Just wanted to reiterate the FACTS. Stop this subjective bullshit.

 

*Checks your username posts*
Whats wrong with you?

 

^ still, old and ugly. Get a new car.

 

Do you have anything better to say? 99.99% of your posts are completely retarded. Even your signature is pointless.

Are you still in elementary school? "Pfft, i know you are, but what am i?" "You're stupid" "OMG like so stupid".

 

^ RX7 is still ugly.

 

Are you serious? I have to say, the rx8 is not attractive compared to the rx7. Only thing that bothers me about the appearance of the rx7 is the hideaway lights. Otherwise, I love it. And I am sure most people would agree rx8 appearance < rx7 appearance.

 

RX7 looks gay.

 

What's up with the RX-8 and RX-7 guys bashing? Both cars are good, period. They were both designed for two completely different reasons.

RX-7 is a crazy good track car, so much so after the first year they had to come out with a softer suspension.

RX-8 is a amazingly practical sports car, decent trunk, full room for 4 adults, expecially compared to a new Mustang GT.

Two very different cars, why are they compared? Only because they both have rotaries and are made by Mazda? There's a reason Mazda didn't call the SE3P a FE RX-7, it's a completely different car.

Should we compare a C5 Corvette to a 4-gen Camaro? They both are made by Chevy and they both have LS1. Corvette is great track car like RX-7, Camaro? Good engine for the value but old solid-rear axle, and only babies can sit in the rear seats, but good money for the engine non-the-less.

 

Welcome to my ignore list, 4me2.

 

UGLY.

 

Spend some money and get a college education.

Your comments are contradicting what your other members are saying. You would be a better help to them if you stayed out of this debate/argument/pissing contest.

 

Ugly and old. What more needs to be said?

 

I agree. I still love RX-8s and plan to own one. The girlfriend wants one and I really enjoy driving them. I'd love to drive them everyday. Would I drive my RX-7 every day? Yes, but I hate putting miles on it. Is it reliable enough for everyday? Yes, plus I've worked on rotaries for over 7 years. Has my RX-7 broke on me? No. Not in the 5+ years of owning this one.

I've owned an 88 TII, 93 FD touring, and my current 93.

We're all in love with the rotary engines. But I agree two different cars. And this whole "better" argument is truly just annoying. To me, Numbers speak. Not subjective banter.

 

From you? Nothing, you've already displayed to everyone how immature you are. Now GTFO.

 

More 2 cars, than #'s.

^still ugly and old.

 

Did a FD RX-7 beat you in a race?

I hope the guys on RX7club don't find one guy that bashes the RX-7 on here indicative of us all, I for one find the FDs sexy. Would be dumb if they bashed our RX-8s, looks are subjective, and each car has it's pros and cons no question about that.

As for the track potential of the RX-8, Isami Amemiya himself on video said he believes the car has the most potential, that the suspension and chassis is superior but the engine is lacking only. Once the RX-8s have been out for awhile and the track cars have their power tuned, they'll prove themselves. The RX-7 has already proven itself on many tracks.

 

Wow. Certain owners from both sides really need to grow up. Since when did 7 & 8 owners become rivals?

Some of you (and you know who you are) need to realize that no one wants to hear your pointless bashing. FDs are unreliable; we know this, why the **** are you polluting the forums with brainless taunts and bashes over the matter. 8's are the slowest kids on the block; once again we all ******* know this.
And who gives a **** about how many ******* seats you have? Read the thread title again. Where the hell does it say anything about practicality vs. sportiness?

The 8 does a good job of being a sporty 4-seater.
The 7 does a good job of being a sporty 2-seater.
The. *******. End.
Can we not wage war over the purely subjective topic of "more seats = better car?" Wouldn't it be more engaging and enlightening to compare which car pulled off it's build better?

For example, the legendary status of the 7 would suggest that it did an excellent job of being a 2-seater sports car. However, it does have a reputation for being attrociously unreliable. Now, the 8, when professionally reviewed, wins 1st place with astonishing consistancy. However, it's plagued with a reputation for being slow, and it's predecessor's unreliability reputation has carried over from the 7 despite the decade-long hiatus of rotary cars in the US.
Intelligent discussion question: Given the areas of success & failure of the 7 & 8, which would you say, with timelines of availibility and production taken into account, did the better job of conquering its nitch in the marketplace?



(P.S.: Answers like "TeH 8 cUZ tthe RX- 7scuKEd mY nUtzzzzzz" are neither encouraged nor English)

 

(all new) I owned a 1988 rx7 turbo, then a 1990 300zx. The rx7's 3'rd gen, were to ugly for me to get.

You people buy these old cars thinking you are cool, but when they were new, they weren't that cool. I was there, and they were ugly then, and still are.

 

DIAF. That is all.

 

Seriously, someone should ban this 4me2 guy. He's nothing but a post ***** and going on ignore. Pointless thread clogging garbage.

 

I think you're wrong there. Numbers only say so much. As pointed out earlier, the 7 has practically negligable advantages over the 8 in terms of weight and horsepower, yet anyone who's every driven both can tell you that the 7 has assloads more power, and drives much much more nimbler.
Numbers give a good outline on a car's performance, but in a thread about retrospective and comparing cars against each other with their different builds taken into account, you need more than just engine and suspension stats.

Yes, the FD kicks the 8's face in every category when looking at HP, Torque, weight, ect. However, given that it's got 2 less seats and wasn't intended to be practical at all, it damn well better win in every category on paper. The trick now is to take it's age into perspective and intelligently determine weather or not it did as well for a 2-seater back in '93 as the 8 did for a 4-seater in '04.

Looking at the other legends in the 90's, there were faster cars out there, and there were some that definately gave the FD a run for its money in the corners. Now, as we all know, there are competators for the 8 that are faster, and there are a few who give it a run for its money in the turns. The million dollar question is this: Who has the narrower gaps, the FD or the 8?

 

Grammar ftw!!!

 

^Go back 2 your loser forum.

 

If someone disagrees with you,,,,,,,,, you tell them to die in a fire?

 

Mmmm... I don't get this.

RX-7 vs RX-8:

Number of seats is different.
Number of doors is different.
Style is different.
Purpose is different.
Each buyers' priorities are different.

How can we compare this?