FT86 vs. RX-7 FD
 

Hey guys,

Besides the S2000 which I think is an absolutely great car, I think the next best thing besides the FT86 is an FD rx7. most of the specs I found online show this car is not too much larger than the ft86 and it not much heavier either (around 2850lbs). The height of the rx7 is also lower and thus I suspect the COG may be lower. I just think this is one car (although almost 20yrs old) can rival the ft86. Now I may be comparing apples to oranges here but I would just like to see what you guys think.

Thanks,
Mike

i dont think you would find too many people saying the fd is the next best thing behind an s2k. i also dont think these parameters are quite what we should be measuring the cars by. i think its safe to say the rx7 is gonna be the better car

Hum IDK the RX7 is an older tech, and just because the roof line is lower doesn't mean the car is lower or the COG is lower.

I posted this in the other thread

No but having a rotary engine gives it low COG. My bet, the FD would beat the FR-S on any given track even though it's older tech. It was designed to go after the 911 of the time. Maybe when the FR-S comes out someone can do a comparision.

True that rotary engine is really low CoG, but I don't really know how low. RX-7 is completely different cars though. Like you said, it was designed to go against 911. FRS is not designed to go against any of those light-heavyweight cars.

Rx7 was the best handling car in its class from factory when it was released.
This looks awesome btw

the FRS has some tough challenges ahead of itself to chase after the FD in its best habitat. It is considered a top competitor in japan, and not many cars built today can do what the FD does stock on the skidpad.

FRS is new challenger in a list of Japanese cars that are really focused on a certain area of sportiness, like; Silvia, Rx-7, MX-5, MR-S, CIVIC R, INTEGRA R, AE86, ect..

For dd I'd prefer an FR-S. I know rotary isn't that good on MPG, as what my friend tells me with is RX-8. And I'm sure it cost less to maintain a H4 than a rotary too. That's my take in the dd section. Not much, but a couple of my .02

Yeah, pretty much the only thing in that class that could objectively out-handle the MkIV Supra (even though not by much.. and not in every test).

You don't get a rotary if you want economy.
If you are doing maintenance your self, rotary is very easy to maintain. It doesn't cost any more than any other car I have drive or owned. Perhaps you/r friend don't know much about cars or how to maintain them?

Mmmm fd+mkiv should have babies. My fav cars :D

FD no not a chance maybe a FC yes

Anyone else drawing a close comparison between the FS1 (BRZ, FT-86) and the currently dying on the dealer lot RX-8?

The RX-8 is slightly heavier, but has been lauded repeatedly as one of the best handling cars out there. It has slightly more power and (for enthusiast driving) a useful rev band.

The more I think about running to buy a new BRZ, the more I think, why not a -8?

Oil consuming engine. Bad mileage. You better get it if supercar mileage is not an issue to you.

IIRC the rx8 realistically gets around 14mpg with aggressive street driving, hardly supercar worthy. You gotta pay to play.

Fuel economy is literally the last thing on my list for a new performance car, as long as its above 10mpg Ill happy.

Original retail price of an RX-7 in 1995: $37,800
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/pr...RX-7&trimid=-1

Today's dollars: $56,275.62
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

similar dimensions aside-not exactly a fair comparison! Completely different class of car. Now, you want to compare it to a Lotus or Porsche Boxster, sure.

As someone who owns an 8, I see your point very well. Basically, the only reason I'm looking at the BRZ is because of reliability (mine is creeping up on 100k miles), looks, and smaller size. The RX8 driving position is rather upright compared to the BRZ (from what I can tell).

Also, fuel economy is crap in the 8. I get like 22 highway at 70 mph, and that's considered good in rx8 circles.

To actually answer the OP, if you're actually asking about performance: a stock FD with in proper tune will absolutely annihilate the FT86 in all categories. Except maybe the tightest of autocrosses. Even then it's dubious. This is not a knock at all against the 86, it simply is not the same breed of car.

Because the RX-8 is hideous, whereas the FR-S is great looking and the RX-7 is gorgeous.

Looks are subjective but the majority of the population agrees that the RX8 is a sharp looking ride.

The general consensus on these forums seems to be that the FT-86 despite its sporting intentions will not be able to compete at the top with cars like the 911, Z06, GTR, FD, etc. At least for short and tight circuits, I'm not so sure this is true. The car is lightweight, has a low center of gravity, a rigid chassis, can fit wide, grippy tires, and has the potential to have a turbocharged engine... why couldn't it compete? I'm talking fully modified here... if a fully modified version doesn't lap Tsukuba in the 58 second range I'm going to be disappointed.

all of those statements have been extremely vague so i think it is difficult to have any expectations based on the premise. also its difficult to talk about fully modified cars. i mean there are "fully modified" ae86s running under a minute at tsukuba but that doesnt mean that an ae86 competes with the 911 z06 etc

Stock to stock, the FD is just better. No questions asked. Especially the TT Spirit R versions with even more power, better suspension, less weight etc.

