Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Mazda RX7 Convertible with Motor V8

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    406
    Why the hell would anyone want to put a V8 in an Rx-7? They are all about the rotary engines.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,772
    Quote Originally Posted by islero
    Why the hell would anyone want to put a V8 in an Rx-7? They are all about the rotary engines.
    Christ, how many times does it need to be said?

    Quote Originally Posted by Egg Nog
    More power, more torque, and better efficiency
    I'd also like to add that they are generally much more reliable and less expensive to maintain.

    About half a year ago I was thinking about buying an RX-7 FC Turbo II that had a 350 Chev in it (from an IROC Camaro). The owner nearly sold it 4 years earlier because he drove it fairly hard and the rotary kept having issues. Instead of selling it, he did the V8 swap. Over the next 4 years of commuting in it daily, he had no engine problems at all, loads more power, and gobs of added torque (especially low-end). He also got noticeably better fuel economy.
    Last edited by Egg Nog; 12-29-2004 at 08:58 PM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,465
    Wolf, theres a particular magazine in NZ called Performance Car, its a rice mag, but it also has alot of good cars in it.

    Obviously a V8 swap is a godo choice into a RX7, however, I think it robs it of its uniqueness. I would, personally, put a twin turbo'd hi output Renesis into one.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Spastik_Roach
    Wolf, theres a particular magazine in NZ called Performance Car, its a rice mag, but it also has alot of good cars in it.

    Obviously a V8 swap is a godo choice into a RX7, however, I think it robs it of its uniqueness. I would, personally, put a twin turbo'd hi output Renesis into one.
    I appreciate your creativity, but in all fairness, that would probably cost more than four times what a built 350 Chev would. Cost is a huge factor when it comes to highly customizing cars. Most people do V8 swaps because the low engine costs actually make it quite effective as far as advantages-per-dollar go. I could put a built-up 3.0 Porsche 968 Engine into my 944, but I'm sure that it would be at least double the cost of swapping in a Corvette LT1 to get the same amount of power.

    P.S. - I realize that despite your maturity, your age still prevents you from seeing money issues in the truest light. Just kidding buddy...
    Last edited by Egg Nog; 12-29-2004 at 09:10 PM.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Davis
    Posts
    180
    Whoever said the RX-8 is a updated RX-7 is wrong. Mazda plans to build an RX-7 by 2007 and why would the 'updated' RX-7 be a four door sport-sedan? The true rx-7 is a sport roadster and will remain so. RX-8 is not the new RX-7. Just to clarify things up.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,465
    Yeah my post was really a sort of Money-no-problem sorta post

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    917
    Quote Originally Posted by Egg Nog
    No, not really. RX-7s are among the best handling cars for the money in the world. Excellent suspension and weight balance. It's a shame that (especially in the 2nd gen) the gas milage was so bad, and there was little torque to be found anywhere in the rev range. The added weight of the Chevy 350 is not actually very much, and where it's located in that car, won't make much of a difference at all.

    Actually, never mind, you're right. Someone should've told the talented mechanic who built this that more power, more torque, and better efficiency is a "waste of an RX-7".
    wouldnt a V8 affect the weight balance just slightly?
    halo 2 - november 9

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,772
    Quote Originally Posted by danno
    wouldnt a V8 affect the weight balance just slightly?
    Most of the V8s swapped into RX-7s are aluminum Chevy 350s, at around 160kg (some are a little more, some a little less). The rotary in the RX-7 Turbo II weighed around 180kg. The rotary sat slightly farther back though, so it works out pretty even.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1
    Swapping a V8 into the RX-7 is one of the best all around performance improvements you can do. When you use a light weight V8 motor such as an aluminum chevy LS series or a ford 5.0 fuel injected with aluminum heads you get greatly improved performane and no weight gain, if the proper parts are used you can actually make the car lighter than it orignal came from the factory. Plus you get much better reliability and greatly improved fuel mileage when fuel injected V8 motors are used. I think the with a properly set up v8 and some slight suspenion tuning it basically turns the Rx-7 into a high performace super car, amazing acceleration, great handling, and awesome looks. But I guess that's just my oppinion?

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Bionic316 View Post
    Swapping a V8 into the RX-7 is one of the best all around performance improvements you can do. When you use a light weight V8 motor such as an aluminum chevy LS series or a ford 5.0 fuel injected with aluminum heads you get greatly improved performane and no weight gain, if the proper parts are used you can actually make the car lighter than it orignal came from the factory. Plus you get much better reliability and greatly improved fuel mileage when fuel injected V8 motors are used. I think the with a properly set up v8 and some slight suspenion tuning it basically turns the Rx-7 into a high performace super car, amazing acceleration, great handling, and awesome looks. But I guess that's just my oppinion?
    your opinion could be right. I don't now the figures about the weight of American V8s or of the rotary of the old RX-7 as this is. but I would think the rotary is lighter, because it's very small compared to the V8. surely the rotary isn't very recommended for high mileage, but AFAIK even American V8s aren't very easy on the gas. consider I'm from EU, here 20km/l (or almost 120miles per gallon) is a good mileage .
    sure the reliability is easily going to be improved with the change.
    don't know about the overall balance of the car and so its handling capabilities, it depends on the considerations of above. My opinion is to stick with the standard engine.

    and welcome on UCP
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,488
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    20km/l (or almost 120miles per gallon)
    I think you are a bit off with your conversions...

    120mpg is about 1,95l/100km. You meant 47mpg (which is 5l/100km).
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    brisbane - sub-tropical land of mangoes
    Posts
    16,251
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    your opinion could be right. I don't now the figures about the weight of American V8s or of the rotary of the old RX-7 as this is. but I would think the rotary is lighter, because it's very small compared to the V8. surely the rotary isn't very recommended for high mileage, but AFAIK even American V8s aren't very easy on the gas. consider I'm from EU, here 20km/l (or almost 120miles per gallon) is a good mileage .
    sure the reliability is easily going to be improved with the change.
    don't know about the overall balance of the car and so its handling capabilities, it depends on the considerations of above. My opinion is to stick with the standard engine.

    and welcome on UCP
    an LSx series engine in an RX-7 wouldn't be any worse than many other sportscars, considering they get pretty good fuel economy in a corvette for example.
    but if i was buying an RX-7, it'd be for the rotary anyway..?
    Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrer View Post
    I think you are a bit off with your conversions...

    120mpg is about 1,95l/100km. You meant 47mpg (which is 5l/100km).
    damn, yeah, that's what happens when you post numbers while studying numbers
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-18-2021, 05:13 PM
  2. What about the Wankel Engine??
    By piledriver in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 11-21-2005, 04:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •