I understand the whole concept of the rotary engine and how it works, and its quite amazing that an engine that small cranks out massive HP for its size but id like to know other than the A-pec seals always wearing down causing oil leakes, but what were the ups, and downs, to its power band and where was its power band with, and without a turbocharger???? im asking all years not just one specific bodystyle :lala:

 

This motor can rev very high due to few moving parts in the engine. Its a giant crankshaft. This motor does not run clean and drinks gas. The car relies on rpms for power. This applies to all the years.

 

drinks gas?

how does 30-35mpg hwy at 80-90 mph sound
and 20-25city

and with 3 cats and a stupid exhuast plenum it runs fairly clean to be honest

apex seals wearing down doesn´t cause the oil eating
the car is MADE TO BURN OIL

a lot of ppl do not know a whole lot about them and believe a lot of problems with them only due to the early ones had those problems and that is about the last they heard of them so that is all they know
ex: ppl tell me all the time that I would be lucky to get 30k miles out of the car
I´m at 181k right now
only reason motor is going is due to MY fault in overheating it b/c I broke a belt (will explain later)

86-88 n/a is 138tq @3800 rpms 146hp @7000rpms
89-91 14xtq at 3800rpms and 160hp @ 7000
have to go soon so will get the rest of the stats up tomorrow

tomorrow I will have a huge a<x>ss thing for you though explaining the good the bad, torque curves, rpm ranges, and everything else I can think of on here


also I am buying a short block this weekend so I will even have pictures soon I hope to show the insides of a rotary to everyone who wanted to know

 

The 3rd generation Twin turbos are only rated at 25 highway EPA rating. I also forgot about the tons of vacuum lines.

 

:hail: rotary. Great design, and it works. I'd put an RX-7 on the light side of 2800 lbs. So it better get good mileage. I have an 81 RX-7 with a 1.1 Liter 12A rotary as a project. Someday it will be a beast.

 

PLEASE! Gas mileage with a rotary... you're kidding right? As far as gas mileage goes they are probably the most ineffecient motor ever made!

Problems exist with ALL rotaries. They older NA were fairly decent - capable of higher mileage like you stated. However, the newer 93-95 weren't. Anything over 60K on the stock engine and you're running on borrowed time.

derfrank - Rotaries have crankshafts? What ever happened to the eccentric shaft?

wes2k3 - Just curious how you got a 1.1L 12A? You do know 12A means 1.2L carbed right?

 

I meant to say its like a ginat crankshaft. I'll be more technical next time. I believe RX7speed has that animation of a RX7 engine in motion. Check it out.

 

Yeah, it is pretty heavy for its size. 40lbs I think!

 

Again we come to the rotary discussion.

Many people have opinions on rotary engines. Let me give you mine.

I drove an old '83 RX7 for 3 years. If it hadnt gotten in an accident, I am sure it would still be running great. It had the 12A...slightly different than the 13B that would power a 2nd gen RX7 (4port vs 6 port, carb vs EFI). The output of the motor was much better than average for its size. It made a whopping 100hp and 110ft/lbs...but keep in mind that it only displaced 1.19 litres.

Let me tell you this...that was the smothest running engine I have ever seen. At stoplights my passengers would think I had killed the engine (no ****).

The rest of the car was very good for the period. The interior was comfy, guages were easy to read (huge tach, little speedo off to the side ), the transmission was silky smooth, and it was a great handler. Id say that the car couldnt have weighed more than 2700lbs.

As far as potential....
If I still had the car, I'd find some way to work a SBC into it (sorry Dr. Felix Wankel). Mazda parts/motors were just too d@mn expensive!

Gas mileage was fair - 15-18 city, 25-27 highway (with 4.10 gears)

And yep, Mine had an oil injector on the carb.

I'd say the downfalls of the rotary engine would be the heat generated by the motor, the apex seals (I had no problems here, but knew a few who did), and they are a b!tch to start in the cold.

My favorite story about the car...

Once I missed 4th gear @ WOT and found 2nd instead. I looked down at the tach and it was burried! Man did that thing sound like a race car then . After I pushed my foot on the clutch the tach took a second before it even started to come down from 8,000rpm...my guess is I had her up to around 9500rpm or so (think no valves/no valvetrain). NO DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THE ENGINE. I checked compression after that happened and it was the same.

-Doug

 

am I joking about the gas no
I can hit that gas milage easily. I know of a few ppl in my area alone that are hitting close to that also. now granted at one point I was hitting about 22 hwy and 15 city. but that was with fouled plugs, guessing a little carbon build up, and few other things in need of tune.
oh yeah took a real dive with gas milage once when I used premium fuel. gas milage almost went half of what I get off reg.... is that what you where trying?

as for the 93-95 motors
yes they had problems with lasting long
easiest way I heard to fix it is get rid of the stock computer and step of the fuel injectors
for some reason mazda put those things right on the verge of going over the stock fuel system. and so after a while when things started to wear boom!

 

Uhh people, why is this on a thirdgen site? Helllllllo, why don't you go to www.rx7.com? j/p I own a RX-7 too and although it doesn't get great gas mileage it gets ok. Prolly around 21-23 city and it gets really good mileage on the highway.

