******' Rx7's
11-09-2002, 08:53 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,547
Drove mom and sister shopping (don't ask), parked the car in parking lot of some girls clothing store or something, and there she was. 93 Silver/Red Touring 5 speed. My dream FD, she was banged up a bit. Could use a wash and some wax but nontheless, still so very pretty. No spoilers or anything on the outside, I could see an Apex Autotimer, Apex GT Spec catback, what looked like a GReddy shiftknob, and an 8-Mile soundtrack CD in the passanger seat. My GOD, I was looking at 'er for like 20 minutes and just couldn't take my eyes off. Man I can't wait till winter ends. 
11-09-2002, 09:47 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 10,906
I know, and my mom tried to tell me its still just a mazda, not a ferrari or a porsche, but i was like what year one did u see? she said umm it was like a new one, 2000 or so! classic I think fds are thee sexiest cars ever, there is not a car that has better body lines IMO, for under like 100k.
11-09-2002, 09:50 PM
#3
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Virginia Tech
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by 1Revvin7' date='Nov 9 2002, 10:47 PM
I know, and my mom tried to tell me its still just a mazda, not a ferrari or a porsche, but i was like what year one did u see? she said umm it was like a new one, 2000 or so! classic I think fds are thee sexiest cars ever, there is not a car that has better body lines IMO, for under like 100k.
11-09-2002, 09:59 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,547
Originally Posted by 1Revvin7' date='Nov 9 2002, 07:47 PM
I know, and my mom tried to tell me its still just a mazda, not a ferrari or a porsche, but i was like what year one did u see? she said umm it was like a new one, 2000 or so! classic I think fds are thee sexiest cars ever, there is not a car that has better body lines IMO, for under like 100k.
11-10-2002, 10:38 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 253
its always hard to respond to posts from people who think the supra is in the same league as the rx7 as far as the body design is concerned. first, there have been so many publications (automodile, evo, r&t, sports car intl, c&d, and others) who have commented on the rx7 fd design as a classic. it has been studied extensively. there is no similar "body of literature" saying that the supra is a beautiful design. so, automotive experts say the rx7 is a classic and beautiful design and do not think that the supra is. that, of course, doesn't prove anything other than exactly that. people who spend every day of their lives studying and driving cars think the rx7 is beautiful and special and don't feel the same way about the supra.
so, i happen to agree with them and will try to be object about why. the rx7 is a well-resolved overall design. it has strong and acceptable proportions from any angle. the "massing" of the shapes (the ratio of the greenhouse to the fender cut lines... the placement of the greenhouse mass relative to the length of the body and front and rear overhangs...) is perfect. the supra is very poor in this regard, because the greenhouse is too short (squashed down) relative to the height from the ground to the fender cutline. also, the mass of the greenhouse is too small relative to the mass of the rest of the car. and, the greenhouse is too far toward the rear of the body. i suspect that this latter problem is probably because they based the supra on another toyota, like the sc400/300 platform. i'm not sure which they used, but don't think it was a clean slate design, which the fd was.
also, the supra has many busy elements to it that the fd doesn't. there are no extraneous scoops or lines. its clean. the supra is not. this is especially obvious in looking at the way the front and rear were handled. the fd has very clean ends. the rear is probably the best resolved design ever in automotive sports car design. there's nothing akward about the rear anywhere. every line ends where it should and the curve of the rear top edge with the unified bridge connecting the lights will always be one of the best designs ever. the curve itself is beautiful. ford used it on the taurus and probes to lesser though good effect.
the fd is among the top several sports car dewsigns in history and the others don't include supras.
