Anyone have personal experience with 93-95 RX7 or 97-98 240SX?
05-20-11 | 04:22 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,508
Likes: 0
From: IL
Anyone have personal experience with 93-95 RX7 or 97-98 240SX?
93-95 RX7
97-98 240SX
Just thought I'd ask for opinions on these two cars. I have been casually searching for an RX7 or 240SX to add to my stable. Something with <50,000 miles, and stock. I would keep it stock. Price is not an issue. I just can't get over my love for 90's sports cars. One of my cars is a stock white 97 MKIV with 43k miles.
Can any owners or previous owners chime in on reliability (or lack of), overall experience, and what to look out for when checking one of these cars out?
Thanks in advance.....
Vince
97-98 240SX
Just thought I'd ask for opinions on these two cars. I have been casually searching for an RX7 or 240SX to add to my stable. Something with <50,000 miles, and stock. I would keep it stock. Price is not an issue. I just can't get over my love for 90's sports cars. One of my cars is a stock white 97 MKIV with 43k miles.
Can any owners or previous owners chime in on reliability (or lack of), overall experience, and what to look out for when checking one of these cars out?
Thanks in advance.....
Vince
05-20-11 | 05:24 PM
#2
Nothing wrong with 90's sports cars...IMO, best era for affordable sports cars. When I get the money, those cars are what I'm filling my garage with 
I don't have any personal experience with either cars, but one of my friends owns a 97 240sx. Unfortunately, it's not in the best of shape physically, but it's still mechanically sound. It does have an SR20DET in it though. Another buddy of mine has a 95 240sx. It's on the original engine, and it sounds like a pickup truck. Neither have had any real major issues with the car, although both have had the clutch and flywheel replaced.
I don't have any personal experience with either cars, but one of my friends owns a 97 240sx. Unfortunately, it's not in the best of shape physically, but it's still mechanically sound. It does have an SR20DET in it though. Another buddy of mine has a 95 240sx. It's on the original engine, and it sounds like a pickup truck. Neither have had any real major issues with the car, although both have had the clutch and flywheel replaced.
05-21-11 | 11:29 AM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 91,625
Likes: 89
From: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
I reviewed and test-drove both back in the 1990s, when they were new, but did not actually own either one.
The RX-7 had superb handling, ultra-quick steeering response, and an almost perfect-balance from the small, light rotary-engine's location back near the firewall. The twin-turbos (not found on the successor Renesis RX-8 rotary) gave plenty of spunk, but there was little low-RPM torque, and, to get that spunk, you had to spin the engine, with its turbine-like smoothness, to almost motorcycle-RPM levels).
The RX-7, though, had some flies in the ointment as well. First, the Turbo 3rd-generation model, like its Supra, 3000GTVR4, Stealth, and 300ZX competitors, was just too expensive for the time, and the manufacturers made no attempt to decontent them and lower the price any. Second, like its Miata brother, it was quite cramped inside, especially for a person my size. Third, the RX-7 had horrendous road and wind noise from very light construction and a serious lack of sound-insulation.....road bumps often came through as loud crashing noises. Third, the lightweight-aluminum chassis/steering/suspension parts produced fantastic handling, but were not very durable......you could easily bend them over potholes and road-impacts.
From what I remember of the 240SX, it was built more solidly than the RX-7, was less-expensive, drove more like a regular sport-coupe than a pure sports-car like the RX-7, was much quieter on the road, and, while not as powerful as the RX-7's twin-turbos, had a more linear power-delivery. Like most Nissan products of the time, it had a generally good reliability record...the well-known Nissan cost-cutting and quality drop did not start until around 2000, after Renault bought them out. But, like any used vehicle, the condition of the individual car is more important that the overall reliability record from Consumer Reports.
The RX-7 had superb handling, ultra-quick steeering response, and an almost perfect-balance from the small, light rotary-engine's location back near the firewall. The twin-turbos (not found on the successor Renesis RX-8 rotary) gave plenty of spunk, but there was little low-RPM torque, and, to get that spunk, you had to spin the engine, with its turbine-like smoothness, to almost motorcycle-RPM levels).
The RX-7, though, had some flies in the ointment as well. First, the Turbo 3rd-generation model, like its Supra, 3000GTVR4, Stealth, and 300ZX competitors, was just too expensive for the time, and the manufacturers made no attempt to decontent them and lower the price any. Second, like its Miata brother, it was quite cramped inside, especially for a person my size. Third, the RX-7 had horrendous road and wind noise from very light construction and a serious lack of sound-insulation.....road bumps often came through as loud crashing noises. Third, the lightweight-aluminum chassis/steering/suspension parts produced fantastic handling, but were not very durable......you could easily bend them over potholes and road-impacts.
