Rx-7 break in period
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rx-7 break in period
I was just curious -- what does the manual say on a 3rd gen Rx-7 break in period. It seems like so many people on these forums guffaw at the mazda recommended break-in period of 600 miles, and instead say Racing Beat's plan is right just becacuse it is more conservative. I'm not saying Racing Beat isn't a brilliant company, but doesn't Mazda have a vested interest in the thing? If they say the break-in is 600 miles, and 600 mile break-in's lead to a lot of problems with the powertrain, that costs Mazda. Granted, if you're thinking about your engine running at 100,000 miles, that doesn't affect Mazda too much. But I don't think they'd stear there customers that wrong...
So I was just wondering what the Rx-7 suggested for break-in. If it's similarly low, knowing that rotory tech has evolved since 1993, I'll just assume they're being optomistic.
So I was just wondering what the Rx-7 suggested for break-in. If it's similarly low, knowing that rotory tech has evolved since 1993, I'll just assume they're being optomistic.
#2
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Okay, first of all, I see your posts so damned often, I wanna know -- what's your real name? Where do you live (if your profile isn't accurate...), how old are you, what do you do for a living, etc.
The point of the breakin period is, I'm in the breakin period (at about 650 miles) and I think to myself 'isn't it odd that Mazda would suggest a breakin period which is not sufficient for a motor they have to pay to fix during the warranty period. That seems counter intuative to me. So I started thinking about other rotary cars (if you can think of a more recent example than the RX-7 lemme know) and what their suggested breakin period, from Mazda, was, vs what people suggest for the car.
The point of the breakin period is, I'm in the breakin period (at about 650 miles) and I think to myself 'isn't it odd that Mazda would suggest a breakin period which is not sufficient for a motor they have to pay to fix during the warranty period. That seems counter intuative to me. So I started thinking about other rotary cars (if you can think of a more recent example than the RX-7 lemme know) and what their suggested breakin period, from Mazda, was, vs what people suggest for the car.
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the way I see it is that the mazda method will suffice. But the RB method is recommended and is most likely better (I havnt done the research on it myself so havnt actually seen physical evidence aside from many recommendations of using it). It's kinda like how software for computers often have "minimal requirements" and "recommended" set up. One works, the other is better.
#4
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
I see where you're coming from... it would be quite interesting to see how well the different methods work when compared to one another... it'd have to be 5 cars that match exactly though... so if one gets modded, the other side needs one modded similarly. If it was stock vs stock that would work very well.
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see where you're coming from... it would be quite interesting to see how well the different methods work when compared to one another... it'd have to be 5 cars that match exactly though... so if one gets modded, the other side needs one modded similarly. If it was stock vs stock that would work very well.
#6
Merchant Of Pace
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clovis, California
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wildside,
To suggest the FD is overrated is pathetic. The FD is legendary!! Ask most people who have one or better yet legitimate racers who have tracked/tuned the car and I think the respect for the car would be quite evident. Remember, at stock, as a 10 + year old car it still out performs most sports cars today in it's price range including my 30+K 2006 8. With a few modifications it'll run not too far off the pace of cars many K more in price.
Oh and as for the comparison between the Corvette and Rx8. I've had both the C6 and 8 on the track and outside of the +- 250 extra hps in the vette (which is a significant advantage) I probably had more fun in my 8. I can only imagine how much fun it would be to run a 20B 8 on the track!!
To suggest the FD is overrated is pathetic. The FD is legendary!! Ask most people who have one or better yet legitimate racers who have tracked/tuned the car and I think the respect for the car would be quite evident. Remember, at stock, as a 10 + year old car it still out performs most sports cars today in it's price range including my 30+K 2006 8. With a few modifications it'll run not too far off the pace of cars many K more in price.
Oh and as for the comparison between the Corvette and Rx8. I've had both the C6 and 8 on the track and outside of the +- 250 extra hps in the vette (which is a significant advantage) I probably had more fun in my 8. I can only imagine how much fun it would be to run a 20B 8 on the track!!
#7
Zoom-Freakin'-Zoom
iTrader: (5)
Oh hell, I'm sorry man. You must be misunderstanding me. I am not in any way attacking your posting. I think it's awesome you stay up on the boards. Post away!
