Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette. 2

Discussion in '2002 Mazda RX-7 Spirit R' started by mariowrc, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Motortrend is wrong, this car does 0-60 in 4.8 Seconds, it also does the q/t mile in 13.5 seconds i believe.
     
  2. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from MrCarrera</i>
    <b>Actually, the RX-7 Turbo is easily capable of beating a standard C5 Coupe. The RX-7 is on par with the Z06 in every catagory, including acceleration.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    Prove it!!! Where do you get your info? what info do you have?

    I KNOW! None, wuit talking out your ass.
     
  3. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    "Ther you go, cold hard facts, that cant really be disputed. I do love the rx7 however, in fact it is one of the only japanese cars that i do like, but it does get beat in this test. The hp difference really doesnt make too much of a differenc in this race due to the rx7's much smaller weight. As for handling, even being an american car entusiast iw ill have to honestly bow out to the rx7, but just slightly, due to its lighter weight and smaller size i do believe that the mazda will beat the incredibly nimble vette through the curvies (although i have no facts to back that up like i do the acceleration)"


    Except, that there is disputing your "facts" when they are incorect. First off, several times the 94+ FD RX7 were tested doing 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, and the 1/4 mile in 13.5.....And that is the US spec FD RX7! Sure, it was tested doing slower than that, but then again, so has the vette, which has also been tested doing much slower.

    Also, even the 265HP versian in Japan has been tested MUCH faster than that. There are many test by Japanese magazines with the FD running 0-60 in 4.8 seconds, and 13.2 in the 1/4 mile. So...what does that say....That in terms of acceleration, even those lower HP versians compete in terms of acceleration.

    And, even Best Motoring has tested a bone stock(inclduing stock tires) FD RX7 with the factory 276HP doing an amzing 12.9 1/4 mile....soooo, there you go.
    And this one has 280HP, and lighter weight....so sorry to tell you, but this car could absolutly compete with a 2002 Vette.

    Even when it was brand new, the US spec FD had handling numbers as good or better than other supercars out there. It was tested pulling skipad numbers of .98-1.0 G!! Also, it being a small car and wonderfully balanced, it had amazing slolam runs, sometimes doing up to 70MPH through the standard slalom!! Also, even in 93, the FD had 60-0 distances of 107ft...that is world class.

    So, it absolutly DOES compete in terms of acceleration and other atributes.

    Oh, and one more thing,...please tell me of who you know who paid $45K for a new FD RX7. I worked at an RX7 specialty shop for years, with my boss owning 7 FDs, and having countless original owner cars in there, and the price ranged for new FDs was $33K-$40K when they bought them....so, that again is not exactly true.

    Is the FD a better car than a 2002 vette? Well, that is hard to say. It isnt faster. They both are as sexy as anything. The advantage the vette has is reliablity and logevity, and the advantage of the RX7 is size and nimbleness. If I was getting them both new, i would take the FD...also note that I have driven and worked on both for years. If i was getting one used I would definately get the vette.
     
  4. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    this rx-7 will take out a regular corvette, no doubt about that. but im not quite sure on the z06, im willing to bet that itll give it a run for its money, but not quite sure if itll beat it. itll probably come down to the driver in either car at the end.<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    ok..Ferrari4ever's post made me upset. does it matter how u get power? as long as u get it? seriously? the Z06 is not crap. i like all cars, of every make equal to what they deserve. and good ol' pushrod power is just a different way to get the power you want. so go study more cars and come back to the website when u have more respect for all technology. u dont deserve to use that ferrari logo u ignorant ass.
     
  6. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    look, Chevman, technology comes in many places, Japan is one of them. Using the laws of physics you cannot get incredbly large hp and tq from small disp engines, it doesnt happen, so that is why they use forced induction (to try and imitate displacement) by cramming more air and gas into the same space. That does not make a car better or worse, jsut different. I am not personally a big jap car fan, i think that too many of those cars are designed for one purpose and then pretend to be used for another (aka civic) and i think tht too many of those cars have been over hyped and over rated (aka skyline) and i think that too many are jusk ugly (aka supra) but just because they are from a different continent doesnt mean that they are bad. Yes HP/L is retarded, no japan can not seem to make a large disp engine worth a shit compared to american ones. And dont you ever imply or say that a porsche is a bad car because it is turboed ever again (you sound dumber than the peopel you are trying to insult when you say that). But other than all that, you have a couple of good points.


    p.s. chevman, dont insult others intelligence until you know the facts yourself, the NSX and porsche 911 are both NA. the 911 is only turboed, wen it is the 911 TURBO, or carrera 4 TURBO, or GT2, or several other variants. The base 911 is not turbo
     
  7. #57 bigrob, Aug 10, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    hey ferrarri, a couple of things to say to you, not to be a dick, just trying to point some stuff out.

