Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

FD RX7 reliability?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-30-09, 12:39 PM
  #46  
emoshun
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (11)
 
emoshun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cali
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by mmarshall
You forget that many Lexus owners own (or plan to own) more than one vehicle).
Most RX-7 owners own more than one vehicle as well, but that is irrelevant. I was referring to the inability/unwillingness of Lexus owners to wrench their own cars.

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Yes, the RX-7 is indeed a performance car. But we have pointed out, correctly, that much of that performance comes at the cost of lightweight construction and parts. Rough roads, in particular, can do a job on the light suspension parts. The RX-8 generally doesn't have that problem.....its suspension/chassis parts are more durable, although there is a small loss of body rigidity with the lack of B-Pillars for the small rear doors.
That has nothing to do with reliability! You choose where you drive the car, rough roads, smooth roads, it's your choice, not a fault of the car!

Once again, the problem lies with the owner, not the vehicle. You can't blame the design of sports car for the unwise choices of its owner, and the lashed he/she puts it through.

Originally Posted by mmarshall
What shame? Maybe not all, but most of what CL members said here is factual.
Please copy&paste first hand, factual information/experience here please. Owners need only reply, not friends of a buddy's uncle that had problems.

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Yes, it is more HP, but what do you expect with twin turbos? The S2000 manages a normally-aspirated 240 HP, with no turbos at all, thoiugh, admittedly, there's nt much torque except at very high RPMs.
I was comparing stock to stock, apples to apples. I should have emphasized the 1.3l vs. 2.0l.

Originally Posted by mmarshall
They have advantages and disadvantages. We simply pointed out both sides, that's all.
All I heard was bashing, but then again, it's never seen as such.

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Yes, we did state that it uses more oil than conventional piston engines. The reasons why, for the sake of this discussion, are irrelevant. You still, sometimes, need to carry thayt extra quart of oil in the trunk.
Yes, you and I know what the lay term "uses" means. But to the uneducated reader, they would think that use, means "burn".

They would never think to investigate that it "uses" oil as a part of the mixture during combustion. More so than a piston engine, but understanding the "extra use" should never be seen as a negative. It's designed that way.

Thank you for your response MM, I hope you see these last few posts as purely conversational. As I enjoy reading your reviews!
emoshun is offline  
Old 01-30-09, 03:47 PM
  #47  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,203
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by emoshun


That has nothing to do with reliability! You choose where you drive the car, rough roads, smooth roads, it's your choice, not a fault of the car!

Once again, the problem lies with the owner, not the vehicle. You can't blame the design of sports car for the unwise choices of its owner, and the lashed he/she puts it through.
True, a car can't dictate what roads it's driven on, but my point was that the early-90's vintage RX-7 had a somewhat under-built chassis, suspension, and steering parts to keep the weight down...a key reason, along with the light engine, for its great handling on the track. But those lightweight aluminum parts had a tendency to bend or warp on road surfaces that many other vehicles routinely drove over with little or no problem, even some of its competing sposts cars like the Supra, 300ZX, 3000GT, etc...

In the early 90's, I was still driving Mazda sedans myself (I hadn't switched yet to Toyota/Lexus and later Subaru). I saw, in the Mazda service bays, some of those RX-7's with bent underbody parts getting repaired.



Thank you for your response MM, I hope you see these last few posts as purely conversational. As I enjoy reading your reviews!
Thanks, More reviews are coming up. The VW CC is the next planned one, and then the Audi Q5 and the new Lexus RX when they are available.

I probably won't be posting any more reviews till after the Washington, D.C. Auto Show next week....that will be my main priority. I'll spend 2-3 days there as usual (especially with my free show passes ).

Last edited by mmarshall; 01-30-09 at 03:52 PM.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 01-30-09, 09:37 PM
  #48  
Koma
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
Koma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,809
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by emoshun
I was comparing stock to stock, apples to apples. I should have emphasized the 1.3l vs. 2.0l.
Again, comparing a rotary engine to a piston engine is not apples to apples.
Koma is offline  
Old 01-31-09, 05:42 PM
  #49  
Johnny
Pole Position
 
Johnny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sakon Nakhon
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 0
Received 20 Likes on 16 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by emoshun
They would never think to investigate that it "uses" oil as a part of the mixture during combustion. More so than a piston engine, but understanding the "extra use" should never be seen as a negative. It's designed that way.
Correct! This is an often misunderstood slam that comes up again and again, mostly from rotary illiterates. Without oil injection, the combustion chamber and the seals would self-destruct after a few revs. Capillary grooves are machined into the walls of the trochoid chamber which in turn trap the injected oil providing lubrication to the walls and the seals. As long as the owner changes the oil (conventional btw, not synthetic) regularly, the life of the engine can easily surpass or match piston engines - and therein is the principal cause of most seal failures, I suspect. So yes, the engine does burn residual oil during as part of this cycle - but not as much as some would believe. I was only adding one quart at most halfway between changes.

Last edited by Johnny; 01-31-09 at 11:19 PM.
Johnny is offline  
Old 01-31-09, 07:24 PM
  #50  
Dynasty SC
Lead Lap
 
Dynasty SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

amazing cars but totally unreliable. new engine every 60k or just about. the FD is a dream: super light, powerful, 50/50 weight distribution. i would have one if they were more reliable. i had a buddy that was a mazda tech... even he would blow his FD engines (he had one in every color) every once in awhile.
Dynasty SC is offline  
Old 02-04-09, 06:04 PM
  #51  
toy4two
Lexus Champion
 
toy4two's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ca
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

there used to be a Mazda dealer we would take our Millenia Supercharged to in Escondido ca. They had at least 20 bays. Guess how many had RX7's on them during our visit in the mid'90's. Pretty much all of them! It was quite a sight. At the time I was drooling over the cars, but the mechanic told me, unless you want to visit me all the time do not buy that car (and he worked for Mazda!).
toy4two is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DougHII
RC F (2015-present)
5
03-16-15 06:50 AM
bitkahuna
Car Chat
19
08-09-13 02:24 PM
Och
Car Chat
6
09-06-12 02:55 PM
CrazySC300
CL of Southern California
33
11-22-08 12:09 AM
LexFather
Car Chat
15
07-02-08 10:30 PM



Quick Reply: FD RX7 reliability?



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:17 AM.