m73m95

I have read several places that back in the 80s, the Mazda RX7 was a direct competitor for the 944. Some places said it was even a little faster.

So my question is, why do I never see any RX7s racing or "competing" with the 944 in any way? I barely even see them on the street anymore. did none of them hold up through the years? Were they never really fast?

Not that I particularly care about the RX7...it just seems strange to me. The only Mazda I ever hear about racing with the 944 is the Miata....and that I just don't understand...

roman944

they had their own "engine" troubles ... many sit around in garages waiting for owners to find some time for a rebuild etc.

there are still nice mint examples roling around as well

plenty of LSx swapped ones , just like 944's etc.

as to why - don't know

Reimu

Was probably overrated. People always love an 'underdog,' cheap little Japanese rotary with heart versus the big bad rich man's Porsche.

seattle951

In high school and college I had 2 924s and 3 Rx7s. The Rx7s were the better car. On one of the RX-7s I put 300,000 on it with minimal maintenance. You just put gas in them and they run forever. They handled well but felt plasticy.

I have had 924S's and 951s since then. The 79 thru 83 RX-7s were definately inferior to either of these cars. I never drove an RX-7 from the same era as the 924S, 944, 951.

Tom M'Guinn

I owned a handful of them over time, incluing an new 87 n/a. They'd run with a 944 n/a all day long. The non-turbo 13B's are actually very reliable. I put 140k on my motor before selling it, and never had a single issue. The turbo cars had shorter engine lives though. They were a great car in their day, but without a racing history, porsche-like following, and resale value, few people are willing to put in the time and engery to keep up a car that is slower than most modern econoboxes. Sadly.

J Silverman

The NA 13b Rx7s (Especially the 2nd gen) compete directly against the 8v and 2.5 16v 944s at least in SCCA Improved Touring. There arent many fully built 944s running in IT because the motor alone would cost more than building an RX7 to race. The 12A RX7s (first gen) arent much of a match for the 944 unless you really do some motor work. Handling is roughly the same, they just dont have the power.

Tom R.

resale and rust. other than that they were just as good as a 944. but what do i know, i had only 7 of them.

FRporscheman

A friend of mine is an rx-7 fiend. He tells me typically a rotary engine needs a rebuild every 60k-100k miles. He had an FC (looks like a 944) while I had my 944, and we'd always bench race and even funrun together, but we never did anything stupid like race. The cares were very equal in stock trim, with the 944 handling better of course and it had way more torque. He bought every single suspension upgrade available and it was very sweet.

Now he has an FD twin turbo and I have a 968. He pulls on me in the straights but I eat him up in the turns, all I have on my car is konis... maybe I just drive harder.

I don't know about the rx-7 FB (looks like a 924) vs the 924, but I do know that while mazda was designing the FC they had posters of the 944 all over the place in their design office. It was made to be a direct knock off and it succeeded IMHO.

Tom M'Guinn

The 13B non-turbo will last much longer than 60 to 100k. The twin turbo was a fantastic car in my opinion, although that motor does tend to die young. If you eat up a twin turbo in the corners in a 968, then you are driving harder or better or both.

tifosiman

Back when I used to race Pro-Rally, a gentleman named Rod Millen was lightning quick in a first-gen RX-7. IIRC he even built a monster version that was AWD and raced in Open Class. Out in the middle of the woods, in the darkness of a night stage, a screaming RX7 rotary engine would sound like something straight out of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. There was nothing like it. The only other engine that was as easily distinguishable out there was an Audi 5 cylinder.

m73m95

So what it all boils down to is, they're just not worth putting money into...like a porsche is?

I mean, they're quick. And, I know at one time, they were pretty popular. I would think that with the new one out (Rx8) that the older ones would gain in popularity.

mbonner

I have a 1984 RX7 GSL-SE 13B. It has 202,000 odd kms, about126,000 miles. Runs great, all I have had to buy for it over the years is a muffler system, tires, battery and a fuel pump and filter. These cars can rust out badly, which is why you do not see many around. Mine has virtually no rust. The 84 and 85 13B motors have 3mm apex seals. the FC, second generation motor has 2mm apex seals which break and score the combustion chambers, these motors usually need rebuilding at 160,000 kms, my RX7 parts guy tells me. The FDs, twin turbo, usually make it to 75,000 kms. Lots of FDs in the States and Canada, and many right-hand drive imported from Japan for sale with blown motors
I also have 1983 944 which ate its timing belt and is being fixed right now. That 944 has had so many expensive issues I've lost track.
From the reliability aspect my Rex wins hands down, it's faster too. However the RX7 doors do not have that Teutonic solid clunk when you close them, and it is still not a Porsche.
Mike

J Silverman

I see RX7s at every race/track day I go to. Everything from the old 70s with the 12A up to the twin turbos. THe "tuner" crowd seems to favor the newer twin turbos which are few and far between. (best looking japanese car ever made in my opinion, I remember reading it was designed by the same guy that did the viper)

Here is a video from a local automotive show back in the 80s comparing the 944 turbo and the rx7 at a local track. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92NoDd7DGnU

Legoland951

Rod millen also had million dollar budgets though. At Streets of Willow, my 84 944 was faster than a 85 GSL SE with the only stock 13b in the gen I RX7 with another amateur driver like me. That doesn't really mean much though. When I had my shop, we bought and sold over 100 Gen I RX7s and the engines were definitely not as durable as the 944. Apex seals and rotor housings will get scored from over revving and those things love to rev. I got 15 to 18 miles per gallon so the mileage is terrible for that 4 barrel carb. Its next to impossible to pass Ca smog with one of those since oil is injected directly into the combustion chamber for lubrication.

I believe they dominated IMSA racing for their class several years. They are lots of fun to drive and easy to toss around with those 13 inch tires.

mbonner

I have had four RX7s and I got horrible gas mileage with the 3 12As that had the 4bbl carbs, however I get 28 miles to the Imperial (Canadian) gallon of regular gas in the 13B 84 GSL-SE.
30 mpg in the 944, by the way. The Government is hinting at emission tests here in Manitoba, I might have a problem there as I have a Racing Beat header, no air pump or catalitic converter and an oil pump which squirts oil int the combustion chambers. Guess I should go for an 8 cylinder motor out of a Corvette. And bigger brakes too!
Mike
Mike