    "For example...the higest level of motorsports....Formula 1 3.0L 800-850 HP.....that is like 280 HP\l or so....the viper in ALMS....say...700 HP that is less than 100 HP\L...I like vipers...but that isn't technology...it is just brute displacement that makes that HP...."

    Obvioulsy the F1 car would whoop the viper, but the viper is not exactly a shabby car to begin with either. The viper is based off a production car and the F1 not. And i am willing to bet that the viper has a lot more torque. Torque is one the the primary reasons for high displacement motors. And the reason that the F1 motor is so small and compact is because the rules of the league say it must be, and because MILLIONS of dollars go into producing that motor, not so much to the viper.

    "Honda for example...they use F1 technology in their cars"

    Where? what in there car is F! tech? (just curious actually). And you dont think that GM and Chrylser use what they learn racing in their production cars? I mean hell the LS1 BLOCK is used in the C5R, same with the viper (not the same motor exactly, just the same block and random other components), can honda say that they use the sam block in their race cars as they doo in production ones?

    "1.6L 160 HP honda civic Si) .....look at the 2003 viper...they had a 8.0L for 2001 and now they are using a 8.3L to make 50 more HP"

    These cars are not really a good comparison, due to one being an econobox and the other a world class sports car, but the viper and it designers enjoy torque, something that most jap car manufacturers that rely on hp?L as a measurement of their engine's worth seem to forget about.

    "You talk about forced induction...You are right...there are forign cars with forced induction but not all....now I am not talking about money or anything like that....just stats...
    Ferrari 550 ....5.5L 485 HP
    Corvette Z06....5.7L 405 HP"

    Look at the price differenc between these two cars, it is ovver 100,000 dollars. Not saying that the ferrarri si not worth it, it most definately is, but the performance difference between these two cars is not as emence as one would expect from these two cars, and the vette can actually be increased in hp from the aftermarket, I challenge anyone to go find large amounts of aftermarket parts for the ferrarri, i really dont think that they are there. Most people buy ferrarris expecting a car to be as good as it gets, and that is what they get. I love ferrarri, if i got offered both sets of keys my hand would take the ferrarri without a second thought. I dont think that the comparison of these two cars (even though in my opinion they are in the same performance class, not the same prestige class though) is really wise for what you are trying to prove.

    "Dodge Neon R\T ...2.0L 135 HP
    Honda Civic 2002..2.0L 200 HP"

    Now those stats are jsut wrong. First off the Neon RT makes 150 hp at 6500 rpm (01 neon RT) out of a 2.0 L motor. And second you pointed out earier an intereesting spec sheet for the civic si, well you got it half right there and half right here, that actuall specs for the new civic si (2002) is 2.0L 160 hp. dont believe me? go check it out at this link... http://civicsi.honda.com/
    P.S. and by the way, the Neon RT (or SRTnext year) will be turboed for next year providing the first car in its class EVER to make 0-60 in less than 6 seconds, not even the integra typr R could do that.

    "And whoever said that Corvette has more history than Porsche...I dont even know what to tell you....but simply you are wrong...."

    Tecnically the vette did start before porsche, but that is neither here nor there. In america the vette has more history and in europe visa versa. I see eaqual history and racing dominance jsut in different parts of the world.

    ----------

    Bro i am not saying any of this to be a dick, and i respect you for coming out and saying that you did not want to start a fight, but as i read your posts i found a great many topics that i wanted to respond to, so i did. sorry if it came across harsh.
     
  8. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    This RX7 by the way,kicks ass, i just wish that it would be possible to make a reliable wenkel motor, and maybe a larger one. i know that both of those are tall orders, but the way that this motor works even 100 cc's extra could cause HUGE gains, but.......................... THE VETTE IS FASTER! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
     
  9. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    ok first of all, big rob u seem to be one of the few people on ehre that look at all aspects of each side of the car industry. thank god there are some of you out there. second of all whoever said every 16 year old will have one is a dumbass. i really wish i would see more RX-7's on the road. but hell i cant get out of my neighborhood without seeing 3 C5's and one Z06. #$%#in vette's r everywhere! it would be very pleasing to my eye to see more RX-7's/ Supra's/ Skyline's soon to come.
     
