Mustang or RX7???

[saxon4u]

Compare Them Here

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo saxon4u,

 

kennst du schon Mustang or RX7??? (Anzeige)? Dort ist vieles zu finden.

 

Sportwagen Kaufberatung Ersatzteile (Anzeige) | Sportwagen Kaufberatung Tuning (Anzeige) | Sportwagen Kaufberatung Uhren (Anzeige)

[izzyloveslizzy]

I think the Mustang engines are Torqueier and therefore nicer, but the Rotary is a good idea and if they can find a way to inject some Torque muscle into that thing then it's a good engine. Personally I think Mustangs are more flexible as a platform, and on the whole nicer-looking (though I'm comparing and contrasting between the Mustangs and the RX7 only; if you bring the RX8 into the equation it'll be a bit different). Overall Mustangs have always had more power and they offer good value. Handling has always been good (or at the very worst better than average), the factory kits are better, and there are more customizability options out there due to the widespread influenece of Ford and the mustang heritage. I've seen Mustangs as far away from North America as, say, in the Middle East. But I don't think I've seen too many RX-7s there! As far as the RX-7's looks, the car looked good. the current Mustangs are getting a bit long in the tooth when it comes to appearance, but the 2004/2005+ Mustang should take care of that little problem.

Here are a few pics for others to see them head-to-head:

Note: The pics of the RX7 show a 1995 RX7, while the Mustang pics show the 2003 Mach-1 Mustang.

[bleh]

apples and oranges.

[izzyloveslizzy]

Not really Apples and Oranges, but I'd still appreciate your unique view on the matter. Could you explain why (or at least write more than 3 words)?

- Izzy

[thepolarfoxqx]

they are very different cars in terms of engineering philosophy, but they do compete performance wise, and are in nearly the same price segment.

An RX has a rotary, which is an interesting engine to say the least, it's major advantage is an ability to spin to ungodfully high speeds, it's major draw-back, to go fast, you have to rev to ungodfully high rpms, and there and only there in a slim torque band does the RX start to really haul. It has great handling.

Conversely, the GT has a big SOHC V8, which is all about a flat torque curve, so what if it is through by 6,500, it comes on low and strong, 90% of peak available 1,500rpms through 5,500rpms, there is always gobs of torque on demand. Disadvantage, a shifter that may be one of the world's worst, a beam rear axle, and handling that is unimpressive. spotty build quality, and a high lack of refinement. It has go power everywhere though, no matter where in what gear, this thing feels like it has tons of torque in reserve.

It is driving style really, most people either like one or the other.

[bleh]

i thought you guys didnt like my leviathan posts:). i didnt know that saxon got banned.

but a brief comparison:

like polarfox said very different engineering philosophy. both have a very strong after market. the mustang is a torque machine and quarter mile monster(when tuned correctly). the rx7 handles and is ment for more balanced driving.

how high the engine revs is purely preference of the driver. i love cars that rev past 7000 rpm, allows for a first gear that has the same acceleration to last longer than if it could not rev as high. but to switch from normal cruising to agressive acceleration requires a large downshift.

the rx7's b13b i think it is? produces the same cumbustions per revolution as a 4 cylinder. the turbo helps make up for this flaw at highspeeds. the rotary engine is incredibly compact and light allowing it to be very versitle in the right hands but it is a far from perfected technology and thus not as reliable. from my experience this is a car that is very flexible and can be insane in the quarter mile or on winding roads depending on how you tune it.

the mustang has double the cumbustions per revolution and like polarfox said again, torque wherever and whenever. from my experience with these the are great for the amateur tuner who really only cars about straight line driving and donuts.

i appreciate both with enthusiasm, but have preference with the rx7. it is entirely based on driving style.

[thepolarfoxqx]

also, the way they are tuned is huge. The RX-7 is meant to be a very balanced "sports-car" - handling is very pinned down, it is light, and tight, and to go fast, you have to rev it like a banshee, the Mustang - tuned for low end, torque where ever, whenever, is a muscle-car, handling on it is average, and it is reasonably heavy. To go fast in a stang, simply pin the peddle, any gear, any time, and it will pin you. if you like smoking the tires and having gobs of torque all over, a stang is for you, you can be sloppy and still drive it fast. An RX-7 has the capacity for very sporty driving, but you have to keep the car right in the sweet spot. rarely do RX-7 people like driving stangs, and vise versa.

