decisions
#2
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
That's a complicated question. For example, 1st gens are much more simple cars but it is getting hard to find parts and it is an archaic suspension design. 2nd gens have a much better suspension, come turbo, but are heavier and less pure.
It all boils down to what you are looking for.
For me, the early 2nd gen ('86) and the early 1st gen ('78, '79) are the RX-7s I look for because they are most pure.
It all boils down to what you are looking for.
For me, the early 2nd gen ('86) and the early 1st gen ('78, '79) are the RX-7s I look for because they are most pure.
#3
Lives on the Forum
I prefer the 1st gens myself. Lighter, long history of racing, and great availability of performance parts now thanks to www.re-speed.com
True, the stock suspension leaves a lot to be desired, but with a little work you can turn one into a go kart. 2nd gens can be improved too, I'm sure, but I've never been concerned at an autocross event when I see a 2nd gen pull in.... Great cars, no doubt, but I think they went too far towards comfort and wandered away from the racing heritage, resulting in a car with a great motor and suspension that was just too heavy to do anything with. The Z cars ended up much the same way, which is too bad in my opinion.
.
True, the stock suspension leaves a lot to be desired, but with a little work you can turn one into a go kart. 2nd gens can be improved too, I'm sure, but I've never been concerned at an autocross event when I see a 2nd gen pull in.... Great cars, no doubt, but I think they went too far towards comfort and wandered away from the racing heritage, resulting in a car with a great motor and suspension that was just too heavy to do anything with. The Z cars ended up much the same way, which is too bad in my opinion.
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lookingforrx-7
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
1
05-20-02 11:48 AM