  10. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Hi there!!! First, u shouldn't take number so seriously as u take, except for really big differences. HP, torque, 0-60, topspeed, all of those are very relative for a really car lover. U can't say u have as much fun driving a MB S600 Brabus limo (a one that makes over 300km/h and has really good acceleration) than u hould have driving a peugeot 106 gti, or something like that. They are tottaly different experiences. It all deppends on what u like to do.
    And this stars my next point. I hear most of u Americans talk about drag-racing between cars, as for here in europe, we have more preference for really circuit-racing, thats a fact, thought I do not intent to generalyse ( so don't feel offended). That makes a huge difference between american ane european cars. Even your roads are different form ours. So I think this makes the discussion pointless. A vette (and a viper, and a mustang, and...), though being a good sportscar, is more for fast cruising, and the mazda (as for all european sportscars) is made for "the corners".
    Tecnollogy? Yes, off course most euro. cars have a lot more tech, but, as u say, u must consider the price, and the propose.
    In my oppinion, it gets really difficult to compare american VS european cars because they are built for different purposes.
    To finish, I guess the vette hould (off couse...) win a drag-race, and the mazda would beat him on a circuit.
     
  11. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Ok...I know for sure that Price-to-Performance ratio is very important. And yes domestic cars cost less than exotic cars for the performance ratio.

    I guess that the general public dosen't look at the numbers... they just step on the gas and the car moves...that is all that counts. I am not even going to get into handling...but it isn't like they built cars for that...

    well understand this.....Euro and Japanese cars all make alot of HP out of small engines...why?..becuase in history they were not as wealthy as Americans so they have to use smaller displacement engines...so they developed them WITH ALOT OF TECHNOLOGY and made them powerful. Americans have always been more wealthy and could afford alot of gas so they made huge displacement engines to make HP.
    Euro cars handle great because they have tight twisty roads and not as much highways. Here in America they have plenty open highway so handling wasn't an issue..

    It isn't bias or anything just kinda the history of why cars are the way they are...I dont hate any car...just like technology alot...

    I say that pushrod are bad because they are very old technology... Yes they produce alot of HP (i.e. Nascar) because well they are so old that they have been developed over a long period of time....If you build upon something for 50 years ..Yes you are going to get alot out of it.
     
  12. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    JanDaMan you really are the man...thank you for saying that.


    Rod Millen Pikes Peak Open Class winning Celica= 1000HP 2.1L turbo No NOS

    HKS supra 4.7L BiTurbo 2000+ HP no NOS

    It isn't like the Japanese and Euro companies didn't want big engines it is just that they couldn't afford it ..

    you know that in japan like over 2.0L or 2.5L displacement you have to pay more tax or something like that.....They just had to make power with what they had...and all they had was small engines.

    Ohh man at Summer Slam (Englishtown NJ.) last year Ari Yallen brought his 20B 3 rotor RX7......single turbo with NOS 1300+ HP

     
  13. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    I am going to have to defend the vette[ I'm named after it's tires]. First off, The vette's handling[Z06] is 1.01g, Is alot better than this, The tires are wider[P295/30ZR20 rear, P265/35ZR18 front] which mean added grip, There is more power as well. Plus, after the firestone debacle I wouldn't want to riding on them. As for the C5, I don't know. We will just have to see. This, Being tuned, would probably beat the C5. I would buy this car if it was still avalible, I would just change the tires, and put more power in. This car makes the best use of it's power, and it looks great. <!-- Signature -->
     
  14. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    i've broken my silence on this site because of the ignorance of some of the people on here...first of all, let me just post some stats from Car and Driver (and to the jackass who said something like car tester magazines are crap? go play on the highway)

    2002 Porsche GT2
    0-60 3.80s
    1/4 mile 12.00
    skidpad 0.98

    2002 Corvette ZO6
    0-60 4.07
    1/4 mile 12.48
    skidpad 0.99

    so, there you have it, that's one test where the porsche is clearly the better car, not by much, but better performance wise. ah, be we are forgetting one very important stat that i will list....now

