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

Discussion in '2002 Mazda RX-7 Spirit R' started by robert2420, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. 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 7.3 sec...could have been faster

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


    you make good points....

    Fine....Honda S2000 2.0L 240 HP....that is more than the neon
    Not that they are in the same class (Neon FWD.S2000 RWD)..but just numbers

    Tom18Si....same here man.....there are like 40 Corvettes in my town (well not literally) and like 1 nice RX7...

    ohh... I read in a magazine that the EvO 6 (Japanes Version) ran 1\4 mile in 12.4 sec...that is par with the Z06
  3. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Kahless</i>
    <b>they actually look alot alike</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    If you guys actually go back and look at the beginning of this thread you wil laugh, like i do. This thread was not started to compare this car to the Z06, but to the base vette. This thread also started with logical comments, not anymore. I might be able to see this as a good comparo between stock vett and this car, but to say that this car will beat the z06, now that is just rediculous. you mean to tell me that this car can get to 60 in less than 4 flat? no. You mean to tell me that this car can do the quarter in the 12 seconds range stock? No. You mean to tell me that this car will do more than 1 G on the skid and faster than 70 mph? Not a chance, and if you do think so where are you getting your numbers from? I think that you guys are pulling them out of your ass if you actually believe that this car can beat a z06.

    02 Z06 Cpe (C&D Feb-02) 5.7 V-8/6M

    0-50, s. 3.30
    0-60, s. 4.07
    0-70, s. 5.39
    1/4 Mile, s. 12.48
    60-0 Braking, ft. 104.00
    Skidpad, g 0.99
    Slalom, mph 70.30

    There, from Car and driver. Where do you get your numbers from?

    I have got to disagree with whoever said that import car guys know more about cars than do american car guys, Very much so. There is an art to both sides of the ocean but en masse, i think it is the exact oppisite. How many times a day do you see civics and the like with huge spoiler and 4 inch exhaust tips with a pillar guages and no real performanc emods to speak of covered in stickers? I see them all the time everywhere i go. In fact in the parking lot of my building right now there is a 95 celica with body kit and a 4 inch tip, 2ft tall bookshelf spoiler and a tail light kit made to look like a supra's tail lights, but has he done anything to enhance the performace of his car to match the performance image that his car gives off? NO! unless you concider the fake innercooler in the from ofhis body kit made of chicken wire. How often do yo see than in american car guys, you do see it, but no where near as often!
  4. 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
  5. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    phunk, all of the cars you mentioned except for the s2000 have turbos, slap a pair of turbos on a vette, for example, lingenfelter twin turbo, and you have nearly 700 horsepower, for a hp/l ratio of well over 100 to 1. it will also have an extremely high amount of torque. i would rather have a ar with a 5.7 liter motor making 100 horsepower per liter then a car with a 3 liter motor making the same power per liter, hell, i would rather have a car with a 5.7 liter motor making like 70 horsepower per liter, like a zo6, then a 3 liter car making 120 or 130 horsepower per liter becasue of the huge torque addvantage. the heavier weight of the large motor is even partially countered by the weight of turbos and intercoolers needed for the smaller motor to reach big horsepower. i think everybody should just chill a little and just respect a fast car, wether its from displacement or forced induction. everyone has their own opinion on what makes a good car, and for the most part, they are right. this debate springs up in every forum, whether it is for a viper or a ferrari or a civic. if the car is fast, respect it. i like just about all cars, but i just happen to prefer the throathy rumble of a big american v8 to the scream of a 9000 rpm 2 liter inline 4.
  6. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    pmurf54 ...yes that is alot of HP but the vette is 5.7L are you crazy or something...we are talking about small displacemtn engines...not your big 5.7L V8's..

    plenty of NA engines produce 100 HP\L
    Ferrari 360 3.5L 400 HP
    Honda S2000 2.0L 240 HP
    Civic Si 1.6L 160 HP
    Integra R 1.8L 192 HP

    No american NA stock car can math that ...NONE...that is my argument!

    Efficiency is very important....that is what I have been talking about since page 3......

    this is also true about acceleration....American cars are built for straight line speed...that is why they aer always comparing 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times...geeze

    They dont concider the many other elements of cars.

    Oh...and we bring up the z06 because it is supposed to be so fast!...and most other (well pretty much all the rest) american cars dont match it....