Here's your baby!

http://www.tamparacing.com/forums/at...icture-002.jpg

2jz no shit :)
Haha that's awesome cheers

As an RX8 owner who has worked heavily on RX7s, the FD from a numbers standpoint would walk an FR-S in most categories, but that doesn't mean the FR-S isn't damn good. the FD had a lot of reliability issues the FR-S won't have to deal with. As pointed out earlier, the FD was a totally different price class of car. As a DD, the FR-S would be a better car give its reliability, cost of ownership and fuel economy. The RX8 and FR-S are likely to be closer in terms of handling performance, the FR-S will get better overall economy while the RX8 has more interior space but worse fuel economy.

Its tough to compare with out driving it, but the FR-S looks like its high on the fun factor in terms of driving feel which is why i love my RX8.

FDs are sexy....
http://mycarblog.org/wp-content/uplo.../Mazda_RX7.jpg

I had an FD in 1998. It was an incredible car but nearly always broken....like 14 months in the shop over 24 months of ownership. Seriously. I had 4 friends with them and all of them were the same.

It was such a great car when it worked, but I can't even imagine how people can keep them on the road now as old as they are.

My S2000 had zero problems in 6 years and over 60k miles. I'm hoping for more of that and less of the FD memories out of my DD FR-S.

FD probs feexed!
http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot...93796841_n.jpg

Nope...

http://www.tamparacing.com/forums/at...icture-002.jpg


Now they're fixed!

Either way :D I love the concept of rotaries, but the reality...
Actually, as I think about it, I'd probably do a turbo rotary sooner than 2JZ, but to each his own of course.

What does the 2JZ do to weight and weight distribution?

The LS2 added ~30 lb., now 2815 lb. empty. F/R = 50.6/49.4 with 1/2 tank, 50.0/50.0 with 1/2 tank and driver installed :)
(zero weight-savings mods/omissions, the car was built to be a dd street + sometime track car, with power steering, A/C, tons of dynamat)

I am kind of looking at both cars actually...

There's an FD up on RX7club I've been eyeing for a while. But the problem is that I know I'll have to keep my Civic as a DD if I get it. But after owing a few FC's I would love to get one.

But I think that an FR-S or BRZ is a better investment overall. Toyota's and Subaru's hold their value pretty well, and I'll be able to sell all my cars and focus on one. Plus I'd be better off only having to pay insurance on one car and not two.

Not to mention the whole 'brand new vehicle vs 19 y/o used car' thing

What you pay is what you get - If you get a cheap FD and expect it to run perfectly as it is you're soooo mistaken. Do NOT for a moment think that because the car is cheap to buy (because so damn many were destroyed by people who didn't know how to maintain / abused them) that they're cheap to maintain !

Get a decent FD chassis, rebuild the engine, do a single turbo swap (GT35R comes to mind) + reliability/cooling mods and you're looking at 350whp to 400whp with minor changes to MPG and a pretty reliable car for an exotic killer...

To be honest, even looking at the title thread made me laugh out loud even if I believe the GT86 will be a good car...FD territory ? Really ? :P

The only cars the GT86 should be compared is the new Genesis, the RX8 and ... that's it :P Can't think of another one...

Isn't the FD also a superior suspension setup (like the miata for that matter?)

Double Wishbone front vs MacStruts in the front means that the mazdas can get negative camber as the body rolls, keeping more of the tire planted when the suspension articulates.

Yep, mazda miata, RX-7 FD, RX-8, honda s2000, nissan 350/370z all have double wishbone front but out of all of those the RX-7 FD is really a class above because of the power/weight.

Also it's worth noting the RX8 and the latest Miata have a multi-link rear instead of double wishbone which a bit more complex.

The multilink is usually found in more expensive/luxury brand cars but I think Mazda is the only brand introducing it to this price range - Correct me If I'm wrong, I'm not 100% sure.


Also from the cars scorcherjf listed correctly it's also the only one with forced induction as a stock option :D

Even the early ~250HP models of the FD are not to be underestimated in any challenge!

Multilink is not necessarily "better" for a sports/sporty car. Double-wishbones are generally preferred. I'd rather have double-wishbones in the back of my FD.
FWIW, the FR-S's forebear, the 240SX, had multilink rear and strut front suspension, so it's not like the setup is for expensive/luxury cars. I think one benefit is to allow some compliance while maintaining toe control.

It's not unattractive, and I've had ladies give it approving looks, but it's certainly not a real looker like the FD was.

McPherson struts also gain camber on the with bump (i.e. additional negative camber on the outside wheels with roll), just not as much as you can easily get with double-wishbones.
My 240Z gained ~0.5deg per inch, whereas the S2000 is more like 1deg per inch (don't have the FD suspension modeled, but I bet it's in the 1deg/in range).

You'd need to gain ~1.75deg/inch to totally counter body roll in cornering, but that much camber change with bump would have negatives, e.g. excessive negative camber up front under straight-line braking, too much camber change with pitch, etc.

Struts aren't ideal, but they're not that bad a compromise, either. To me the biggest negatives are lack of stock camber adjustability and they force the hood/front fenderline higher.

I don't know where people get the idea that struts don't gain camber with bump. I've even seen it suggested that struts gain POSITIVE camber with bump. If you look at the geometry, you'll see that for most cars you'd have to go beyond the limits of suspension travel before you'd start gaining positive camber, I know this is true for the 240Z.