    2002 Porsche GT2 base price
    $179900

    2002 Corvette Z06 base price
    $50430

    hmmmm, so basically, i could get 3 Z06s for the price of 1 porsche. i think comparing the Z06 to a car like the GT2 is quite the compliment to the Corvette...now on to the car at hand, the RX7. although there are no stats out for this car anywhere, unless you can read japanese, it's really hard to say...oh wait, this is the same exact car as the old RX7, just with new seats and new brakes. that one didn't beat the vette, what makes you think this one will?

    i read something earlier on this forum about how some guy thinks import guys know more about cars in general and most import lovers are mechanics or engineers? where the hell do you live? every mechanic i know, EVERY mechanic i know, including my father who has been one for well over 30 years now, drives and loves domestics and will tell you this...which ALL of you people need to realize...HP/L is a retarded measurement of a cars performance, it's just a way for you silly ricer people to think your civic built for economic purposes is some sort of high-performance car...you people make real car lovers like me and bigrob sick...

    ps to bigrob...HA! i finally posted!<!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Real quick-how come everyone says that the Vette or Viper does not handle well? In the hands of a skilled driver, they are amazing (as is the RX-7). Am I the only person here who watches Le Mans and sees how well those cars handle, though modified, under extreme conditions?<!-- Signature -->
     
  16. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    BigRob

    I am not biased....

    But you are the opposite....you make it sound like Vipers and Corvettes are te greated thing since sliced bread....

    I dont know..people around me think that american muscle will beat anything.....when a Integra Type R will 1/4 mile faster than a mustang 5.0

    haha....and Porche and Ferrari have a very very long resume of success in International auto racing...

    not just the US
     
  17. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    well for one yes the viper and vette dont have good handling the only reason why it does have any handling at all is cuz the makes of it gave it big wheels it counter the weight so it can have some kinda handling. the viper and vette isnt a great car either. these cars if you race them you cant drift. like most import cars can cuz of there engine size. the viper is built by mitsubitshi and the engine is from lamborgini and the design is from dodge. but dodge paid them for this so yea i guess its right fully theres
     
  18. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    BigWillman

    your stats dont mean crap....because I can get you different numbers from Road & Track....that is exactly why we said that the numbers are differnt in differnt magazines....ok

    And yes I have been watching motor racing all my life..

    Rally, ALMS, F1, SpeedVision GT & TC, BTCC, etx...

    BigWillman Have fun on the highway....
     
  19. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    I would say the vette on drags and FD3S on winding courses and overall handling.

    Vette has torque .. .lots of it.. but FD isn't bad in that area either!.

    vette for sure is not as nimble as the FD...
    FD is a better balance between power and handling I think...
    maybe I'm bias.. never a big fan of american cars...
    but Vette isn't bad
     
  20. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ferrari4ever123</i>
    <b>BigRob

    I am not biased....

    But you are the opposite....you make it sound like Vipers and Corvettes are te greated thing since sliced bread....

    I dont know..people around me think that american muscle will beat anything.....when a Integra Type R will 1/4 mile faster than a mustang 5.0

    haha....and Porche and Ferrari have a very very long resume of success in International auto racing...

    not just the US</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->You obviously have not read anything else that i have posted. The reason that i have posted the way i have is because I believe that the corvette is a better car than this, performance wise. I have admitted that i believe that this rx7 will out handle a C5, iw ill continue to admit that, but this rx will not wouthandle a z06. And to top that off, who the **** brought up Z06 anyway? That wasnt the point of this conversation to begin with.

    And about your second point, i dont give a F if the mustang loses in a quarter to an integra type R. Couple things about that though, it depends on the year of the stang (early 80's hell yeahit loses that car was lucky to hit a 16 sec 1/4) early 90's though, i think that it would be a pretty damn good drag race, but the mustang would probably win especiall if it were from 89-95 5.0 L mustangs due to the introduction of the HO engine. Once again though i am not a huge mustang fan either. ANd look at the age difference between the cars as well. ANyway, the integra type R woudl also dust 305 ci camaros ffrom the 80's.

    This Rx7 to me lies in the performanc eclass between the pony cars and the vettes. It is better than an Fbody in most aspects but then again nota s good as the vette in most aspects. Then again it also costs 5,000 less so it shouldnt be as good.

    As for me thinking that vipers ane vettes are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Not quite. I do love those cars, but i respect pretty much all cars for their place in the performance food chain. I respect them for what they were disigned to do and who they were disigned to do them for. I love euro cars, and i enjoy jap cars, i just often times think that Jap cars are over rated.

    BigWIll, its great to hear you talk, beach-pussyweather! On to the House!!!!!!!
     