As for me, my name is Scott, I'm from Minnesota (a suburb south of Minneapolis), and lemme tell you, RX-8s out here are about as common as Big Foot. I think up here, most people willing to put down 30k on a car want either AWD or a lot of luxary and a huge back seat (or an SUV...)
The 2K comes from racing beat's suggestion. Below 4k for 1,000 miles, no full throttle for another 1k.
As for me, my name is Scott, I'm from Minnesota (a suburb south of Minneapolis), and lemme tell you, RX-8s out here are about as common as Big Foot. I think up here, most people willing to put down 30k on a car want either AWD or a lot of luxary and a huge back seat (or an SUV...)
The 2K comes from racing beat's suggestion. Below 4k for 1,000 miles, no full throttle for another 1k.
check pm...
the whole rx7 break in just caught me as odd..
beers
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wildside,
To suggest the FD is overrated is pathetic. The FD is legendary!! Ask most people who have one or better yet legitimate racers who have tracked/tuned the car and I think the respect for the car would be quite evident. Remember, at stock, as a 10 + year old car it still out performs most sports cars today in it's price range including my 30+K 2006 8. With a few modifications it'll run not too far off the pace of cars many K more in price.
Oh and as for the comparison between the Corvette and Rx8. I've had both the C6 and 8 on the track and outside of the +- 250 extra hps in the vette (which is a significant advantage) I probably had more fun in my 8. I can only imagine how much fun it would be to run a 20B 8 on the track!!
To suggest the FD is overrated is pathetic. The FD is legendary!! Ask most people who have one or better yet legitimate racers who have tracked/tuned the car and I think the respect for the car would be quite evident. Remember, at stock, as a 10 + year old car it still out performs most sports cars today in it's price range including my 30+K 2006 8. With a few modifications it'll run not too far off the pace of cars many K more in price.
Oh and as for the comparison between the Corvette and Rx8. I've had both the C6 and 8 on the track and outside of the +- 250 extra hps in the vette (which is a significant advantage) I probably had more fun in my 8. I can only imagine how much fun it would be to run a 20B 8 on the track!!
And yes, if the RX-7 3rd gen was a 30-40k car, it'd be exceptional (as a track car). But with a starting price of 32,500 in 1993 (about 45,000 today with inflation) before any options were added, and you're talking about a VERY expensive car. My point (as off topic as it has become...) is simply that for 45k, you have a lot of cars to chose from. The RX-7 is punishing to drive on the road, from all accounts. Compare that to the RX-8 which is a better car than the 350Z in most opinions not because it's faster at the track (which it certainly isn't) but because it is the better car overall.
I think the same logic should be applied to the Rx-7. Is it a fantastic track car? Yes. So was the vette and other super cars of the time. (Keep in mind, I've driven none of them, and only ridden in a 3rd gen once). I just don't think as an everyday car it is that great. MHO.
Edit: In reading my own post, I realized I countered my own point. The Corvette is equally legendary, equally expensive at the time, and equally as un-utilitarian. Guess I should just shut up. Still would rather have a more comfortable (read: RX-8) car for everyday is all.
Last edited by wildside50; 02-07-2008 at 03:30 AM.
#9
Zoom-Freakin'-Zoom
iTrader: (5)
Obviously, the idea of an "over rated car" is completely subjective. Trust me -- I own a Dodge SRT-4, and it has to be called overrated more times on every board I've ever been on than any other car in existance. Personally, I find it fun as hell to drive.
And yes, if the RX-7 3rd gen was a 30-40k car, it'd be exceptional (as a track car). But with a starting price of 32,500 in 1993 (about 45,000 today with inflation) before any options were added, and you're talking about a VERY expensive car. My point (as off topic as it has become...) is simply that for 45k, you have a lot of cars to chose from. The RX-7 is punishing to drive on the road, from all accounts. Compare that to the RX-8 which is a better car than the 350Z in most opinions not because it's faster at the track (which it certainly isn't) but because it is the better car overall.
I think the same logic should be applied to the Rx-7. Is it a fantastic track car? Yes. So was the vette and other super cars of the time. (Keep in mind, I've driven none of them, and only ridden in a 3rd gen once). I just don't think as an everyday car it is that great. MHO.