[izzyloveslizzy]

I completely agree with both of you.

I dislike the RX rotaries because of their low-torque band and their high rev delivery needs. By the way I don't like pushing engines to high revs just to get "better" aceleration in 1st. Revving an engine to 7K or beyond from start can kill the engine faster than you can say "crap my engine's dead". Well, maybe not exactly, but it's still unhealthy (especially if you have the fast driving habits of a racer, which means you will really work a car). The Mustang doesn't suffer from the torque problem of the rotary RX at all, because it has more to begin with anyway, and it's available at low ends, which means it won't have to push itself to 7K just to speed to 62MPH.

Good reviews, gentlemen!

[djfux69]

i agree with all of you, it is definetly up to personal preferances. i consider the rx-7 more like a go kart bacause of its dimensions and weight. i have never driven one but i am guessing it would be a pretty nimble car. however i have driven the mustang gt, and i have to say it is not my type of car. i mean if you like smoking tires like izzy said then go for it. there is something about the way the weight dist is set up that no matter what, everytime you take off, you smoke tires. handling is below average in my opinion(or at least it feels that way with the soft suspension) it reminds me of my dads old car (92 buick park avenue, thank god he sold it a long time ago)

however a downfall fro the rx-7 is the rotary, which needs to be replaced( everyone sais rebuilt but i talked to a mazda tech and if u want to do it right it has to be replaced) after 40k. also to fix it you need a rotary specialist. i think if u have the means to spend money at least everymonth on your car, and you know a specialist go with the rx-7. it isnt a problem to tune them to 400 rwhp.

however if you would rather set it and forget it, stang.

[thepolarfoxqx]

weight distrobution is solid on a mustang, the extremely high low end torque, stiff clutch, and aggressive gearing, coupled with a beam rear axle make for easy burnouts. Handling is decent, but is hampered by the american softness, that said, it is much much much more practical than the small and volatile RX-7. If RX-7 had a highly tuned Duratech 3.0L V6, or a highly tuned turbocharged Ecotec 2.0L I4, it would have what it takes. Keep in mind, nowadays, these are both ford!

[Anzeige Amazon]

Hallo saxon4u,

 

schau doch mal hier zum Thema Sportwagen Kaufberatung (Anzeige)? Eventuell gibt es dort etwas Passendes.

 

Der V16 Motor zum Selberbauen (Anzeige) ist auch genial.

[bleh]

weight distrobution is solid on a mustang

thats why it weighs so much

If RX-7 had a highly tuned Duratech 3.0L V6, or a highly tuned turbocharged Ecotec 2.0L I4, it would have what it takes.

i dont think a v6 or i4 is the answer with this car.

rotary technology needs the be further developed and given more variety. two rotors is not enough for a higher performance engine. the rotary engine is in the wrong hands. it has the potential to become the greatest automotive technology in performance motorsports if reliability and efficiency problems were ironed out. when the rx-8's statistics had come out i was very disappointed in the numbers and target price. i was expecting something that would surpass the rx7 but it really doesnt come close in torque(and you were complaining about the rx7's torque!) i understand that most of the limitations to this car spawned from poor emissions and reliability, but this hurdle can most definitly be leaped if more money, research, and development were spent on it.

my solution: sell the pattent to honda, toyota, nissan, bmw, vw, or someone who will make first priority of perfecting and using the technology.

[djfux69]

rx-8 isnt that bad. i mean it puts out the same numbers as the tt rx-7.

[thepolarfoxqx]

The RX-8 will deliver on the promise that RX-7 layed forth in rotary tech. Finally there will be a fast,sporty, practical, and reliable rotary sports car.

[bleh]

rx-8 isnt that bad. i mean it puts out the same numbers as the tt rx-7.

no. look at the torque lost and the weight gained. granted it is now a four door, it still will not live up to the rx7 which weighted approximately 200lbs. less and had near 60 more torque. it does show progress that they are able to produce those numbers naturally aspirated and are making it more practical with four seats, but it still has not come close to its potential.

the rx8 is competing with the s2000(practicality set aside). the rx8 has just a few more hp, a little more torque, weighs 200lbs more and costs about 4-6 thousand less.

the rx7 used to compete with japan's finest. the rx8 is competing with japans finest four bangers.

[FstVr6ex]

The RX -8 is not Mazdas answer to the lost but not forgotten RX-7. It is not being made to compete with the 7's power or torque or anything. It marks the beginning of the next generation of rotary powered cars from mazda. If mazda wanted it to be the next rx7 they would have called it an rx7. The truth is that mazda has ideas and plans for the next rx7 and look for a figure of around 310-330HP from those two spinning rotors. The rotary has been reborn as the REnesis, and its gearing up for battle.

[bleh]

where could i get more information on the new rx7? and why dont they use more rotors? i havent seen anything to hint that the rx7 will be coming back. the development of the rotary engine is a very high concern of mine.

[GIR]

WOW Rotary engines! I'd like to see the service interval on those.

[thepolarfoxqx]

it can't be good

or even close. a maintanance nightmare.

[FstVr6ex]

The rotory is of very high concern to me as well. I use to own an '87 turbo and loved it until i wrapped it around a tree. All of the things ive heard about the new rx7 have been in articles about the rx8. Theyre just little blurbs but they all seem to be consistentwith each other. From what i understand mazda wants to see how well the rx8 is does in sales and customer satisfaction before it pulls out the big guns in the rx7 form. I hope and believe the next gen. rx7 isnt too far around the corner. And just think it would be the perfect catalyst to revive the HP maniacs at Toyota. RX-7, Supra, and 350Z batteling it out once again! Im in heaven.! As far as maintanance problems we have to at least give the new renesis a chance to prove or disprove thaat it is a reliable engine. It sounds as if the engineers have adddressed most of the major issues of the old 13B. Only time will tell.

[bleh]

RX-7, Supra, and 350Z batteling it out once again!

no 3000gt??

now i am excited again. if they do this right it should be beyond everyones expectations. i would assume the rx8 would be more reliable simply because it is naturally aspirated, but it is a ford .....

[thepolarfoxqx]

No. 3000GT is dead. Too bad.

This will be a fun match up.

You know Road and Track (i think it was them) did a comparo of the Mustang Mach 1, the RX-8, and the 350Z, ranking the Mach 1 3rd, 350Z 2nd, and the worst performer of the group - the RX-8 1st.

[djfux69]

i saw the road and track comparison of mach 1, s2000, audi TT, and 350z. tt 4th, s2000 3rd, mach 1 2nd, and 350z 1st. i have here a comparison of the 350, rx-8 and 330ci. they wanted to see if the rx-8 would be considered a true sports car even though it is a 2+2, and if it was roomy. i dont know about you but i consider the porsches to be true sports cars and i know they had a back seat, useless maybe, but it was there. the numbers arent too bad on the rx-8, it is highend where it gets stomped.

fox let me know what magazine you saw the comparison in i would like to read it. thank you

[izzyloveslizzy]

Let's not get TOO far off topic.

No matter how good the RX-8 rotary is, I still don't think a Rotary is the answer, unless you're getting experimental, or if you're a real fan of the Wankels. The fact of the matter is, the Mustang engine will be working it's ass off years after the RX rotary has worn out (which, by the way, still does happen, contrary to Mazda advertisement). I'll take the pistons and cylinders and good old fashioned engines over a rotary, thank you. More power, more milage, and less hassle. Maybe the future has some room for improved rotaries, but it's not a big market (and thus not competitive, which means you won't see giant leaps towards better rotaries). Also, it would be interesting to see if Mazda can make a Diesel Rotary of some sort. That way at least the horsepower and Torque can balance out more fairly.

[Kevin321]

To bad they are both fords.

[thepolarfoxqx]

hey, ford is easily the most modern and quality of the american manufacturers.