RX-7??

ElRazur

ElRazur

ElRazur

Soldato
Joined
15 Mar 2005
Posts
10,424
Location
I am everywhere...
Please tell me all i need to know as per insurance wise, maintainance, cost, servicing, reliability etc. Me and my brother are consindering getting one from japan.

Please advice.
 
I assume you are talking about the FD.

Get one with a fresh rebuild and there is no reason for them to be unreliable if looked after properly. They need a rebuild at around 60k normally, but some can go longer, some can go sooner. That's why it's best to get one on a fresh rebuild.

Also, you have to remember the rotary likes to consume oil by design, so keep on top of it.

Servicing is very reasonable, remember there is no cambelt to worry about.

Insurance is pretty reasonable, I'm paying 625 full comp, all mods declared (I'm 30 with 7-years NCD in a fairly good insurance area).

Be prepared for the fuel consumption though, they drink like there is a hole in the fuel tank. You'll get around 15 mpg out of a standard one. I get about 9 mpg out of mine when I'm going for it.......

All in all though they are just awesome cars. The handling is sublime, many describe the handing as 'like an overweight Caterham'. the power delievery is very addictive, the rotary loves to rev and you hit the rev buzzer before you know it. The brakes are incredible too.

All in all worth every penny it costs to run.

EDIT: The interior is very, 'enclosing', it literally wraps around you. It can feel clostrophobic at first, and if you are very tall forget it. I'm 6ft exactly and I just fit with the seat all the way back. You can mod the seat rails for more movement fairly easily though.

EDIT 2: Go here: www.mazdarotaryclub.com, the forums are a great place to learn about these cars.
 
Last edited:
DreXeL said:
.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

15mpg :eek: are you crazy? How come if the machine is classified as being a 1.3? :confused:

What's the top speed? I also noticed there seem to be different versions like R, R2 etc, can you shed any light on them please.
 
ElRazur said:
Thanks.

15mpg :eek: are you crazy? How come if the machine is classified as being a 1.3? :confused:

What's the top speed? I also noticed there seem to be different versions like R, R2 etc, can you shed any light on them please.
Click to expand...

It's 'sort of' a 1.3, but it's hard to compare it to a piston engine. It is officially classed as a 1.3 (well, 2 x 654cc) by Mazda, hence why it is called the '13B'. Mine is down as a 1.3 on the V5, but the UK cars are down as a 2.6 thanks to an agreement with the government about rotary engines.

Yes, 15mpg is all you will get on average. The rotary is just a very thirsty engine.

The R and R2 is just short for Type-R, and the later ones were called the Type-R2.

The main difference between the Type-R and the 'Touring', is less weight due to not having things like the bose sound system, and other weight savings. The Type-R is about 30kg lighter IIRC. They also have twin oil-coolers, compared to the touring's single one. Mine is a Type-R BTW.

Off the top of my head:

0-60 is about 4.9, and top speed is 162 IIRC.
 
[TW]Fox said:
Becuase it isn't a 1.3?
Click to expand...


Ok, to explain it all again to those that STILL think the RX-7's rotary engine is a 2.6L.....

You measure an engine's displacement by taking the swept volume of a compression chamber in the engine and multiply it be the number of them.

On the rotary engine there are only two rotors, each with a swept volume of 654cc's. 654 X 2 = 1308cc = 1.3L

For those that like to argue that there are more than one compression chamber per rotor : How many exhaust ports are there? How many intake ports are there?

If you start thinking that there are more than one compression chamber per rotor, then there's no way in HELL it would be called a 2.6, it would be called a 3.9L as there are three faces to each rotor. 654cc X 3 faces X 2 rotors = 3924cc = 3.9L

So please, STOP calling the Mazda rotary engine in ANY of its forms a 2.6L. The only people that would want to call it such would be money grubbing greedy government types that don't have two mechanical brain cells to rub together to make a coherent thought out of, and if you agree with them, you look just as foolish!!!

Not completely directed at you Fox, you just happened to be today's victim.... ;)
 
Mickey_D said:
So please, STOP calling the Mazda rotary engine in ANY of its forms a 2.6L. The only people that would want to call it such would be money grubbing greedy government types that don't have two mechanical brain cells to rub together to make a coherent thought out of, and if you agree with them, you look just as foolish!!!

Not completely directed at you Fox, you just happened to be today's victim.... ;)
Click to expand...

Isn't it class as a 2.6 because it is a 1.3 engine but fires every rotation of the crank and so twice as often as a normal piston engine
 
Nope thay just class it as a 2.6L so they can get the full road tax out of you!!!...

Minister for transport n' stuff - "You cant have a Jap Supercar with 200+bhp and only pay half Road tax cos its under 1.5L!"..

Ministers Numpty - "Yes Sir. I know, OK... Erm.. Because it fires every rotation of the crank and so twice as often as a normal piston engine, lest class it as a 2.6L!, We can get loads more money on top of the Fuel Tax!"

Minister for transport n' stuff - "Eeeexxxceleeennt Smithers!!"

:D
 
To be fare to the government, it probably dumps out at least as much CO2 as a "normal" 2.6, hence the classification.

I know we'd all love to drive powerful RX7s and pay cheap road tax, but thats just a dream :)
 
I put this in the last thread that turned into a discussion on the size classification of the rotaries but no one answered it.

Jagen said:
To be fair it does make sense to to class a 2 rotor engine as a 2.6 for comparative and equivalence purposes, a normal 4 stroke will sweep its displacement in 720 degrees of the crank.
It takes 1080 degrees of crank rotation for a single face in a rotary to complete a cycle, if you compare similar output rotations, ie 720 degrees rotation on the crank in a rotary you have 3 faces each having completed 2/3rds of their cycle per rotor so the total swept volume for 720 degrees in a 2 rotor engine is (displacement swept by a single face ina complete cycle) * (number of faces) * 2/3rds (proportion of cycle completed) * (number of rotors).
If you do this with a value of 654cc you get pretty much 2.6L
Click to expand...
 
D4VE said:
I know we'd all love to drive powerful RX7s and pay cheap road tax, but thats just a dream :)
Click to expand...

It's not a dream for me. Mine is down as 1.3 on the V5. I do pay cheap road tax ;)

The huge fuel bill pretty soon wipes that saving out though :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom