In the 80's what was the 7's biggest competitor

 

early or late 80s? (i'm guessing early since we're speaking in the 1st gen section..)

porsche 944 in the early 80's

 

give me a break.
The Porsche was a much more expensive car, the rx-7 was an economy priced sports car, listed for 10K or 14k for a gsl-se.
The copmetitors for market share were the other cars similarly equipped & priced.
The Nissan 300zx & the toyota supra

 

.... The Datsun/Nissan 280ZX/300ZX, Toyota Celica Supra/ Supra, Mitsubishi Starion/ Chrysler Conquest, Porsche 924/ 944, I know I'm leaving something out... The Rx-7 didnt compete against any one car, it competed in its class. Small Affordable Kinda Fast Sexy Looking. And it did very, very well.

 

Actually there are a lot of magazines that compared the rx7 and the 944, as a matter of fact I think an old fifth gear episode compared them around a track, The 944 was not much more expensive. And their performance was almost identicle with the Rx-7 coming out on top in all around fun and bang for the buck, but the 944 had a more familier name and a race bred heritage (PORSCHE) and it also got better gas mileage...

 

Rust.

 

There was one with a 2nd Gen and a 924.... I think thats what your thinking of

 

nice.

 

this one? http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...59463783&q=rx7

 

Yep thats the one

 

Yeah, Yeah same difference. But you get what Im saying, they arent as different as you'd think

 

I second that!

 

"miss christina drives a 944,
satisfaction oozes from her pores,
cocaine in the dresser, bars on the doors.
pick a habit, we have plenty to go around" from the 1986 hit single "BoomTown"

I think the RX-7 is better in everyother aspect.

 

I have to go with alex on this one, rust, because althought the rx-7 was great and all it all depends on eairly or late because the eairly ones where not so fined tuned but by the time they got the late 80s they started to catch on to most of thier problems like thier biggest one at first the infamous "bad "o" rings" and in later years they had problem with the turbos so it all just depends on what years and wheither you are a person who drives stock or speefs the crap out of thier rides!!!

 

The first and second gen Rx-7 were entered into themarket to bedrioect competition for the Porsche 924 and then the 944

 

My friend owns a 944 and my rx7 and his are very competitive! They handle and accelerate almost equally. Both cars had a turbo version too! Im sure the 7 could outhandle the 944 but in a straight line the two are dead equal or the porsche has a 1 car length ahead.

 

I love the early Datsun Z's

 

I bought an old Road and Track (or Car and Driver, can't remember) at a race at Lime Rock that compared the 79 RX-7 to the 280ZX, 924, and corvette(!). I believe they said all around, the RX7 was the best. The 280zx was a little anemic and the 924 couldn't get out of it's own way. The vette raped everyone in a strait line, but everything else about it sucked.

I'll see if I can find it and maybe I'll scan and post some pictures

 

The Gen 1 RX-7 was not designed to compete against the 924 or 944 but to provide a cheap mass produced alternative, and build on the sucess of the 240Z. In the early 80s the competition for the cheap end of the sports car market came from other Japanese makes, Datsun Z, Honda CRX and Toyata MR2. There were different markets for the large US sports cars and the European exotics, except perhaps the XI/9. The 924 was not a success because it was seen to be too cheap! The traditional UK sports cars lost out because of a lack of a widespread dealer network selling/servicing a range of models.

The relative merit in terms of performance [speed and handling] did not seem to impact on market competition, perhaps because less than 10% of buyers drive a sports car according to its potential. They could not care less if the top speed was 2mph quicker unlike magazine comparisons. Subjective appeal is important, this is why the Miatra was such a great success for Mazda. Production of the RX-7 produced little profit after about 1981 as prices were squeezed by the competition. Mazda kept it going as part of its branding strategy, but not as extreme as Honda with its NSX.

However, I believe the Gen 1 never had any real competitor, it was unique!

 

The 944 would own you on the curves. Porsche are notoriously deadly predators when it comes to road racing. Your downfalls are solid live axle, and recirculating ball steering. If you had an open diff that wouldnt help much either. 944's are FR with rack and pinion steering, and IRS, they dont even have a diff they use a rear transaxle. That almost gives it the same balance as an Rx-7. Plus a 944 is heavier and more stable. The Rx-7's *** is very skittish and the steering very heavy.

No Offense, I love the Rx as much as the next guy but a 944 in road racing just outclasses the Rx, Have you ever looked underneath a 1980 Toyota Celica GT? its almost the same drivetrain suspension layout. A Porsche had a hundred technical engineers fine tune everything, not to mention all 944's or ALL Porsche since their inception in 1948 have had all wheel disks.

I own a 944, it is bone stock. My Rx's suspension is heavily modified and I still dont think my 7 would take a 944 on the track. Hey maybe I should post pics of my FB and 944 together

 

Yes, this is very true, and I do agree with you on it being unique. But Porsche can sell anything SIMPLY because it has a Porsche badge on it. If it has the Stuttgart badge of approval, you know its reliable, fast, fun, handles great, expensive, and will retain its value. You just dont see cheap Porsches unless they are blown or abused, and you dont see to many of those either.


Porsche can charge outrageous prices because people expect that. Nobody wants to pay in upwards of 40K for a "japanese car'' hell theres probably alot of people (I PROMISE THIS) that dont even know what a rotary is! but even your average soccer mom knows what a Porsche is (even if they only know about the SUV...... *grumble* *grumble* )

 

I've seen you post somewhere else, I think I roasted you there as well.... Do you even have a "ride" J/W..... And what factual information do you have to prove the "early" models were not fine tuned? As far as Im concerned if you take care of it properly you never have any problems. whether it be 12A or 13B, and yes so everyone knows, my ride has officially been speefed.....

 

. . . . a Front Engined car with a rear transaxle? You sure you aren't thinking of a 911?

 

Rust was a common killer of many of the cars on the list. All of the Japanese cars had little or no rust protection. That was one of thier biggest blunders when they entered the US market, and that reputation stayed with them even after they made improvements. Even the older BMWs, like the 2002 and some of the Mercedes were cancer with 4 wheels.

As far as direct competition, I have to say the Datsun 2XXZ series. Back in those days, everyone pretty much had thier own camps. Domestics shouldn't even be on the list. You were either home grown or import oriented and the import guys were broke into thier sub groups, Japanese, British, or the higher end snots, er, snobs.

 

From the perspective of Automobile Marketing, the RX-7 was in Size and Price directly in competition with Porsche 924 and Triumph TR-7 models--by Design. Fiat X1/9 and Datsun 280Z included as well.

In Motorsport Competitions, the Porsche 911 and Datsun 280ZX were the RX-7's original direct Competitors. In subsequent years, competing against the larger GTO Corvettes, Camaros, Ferraris, Porsche Carreras, and BMW M1, the RX-7 remained very successful.

Due to those huge successes, and overall value of the RX-7, there were indeed sales taken from Porsche 924, 944, 911, and Corvette. Thus while not fully intended, it was the ultimate result, a sales Competitor for them as well.