 

damn you rx7 ppl


I was here first


I will now claim this my forum


haha my place now

 

a few other places are


www.rx7club.com

and my fav anymore

teamfc3s.org

or if you get bored you can always look of a local guy here

don´t know if he updated it but here it is

home.rmci.net/panther

 

...oh dear look what i started im going to just back slowly away and i thought the RX-7's n/a came with more then just 145 er sumthing HP im goad because now when i come up to one that doesnt have a turbo ill relax a bit haha i get scared of them theres one kid with one from the eraly 80's looks like it should belong in the 60's with the way it looks it would fit right in but hes got a muffler and kat on it and some customised intake its not turbocharged and he drives it like its the fastest thing on earth ill enjoy teaching him the rules of the road with my baby

 

Actually I have been here alot longer than you

 

what is it you drive?

and at most the stock N/A will have 146hp


but he could port it to make up in the 300hp range N/A

though not easy to drive on the street

he can also do a street port and make about 180-200hp and still easily drive it on the street

 

damn your right


but haha you don't own an rx7 anymore and I still do

 

Yea I do. 1990 RX-7 GXL and this one actually has a good clutch! lol too bad its not a turbo 2 like my last one.

 

and hey you might have been here longer


but I claimed it as mine first


ewwww GXL sucky sucky

 

what is the fastest stock rx7?

 

the 93-95 RX7's were the fastest from the factory. They were able to hit very high 13's to very low 14's stock with a 5sp.

 

but with the way the rotary works and how well they are suited to a turbo (vs a boinger) they are very easy to mod and make faster


the numbers for the thirdgen rx7

255hp@7000
215lbs/ft @5000
the weight is around 2700lbs



also a flat as hell torque curve

 

but the thing with the rx7 is not straight line


try taking a 93 RX7 with the R1 package on in the turns


your not going to win very easily


the only reason a z06 MIGHT win is b/c of power

but on the skidpad they are even
slolam the rx7 wins

braking.... rx7 wins big time.


plus overall feel of the rx7 is very nice in my opinion

 

but the thing with the rx7 is not straight line


try taking a 93 RX7 with the R1 package on in the turns


your not going to win very easily


the only reason a z06 MIGHT win is b/c of power

but on the skidpad they are even
slolam the rx7 wins

braking.... rx7 wins big time.


plus overall feel of the rx7 is very nice in my opinion

 

you are absolutely correct with the RX7 R1 Package. The 93 RX7 R1 package is the best handling car i'v ever driven and probably will beat the z06 in the turns. But for an everyday driver, the R1 package is just bone shaking and rough.

 

all I have to say is suck it up and take it like a man


had a guy localy who took the R1 package put some koni yellows on there with some sort of coil over pushing about 550/525 f/r spring rates... not sure if they are right but I know it was 500+ frton and rear, poly bushings, 18"inch rims frong and rear strut brace, and who knows what else

daily driver when he wanted with soem D.O.T. road race slicks hehe had two grooves in them

 

I've driven a couple R1's. I've ridden in a 02 405HP Z06. By far no comparison in acceleration. The Z06 would beat the R1 starting in 3rd gear!

Handling would be close, that Z06 stuck like glue. It felt heavier than the R1 (rightfully so), but it STUCK LIKE GLUE. I was grabbing for stuff to hold.

And braking? Please... Just like acceleration, the Z06 has it all over the R1. It made my eyes hurt

 

yes as far as accel goes the z06 does do faster

in the 1/4 though the z06 is about what 12.8 or so

the R1 should be around 13.8

braking stats

r1 should be from 0-60 in about 118 feet

just about the same as a 360 modena

 

Bottom line: Do not mess with a 93-95 Twin Turbo RX7, I had my A** handed to me one day. I love my car but the 93-95 RX7 is like a little slot car and for an import it is very nice. A stock L98 will not have a chance with one of those, a modded L98 maybe a little iffy, those RX7's (93-95TT) are definitly mid 13 sec stock.

 

straight 1 and 2 gen rx7's (I like 2 gen) from the wrecking yard can be re-animated with the insertion of chevy power via TPI or LS1 (LS1 preferred for its light aluminum weight) for a car that is nice looking handles well still and kills most thirdgens without having to totally learn to build/operate/run a new type of torqueless powerplant assembly (wankel).

 

Actually I think they are good for mid 14's. But then again I could be wrong. None the less they are fast!

 

The ZO6s brake better than 118 from 60-0. I remember reading old magazines about the C5, which I was in love with in 97, running sub-110 ft braking runs from 60-0. I think the best I saw, can't remember if it was in Motor trend or Car and driver, as I had a subscription to both, but 108 ft from 60 to 0. I know the ZO6 is lighter, and it does have a better braking system. I'd venture to say it has better brakes than did the normal C5. Still, even the old C5s were a head rush under the fully applied ABS.....WOW :rockon:

 

I don't see them being that slow, to be honest. In my old stock 89 mustang, I raced on on the highway, and it fuggin creamed me. What did those things trap?

Chris

 

I looked up and found:

1993 Mazda RX7 Twin Turbo R-1
0-60: 4.8 Sec
1/4 mile: 13.6@104
Skidpad:.93G
Base price: $38,000

They priced themselves out of the market, but as you can see they were worthly performers.

 

spec for the skidpad seems to be a little low
it should be around .99
0-60 times look a little low from the norm that I have seen
I have heard though anywhere from 4.8 to 5.3
but most are around 5-5.2
still looking for braking stats though on the car

I think it was 118 but I'm not sure

either way it was a worthwhile car and not bad for something that came out some time before the recent z06

 

I heard that Corvette experimented w/ rotory stuff, never went anywhere though.

 

they did

but I think that was in a time where the rotary got a bad rap and kinda kept it. it was eating seals. burning oil. burning lots and lots of gas


just about everyone tried working with the rotary

but only one made mass productiong cars out of it if I remember