Better road racer GTU or GXL
01-21-03 | 09:29 PM
#51
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Originally posted by Icemark
Those number are fine and dandy, but if you looked at the actual window stickers for the actual cars you would see the difference.
For example most of the non-leather 86-87 GXL models were actually 2680 according to the window sticker when they landed in Long beach.
While the 90 GXL was 2880 according to the window sticker...
That is 200 lbs between the S4 and S5 version.
Heck even my old 87 Sport weighed only 2623 (with AC/PS/Radio/Cruise/Etc) according to the window sticker, yet your figures suggest that only a stripped base could weigh that.
The weight from the S5 cars comes from a revised dash support, larger gas tank, but also revised body panels. A couple of the body panels got thicker and heavier, (most notibly the A pillar and A pillar to B piller support as well as the B-pillar) and also lame stuff like Mazda stopped putting in the ultra light weight german jack and tool kit (to save costs, but still the light jack alone was 3lbs lighter) and added the much heavier mouse belts and other accessories like that.
See on the S4 coupes Mazda had to have the weight under 2875 or they would go into the CAFE gas guzzler charges (about an extra $1100 USD per car), so the had to get the weight down. On the S5 cars the weight limit [for cars getting 21 combined City/Highway] had changed to 3100 lbs and the cars weight went up because of it. Why do you think that the S4 verts didn't come from the factory with a auto tranny or Turbo??? because they would have failed the gas guzzler restrictions.
Those number are fine and dandy, but if you looked at the actual window stickers for the actual cars you would see the difference.
For example most of the non-leather 86-87 GXL models were actually 2680 according to the window sticker when they landed in Long beach.
While the 90 GXL was 2880 according to the window sticker...
That is 200 lbs between the S4 and S5 version.
Heck even my old 87 Sport weighed only 2623 (with AC/PS/Radio/Cruise/Etc) according to the window sticker, yet your figures suggest that only a stripped base could weigh that.
The weight from the S5 cars comes from a revised dash support, larger gas tank, but also revised body panels. A couple of the body panels got thicker and heavier, (most notibly the A pillar and A pillar to B piller support as well as the B-pillar) and also lame stuff like Mazda stopped putting in the ultra light weight german jack and tool kit (to save costs, but still the light jack alone was 3lbs lighter) and added the much heavier mouse belts and other accessories like that.
See on the S4 coupes Mazda had to have the weight under 2875 or they would go into the CAFE gas guzzler charges (about an extra $1100 USD per car), so the had to get the weight down. On the S5 cars the weight limit [for cars getting 21 combined City/Highway] had changed to 3100 lbs and the cars weight went up because of it. Why do you think that the S4 verts didn't come from the factory with a auto tranny or Turbo??? because they would have failed the gas guzzler restrictions.
Ok, all of the above is fair enough. I have never seen the original window stickers so that is interesting to me. I guess what we really need are people with totally stock cars to go to a weigh station with a full tank and no junk in the car. If we get real numbers, we can finally put an end to the weight debate.
Its obvious that the S5 belts are an undesirable aspect of the S5, but did the chassis reinforcements pay any dividends??? Are there bending and torsional rigidity numbers showing the S5 to be a stronger chassis? And if the chassis is indeed stronger, does it allow for a better handling car if suspensions are identical between S5 and S4?
For the record, I love the 5600 RPM surge of my S5 and would really miss that if I had a S4!! :-)
01-21-03 | 10:08 PM
#52
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 20
From: Rohnert Park CA
Actually the majority of the chassis re-enforcements were related to the the dammed mouse belts and making the structure so that you didn't hurt yourself as bad if you didn't belt yourself in correctly.
Actually the best bet for racing a NA would be a class that would let you use the lighter/tighter S4 body with the N/A S5 motor (although I am not wild about the S5/S6 electric OMP and its operation).
Actually the best bet for racing a NA would be a class that would let you use the lighter/tighter S4 body with the N/A S5 motor (although I am not wild about the S5/S6 electric OMP and its operation).
01-21-03 | 10:55 PM
#53
Yes, that is my car
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans La.
Originally posted by Icemark
in my case was, that I rather spent the money on a FMIC than a stand alone.
Not saying that I won't do a stand alone down the road, but the 338 works fine for now
in my case was, that I rather spent the money on a FMIC than a stand alone.
Not saying that I won't do a stand alone down the road, but the 338 works fine for now
Do you have a cheat sheet you could send me of what to rewire when I add a turbo to my NA? The last time I happened to have both factory manuals and had to trace schematics for hours.
John 88 vert.
01-21-03 | 10:59 PM
#54
Yes, that is my car
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans La.
Originally posted by Icemark
So swap in a Turbo motor... the 88 'verts are the easiest to swap... heck you can even keep your same ECU.
So swap in a Turbo motor... the 88 'verts are the easiest to swap... heck you can even keep your same ECU.
01-22-03 | 10:25 AM
#55
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 20
From: Rohnert Park CA
Kevin Landers site has all the info for swapping and the pro's and cons of changing the drive train:
http://www.rotaryresurrection.com/
http://www.rotaryresurrection.com/
01-22-03 | 09:18 PM
#58
Former Moderator. RIP Icemark.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 20
From: Rohnert Park CA
Originally posted by Jaxon
so i take it that the s4, being lighter, is a perfect candidate for a V8 swap
so i take it that the s4, being lighter, is a perfect candidate for a V8 swap
I don't think any RX-7 is a good candidate for a V8 swap.I think V6 mustangs and V6 F-bodies are perfect candidates for V8 swaps
01-22-03 | 11:49 PM
#59
Yes, that is my car
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans La.
Ditto to that, I too have thought about the big HP V8`s but then it would`nt be a RX-7......RX means rotory, plus I would always feel like a Camaro guy if I had a SBC engine, I had a Camaro before and it was fast but that style just was'nt me. Rotory is the only way to go, a good upgrade would be a 3 rotor though. :-)
John
John
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
edmcguirk
NE RX-7 Forum
3
05-30-18 06:50 PM
rx8volks
Canadian Forum
0
09-01-15 10:46 PM
