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.

    I don't know if any of you have ever seen a Linkin Felter corvette but right now it would kick any RX-7s a$$ no matter what, I myself am an import enthusiast but the linkin Felter Corvette is a twin turbo V8 I saw it run at New England Dragway a week ago and it ran a 10 second quarter mile, don't ask how fast it was because I was too impressed by watching it.<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from NeeDSM</i>
    <b>I don't know if any of you have ever seen a Linkin Felter corvette but right now it would kick any RX-7s a$$ no matter what, I myself am an import enthusiast but the linkin Felter Corvette is a twin turbo V8 I saw it run at New England Dragway a week ago and it ran a 10 second quarter mile, don't ask how fast it was because I was too impressed by watching it.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->First- its Lingenfelter. Second-don't ever compare a tuner with stock. That's not fair. Third-the 427 twin Turbo Lingenfelter costs much more than an RX-7. Fourth- It runs the 1/4 mile in roughly 8.5 to 8 seconds. Remember this is a comparison between the STOCK 2002 RX-7 and the STOCK 2002 Corvette (Not the Z06). <!-- Signature -->
     
  3. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    back on page 7, i read something that caught my attention as being completely erroneous. venomgtr said that a modified race rx-7 could make 600+ horsepower without forced induction. this car, with turbos, makes less then 300. a rotary making 600 horsepower without forced induction would have to be rather large, and large rotaries dont work very well. ferrari4life123, sorry that i didnt respond earlier, but my computer has been down for a while. i agree that no NA stock american car makes 100 hp/l but its irrelevant. a viper, with an eight liter v-10, makes 450 hp and 480 footpounds of torque. it is one of the fastest cars ever made. the new ones have 8.2 liter v-10s and make 500 horsepower and 500 footpounds on torque. it doesnt matter that there is huge motors in the front of the car because the chassis design counters it and allows for excellent handling. vipers pretty much own their class in endurance racing, with corvettes being some of their main competition. porsche 911 turbos are about the only other cars that can hang with the big displacement american racing machines.
     
  4. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Great great comparison, On the drag strip and on the road my NSX gets embaressed by a nicely tuned rx7. Now someone earlier was making fun of turbo charged japanese vehicles saying how if u stick a turbo on a vette then it will be a ferrari killer.... AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH i laugh at people who think so. how stupid do you have to be to stick a turbo on an engine that is not likely to last more than 3 years. The rx7 was rated "very good" in reliability by the anual consumer report, the stinking vette however a whopping "very poor". Now you stick a turbo on that "very poor" engine and see it blow up after the very first race. The japanese engine are MADE to be turbo/blower capable, the american push rod engine is not. Japanese cars have ALWAYS been a lot more mod capable, so lets not bring up this stupid ass argument of japs using boosts to keep up with the american "25" liter engines....<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ferrari4ever123</i>
    <b>I am sorry but all you American Muscle heads are ignorant.

    Dont mean to offend...but everytime a sweet car like this comes about you compare it to a american muscle car..!
    it is totally true.... all american cars make horsepower by displacement....they have a huge engine that makes less then 100 HP\L ...all those muscle cars have pushrod engines...this is a technology that was made in the 1950's....everyother manufacturer in the world switched to overhead cam engines...because they see the advantage....</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    first off, the corvette is legendary, like the porsche, and even though it has a larger engine, its still heavier, so WTF are you talking about? And pushrod engines? well, overhead cam is great, for high-end power, but honestly, how many americans go out and top-end thier cars to see how fast they can do? not the vast majority. but how many occasionally pull up to somthing nice at a stoplight and se how fast they can hit the speed limit? most americans have, and so we build our cars for acceleration and torque, you know, that litte thing that lets you get up to speed really quickly? OHC and DOHC don't help torque, they help horsepower, pushrods help torque, and that is why we use them. <!-- Signature -->
     
  6. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Aan 'American Musclehead' didn't start this forum moron. LamboOwner did, and in case you couldn't tell by his name, he likes Italian! <!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    --------------------------
    Great great comparison, On the drag strip and on the road my NSX gets embaressed by a nicely tuned rx7. Now someone earlier was making fun of turbo charged japanese vehicles saying how if u stick a turbo on a vette then it will be a ferrari killer.... AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH i laugh at people who think so. how stupid do you have to be to stick a turbo on an engine that is not likely to last more than 3 years. The rx7 was rated "very good" in reliability by the anual consumer report, the stinking vette however a whopping "very poor". Now you stick a turbo on that "very poor" engine and see it blow up after the very first race. The japanese engine are MADE to be turbo/blower capable, the american push rod engine is not. Japanese cars have ALWAYS been a lot more mod capable, so lets not bring up this stupid ass argument of japs using boosts to keep up with the american "25" liter engines....
    --------------------------

