistics are collections of facts, so I don't know where you're trying to go with that. I'll try to resist getting sidetracked into a philosophical argument because there is a more important point to be made here.

There are several faulty links in Black3rdGen's chain of reasoning, but chief among them is confusing an effect for the cause. He failed to discern the conclusion in the very source he cited at www.fd3s.net which said "detonation is what breaks the apex seals at the rear."

The last thing we need is another new myth about FD unreliability, and when someone posts that it's well know that the apex seals fail on 93's at 60k miles it's important to correct such misinformation before it becomes "common knowledge."

If you, or someone else, wants to contend that due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle there's a 3rd Gen RX-7 somewhere whose apex seals suddenly blew apart on their own at 60k miles without some other external cause, then I suppose you can try to make that argument. But you and I both know that's not what's going on here in terms of FD engine reliability.

 

Heisenberg ... wasn't it his blimp with Hydrogen that blew up from flying through an electrical storm? or was that Hidenberg's blimp?

But ya, you're right... his "uncertainty principle" was that he was uncertain about putting hydrogen in a blimp. Maybe people thought that all blimps blow up in electrical storms... just as some think all FD's engines blow at 60K.

"OMG!! pull over PULL the phuk over! you're almost past 59,990 miles .. it's gonna B L O W!"

 

A lot of people are thowing out opinions on this particular car. i don't think anyone on a forum can tell you to buy a car or not without personal inspection. It could be steam from the exhaust. The coolant may simply have never been changed and might be low. No way to know for sure. My tranny also is notchy in 1st and 2nd until warm, which is normal IMO.

The best thing you could do is find a shop (not a dealer) that knows rotaries. Take any car you are thinking of buying for a 'buyer's inspection' to include a compression check, hydro-carbon coolant check, overall visual, and test drive.

-Ian

 

FYI - the Hindenburg disaster had nothing to do with the storm. The cause of the accident has never been determined. Common theories: sabotage, static spark, engine exhaust flames (like my FD =D) etc. etc.

 

The guy shares his experience and that of some others he knows personally, and you're accusing him of trying to take down the "body of knowledge"? He's not trying to declare causality, he's sharing correlation. Loosen the britches already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correla...mply_causation

I think that's insufficient reasoning. 1) because you're propheting with the disclaimer "to the best of my knowledge" and 2) because at 60k the car is out of warranty. No sane automotive manufacturer will change parts to improve the reliability of a car when it's beyond it's warranty period. Particularly Mazda, after the huge stinky warranty bill the FD had already accumulated.

In my opinion, one reason 93s showed up for more engine work than 94s or 95s, is that there are far more of them. Any discussion of the number of problems with a model year must first be compared against the number produced in that year.

Another possibility for the 60k apex seal failure is simply coincidence. At that time there were many 93 FDs at the 60k mark. As well, better tuning tools (imperfect ones, at that) became available. I'm sure more than one owner just under 60k showed up for warranty work after removing the mods that blew the motor just to see if they could get Mazda to foot the bill.

Since when is telling a first-hand account misinformation? Do you even have first-hand information to bring to the discussion?

It seems much of the "common knowledge" used on this forum originated from the FAQ that I authored. That FAQ was a skimming of what I could find in searching the forum's past threads and the other big FD websites. I did not intend to divide those with differing opinions and experiences into right and wrong, or fact and fiction. I left lots of words in the FAQ ("most", "many", "commonly") because I made generalizations. If these generalizations are used for what they really are, I believe the document is useful. If those generalizations are elevated to the status of uncontested truth then something is terribly wrong.

None of these generalizations should ever be confused with fact. The www simply isn't going to get enough answers from enough owners who understand the question to generate a truly conclusive consensus.

 

What about Schrodinger's Apex Seals?
The seals at 60k haven't failed until you open the motor...

(Sorry for the mild-trolling, long time lurker. )

To the OP, the car in question sure isn't the best deal in the world as others have noted,
and you now have many great examples of how tenacious being an fd owner is.

 

I lost this while trying to post, so hopefully it doesn't show up twice!
------

Don't worry Trickshot, unless the opinion of others puts food on my table, shelter over my head, or clothes on my back, it doesn't bother me in the least.

We all have different experiences, and our opinions are based on those experiences. Since my experience in this differs greatly from yours and others (& even differs from my 2nd gen RX-7 experiences), my opinion differs as well.

