Curious: who would buy a new RX7?

mjd77

You are correct. It is actually 1.3L per rotor, so technically it is a 2.6. So you essentially have a 2.6L rotary engine that has the low end power of a 4-cylinder and the gas mileage of a V-8. Not real impressive when you look at it that way.

mjd77

For the record, I will consider one but for now I am considering the 370 or the slightly improved RX8 R3 or just holding on to mine until there is some concrete info about the new rotary. Even more important to me than the power, if they can't do something about the gas mileage I dont think I could pull the trigger. I know the 8 is a performance car, but I cant accept the fact that with my mostly highway driving commute to work I still only manage about 20mpg. I know 2 people that have 350zs with a similar commute and they manage close to 30mpg.

Lug

This is incorrect. From the WIKI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_Wankel_engine
*****
In auto racing, the displacement of a Wankel engine is usually doubled for classing purposes. For Japanese tax purposes, the displacement of Wankel engines is defined as the equivalent of 1.5 times the nominal displacement. So the 1.3 L 13B engines count as just under 2.0 L for these purposes.

The 13B is the most widely produced engine. It was the basis for all future Mazda Wankel engines, and was produced for almost 30 years. The 13B has no relation to the 13A. Instead, it is a lengthened version of the 12A, having 80 mm (3.1 in) thick rotors. Each rotor had a displacement of 654 cc, for a total of 1308 cc displacement in the engine.
*****
The upped cc measurement was strictly for balancing racing capabilities.

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs

MightyBobo

Interesting...

__________________
I don't own a car anymore.

Lug

More interesting is the R26B 2.6 liter 4-rotor engine they built (kinda two 13B's wedged together) that makes 700hp.

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs

Forrest

Its true if you grandma at 60-65 you can obtain those numbers in the 350z. But i dont know about my 370z i have not driven it enough, i am suspecting grandma'ing it will achieve 28mpg. Thats what i have seen on a long highway drive no nasty hills.

k.alexander

Long highway rides, relatively flat, cruise set to 75. I get 28.5mph in the 370Z.

__________________
-Are you coming to bed?
-I can't. This is important. -What?
-Someone is WRONG on the internet.

Lug

Houston to Louisiana and back with cruise set around 80 MPH about 90% of the time = between 26 and 27 MPG in 2006 350Z Auto.

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs

Anatoray

I just saw an old 93 era RX-7 on the street today, and that solidified in my mind that no, I would not buy a new styled RX-7. The old one is legendary, much like the Supra of the same age, and every new concept for a potential new model that comes out just pails in comparison. The current one in particular just doesn't look right at all.

antennahead

I owned one of those, great car, very fast and handled great, but the twin turbos usually went at about 75,000 miles, and was very expensive to replace.

John

armensti

i had no idea about the rx7 or the supra but if either one of them comes out better then the z with better performance figures then i might have to go with one of those. im not to happy with the 370z clutch sound its so irritating.