    First of all, Ill have to say that the thing about the Corvette's shoddy engine beeing complete BS. The Corvette's LS1 is extremely durable and reliable, especially when you start tuning. Ive seen a Corvette twin turboed to near 1300hp and used as a daily driver (although the guy who did it must have been nearing insanity), and that was with the older LT-1 used before 1997. The most popular heavy mod for a Corvette is either a twin turbo or a supercharger, and it has been that way for many years. I somehow doubt that people wouldve kept doing it if their cars died after 3 years.

    And back on topic, I think the stock Corvette and RX-7 are close enough that it would be left up to differences in the skill of the driver to determin the outcome of the race, unless the track has long straights where the Corvette could pull ahead at speeds over 100mph (better areo and more power = push through air easier).
     
  8. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    guys, forget the lingenfelter vettes... 427 cid, i know... look up a little car in here, calloway sledgehammer corvette, i think its an 88... twin turbo-ed 350. fastest street legal car of its time. <!-- Signature -->
     
  9. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    The Sledgehammer still holds the record for fastest street legal sports car if Im not mistaken. But as far as I know only one was made.
     
  10. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    yea, only one, but still the fastest ever... proves to the world that americans are insane... i should know, im one of em, at least on of the crazyer ones, and whats really cool is that it was made with a smallblock, a stock displacement smallblock, for that matter...<!-- Signature -->
     
  11. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    SHUT DA FUXX UP GUYS!!! Daewoo, Lanos is the best!!! 0-60
    21.34 sec Top speed 90 Mph

    (\~~~/)
    ( =_=") PRICES: $9800
    ¥Y___\)~*
     
  12. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    --------------------------------
    Iam professional "Mechanical Engineer" so I guess that gives me validation to speak in repect to your signature.

    Engine capacity does matter! Shit over 5 litrs and thats all the power American cars produce? If you talking about technology. American cars with their big blocks are way behind.

    And about handling I havnt seen one car Mag in Australia where I am from that even comes close to validate that good handling of American cars. And we do have American readers for our mags.
    --------------------------------

    Again, here we go about efficiency. ! Dammit, the Corvette is made to put out, not show the world that small engines can make respectable power. And lets not forget that it get better gas mileage than these HP/Liter marvels. Jee, I wonder how thats possible with our dinosauric technology? Mabye because its not primitive at all, and we use this method because, unlike wringing the crap out of 3 liter V6s, IT WORKS.

    And the cars that get imported to Australia usually arent the same ones in America. Heck, you can still buy a Caprice in Aussie brand new, they stopped selling them over here back in '96.
     
  13. WTF IS THIS??!!!

    If we are talking about STOCK vs. STOCK what a Shitty line up you need to learn how to Compair Cars that are actully are made to battle. "What fools to say a Z06 would beat this
    but a C5 nah i think C5 would be loser." OMFG I have seen to many street and drag races to even be minorly convinced of this. Even the C5 would beat this of course no doubt about it but consider these cars have almost nothing in common. Maybe they look a little the same
    but this is no base on Comparing them to each other.

    By the way I race a Imported Gto but im not brainless. No Doubt who the winner is Stock vs. Stock
     