I DO agree though, that if anyone is planning on purchasing a 3rd Gen RX-7...or any used high performance vehicle....., whether it's hearsay, misinformation, myth, a shred of truth, whatever you believe, have it checked out by a specialist....preferrably one that's had years and years of experience with the car/model.

Excuse me guys, I gotta go wipe my 7 down...the daily ritual after I get off from work

 

^^ degreesaman,

You've gone around and around in a long post above but you've done nothing to refute my statements or substantiate the flimsy allegation made by
Black3rdGenRX7.

I think you know full well that there was no design or manufacturing flaw in and of the apex seals that caused them to fail consistently at 60k miles in 93 model FD's as his post clearly implies.

The "evidence" Black3rdGen offers is completely flimsy, imprecise, and based on hearsay. For instance, look what he says about his dealership experience:


"I even recall (when taking the car in for regular maintenance after having clocked 100K+ miles on the odometer) the head of the Service Dept. at Brandon Mazda (I'm in central Florida, near Tampa) asking me whether I was having trouble getting my RX7 started(?!!). Of course not.......well, not at the time he asked me; so I'm guessing they/Mazda was aware of the problem"


What problem? Does this Service Dept. head explicitly say there's an apex seal weakness? No. There's nothing specific here to hang your hat on.
Any don't most of us agree that most of the expertise any Mazda dealership had in FD's evaporated over time? (There are those who contend they didn't have much to begin with.) So when Black3rdGen takes his in at 100k mi. how up were they on FD's?

But that doesn't stop Black3rdGen from the myth building. He goes on to state:

"There were a few "maintenance recalls" as well, but these weren't blasted across newspapers and tv either; just a letter to purchasers from Mazda Corp. of America."

For defective apex seals?!!! That's a new one on me, and I bet on you too. This is the kind of half baked, destructive rumor-mongering that gets amplified on the web.

Then there's conflation. That's when you take one thing that's sort of true and blend it with something false and come up with something that sounds good but is basically false. That's what Black3rd Gen does when he states:


"It's at that time that I found out, not only from a few local 3rd Gen RX7 owners I came into contact with, but on the WWW, there was a constituent (I have no idea of the number of course) of other 3rd Gen RX7 owners reporting the same apexseal/engine problem."

He throws that in to support his bad apex seal contention. I'll say it again, while it's true some have marked 60k miles as an engine failure point there is nothing to indicate that the fault for this alleged widespread failure rate lay within the apex seals. It's a half-baked allegation and the statements offered in its support are no evidence at all.

 

Ha, ha. Good one. I guess you'd have to say they're both there and they're not.

 

I'm glad you're not offended. I'm not trying to be personal here. You sound like a nice guy and a great rotary enthusiast. But I am trying to set the record straight and that can at times sound harsher than I would mean it to be.

There's an old saying, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no one is entitled to their own facts."

There are no facts to support the statement that there was widespread engine failure among 93 FD's at 60k miles due to faulty apex seals.

 

Your "facts" are no more factual than anything else brought up in this thread. Which brings me to my point: facts alone will never generate any kind of conclusion on a subject such as this. If you want facts you're on the wrong subject.

Frankly I don't have the patience to follow your scattering rants. I don't think anyone else has bothered either.

 

You can always tell when someone has lost an argument. They resort to a personal attack just like the one in the post quoted above.

 

The quote above shows an inability to perceive the core of the argument.

In my post above I wrote:

"There are no facts to support the statement that there was widespread engine failure among 93 FD's at 60k miles due to faulty apex seals."

That is my central point. It's up to the person making a statement to supply evidence or *facts* proving that argument, otherwise the claim fails.

When Black3rdGenRX7 made his claim about faulty apex seals in 93 FD's I and another poster requested him to substantiate that claim. What he submitted was nothing more than hearsay and vague statements. The allegation that there was a problem with the apex seals in 93 FD's at 60k miles fails the test.

 

Run as fast as you can away from this car. Not for $18K.

 

There was no argument. You've been yelling into the wind.

Sure, the other guy shared a story based on hearsay. He even mentioned his sources. It was abundantly clear - I'm not sure how this got you so upset.

Now since you've been begging for facts but unwilling fill the void I took a minute and did what you could have done - I checked the parts fiche. In fact, Mazda introduced a new apex seal part number in 1995. Unfortunately I haven't found any info on whether there is an actual material or design change associated with it. So there remains an element of plausibility here.

