Forbes insults the RX-2!
Thread Starter
Full Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Santa Cruz, CA / USA
Forbes insults the RX-2!
OLDROTA
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 2
From: Los Angeles
What a f**ked bunch of ********! My car DEFINATELY does not belong with a Trabant, a Yugo, or a Pacer. And my parents we married in a Dauphine....the F**kers!
Why did the "unsafe at any speed" champion, the Corvair, not even MAKE THE LIST. I would say I lost ALL faith in the people at that mag.
Why did the "unsafe at any speed" champion, the Corvair, not even MAKE THE LIST. I would say I lost ALL faith in the people at that mag.
Thread Starter
Full Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Santa Cruz, CA / USA
seriously. thankfully it has the lowest votes in their stupid poll but it (along with the Citroen SM and the Dauphine and some others) doesn't belong on a list like that.
rx2 has 1% of the vote currently. yugo leader @ 31%
BUT you gotta remember, early rotary engines did take a **** after no time. bad stationary gears + oil seals if I remember right. wasn't unheard of to get a dealer reman motor after 30,000 miles.
BUT you gotta remember, early rotary engines did take a **** after no time. bad stationary gears + oil seals if I remember right. wasn't unheard of to get a dealer reman motor after 30,000 miles.
Thread Starter
Full Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Santa Cruz, CA / USA
There's a good reason that rotary engines never really caught on. Rotaries--which run in circles, unlike pistons, which run up and down--are like diesels; they had major problems early in life, creating a buying populace that to this date does not fully trust them. Mazda's RX-2, one of the first rotary-engine cars, had problems with catching on fire. It also raised the classic problems of rotary engines: bad fuel economy and emissions. Rotary seals would wear out early in an RX-2's life, leaking fuel and emissions along the way.
Hmmm I have put lots of miles on many different rx2's and
have never heard of a catching on fire problem!
my first rx2 went 88,000miles on the first motor, i call
that darn good! considering how i drove it.
it did burn lots of oil by the time it was done but
other than that it was a GREAT car!
matt
have never heard of a catching on fire problem!
my first rx2 went 88,000miles on the first motor, i call
that darn good! considering how i drove it.
it did burn lots of oil by the time it was done but
other than that it was a GREAT car!
matt
Trending Topics
'Last Minute' Rallying
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
From: Lincoln, England
this guy needs to open his eyes to the rest of the world !
diesels have never caught on !! What total pile of cr@p !! diesels have never caught on in the US ... diesel cars are very common in europe and the rest of the world !
diesels have never caught on !! What total pile of cr@p !! diesels have never caught on in the US ... diesel cars are very common in europe and the rest of the world !
Altered Beast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: Arlington, VA
Why would they pick the RX-2 over the R100? And what car with the performance of an RX-2 didn't have bad emissions and fuel economy? Come on, this is 1971. I agree that the RX-2 had its problems, but it doesn't belong on the same list as the Ford Pinto, which would incinerate drivers who got rear-ended in one when the fuel tank exploded.
My FSP Fiesta eats Jettas
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 3
The carbon apex seals almost spelled doom for Mazda when they routinely went out at about 30k miles. The redesign of 1974 solved that problem and others, but the damage was already done with respect to people's perception of rotary engines.
Hey, Hugh Hefner had an RX2, that's gotta say something...
Hey, Hugh Hefner had an RX2, that's gotta say something...
It says in the article that only the years listed were considered for the list. Why 1971 was singled out was probably due to the premature failure of the oil seals in the earliest cars. Note that the Rx-3 was not listed yet the two cars share the same machanicals. The Rx-3 was not introduced in the U.S. until 1972 which would explain this. If you go back to magazine articles of the early 1970s, rave reviews of the Rx-2 can only be found. The Rx-2 and RX-3 were both voted "car of the year" in car magazines of the time. I think the only bad comments were the relatively poor fuel mileage of the early rotaries, but this was accepted as these cars had equal performance of many V8s of the time. Comparing an Rx-2 or 3 to any small imported sedan was nearly impossible as far as performance was concerned. Hell, even "Comsumer Reports" liked the RX-2!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
