na vs t2
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
so i have had an opportunity to drive both back to back recently heres my thoughts.
blaze red 1991 mazda rx7 coupe:
its a nice car, it handles well, the odometer reads 210,163miles, and its had a raditor and a clutch. it is fricking slow though, we were racing a 91 civic vx and the fc pulls on it at the top end by a car length or two. the honda gets 58mpg, they both had 200,000miles.
verdict: i had an s4 na years ago and it was nice, but the 89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
blaze red 1991 mazda rx7 coupe:
its a nice car, it handles well, the odometer reads 210,163miles, and its had a raditor and a clutch. it is fricking slow though, we were racing a 91 civic vx and the fc pulls on it at the top end by a car length or two. the honda gets 58mpg, they both had 200,000miles.
verdict: i had an s4 na years ago and it was nice, but the 89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 597
From: KAOH
but but but i have n/a 
and and and , yeah its slow...............but ive beat almost every honda except for one with a motor swap/nos and my buddies old vtec del sol, until it was t-boned that is................
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 10,906
From: Peoria, AZ
Originally Posted by Felix Wankel' date='Oct 22 2002, 10:08 PM
[quote name='j9fd3s' date='Oct 22 2002, 11:19 AM']89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
mike
they figured that **** out with the FD!
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,316
From: Bay Area, CA
Originally Posted by 1Revvin7' date='Oct 22 2002, 08:35 PM
[quote name='Felix Wankel' date='Oct 22 2002, 10:08 PM'][quote name='j9fd3s' date='Oct 22 2002, 11:19 AM']89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
mike
they figured that **** out with the FD![/quote]
I thought that all Japanese 2nd gen's for 89-91 were turbo?
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 458
From: New Jersey YO!
Originally Posted by j9fd3s' date='Oct 22 2002, 04:19 PM
so i have had an opportunity to drive both back to back recently heres my thoughts.
blaze red 1991 mazda rx7 coupe:
its a nice car, it handles well, the odometer reads 210,163miles, and its had a raditor and a clutch. it is fricking slow though, we were racing a 91 civic vx and the fc pulls on it at the top end by a car length or two. the honda gets 58mpg, they both had 200,000miles.
verdict: i had an s4 na years ago and it was nice, but the 89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
blaze red 1991 mazda rx7 coupe:
its a nice car, it handles well, the odometer reads 210,163miles, and its had a raditor and a clutch. it is fricking slow though, we were racing a 91 civic vx and the fc pulls on it at the top end by a car length or two. the honda gets 58mpg, they both had 200,000miles.
verdict: i had an s4 na years ago and it was nice, but the 89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
or better yet, go here and buy one straight from japan:
http://list.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/208404...egory-leaf.html
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,316
From: Bay Area, CA
Originally Posted by vosko' date='Oct 22 2002, 08:40 PM
i swear. i need to make a quote hall of fame portion of the board.......
-Earl Tudberry
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,535
From: VA
Originally Posted by 1Revvin7' date='Oct 23 2002, 03:35 AM
[quote name='Felix Wankel' date='Oct 22 2002, 10:08 PM'][quote name='j9fd3s' date='Oct 22 2002, 11:19 AM']89 na was a mistake, they should have all been turbo.
mike
mike
they figured that **** out with the FD![/quote]
I agree...
BUT...
By 1989 or '90, the RX-7 was pretty pricey next to its competition. In spite of the performance advantage, many more n/a's than turbos were sold. The FD was an awesome performer, but the resulting price jump (and reliability issues) is what killed FD sales in the states.