  21. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    I understand...

    But some american cars are overrated also.

    But I think that a Japanese RX7 will probably spank a C5 and maybe take a crack at a Z06

    Peace rob
     
  22. i vote for the r x7

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from bigrob</i>
    <b>Ok here it goes, real specs from mazda and from motor trend (they are what i could find)

    rx7 (1999 turbo, same as this car, different seats)

    250 hp
    5.4 0-60
    158 top speed
    13.8 1/4

    vette (1999 coupe, before hp increase)

    345 hp
    375 tq
    4.8 0-60
    173 top speed
    13.2 1/4

    Ther you go, cold hard facts, that cant really be disputed. I do love the rx7 however, in fact it is one of the only japanese cars that i do like, but it does get beat in this test. The hp difference really doesnt make too much of a differenc in this race due to the rx7's much smaller weight. As for handling, even being an american car entusiast iw ill have to honestly bow out to the rx7, but just slightly, due to its lighter weight and smaller size i do believe that the mazda will beat the incredibly nimble vette through the curvies (although i have no facts to back that up like i do the acceleration)

    As for these two cars being non comparable, get your head out of your ass and wake up, the two countries build cars differently and thusly their cars will have different engine types but can be built for the sme purpose. Think about it man, countries seperated by oceans and with differenc economical and cultural differeces will develop different types of sprts cars, both will be fast, both will handle well, and both will be built differently. Don't spout HP/Liter, because as someone said that topic has been discussed at naseum and has been proven retarded. The only time that hp/L means anything is when you enter your car into a displacemnet limited race, thats it.

    Why is it so hard for some people to realize that displacement does not neccisarily determinie class, but purpose and performance does? </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    That is a bunch of crap. For this car mazda reworked this thing. it probley running with bigger turbos and better suspention. Diffent seats? does that make any sence? your going to make a car and make it a special edition and just add stupid seats? give me a break find some real stats on this car then you can talk
     
  23. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    one more thing you bigblock lovers love to quote carand drive find me a test were the vette does over 1.0g on the pad..
     
  24. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    First and foremost...I am sorry...I didn't mean to offend anyonee (obviously I did..) but look at the names of the people who replied.... Chevman....Vette....I know you like american cars.

    this has nothing to do with beauty or racism or anything like that or patriotism...I like american cars...I think some look great...and yes there are plenty of bad forign cars....I am not a racist..

    but look who pushes the lines of power output...not American Manufacturers.

    and for Chev.....not all forign cars have forced induction....
    there are no turbo hondas ... not stock anyways...but they manage
    100 HP\L...

    For example...the higest level of motorsports....Formula 1 3.0L 800-850 HP.....that is like 280 HP\l or so....the viper in ALMS....say...700 HP that is less than 100 HP\L...I like vipers...but that isn't technology...it is just brute displacement that makes that HP....



    ok so the specific HP output has been disgussed before...but why must there be (in almost every racing series and magazine) always giving a displacement advantage to pushrod cars....Like you say "who cares" well the general public dosen't care...they just step on the pedal and the car takes off....but

    Technology pushes the world....why not use some of it....
    you know why I brought this up....look at Honda for example...they use F1 technology in their cars and they sqeueeze out as much HP as possible....(1.6L 160 HP honda civic Si) .....look at the 2003 viper...they had a 8.0L for 2001 and now they are using a 8.3L to make 50 more HP?....why it seems like they aren't trying....they just do what is easy......

    dam there were 14 posts yesturday ,......damm

    By the way....I wanted this to be more a discussion not a war...
    I am sorry if I pissed anyone off...
     
  25. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    This is for Chevman348 ....

    1.) chill out....I dont hate anyone..I am trying to put anything down or anything like that...I OWN AMERICAN CARS!!!!!!!!!!

    2.) You talk about forced induction...You are right...there are forign cars with forced induction but not all....now I am not talking about money or anything like that....just stats...
    Ferrari 550 ....5.5L 485 HP
    Corvette Z06....5.7L 405 HP

    Dodge Neon R\T ...2.0L 135 HP
    Honda Civic 2002..2.0L 200 HP

    I am mearly trying to say that it seems like they arent trying....
    And Chevman348...I love Vetts...I think they are great all around performers...I hope you understand my point...

    And whoever said that Corvette has more history than Porsche...I dont even know what to tell you....but simply you are wrong....

    peace
     

Share This Page