    Oh and when I said that about the S2000.....I mean the engine only...I know that the Neon can't even come close to comparing to a S2000...
    S2000 2.0L 240 HP!
    Neon 2.0L 150
  7. #82 4agze, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Well, magazines say differnt things, because they get differnt times and test results. Many times cars get differnt times when testing. Car and Driver was able to manage to get 0-60 in 5.4 seconds in the new WRX, but I think Autoweek got something like 6.2. Now, those are two ends of the spectrum, one is on the faster side of that cars capabilities, one is on the slower side. It comes down to test conditions, drivers, the wear and tear on the test car ect.

    But anyways, about the wankel. I worked at an RX7 specialty shop for years, and I will confirm that FD rx7s are very unreliable....they really dont last long, and they are very delicate....and allthough they can be tuned to amazing power, you better not slip up and run lean or you will loose the motor in no time. However, not all wankel engines are unreliable. Turbo rotaries tend to be pretty frail, however, non-turbo rotaries are actually as reliable and sometimes even more than some piston engines. I ruetinly saw original NA rotaries over 250K miles. They are very reliable.

    Hahahaha, i have one here for you that will really piss off quite a few people, but quite a few will like it:

    The times on that first one are really weak, there must be a problem hooking up or something.
    Personally, I think it isnt thaaaaat bad, but I do feel dirty about saying it, hehehe. I mean, you want a extrememly sexy hot looking and handling car, but you also want very reliable big power and torque.....its a good combination. And actually, with all the accesories on the 13BREW the V8 only weighs about 75-100lbs more!

    What do you guys think about that one??
  8. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    That is Amazing!!!! It is the best of both worlds, huge american power and TORQUE, and slick styling and handling. I do wonder though how the handling charateristics of the car channged with the added weight up front though.

    As for Ferrarri, different companiesget different resultdue to a bunch of reasons,

    -quality and skill of driver
    -test location (high altitude/low alt)
    -test conditions (humidity, temp, barrometric pressure, time of day all have huge HUGE effects on the way cars perform)
    -different companies use different skidpads

    By the way, why is it so hard to believe that the vette has a lower drag coeficcient than the porsche? It very well might, that doesnt mean that porsche is bad or anything jsut that the vette has a lower drag coeficient, thats it. The z06 is a world class road car, and the fact that it just compets with the GT2 not to mention bests it in some cases in incredible. So what if the GT2 pulled a lower skid number the odds are that around the track the GT2 would win pretty much every time, but that vette wouldnt be to far behind either. Ferrarri you sound pretty biased twoards american cars, unwilling to accept the fact that the stereotypes that you have believed for so long might be untrue about the american car industry. Deal with it, american cars handle too, and very VERY well. Hell the Viper pulls between .97 and 1.01 on the skid too depending on which mag you read along with respectable high sixties low seventies slolom speeds, thanks to its fully independent race bred suspension.

    Oh yeah one more thing to whoever took my comment about the neon srt and compared it to the s2000, dont be a retard, the s2000 is an open top 2 door 2 seat roadster to compete with the bmw z3 (or m roadster) and the porsche boxters, not the neon. Why would you insult the s2000 by having to point out that it is better than a 4 door 4 seat family econobox. Holy Sh*t man.
  9. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Okay, okay, okay. A few things.

    Both are very nice cars, and both are very quick. Yet, both couldn't be more different. The engines are vastly different and comparing HP/L or Displacement could only be the worst comparison. The only real way to get a good comparison would be to line up both cars and run perhaps 10 drivers through both cars. This would give you a nice average performance number.

    Another gripe is the displacement numbers and what not for rotaries. The 12A is approximately 1.2 liters. Actually, it is closer to 1.1 liters. The 13B is approximately 1.3 liters. There are 2 larger engines and they are the 20B and the 4 rotor beast in the 787B. The problem with increasing displacement is that to do it efficiently the method is to increase the number of chambers. i.e. going from 2 rotors to 3 or 4. To do this you really need to pay special attention to the excentric shaft. However it can be done.

    Lastly, the car is a 4 stroke motor. It goes through the same intake, compression, expansion, and exhaust as recipricating piston engines. It just happens to give 2 power strokes per revolution of the eccentric shaft, as opposed to 1 in a piston engine.<!-- Signature -->
  10. 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

    2002 Porsche GT2 base price

    2002 Corvette Z06 base price

    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 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 people make real car lovers like me and bigrob sick...

    ps to bigrob...HA! i finally posted!<!-- Signature -->
  11. 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 -->
  12. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.


    I am not biased....

    But you are the 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
  13. 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
  14. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.


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

    see there you go again....that is my whole point.. a 3.5L Ferrari 360 will make 400 HP....your Z06 will make 400 HP also...but it will take them 5.7L....that is my point....

