Crit

I'm considering an S2 with 77k miles, don't really have the means for a compression test on the spot. In general, has the third injector improved things such that they're no longer a grenade at 80k miles, or is still a big liability?

200.mph

iTrader: (9)

this is bullshit. a lot to do with how it was taken care of. get a comp test

Steve Dallas

You are right, 200.mph. Some grenade at 20K miles.

Always get a compression test.

ZoomEricZoom

Yes. They're more reliable. People aren't having nearly the amount of engine issues as say an '04/S1. I think a lot of it has to do with the 3rd oil injector that was added (on the S2).

However, it's still a rotary!! Just cause it's improved DOES NOT mean that it's fixed. The key word is improved! (Although, IMO, it's significantly improved).

Lots of people on here, including myself, think that an extremely well-maintained S1 will outlast a neglected S2 long-term.

New Yorker

I, too, believe that "quality of maintenance" trumps differences between the S1 and S2. I think the S1 design is reliable assuming it's properly maintained, which it usually is not. (You'd be amazed how many owners don't follow all of Mazda's "rules" to the letter!) As a corollary, I believe the S2 refinements simply increased the margin for error for owner neglect a bit.

Bottom line? Any Renesis will prove reliable if you do what you're supposed to - and don't do what you're not supposed to do.

Crit

Thanks guys. As much as I enjoy being chastised, let's please keep it civil. In the end, I'm just trying to de-risk a purchase and will only have a few hours to do so. I'm looking to see if I can borrow a compression tester. The current owner isn't terribly proficient. I've asked if I can take the wheel off for a compression test and to pull the coils - we'll see how it goes.

ZiG

I..don't know if I would give the third injector as much credit as others here. Remember the RX7 only had one. I believe the oil pressure was increased, the filter relocated etc, but any major improvement (real, not imagined) may be a combination of the oil pressure, third injector, tune, and so on. Not sure if I could believe it's any one thing.

acroy

Howdy Crit
I bought a meticulously maintained 22k mile S2 in Dec '15.
Engine was low compression and replaced under warranty Jan 2016.

IF the car is still under warranty (8yrs 100k miles) then compression test before purchase is 'nice to have' but not needed.

My suggestion:

If the car is
1) good condition
2) good price
3) under warranty
Then roll the dice and buy it. Enjoy until 2-3mo before warranty is up. Have it tested at a dealer ($100-150). Fail = new free engine. Pass = smiles.

neit_jnf

depends on the generation... older RX-7's had one oil injector on the housing but also one on the intake manifold runner (total 4). It was the 3rd gen twin turbo that went with only one per housing and those are not known for their exceptional reliability

sinkas

I think the consensus is that the S2 engine is improved, there appears to be far fewer complaints with them, but there were also far fewer sold
Get a compression test

Crit

I'll do a compression test, but also now have the VIN. In the many (too many) threads I've been reading, someone offered to run VINs through the Mazda maintenance system to check for warranty engine replacements. Any idea who this helpful person would be?

ouimetnick

Call Mazda Corporate (800) 222-5500

Give them the VIN and they can check to see if there was an engine was replaced though warranty.

IamFodi

iTrader: (1)

more reliable / increased margin for owner neglect = po-TA-to / po-TAH-to

By definition, longer lasting means more tolerant to neglect, and vice versa.


Either way you slice it, yes, the S2 should be better. Like, by a lot. It's had a raft of changes that address every known problem -- oiling, cooling, fueling, the works.

But... Keep in mind how freakin' few S2s there are. IIRC, total S2 sales for ALL model years were like 1/8th the sales for MY2004 alone. And obviously S2s are much newer and have a LOT fewer miles. Either one of those things alone would make it hard to judge how much more reliable they are. Together, they make, like... one big ball of uncertainty.

So, do we know for sure that S2s are more reliable? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the answer is "no", and I ain't holding my breath. Though, if we're honest, it sure seems like a safe bet.

IamFodi

iTrader: (1)

Agreed!

ironhacker

I've owned both. A 2005 and 2011 R3 (still have the R3 with 49K). With the 2005, I had many CEL's including A P2070. I had to replace the coils and had oil coat my MAF sensor once.

With the 2011 R3, I've had none of these issues. Just standard maintenance. The thing runs like new at 49K. Also no sag in the back, like others I see.

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

Yeah we have several locals guys who have owned S1's and S2's and they will all tell you that their S2's are far more reliable. One of our local members is a tech at a local Mazda dealer where they have done over 500 S1 RX-8 reman installs and he said he can only recall 5-6 S2's needing engine replacements and one of those was tracked heavily and failed due to running low on oil.

pcs

iTrader: (2)

The other thing to consider is that there have been a LOT more S1s sold compared to S2s, so the basis to which there could be problems is much smaller.

I also subscribe to the theory that it should be more reliable, however, if we're comparing the number of complaints between the two series, it's important to keep in mind the smaller number of S2s compared to the number of S1s.