  14. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from WAY2FAST4YOU</i>
    <b>Great great comparison, On the drag strip and on the road my NSX gets embaressed by a nicely tuned rx7. Now someone earlier was making fun of turbo charged japanese vehicles saying how if u stick a turbo on a vette then it will be a ferrari killer.... AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH i laugh at people who think so. how stupid do you have to be to stick a turbo on an engine that is not likely to last more than 3 years. The rx7 was rated "very good" in reliability by the anual consumer report, the stinking vette however a whopping "very poor". Now you stick a turbo on that "very poor" engine and see it blow up after the very first race. The japanese engine are MADE to be turbo/blower capable, the american push rod engine is not. Japanese cars have ALWAYS been a lot more mod capable, so lets not bring up this stupid ass argument of japs using boosts to keep up with the american "25" liter engines....</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Just wondering, have you ever heard of Edelbrock? Just a question. But yeah, you can buy just a GM block and crank, and then get everthing else from one of Edelbrocks catologs, so don't dare tell me that any jap engine is more mod capable. Cause that is just one company, and there are many more. And if you do ever look through one of their catalogs, they have some crate engines enginered for blowers, and they use the same blocks that Chevy and GMC are puttin in their trucks. What about top fuel dragsters, they run blowers on them, and they take alot bigger of a load then your NSX, and they hold up just fine. And here's another little insight, push rods in no way hinder an engine. If anything, they just make them easier to modify. You can put in timing gears with no belts or chains for precise timing. With the in block cam you can get more of a lift on your valves with a shorter lift on your cam by sticking in rockers with different proportioning. The internal combustion engine is technology from the early 1900's, so according to you it must suck because it's old huh? Electirc must perform so much better, just because it's new technology, right? Wrong. Well pushrods have been around just as long as the four stroke internal combustion engine has, it's been tried and proven, it may be old technology, but it still performs and has it's advantages. But pretty soon all of the cars out there won't even have a cam, and there goes possibly the only advantage that any jap engine has over our American big blocks. <!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Marky678</i>
    <b> SHUT DA FUXX UP GUYS!!! Daewoo, Lanos is the best!!! 0-60
    21.34 sec Top speed 90 Mph

    (\~~~/)
    ( =_=") PRICES: $9800
    ¥Y___\)~*
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I hope to hell you are kidding.<!-- Signature -->
     
  16. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Hey Lambo owner...

    I think that the RX-7 will be the winner...this car is just to fast.
     
  17. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Marky678</i>
    <b> SHUT DA FUXX UP GUYS!!! Daewoo, Lanos is the best!!! 0-60
    21.34 sec Top speed 90 Mph

    (\~~~/)
    ( =_=") PRICES: $9800
    ¥Y___\)~*
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Thank you, man, I really needed the laugh!!!!<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Godspd</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from sparetire</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ferrari4ever123</i>
    <b>I am sorry but all you American Muscle heads are ignorant.

    Dont mean to offend...but everytime a sweet car like this comes about you compare it to a american muscle car..!
    it is totally true.... you are comparing a 1.3L Rotary engine to a 5.7 L V8....ovcourse the 5.7L engine is going to win....why are you people so irnorant....like everything else...

    Look at Road And Track Magazine.. I believe it was the Feburary issue where they compared the Z06 Corvette to the Porsche GT2 and it got beaten...you can't compare a Porsche with a corvette...the name porsche is legendary...corvette is GARBAGE..!!!

    Then in the next months issue the compared the Z06 to the new NSX and the porsche 911...and ovcourse like every other comparison the Z06 has a 5.7L and the Porsche has a 3.6L and the NSX has a 3.2L.....
    and the whole article is about how the Z06 has more power....
    oh my god it has a 2L displacement advantage ofcourse it is going to have more power....

    The Z06 by the way is totaly crap like every other american car...this is so true...all american cars make horsepower by displacement....they have a huge engine that makes less then 100 HP\L ...all those muscle cars have pushrod engines...this is a technology that was made in the 1950's....everyother manufacturer in the world switched to overhead cam engines...because they see the advantage....ohh I guess that the whole world is wrong and american manufactuers are right!!!!!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I wish people like you would read some of these forums before you post. The whole hp/litre discussion has been exahusted, and it has been shown to be pointless. The build quality of Vettes is great. The handling is great. Read the articles on the Vettes and see for yourself. Look at some SCA auto-x stuff. The Vettes do great. Yeah, they use displacement, so what. Displacement is cheap, effective, and reliable. Compare the Z06 to the GT2 and it is very competitive, for about 1/3rd the cost. Less actually. Whats so bad about that? You can sream HP/Litre when you lose the race, who cares? Someone else mentioned how the Vette loses in the gas milage catagory, and it probably does, but it still gets 28 mpg on this highway, which is incredible. "All you american muscle heads are ignorant." LOL. You dont know sh**. Except what a bunch of imports only types told you maybe. This will do quite well against a C5 yes, against the Z06 no, and that means in the twisties as well. Assuming this is the turbo. That makes sense, you could get one of these for about 30K when they were avail. in the states, and even allowing for inflation, that means much cheaper than the Vette.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Iam professional "Mechanical Engineer" so I guess that gives me validation to speak in repect to your signature.

    Engine capacity does matter! Shit over 5 litrs and thats all the power American cars produce? If you talking about technology. American cars with their big blocks are way behind.

    And about handling I havnt seen one car Mag in Australia where I am from that even comes close to validate that good handling of American cars. And we do have American readers for our mags.

