The FC would be a great daily driver/ project car. You can find them for cheap and they are fairly reliable. Modding up the car will give you a much faster car than a stock FD for the same money. You have to put a lot of money into a FD to make it reliable. Even though the sequentials can be a headache - if you get all the problems worked out - the car is amazing. A single can set you back $3500. Obviously stock vs. stock the cars aren't comparable performance and handling wise but your also spending a lot more money for the FD. If I were building a drag car - get a T2 and mod the heck out of it. If you want an extremely fun car that can take out most cars on the street but are willing to spend more in maintenance - get the FD

 

internaly the rotors are different and the port size is different. in an fc turboII the ports are actualy larger. also the older rotors are machined and havier, and the fd's are lighter and they are cast. my personal opinion is to use the fc block (side and rotor housings) with fd rotors. jut recently a friend of mine has made an adapter plate to bolt up an fd lower intake manifold to a turboII block as the ports dont match up. but the fd's upper and lower intake flow better than the fc's and the TB is much larger also. and as far as vosko goes...he's just showing off. he realy want you to say...WOW Vosko....your the man! LOL. you can port the stock wastegate to work sufficiently. there are plenty of fd's running in the low 11's w/ the stock turbos

 

The 87-88 turbo rotors are 10 lbs each and have an 8.5:1 compression ratio. The 89-91 turbo rotors are 9.5 lbs and have a compression ratio of 9.0:1. 93-95 rotors are 9.5 lbs and have a 9.0:1 compression ratio just like the later FC rotors, but the tub has a machined finish. All the rotors are cast, but the FD rotors just have some machining on the tub -- I am not sure why.

Mazdatrix has a good page on the different rotor weights and stuff:
http://www.mazdatrix.com/faq/rotorwgt.htm

-Max

 

The FD does have a better engine, intake, LSD, handling and suspension. But the turbos are crap (smaller than the stock Hitachi turbo of the 2nd gen).

And the IC is certainly not bigger than the 2nd gen.


-M

 

"FD has sequential superchargers"

 

It is more difficult to work on an FD (tight engine bay) and maintain it.

 

Guys, guys, you're breakin my heart, dont tell me all this bad crap about the FD's, man i soo want one, even if i have to trade my TII (which is nice) and some $ for one!!!

 

nothing bad was said. just truth. and if you REALY want one, nothing anyone says would stop you.

 

At the end of the day the Fd replaced the Fc so you would expect some diffrences between the two (the Fd should be far and away the better car).

But then u have things like the stock twins, i never got it why Mazda spent all that money developing the Car then put Twins on?. The handling is amaizing but the second turbo always seems to want to come in half way around a corner and then there is heat, its just far to clutered so there is no good airflow around the Engine bay. So the Moral to this story is Fd + Ecu and T4 makes an Amazing all round Track car.

 

when the sequential turbos work they're great for a standard car. if it was just one turbo the media would complain about no low down power which is important for an accountant.

someone said the fc had bigger intake porting, i thought it was the opposite. place the 2 housing beside each other and i'll think you'll fnd different.

the fd engine also has better stationary gear bearings (better oil flow at higher rpm). and the Australian FD has twin oil coolers. also an Australian SP model.

 

i dunno most people with full exhaust and ported wastegate can get minimum 13psi of boost on cold nights. the stock ported wastegate also spikes and creeps easily in cold weather. we know your jealous

 

Actually, the interior in my R1 looks much higher quality than the interior of my '87 TII did. Don't get me wrong, I did love my '87, but it just wasnt as classy as my R1.

As for the money pit, can't argue with you on that on. But (knock on wood) I haven't had any problems in over a year and 20k miles except for the A/C compressor.

 

Why is twin oil coolers beter than single of equal size?

 

in the US, only the R1 and R2 model of the FD had the twin oil coolers. The base and touring just have one (the same one that the R model has 2 of)

 

yep!


but you know what you are going to be jealous of???




MY credit card's balance!

 

not really balances are on a steady decline

 

I own both I like the turbo 2 for cornering. I normally corner at 25 or 30 mph. But the FD is allot more stable at speeds higher than 100 mph. The turbo II's reliability is awesome compared to the third gen.

 

Ok Basic Breakdown

I've owned an FC and i LOVED that car... they are awesome looking as well as handle and drive great. Mine had no problems dusting LT1s with just the intake, exhaust and FCD running 10psi.

The 89-91 FCs had 9.0 Compression as opposed to 8.6 in the 86-88s.

The difference between the Series 6 (3rd gen) and the series 5 motors (which share the same compression) are the hardened bearings and lighter rotors. The ports are slightly larger on the Series 6 also.

You can easily build an FC into a monster and still have a sick looking car... your best bet is a single turbo the T04 being the best. Get the Haltech and your set. My .02$

 

S6 rotors are the same weight as S5....

(what's so funny about sequential superchargers? turbocharger is just shorthand for turbine-driven supercharger or turbosupercharger... sheesh)

 

FD vs. FC

FC-cheaper to mod, maintain, purchase, etc. stock for stock, the FD is just plain a better car. but a well tuned FC is on par with a well tuned FD. once the mods are installed the playing field is equal.
FD-looks awesome, pulls ***** like a magnet(especialy since THE movie), handles supurbly, pulls harder than a freight train. my main problem with the 3rd gen is its build quality compared to the 2nd gens. to me, the 3rd gen just feels cheaper on the inside. it looks cool as hell. but doesnt feel it. the car is just too poorly built in my opinion. as sweet a car as they are, i just dont really have an interest in one. rather keep my FC. but thats just my opinion.

 

Hey now thats knocking it! The Fd being poor build quality on the inside, the fd is great and very ergonomically friendly! It's more unique than poor! The best package for the money! Fantastic seating position.

But hey that just my opinion!

Guys?

Regards...

 

I must live in a cave. I have had a 79, 83, 85 and currently, 88 vert. These forums are new to me. Where does FC and FD designations come from?

 

I always thought it was 10-8-10.

 

Man i can't belive how far this has gone, at the end of the day the Gen 3 is suposed to be the all singing all dancing Rx7 but you have to face it there is people that would rather have a Fc not for looks or pulling power just good old fastion Tuneability. You talk about gen3's being so much better, get £10,000 then buy both cars and use the remaining money up moding them which ones better?

 

79-81 = SA (1st gen)
82-85 = FB (1st gen)
86-92 = FC (2nd gen)
93+ = FD (3rd gen)


The are from the vin #


-Zach