    Yes I understand your opinion of "who cares how you make the HP" well my point is that in everything all aspects of racing and just about everything else ...Technology pushes manufacturer to make things better...but American manufacturers make HP by displacement not Technology.

    I wasn't trying to sound harsh or bash american cars..but it is a fact.
  16. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    for those of you who think that this rx-7 would kill the c5 vette you have to consider one thing this is not a stock rx-7! compare a stock rx-7 and the c5 vette if you're gonna make it fair. History tells a tale of it's own. Vettes are clearly the best thing on the road! look at the early 90's ZR-1 corvette, it could smoke ferrari, jaguar, etc. anything! Not only in speed but handling as well! It was one of the finest cars ever made! Corvettes are the first REAL sports car ever made! Nothing tops it! The corvette has everything; history, performance, luxury, technology and not to forget stunning looks. everything! So down down play the car who revolutionized the racing world, respect it! Take the most modified rx-7 and pin it against the most modified corvette and watch the result!
  17. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Vette is cheaper and faster. Although I hate American Shit, I can admit this one. At the same time, those who say this car looks like the vette are funny, because Mazda put this fascia out first!!! Sorry, but I'd take this because it's a bit more exclusive.
  18. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    hey about your C5 and Z06 thing well ok now to begin with teh C5 and the Z06 is the same fuc.king car..... the only reason why they came out with the z06 was to get better numbers with its liters.... and no it will not out handle an Rx7. the wheels on the Z06 is bigger than the Rx7 if the Rx7 has the same wheels it will outhandle the Z06 like it is nothing
  19. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    Hey FerrariEver123, do you have a life?<!-- Signature -->
  20. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    i think most of u people comparing the RX-7 to the Z06 are comparing the 2002 RX-7 to the 2001 Z06. the 2002 Z06 would walk all over this RX-7. seriously. 2002 Z06 has been clocked doing 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. thats viper territory my friend. and yeah this RX-7 is extremely light, the vette throughout it's histroy has been known for it's extremely agile performance. i give the 2002 Z06 the win, but the 2002 RX-7 would give a 2002 C5 a run for it's money. seriously. the 2002 Z06 would blow this away. not a very good comparison.
  21. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    MatJM ....

    If you are an adult then I get bored at work and I type really fast so I respond to you guys.

    If you are a kid...then grow up

    Slamb...nothing tops the corvette huh?.....

    I have seen many Z06 at the drag strip on tuning and testing night...
    none of them will do 0-60 in way....

    and dont forget at the drag strip there is extra rubber layed down so there is more traction.....

    I think that the RX7 will probably loose in 0-60 and 1/4 mile(which seems to be the measurement of performance in america)
    but win around a track....

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

    "Oh...and we bring up the z06 because it is supposed to be so fast!...and most other (well pretty much all the rest) american cars dont match it...."

    what about those vipers? since this mazda thing is a spirit R how bout comparing it with the viper gts r? or those viper 800tts? or how bout the sledgehammer corvette? nothing better than the zo6? i believe those cars out do it. So what are you? a kid or an adult? cuz to me you seem dumber than a box of hair with your stupid posts.<!-- Signature -->
  23. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    its not a fair comparission
    a modified race RX7 can weigh 900kg and make 600hp (i know i've driven one!!).... oh and thats *WITHOUT* forced induction... and on 98 RON gas... some vettes could get near that mark - its rare to find a vette engine above 550hp without some kind of racefuel or black magic. but would weigh alot more.

    on the street a vette has more power, and more lard. its comparing apples to oranges but for the sake of an arguement: around a road course, especially a twisty one, the RX-7 would blow the doors off the vette. sorry but they are an unbelieveably awesome car in handling. drive one and throw it through a few bends and you'll know what i'm on about.

    compare a RX-7 to a S2000 or a M3, thats fairer but still a RX-7 does alot to shame even the much improved current vettes.
  24. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    no, it doesn't, youre wrong. a vette would waste this thing, said and done.<!-- Signature -->
  25. Re: 2002 RX-7 Vs. 2002 Corvette.

    road & track i believe it was tested the 2002 Z06 at 3.8

    if i am wrong i am wrong but i know i saw that statistic in a high name mag. given the right driver, enough experience behind the wheel, i believe that 0-60 in 3.8 is possible for a 2002 Z06. my next door neighbor has one, i have ridden in it every friday night on the way to a local carshow for the last 3 months, and i strongly believe it would blow the doors off this RX-7. it may have a much larger engine to get the power it has, but it does have much more power. so all u whiny mother #$%#ers talkin about big engines suck can shut up and just understand that it DOES have more power, no matter the way it got it.

Share This Page