    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I know this is a long post so bear with me.
    I hope you do not think that I consider displacement irelevant. I did not say that. What I said is that HP/Litre is irrelevant. What matters is power. If an engine gets a good powercurve with 3 litres and a turbo or with a 5.7 NA, both are good. The HP/Litre makes no diff, the total power does. Who wins in other words. And yes, American powerplants are not quite as sophisticated as others, but I say that does not matter. In any given system, the more sophistication, the more parts that can expirience failure. Considering that the Vette handles, accelerates and just performs well, I say it is a good car. Does it really matter that it has not got all the tech of an NSX or Skyline? What matters is lap times. The Z06 has damn good ones. Thus I don't think American cars are all behind.
    And the Vette does handle. Motor Trend is a credible mag. So are many others who have rated the Vette. Scca racers have used the Vette and it does handle. And as for other American cars: The Saleen does not handle? The Viper does not handle? The Mosler does not handle? The Panoz does not handle?<!-- Signature -->
     
  19. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    I see it this way, high engine cc = torque. Technological advances like forced air feed, mulivaulve, VVT, OHC/DOHC, etc produce mostly kW. This brings to mind another question. Which is ued for what?

    It goes like this. If you want 0-100, get kW. If you want to tow your trailer/caravan get torque. Both kW and torque take sofisticated enineering to develop and $$$, but torque comes cheaper therfore US car manufacturers try to make best use of it where JAP and Euro car manufacturers make use of kW.

    So stop arguing about HP/l, rather argue about 0-100 and top end. After all these are Sports Cars, weather it be track racing or drag it stays sport.

    I do find that in the search for kW the JAPs and Euros achieve a lot more in sports then the Yanks.



    Just a thought USE IT, DON'T USE IT?
     
  20. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Farily true, but forced induction does add both KW and torque. Look at the Rexy or the EVO.<!-- Signature -->
     
  21. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Molusk</i>
    <b>I see it this way, high engine cc = torque. Technological advances like forced air feed, mulivaulve, VVT, OHC/DOHC, etc produce mostly kW. This brings to mind another question. Which is ued for what?

    It goes like this. If you want 0-100, get kW. If you want to tow your trailer/caravan get torque. Both kW and torque take sofisticated enineering to develop and $$$, but torque comes cheaper therfore US car manufacturers try to make best use of it where JAP and Euro car manufacturers make use of kW.

    So stop arguing about HP/l, rather argue about 0-100 and top end. After all these are Sports Cars, weather it be track racing or drag it stays sport.

    I do find that in the search for kW the JAPs and Euros achieve a lot more in sports then the Yanks.



    Just a thought USE IT, DON'T USE IT?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Uh, last time I checked, it takes low end to race too. Have you seen the Mercedes Smart Car? 400 Horsepower, but it only runs the quarter mile in 20.4 seconds. So how's that? I thought you just said all you need to accelerate is horsepower, geez, what's wrong with that? Want another stat on the Smart car, it has 55 pounds of torque. It takes the right combination of both horsepower and torque to win a race. Yeah, the jap and euro cars have higher top end, but by the time they hit that in a drag race, the low end torquers are already ahead by at least a car length. Also torque will pick you up quicker out of the corners on the track courses, and get you back to the top end of the powerband quicker. Yeah, the japs and euros have more top end, but our american "torque wrenches on wheels" will reach their top end quicker. So it's your choice, get the early lead right off the line and possibly stay there, or get wasted off the line and possibly pass them half way down the track. Torque and horsepower have their places in racing, whether it be track or strip. So don't even start arguing about 0-100 and top end, lets rather discuss 0-100 and the ENTIRE POWERBAND, cause it needs to whole thing to do anything.<!-- Signature -->
     
  22. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    OH MY GOD. I AM IN UTTER DISBELIEF. I have read the first 3 pages of this forum and was freaking out. You guys are actually comparing an rx-7 and a CHEVROLET CORVETTE. I think the RX-7 is a great car, but it has no bussiness trying to compar itself to a Corvette. And, just in case no one noticed, this is no damn STOCK RX-7. IT is a SPIRIT R, does anyone know what that R stand for. YES, that right RACING. This car has a price of at least 100,000 dollars. Now, if you want to compare modded cars. Compare this to a Corvette C5-R. Now we have a real test. Even though a C5 Corvette would blow this "Race" edition away. It makes me sick, none of you(well, I shouldn't say none of you. Spartire, and Z28Vette know what they are talking about)have any repcect for Corvette Heritage. There is just no comparison here. I'm not saying I don't like Japanese cars. They are good because they are cheap. I can buy a 10,000 Civic, spend 10-15 thousands on mods and it would smoke the shit out of a Vette for 25,000 dollars vs. a 45,000 price of a Vette. But which car would catch more attention on the street? CORVETTE. Which car is gonna be worth more in 20 years? CORVETTE. Which car would god rather drive? CORVETTE. AMERICAN MUSCLE CARS RULE. Cars were born in America for crying out loud, now all you bastard ass ricers just throw that away like it didn't matter. While Americans inveted cars, all those damn japs had thier head up their ass. Now, just because they made a car lighter with a smaller engine and make it sorta fast you all bail on Classics? Thats bullshit. PEACE
     
