3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

The Fortunate 350 [CYM]

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-01-09 | 10:34 PM
  #101  
2RotorsNaDream's Avatar
¿¿What are pistons??
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
From: Queens NYC
Originally Posted by wan
Reading comprehension is your friend. He's saying that an R1 in todays market (read: dollar value) is $100k due to inflation. I dont think $100k is accurate but I gather it was just an exagerated example on his part. According to an inflation calculator that I found on line $40,000 dollars in 1993 is the equivalent of $59,208.98 in 2008. Source: http://dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

Back to our regularly scheduled program: How much white FDs kick *** and oh yea, competition yellow mica ones too
Jesus, reading comprehension owns both of you guys. Dont preach to him about reading and then you didnt comprehend it right either. He was talking about classic Mustangs compared to classic Shelbys.
Old 03-01-09 | 10:40 PM
  #102  
Juan's Avatar
Im a tall midget.
iTrader: (28)
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,131
Likes: 6
From: So Cal, USA
Originally Posted by 2RotorsNaDream
Jesus, reading comprehension owns both of you guys. Dont preach to him about reading and then you didnt comprehend it right either. He was talking about classic Mustangs compared to classic Shelbys.
lol Sorry about that, I was too busy laughing at a post on the west section when I typed this up
Old 03-01-09 | 11:27 PM
  #103  
adam c's Avatar
Cheap Bastard
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,370
Likes: 50
From: San Luis Obispo, Ca
Originally Posted by dblboinger
Yeah, maybe if you're worried about spending a couple hundred dollars. I'm willing to spend that to get the better appearance (IMO) of the 93 panels. If you're not willing to spend a couple hundred bones then the FD is probably not the ideal car for you.
Cost isn't the issue. The FACT is that Mazda realized the 93 interior wasn't very good, so they improved it.
Old 03-02-09 | 12:24 AM
  #104  
1point3liter's Avatar
Twin Turbo LSX
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 785
Likes: 1
From: Jacksonville, Fl
Originally Posted by khoveraki
Anyone hating on CYMs have never seen them in person.



and probably have small weiners.

hey 1point3litre I think you you better get your engine bay checked out, I think it has some garbage stuck in it?
i already took the trash out.
Old 03-02-09 | 12:29 AM
  #105  
Mahjik's Avatar
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 27,595
Likes: 43
From: Kansas City, MO
Originally Posted by adam c
Cost isn't the issue. The FACT is that Mazda realized the 93 interior wasn't very good, so they improved it.
I wouldn't say that... It's cheaper in the long run for them to not use the painted surfaces rather than replace them under warranty for everyone. FWIW, my M3 painted panels chipped too (and they were replaced under warranty). However, they (as the 93 FD painted panels) look better than the plastic textured crap used on most cars.
Old 03-02-09 | 10:42 AM
  #106  
adam c's Avatar
Cheap Bastard
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,370
Likes: 50
From: San Luis Obispo, Ca
I'm going to have to disagree with you Kyle. I think the 94/95 panels look much better than the 93's. I think you are with a small minority that feel the 93's look better. The tan plastic on some of the 93's is particularly ugly!!
Old 03-04-09 | 06:47 PM
  #107  
Julian's Avatar
Rotary Freak
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,857
Likes: 5
From: Longview, Texas
Originally Posted by wan
Reading comprehension is your friend. He's saying that an R1 in todays market (read: dollar value) is $100k due to inflation. I dont think $100k is accurate but I gather it was just an exagerated example on his part. According to an inflation calculator that I found on line $40,000 dollars in 1993 is the equivalent of $59,208.98 in 2008. Source: http://dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

Back to our regularly scheduled program: How much white FDs kick *** and oh yea, competition yellow mica ones too
Nice calculator but it doesn't follow car prices. In 1972 a Ferrari 365GTB/4 (nickname: "Daytona") listed for about $27,500 that would put its 2009 equivalent to $138k .. no Ferrari even V-8 models come anywhere close to that. The GTB/4 was the high performance model V-12 of its time .. first car to hit 300 kph. Today you can't touch any Ferrari near this factored price and the 599 GTB is its descendant with a price today of plus $300k, same would go for Porsche models.

That all said, what RX-7 cost $40k in 1992 or 1993, they were introduced at a very low price; under the 2nd gen if memory is correct quickly raising after the first few months, climbed to mid 20’s MSRP then on to mid 30’speaking at 42 k for touring model ($4k option) (R1/R2 was a $2k option) in late 1994-1995 before factory-to-dealer rebates to get last moved.
Old 03-24-09 | 12:45 PM
  #108  
StealthFox's Avatar
Siiickkkkkk

iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted by adam c
I'm going to have to disagree with you Kyle. I think the 94/95 panels look much better than the 93's. I think you are with a small minority that feel the 93's look better. The tan plastic on some of the 93's is particularly ugly!!
tan plastic i dont even think i have seen it and i hope to never, blehh these cars need a lot of modernization and refinishing :\

like someone said before, if your not willing to spend a few hundred bones here and there the FD is not for you, these are some of the most quirky mass produced cars there are.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Coochas
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
44
11-06-19 12:08 AM
jarjarbinks
New Member RX-7 Technical
1
09-26-15 12:03 AM



Quick Reply: The Fortunate 350 [CYM]



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 PM.