And yes, if the RX-7 3rd gen was a 30-40k car, it'd be exceptional (as a track car). But with a starting price of 32,500 in 1993 (about 45,000 today with inflation) before any options were added, and you're talking about a VERY expensive car. My point (as off topic as it has become...) is simply that for 45k, you have a lot of cars to chose from. The RX-7 is punishing to drive on the road, from all accounts. Compare that to the RX-8 which is a better car than the 350Z in most opinions not because it's faster at the track (which it certainly isn't) but because it is the better car overall.
I think the same logic should be applied to the Rx-7. Is it a fantastic track car? Yes. So was the vette and other super cars of the time. (Keep in mind, I've driven none of them, and only ridden in a 3rd gen once). I just don't think as an everyday car it is that great. MHO.
i am more confused now.
as the 3rd gen. was really ok on the road... in the got it from the dealer form..
as to the rx8 vs z on the track.. well i think you would be surprised there same day same driver different car..
got to say the rx8 will win.. unless it is 4 turns with 4 long straights..
beers
#10
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am more confused now.
as the 3rd gen. was really ok on the road... in the got it from the dealer form..
as to the rx8 vs z on the track.. well i think you would be surprised there same day same driver different car..
got to say the rx8 will win.. unless it is 4 turns with 4 long straights..
beers
as the 3rd gen. was really ok on the road... in the got it from the dealer form..
as to the rx8 vs z on the track.. well i think you would be surprised there same day same driver different car..
got to say the rx8 will win.. unless it is 4 turns with 4 long straights..
beers
Guess it depends on the track and driver's preference. When Top Gear tested the RX-8, it got an absolutely identical time (down to the 1/10th of a second) as the 350Z, and just a few ticks below the M3 (E46). But when most American mags test the cars at a track, the 350z usually wins by a second or three.
#11
Btw, I followed the Racing Beat's recommendation.
Last edited by liam; 02-07-2008 at 11:36 PM.
#12
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're either really naive or something worse. Anybody can slap a big turbo onto an econo-box and obtain some mighty impressive straight line figure. If you think FD is all about straight line speed, in lieu of its total overall package, then there's no point with you. In the annals of automotive history, your Srt is a speck compare to the FD.
Btw, I followed the Racing Beat's recommendation.
Btw, I followed the Racing Beat's recommendation.
#13
Wheels, not rims!!
iTrader: (8)
It's not naive to have an opinion. For some people the Corvette doesn't float their boat -- no point in arguing it with them. It just doesn't. The FD doesn't float my boat. I like the FC a lot more. Of course it's not about straight line speed. Stock, the FD was slower than a 350Z in a straight line. My point was fun to drive. For super-car price, there's lots of fun to be had. There's a reason most people who've driven both will say that the RX-8 is the better car. It's certainly not faster. Not the better race car, just the better car.
Last edited by SayNoToPistons; 02-08-2008 at 05:19 AM.
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Burnsville, MN
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, this started out as such a simple thread...
I asked about the Rx-7 breakin period on an Rx-8 message board (mind you, the Gerneral automotive section, not the RX-8 specific section) because, as a new 8 owner, I presumed a lot of people who own an RX-8 have also owned (or do own) and Rx-7, and my question would then expand to relate to the RX-8. If I'd asked it on an Rx-7 board, got an answer, then tried to tie it into the Rx-8, I guess I'd have gotten made fun of there for asking about the 8 on a 7 forum. Ah well.
I'm sorry this thing got so off topic. Twas an honest question, I assure you. I'll just try my luck on the 7 forums for my own edification and leave it alone.
I asked about the Rx-7 breakin period on an Rx-8 message board (mind you, the Gerneral automotive section, not the RX-8 specific section) because, as a new 8 owner, I presumed a lot of people who own an RX-8 have also owned (or do own) and Rx-7, and my question would then expand to relate to the RX-8. If I'd asked it on an Rx-7 board, got an answer, then tried to tie it into the Rx-8, I guess I'd have gotten made fun of there for asking about the 8 on a 7 forum. Ah well.
I'm sorry this thing got so off topic. Twas an honest question, I assure you. I'll just try my luck on the 7 forums for my own edification and leave it alone.
#17
Registered
Most of the guys here who rebuild engines run 1000 miles unboosted. I have no idea what the manual says.
As for this thread... well.. it's time to clean it up.
As for this thread... well.. it's time to clean it up.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Touge
Canada Forum
1
09-23-2019 06:45 PM
R3Dream
Series II Technical and Trouble shooting
48
03-12-2016 01:44 PM