Dave

 

Just about every FD I've ever driven is a little notchy when shifting from 1st to 2nd when shifting quickly. If you slow down you should feel the syncro catch and it should slide in like a hot knife through butter if not the trans is worn.

Any FD that has the coolant light coming on is either leaking coolant, was recently flushed (air pockets) or worse case it's leaking into the combustion chamber. If it smells like coolant there's the possibility of a leak or worse case combustion gas/exhaust is escaping/leaking into the block pressurizing the coolant and pushing it out of the overflow tank.

From your description this is a 14k FD if it has no problems.

I'm selling a nice VR/black 95 PEG for 15k. 73k miles with original paint and well maintained. No paint work or body work ever. Original engine with a set of low mileage turbos. The compression is 6.4 to 6.7 (not great) but nice and even on all six faces and within spec. Car was run hard (nice and hot) before the compression test so this is accurate and there will be no hot start problems. If interested see the for sale section I'm going to start the ad now and will add some pictures when I have the time.

 

Plausibility?! Hardly.

I've been saying in this thread that I thought you knew better, but apparently not.

I consulted two engines builders I respect on this matter. Both supported what I have been saying in this thread regarding the reliability of FD apex seals.

First up is Dave Barninger of KD Rotary. For those of you who don't know, Dave was trained on FD's in Japan by Mazda. Back in the day, he was sent around to dealerships to train local mechanics on how to service and repair 3rd Generation RX-7's. Now he runs his own tuning shop. People come from all over the East and beyond to have him work on their cars. He's Mr. FD as far as many are concerned.

Dave gave me this detailed answer via e-mail when I asked about any apex seal changes and the longevity of the stock FD apex seals. This is what he wrote:



"originally the 93-95 rx7 seals were three piece seal...and approx 2002-2003
they changed them to a 2 piece seals that mimics the rx8 seal....mazda also
changed the material..but they keep that close to the vest...

so there have been changes...but from the dealer all part numbers supercede
to the latest version which is a 2 piece seal..not the old 3 piece...and has
been that way for at least 3-5 years...

pulled all my parts books out and yes..93 had a different part number than
the 95...but when you ordered or bought it the part number supercedes to the
95 number...which supercedes to the latest part number...so what does all
this mean...basically the apex seals have changed in the early 2000's...BUT
there is only one factory apex seal available...all part numbers go to
one...

the factory seal is very durable...UNLESS you detonate...then it breaks
fairly quickly..but we have dynoed completey stock reman engines to over 600
hp with nitros on stock seals...the point is if the rotary is tuned
right..has the right gas...good gas...the factory seals can take those
numbers for a drag season or two...( this motor above lasted for 2 full
seasons)...and on a stock car I have customers into the 200000 mile mark on
original engines...(233K)..just well maintained..all highway...

that point being that factory apex seals will not break on their own for any
reason...there is a cause...detonation...foreign material...carbon
buildup...in 26 years I have never had a factory apex seal break just
because...there is always another underlying reason...hope this
helps..holler if any questions..thanks..dave@KDR "



I also consulted Jeff Gladish at Maztech who has rebuilt many an FD engine. He said he's seen no FD apex seals wear out before the 130 - 140k mile mark. If there's a problem before that he sees detonation as the most likely cause.

I hope this lays to rest the unfounded allegation that there is some sort of problem with weak apex seals failing at 60k miles in '93 FD's.

 

And yet, there you were back again in post #47 replying to what I had written. LOL!!!! Too, too funny.

 

FWIW, you are trying to argue with folks who are some of the most helpful here on this forum. Getting back to the car your considering may be more productive.

3 months ago I bought a 94 Touring with 57k miles for $16,000. The engine is orginal. Mods included: Bonez high-flow cat, Racing Beat cat-back, Greddy Intake, downpipe, grounding kit, new wires, and some other stuff that was pointless that I removed. The interior is clean, the exterior paint has some water spots that are visible under the right light.

The engine runs smooth with 20 inches of vacuum at idle. It has a boost pattern of 10-7-8 depending on outside temperature. A rotary mechanic (who used to race them) describes it as a little "gutless". It doesn't (currently) pass WA state emissions.

All in all, it is a pretty good car but I think I paid 1 to 2 thousand too much for it. Given the unknowns in the car you are looking at, I think $18k is more than I would pay for the car.