-gordon
so, i happen to agree with them and will try to be object about why. the rx7 is a well-resolved overall design. it has strong and acceptable proportions from any angle. the "massing" of the shapes (the ratio of the greenhouse to the fender cut lines... the placement of the greenhouse mass relative to the length of the body and front and rear overhangs...) is perfect. the supra is very poor in this regard, because the greenhouse is too short (squashed down) relative to the height from the ground to the fender cutline. also, the mass of the greenhouse is too small relative to the mass of the rest of the car. and, the greenhouse is too far toward the rear of the body. i suspect that this latter problem is probably because they based the supra on another toyota, like the sc400/300 platform. i'm not sure which they used, but don't think it was a clean slate design, which the fd was.
also, the supra has many busy elements to it that the fd doesn't. there are no extraneous scoops or lines. its clean. the supra is not. this is especially obvious in looking at the way the front and rear were handled. the fd has very clean ends. the rear is probably the best resolved design ever in automotive sports car design. there's nothing akward about the rear anywhere. every line ends where it should and the curve of the rear top edge with the unified bridge connecting the lights will always be one of the best designs ever. the curve itself is beautiful. ford used it on the taurus and probes to lesser though good effect.
the fd is among the top several sports car dewsigns in history and the others don't include supras.
-gordon
11-10-2002, 11:38 AM
#9
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Virginia Tech
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by gmonsen' date='Nov 10 2002, 11:38 AM
its always hard to respond to posts from people who think the supra is in the same league as the rx7 as far as the body design is concerned. first, there have been so many publications (automodile, evo, r&t, sports car intl, c&d, and others) who have commented on the rx7 fd design as a classic. it has been studied extensively. there is no similar "body of literature" saying that the supra is a beautiful design. so, automotive experts say the rx7 is a classic and beautiful design and do not think that the supra is. that, of course, doesn't prove anything other than exactly that. people who spend every day of their lives studying and driving cars think the rx7 is beautiful and special and don't feel the same way about the supra.
so, i happen to agree with them and will try to be object about why. the rx7 is a well-resolved overall design. it has strong and acceptable proportions from any angle. the "massing" of the shapes (the ratio of the greenhouse to the fender cut lines... the placement of the greenhouse mass relative to the length of the body and front and rear overhangs...) is perfect. the supra is very poor in this regard, because the greenhouse is too short (squashed down) relative to the height from the ground to the fender cutline. also, the mass of the greenhouse is too small relative to the mass of the rest of the car. and, the greenhouse is too far toward the rear of the body. i suspect that this latter problem is probably because they based the supra on another toyota, like the sc400/300 platform. i'm not sure which they used, but don't think it was a clean slate design, which the fd was.
also, the supra has many busy elements to it that the fd doesn't. there are no extraneous scoops or lines. its clean. the supra is not. this is especially obvious in looking at the way the front and rear were handled. the fd has very clean ends. the rear is probably the best resolved design ever in automotive sports car design. there's nothing akward about the rear anywhere. every line ends where it should and the curve of the rear top edge with the unified bridge connecting the lights will always be one of the best designs ever. the curve itself is beautiful. ford used it on the taurus and probes to lesser though good effect.
the fd is among the top several sports car dewsigns in history and the others don't include supras.
-gordon
so, i happen to agree with them and will try to be object about why. the rx7 is a well-resolved overall design. it has strong and acceptable proportions from any angle. the "massing" of the shapes (the ratio of the greenhouse to the fender cut lines... the placement of the greenhouse mass relative to the length of the body and front and rear overhangs...) is perfect. the supra is very poor in this regard, because the greenhouse is too short (squashed down) relative to the height from the ground to the fender cutline. also, the mass of the greenhouse is too small relative to the mass of the rest of the car. and, the greenhouse is too far toward the rear of the body. i suspect that this latter problem is probably because they based the supra on another toyota, like the sc400/300 platform. i'm not sure which they used, but don't think it was a clean slate design, which the fd was.
also, the supra has many busy elements to it that the fd doesn't. there are no extraneous scoops or lines. its clean. the supra is not. this is especially obvious in looking at the way the front and rear were handled. the fd has very clean ends. the rear is probably the best resolved design ever in automotive sports car design. there's nothing akward about the rear anywhere. every line ends where it should and the curve of the rear top edge with the unified bridge connecting the lights will always be one of the best designs ever. the curve itself is beautiful. ford used it on the taurus and probes to lesser though good effect.
the fd is among the top several sports car dewsigns in history and the others don't include supras.
-gordon
Gordon have you been to KDR lately?