  23. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    This post really did get messy, One thing I cannot understand is where all of these anti American car dorks came from. I love the Rx-7, It is my favorite car and I am saddened by the Mazda Motor Co's decicion to end the production on it.
    Although, I am an American and I do love Detroit Muscle Cars, Think of it this way. For ford fans, what would you feel like if ford decided that the mustang was over with. Chevy fans how bout you and your Vettes, (Toyo fans just #$%#ing stay out of this argument.) and so on for every car company in the world.
    Right now it feels like some one I know is dying, and there is nothing that I can do about it, I might get lucky and my Girlfriends father will buy her one and that way I can drive one of these but still. There is no replacement for the RX-7, not that #$%#in garbage RX-8.
    And for all of you hardcore people you really cannot compare the RX-7 to the Corvette, One is that the RX is made for handling, and topspeed, I really dont belive that the RX tops out at 150something, the Corvette like all american cars is made for 1/4mile racing, and is a heavier car. The only reason that the RX could win is its lightweight. Imagine if the vette was the same weight as the Rx!

    These cars are not in the same class, so they are not easy to compare! In the end it all boils down to each of our personal preferrences.<!-- Signature -->
     
  24. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Ok Muther#$%#er, I really dont know who you are calling Japs~!!!

    Get your SHit Straight, America Did not INVENT CARS!!! YOU HICK!!! America was the first country to MASS PRODUCE THEM!!! And do you know whos idea it was to do that, HENRY FORD, not JACK CHEVROLET. Every country has great Ideas and great cars (except Yugoslavia) Every country has a car that is great.
    Germany=Porsche,BMW (911,Z8)
    Italy= Ferrari,Lamborghini (Testarosa, GT2B, Diablo)
    England=Jaguar,Aston Martin,TVR,(1955 Roadster, DB7 Vantage, Tuscan Speed Six)
    USA=Ford,Chevrolet,Dodge (Mustang,Corvette,Viper)
    Japan=Mazda,Nissan,Toyota,Subaru (RX-7,Skyline,Supra,WRX)

    Now that was a quick list of cars that i could think of, are you ignorant enough to tell me that all of those cars suck except of the american cars? If you are then, you must be a punk ass kid.
    You need to get off of the racism too, I hope you know that america is a collective of almost every race in the world and most of us work toghether in perfect unity. DORK. I swear you probably dont know shit about cars either. <!-- Signature -->
     
  25. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Kuro Neko</i>
    <b>And for all of you hardcore people you really cannot compare the RX-7 to the Corvette, One is that the RX is made for handling, and topspeed, I really dont belive that the RX tops out at 150something, the Corvette like all american cars is made for 1/4mile racing, and is a heavier car. The only reason that the RX could win is its lightweight.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!? You think an RX-7 can out handle a Corvette. "The Corvette like all american cars is made for 1/4mile racing, and is a heavier car." That is the biggest bunch of bullshit I have ever heard. Yes, America does build cars for drag racing. Chevelle, Charger, etc. I will have you know that a Corvette only weighs 300 pounds more then then a RX-7. And a RX-7's engine only displaces 80 Cubic inches vs. the 350 Cubic engine of a Corvette. The chasis alone of the Vette weighs less then the RX-7's.I apologize for the Jap comment. I never said that Japanese cars were bad. I currently own a Twin Turbo Nissan 300ZX. Its quick, I even like the RX-7. But this forum is trying to compare the RX-7 to a Corvette. There is no comparison. I am a die hard Corvette fanatic. But I don't only like them cause they are fast. I feel, overall, they are the best sports car bargain in the world. The Vette runs with its 80,000-300,000 dollar exotic car competitors. If I wanted to drag race a car I sure as hell wouldn't race a Vette. I would build and old Chevelle with a 427 or something and make it run low 11's, and still be street legal.
     

Share This Page