From what I remember of the 240SX, it was built more solidly than the RX-7, was less-expensive, drove more like a regular sport-coupe than a pure sports-car like the RX-7, was much quieter on the road, and, while not as powerful as the RX-7's twin-turbos, had a more linear power-delivery. Like most Nissan products of the time, it had a generally good reliability record...the well-known Nissan cost-cutting and quality drop did not start until around 2000, after Renault bought them out. But, like any used vehicle, the condition of the individual car is more important that the overall reliability record from Consumer Reports.
Last edited by mmarshall; 05-21-11 at 11:34 AM.
05-21-11 | 05:03 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,508
Likes: 0
From: IL
I reviewed and test-drove both back in the 1990s, when they were new, but did not actually own either one.
The RX-7 had superb handling, ultra-quick steeering response, and an almost perfect-balance from the small, light rotary-engine's location back near the firewall. The twin-turbos (not found on the successor Renesis RX-8 rotary) gave plenty of spunk, but there was little low-RPM torque, and, to get that spunk, you had to spin the engine, with its turbine-like smoothness, to almost motorcycle-RPM levels).
The RX-7, though, had some flies in the ointment as well. First, the Turbo 3rd-generation model, like its Supra, 3000GTVR4, Stealth, and 300ZX competitors, was just too expensive for the time, and the manufacturers made no attempt to decontent them and lower the price any. Second, like its Miata brother, it was quite cramped inside, especially for a person my size. Third, the RX-7 had horrendous road and wind noise from very light construction and a serious lack of sound-insulation.....road bumps often came through as loud crashing noises. Third, the lightweight-aluminum chassis/steering/suspension parts produced fantastic handling, but were not very durable......you could easily bend them over potholes and road-impacts.
From what I remember of the 240SX, it was built more solidly than the RX-7, was less-expensive, drove more like a regular sport-coupe than a pure sports-car like the RX-7, was much quieter on the road, and, while not as powerful as the RX-7's twin-turbos, had a more linear power-delivery. Like most Nissan products of the time, it had a generally good reliability record...the well-known Nissan cost-cutting and quality drop did not start until around 2000, after Renault bought them out. But, like any used vehicle, the condition of the individual car is more important that the overall reliability record from Consumer Reports.
The RX-7 had superb handling, ultra-quick steeering response, and an almost perfect-balance from the small, light rotary-engine's location back near the firewall. The twin-turbos (not found on the successor Renesis RX-8 rotary) gave plenty of spunk, but there was little low-RPM torque, and, to get that spunk, you had to spin the engine, with its turbine-like smoothness, to almost motorcycle-RPM levels).
The RX-7, though, had some flies in the ointment as well. First, the Turbo 3rd-generation model, like its Supra, 3000GTVR4, Stealth, and 300ZX competitors, was just too expensive for the time, and the manufacturers made no attempt to decontent them and lower the price any. Second, like its Miata brother, it was quite cramped inside, especially for a person my size. Third, the RX-7 had horrendous road and wind noise from very light construction and a serious lack of sound-insulation.....road bumps often came through as loud crashing noises. Third, the lightweight-aluminum chassis/steering/suspension parts produced fantastic handling, but were not very durable......you could easily bend them over potholes and road-impacts.
From what I remember of the 240SX, it was built more solidly than the RX-7, was less-expensive, drove more like a regular sport-coupe than a pure sports-car like the RX-7, was much quieter on the road, and, while not as powerful as the RX-7's twin-turbos, had a more linear power-delivery. Like most Nissan products of the time, it had a generally good reliability record...the well-known Nissan cost-cutting and quality drop did not start until around 2000, after Renault bought them out. But, like any used vehicle, the condition of the individual car is more important that the overall reliability record from Consumer Reports.
05-23-11 | 12:04 AM
#6
05-23-11 | 05:56 AM
#7
Trending Topics
05-23-11 | 07:50 AM
#8
I have had many many 240sx's with all motor combinations aside from an rb20/26.
Stock S14's IMO if taken care of are very fun to drive cars that handle very well. I really like the look of the 1995/96 body style personally stock. The 97-98 really needs an aggressive body kit to look good I feel. That being said the reason people say they sound like pick-up trucks is because they have the same 2.4L thats in all the nissan trucks from the time.
Are your intentions to keep it stock or are you planning on swapping it?
Stock S14's IMO if taken care of are very fun to drive cars that handle very well. I really like the look of the 1995/96 body style personally stock. The 97-98 really needs an aggressive body kit to look good I feel. That being said the reason people say they sound like pick-up trucks is because they have the same 2.4L thats in all the nissan trucks from the time.
Are your intentions to keep it stock or are you planning on swapping it?
05-23-11 | 11:03 AM
#9
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,350
Likes: 1
From: Inside
The FD RX-7 is really not that reliable.
I've got a friend who's been driving an RX-7 off-and-on since high school (he is now 25), and he's on his second engine on his second RX-7. His first RX-7 also went through two engines as well.
