What's the big difference between the rx-7 and rx-8 in the engines? Is the Rx-8 reliable (considering it is a rotary like rx7 which was unreliable)? Which is faster, and which has more potential horsepower....? The Pros and Cons...Who comes out on top overall?

 

nice first post

 

My RX7 is reliable as hell! 110000 miles and still fast as hell! I think the Renesis will have more potential when more aftermarket parts come out.

 

my FD surpassed my FE in power and top speed
my FE excels in handling and comfort.

i love 'em both

 

*yawn*

 

I heard that the twin-turbo 7s get broken faster then the non-turbo, but i always say that if u take good care of your 7 it wont break, i see the 8 as a more realiable car, just cause of the new engine

 

isnt it SE?

 

Sigh, I'll bite - the big difference is that the FD RX-7 had TWIN TURBOS, and a zillion vacuum hoses, while the RX-8 is normally aspirated. The RX-7 was unreliable when people started screwing around to try to get more power, and didn't know what they were doing, and would blow up their engines. Also, the twin-turbo setup was not the easiest to maintain or trouble-shoot. Again, no turbos on the Renesis (that's the RX-8 engine), and it should be as reliable as the pre-FD RX-7 non-turbo rotaries - which was VERY reliable, unlike your contention that (all) RX-7s were unreliable.

You need to just do a lot more reading here and learn, your basic assumptions are WAY off.

Regards,
Gordon

 

My '89 RX-7 ran great until 250,110 miles (when I replaced it with an 8). Never had any engine work.

 

Well said, you would know better then me, but I thought the first year ot two of the twin turbo had some issues with seals? Am I wrong?

 

you could also try doing a search on howstuffworks.com keyword: rotary or rotary engine. they have a basic tutorial on how a rotary works and in theory how the rotary engine is of superior design...aloha....

 

My RX-7 went 37,000 miles with out a problem. I had to sell it to get a back set due our second child. (I lost a couple thousand paying off a 5 year lease). It kind a of pissed me off when all the magazine writer said it was the greatest car because it was all sport, then a year later but it down because it was to rough drive daily.

Anyway with me being 10 years older with 2 more kids, I like the RX-8 much better.

 

The FD could pull almost a G on the skidpad, so I'm not sure why you prefer the 8 for handling

john

 

Maybe because we don't like to drive in one big circle nonstop?

 

I got better gas milage with my 1987 RX-7 than I do with the RX-8.

 

yeah i've heard that rotary engines are pretty much more reliable than piston ones that is if your not driving it like you stole it...heh, but i have to admit that the benz's run for a long time too...i just passed the 220,000 mark on my 90' 300E

 

I have 140k miles on my '90 rx7 and it still runs excellent. Oh - it's for sale too!

I think a lot of the bad rep the rx7 got was from the turbos and that folks would modify them without much regard to proper fuel and other aspects and subsequently blow the engine up. Because the FD uses a manifold-pressure system to control the engine, rather than the mass-airflow system used by the '8 (and FC rx7), it's a lot more touchy when it comes to changing things on the engine like intakes and so forth which alter the efficiency of the intake. My FD has 63k miles on it and I haven't driven it more than 150 miles in the last 6 or 8 months - very sad.

 

same ol' misinformed questions...... different day. Rotaries are very reliable if properly maintained and driven hard. The bad rap came from people who didn't/don't know what they were/are doing.

 

200,000 km and no probs,,,,, on my 7

 

Whoa, some more misinformation from some noob whose never owned a rotary, what a suprise... anyway, periodically redlining a rotary is actually good for the it, it helps clean up any carbon deposits that may have formed. Go to rx7club.com and see all the high-mileage 1st gen and 2nd gen NAs that are driven hard every day and still have good compression on the original motor.

 

yeah, your right...i am pretty noob because i dont own a rotary but im willing to learn so thanks for the new info.

 

I had an '88 with no problems with the engine even with over 120k on it.

 

Well, Mazda didn't exactly help themselves with some of their design choices. The plastic air separator tank eventually falls apart, spilling coolant everywhere and, if you're not on your toes, overheating the motor and causing a rebuild in a few months due to bad water seals. The rat's nest of hoses in the turbo control area didn't help either, as they tended to pop off or crack with age, causing difficult-to-diagnose problems with the turbos. When you add to this the amazing level of incompetence at many of the dealers...especially after '95 when they stopped selling the cars in the States...the bad rap was at least partially justified. It just had nothing (or very little) to do with the rotary engine itself.

jds

 

My first gen was the most reliable car I ever owned and also the most fun to drive. My 3rd gen is a great car..but as I tinker with the power output I know I will pay the price in motor life.

the motor designs are different between the renisis and the older motors.

 

Had a 93 Rx-7 R1 and loved it. Sure it was noisy, road rough, was a two handed white knuckled fist full of excitement every time I drove it, buy Never had a flooded engine, never once cared how many gallons to the mile it guzzled, and what person in their right mind cares when a car continues to deliver more smiles to the mile than any other car I have ever owned. Without traction control, power sliding, through turns was positively exhilarating. All of the new fangled traction and handling components on the new 8 are all well in good since I purchased it for my wife, but I liked my RX-7's performance aspects best!