thats some of the doubts i hae always had about rotary engines, i mean i can importa a rx7 from japan..for super cheap but the engine maintanence scares me...

 

maybe yo dou...maybe i do..in a place called the internet...heard of it??

 

From what I've heard, the post-95 13b's don't have the apex seal problems of the pre-95 ones. Though you still need to keep more on track with maintenance than a piston engine.

 

yeah that scares me...and i dont know nothin about rotaries

 

If the RX-7 Didn't have APEX seal problems, it would be the best car in the world, the lighest and most powerful and have the greatest Powerband. They sorta built the best car a year or two back, it was amazing.

I was like, "What is this rice ****, SUPRA7? Who the **** puts the name Supra on a RX7??"

But sure enough pop the hood and there is a MINT 850WHP 2JZ-GTE. You get the baddass handling/Weight/Looks of a 7, and the power of a Supra. Duh.


I am sure teh handling suffered some with the 2JZ in there, the RX7 was technically a Mid engine car, as the motor was SOOOOOOOOO small, that it fit WAY behind the front wheels, about the size of a Keg KUT in half...

 

HAHAHA

http://www.CarPhoto.net

 

No doubt the RX-7 would be the lightest, but certainly not the most powerful. The Evo and STi blow it away in the HP department. As for the powerband, it all depends on where you spend most of your time. You have to really rev up those rotaries in order to get any power. If I recall the TT RX-7 only made 217 lb.ft. of torque and that came at a high RPM. High power small displacement engines don't exactly have a wide powerband. I mean we're talking 255hp out of 1.3liters.

 

Ever heard of a ls1 powered Rx7?

 

SRT-4..........no contest...........I love Mazda's and all (I own one) but an 11 year old rotary v.s. a brand new SRT with the Stage II kits hitting this month? You gotta be on crack not to the get the SRT unless it's a $$$ issue.

 

You got a point. Factory-backed modding is a great part of the SRT, but taking a Stage II SRT vs. a stock RX-7 like you're proposing down the quarter mile isn't a fair contest IMO. The difference between a SRT with stage II and a low-mileage 93 RX-7 is enough to safely level the playing field and possibly tip the scales in the 7's favors. Not to mention that in a road course the RX-7 will very likely mop the floor with the SRT. Not to degrade the Dodge but the RX-7 is one of Japan's best cornering car if not the best.

 

srt-4 or tt rx7........hmmmmmmm.........should i go with a well respected, sought after, track-oriented beast with incredible potential...






or a neon

 

Thats a good one. Seen a lot of fast cars with stickers. Oh and of course the RX7 would win. I don't know why people think the SRT-4 is such a godsend. It isn't that fast. Its decent but won't even beat a stock WRX. Lol. Stickers.

 

won't beat a stock WRX? A stock SRT-4 (235hp at the wheels) does the 1/4 mile in the 13's......nearly a full second faster than a stock WRX.....and with just intake and exhaust and 4psi more boost an SRT is in the 12's. Stage II will be putting 270+ HP at the wheels.......that plus MOPAR coilovers and suspension mods is very attractive to drag racers and Auto-Xers alike.....regardless of the RX-7's performance which can't be denied, you're talking about an 11 year old car that has no doubt been run ragged......even new those cars required constant TLC.....an 11 year old one should be nearly a part-time job before you even start modding it. That's really my main thoughts against it. Yes, at $21k the SRT-4 is a godsend......and it's new.

 

Oh really? I don't know where you get your information because your facts are pretty off. Here is the numbers for a stock 2002 WRX: 0-60: 5.4; 1/4: 14.1; trap: 96. Here is the numbers for a stock 2003 SRT-4: 0-60: 5.6; 1/4: 14.2; trap: 102. Last that I knew 5.4 was less than 5.6 and 14.1 was less than 14.2. Here is the link if you don't believe me:

http://www.car-stats.com

Lets see what else is wrong with your I Love Dodge ramblings. If you even go to Dodge's website (www.4adodge.com), it even lists the hp rating for the SRT-4 as 230. And the site also says 5.8 for 0-60. Even worse than 5.6. So much for a Neon "expert." Oh and I mention that wonderful front wheel drive? Gotta put those big slicks on the front to harness all that American horsepower? Why don't you go buy a Saturn Ion Redline! Those are really cool with underbody neons. So back to the topic of the thread. A twin turbo RX7 Vs. a Neon SRT-4? I think I'll take a RX7 any day over a Neon that is a "godsend." If you don't agree with me, then you don't agree with the almost 90% (see poll) of the people who do. Remember where you are before you write dumb stuff.

 

One more thing. Mazdaspeed Protege? How come Mazda makes a "souped up" version of the Protege with a turbo and it only makes what, 170 hp?