He's got enough mechanical saavy to basically fix anything that goes wrong with it on his own, and has done rebuilds for other people--but even he can see through his undying love for the wankel and admit that they are not the most reliable kind of engine.
His brother recently sold his FD RX-7 for an S2000.
Another friend has had an RX-7 but it has not been on the road...since 2008(?).
I've got a friend who's been driving an RX-7 off-and-on since high school (he is now 25), and he's on his second engine on his second RX-7. His first RX-7 also went through two engines as well.
He's got enough mechanical saavy to basically fix anything that goes wrong with it on his own, and has done rebuilds for other people--but even he can see through his undying love for the wankel and admit that they are not the most reliable kind of engine.
His brother recently sold his FD RX-7 for an S2000.
Another friend has had an RX-7 but it has not been on the road...since 2008(?).
05-23-11 | 12:50 PM
#10
Lead Lap
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,593
Likes: 5
From: CA
I had a '96, which is pretty much the same as '97-'98 except for aesthetics. The engine revs slowly because of a long(ish) stroke, but I don't know that it sounds like a truck motor.
It was a very fun car to drive stock, but even more fun with a few suspension mods. If you're just looking for a reliable DD, I think it'll easily out-live the RX7. I had a couple friends with the RX7s you're looking at and the motors just didn't last although they were much faster. If you're looking to mod, I'd say get the RX7.
In terms of reliability, I never had a problem with mine and just did the basic maintenance. I don't recall any particular problem areas to look for either, they seem to be a pretty solid cars all around. Definitely check out some of the Nissan boards they usually have a TON of technical information.
It was a very fun car to drive stock, but even more fun with a few suspension mods. If you're just looking for a reliable DD, I think it'll easily out-live the RX7. I had a couple friends with the RX7s you're looking at and the motors just didn't last although they were much faster. If you're looking to mod, I'd say get the RX7.
In terms of reliability, I never had a problem with mine and just did the basic maintenance. I don't recall any particular problem areas to look for either, they seem to be a pretty solid cars all around. Definitely check out some of the Nissan boards they usually have a TON of technical information.
05-23-11 | 03:15 PM
#11
Thread Starter
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,508
Likes: 0
From: IL
Thanks for the input everyone. I posted this on supraforums also and got similar feedback. Looks like i will be going with the 97-98 240sx. I am meticulous about maintenance on my vehicles, and I don't mind at all paying for the maintenance work. I make time for this and budget accordingly. However, I do NOT like having to pay to replace things that have broken, and I don't like the inconvenience of a car breaking down on you. Also, I don't like that crappy feeling you get when you know your car is broken and stuck in the shop.
I previously drove a GS400, and I sold it with almost 150k miles for an S2000. The only thing that ever failed on the GS was the starter. I loved that car. Proper maintenance = longevity.
Then, I put 40k miles on my S2000 over three years. I drove that car hard and beat on it every day...the car was so involving to drive! It was resilient, and the only thing that ever failed on it was 1 coil pack. Although the car burned about a quart of oil every 2500 miles, I knew that was a result of me driving in vtec all the time. Again, another testament to proper maintenance. I sold the S2000 with 80k miles because it was no longer practical for a CPO A4 cabriolet.
When I step into any of my vehicles, I want peace of mind. I don't want to drive around wondering if something will break. I want to be able to drive my car hard and know that it can withstand the stress. Thus, I don't think an rx7 would be the right car for me. I can't imagine having to rebuild an engine twice, let alone tolerate it the first time, or breaking suspension parts while driving. That being said, as beautiful as the rx7 is, I don't want a black hole rolling repair bill.
Thanks everyone!
Vince
I previously drove a GS400, and I sold it with almost 150k miles for an S2000. The only thing that ever failed on the GS was the starter. I loved that car. Proper maintenance = longevity.
Then, I put 40k miles on my S2000 over three years. I drove that car hard and beat on it every day...the car was so involving to drive! It was resilient, and the only thing that ever failed on it was 1 coil pack. Although the car burned about a quart of oil every 2500 miles, I knew that was a result of me driving in vtec all the time. Again, another testament to proper maintenance. I sold the S2000 with 80k miles because it was no longer practical for a CPO A4 cabriolet.
When I step into any of my vehicles, I want peace of mind. I don't want to drive around wondering if something will break. I want to be able to drive my car hard and know that it can withstand the stress. Thus, I don't think an rx7 would be the right car for me. I can't imagine having to rebuild an engine twice, let alone tolerate it the first time, or breaking suspension parts while driving. That being said, as beautiful as the rx7 is, I don't want a black hole rolling repair bill.
Thanks everyone!
Vince
Last edited by GQD_GS4; 05-23-11 at 03:21 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
O. L. T.
SC- 1st Gen (1992-2000)
16
04-14-13 08:39 AM
