captain carnage

iTrader: (1)

This probably sounds like a really broad topic, but im honestly curious, in ontario, is it cheaper or easiear to own a fc or fb? By this i mean reliability and parts availabilty, perhaps gas mileage and insurance also. Im kindda stuck in a situation where this may be what it comes down to, if i decide to go for either, it will remain relatively close to being stock.

Cheers-Balatch

Ctrl

i own 2 fb's and an fc.... fc is gxl, other two are gsl they all run just as good, but for stock motors, the fc uses a lot more gas.... costs as much to fill and gets 100km less a tank. That was with a really filthy air filter and a plugged cat exhaust.... replaced all that but haven't figured out what my gas mileage is afterwards..... still seems harder on gas however.

85rotarypower

As far as cost to repair, both are about equal. Ease of repair, the FB is easier to repair as its far simpler in design. As for reliability, the FB may be more reliable, but this is kinda a debated topic. The FC lovers will likely say the FC is more reliable, while the FB lovers (like myself) are more inclined to say the FB is more reliable. I guess the final decision comes down to what type of car you like. I would consider the FC the land yacht of the RX-7's and the FB is the purest of them. With an FC, you get tons of comfort, but with the FB, its all about driving.

Archangels

you want cheap and reliable, buy a honda....

CosmicButtHairs

carb'd fb with all the rats nest removed for sure is easier and cheaper on insurance.

captain carnage

iTrader: (1)

i was told the 13b was the best of the rotary engines, non the less, i think i will go fb, seems like more of an adventure kind of thing....

B6T

iTrader: (2)

If you find a "GSL-SE" FB then you'd already have the 13B engine. The GSL-SE was only available in the 1984 and 1985 model years though, so it may be hard to find one.

dufourmike

iTrader: (1)

Fb's are by far easier to work on. I really want to get rid of my undependable neon and get an fb. Also, fb's are very cheap on insureance, usually 30 bucks a month less in my case, an under 25 driver.

classicauto

iTrader: (3)

comparing the two in an ideal situation (basically meaning they are both new and stock) the FB is easier to work on, cheaper on insurance...gas mileage, they're probably debatably equal.

Now, in the real world you've got to look at a few different factors. If you're buying an FC you have the ability to buy one that (at its newest) is 15 years old. With the FB you have the ability to buy one that (at its newest) is 21 years old.

Now in Ontario's buying market I've noticed that generally speaking, FC's aremore plentiful. You will have mre to pick from and, thereby, more of chance at finding a nice clean stock one - which is what you're after.

For FB's in Ontario, there are many - but they are becoming more and more scarce as time goes on. You could look in autotrader one day and see 5, then none for a month. With that said it will be slightly more difficult to find an FB in nice shape and stock form. However it can be done.

Comparing the cost of an FB and FC in comparable shape(nice and stock), they would probably be pretty equal.

So I say which one do you like the looks of the most? buy that one.

edit: also factor in the 700% increase in pimp factor if you go with an FC...oh yeah, I own an FC - haha

1985mazdarx7gs

Personally I like FCs because they use more modern suspension components....why the hell would Mazda use reciprolcating (sp?) ball style steering in my FB is beyond me.

I agree the FB is all about driving it though...it is comfortable enough for me, but I mean it's a noisy car at cruising speed, and has little to no sound deadener (it's lighter though)....

My FB is still in stock form, original drivetrain...I'm from Saskatchewan though so who knows if it varies province to province

Alak

iTrader: (9)

Both styles cost more money than you could ever spend in the long run.

FC has a nearly unlimited amount of OEM and Aftermarket parts for every inch of the car. Most are pricey. And there are alot more parts on an FC.

FB has a fair amount of OEM parts still availiable, at a very nominal fee.

You'll find the parts you want to replace are cheap. But the parts that BREAK and NEED to be replaced are very expensive.

no_name

What he said (Alak). I own an FB and love it. I drove it for one winter, and the winter really ate at the car so I will not do so again, unless I will absolutly have too.

My FB gets alot of looks, and I get alot of compliments about my car (often mistaken as a Porsche). On the con side it's carburated, so cold startups are not the best, and I can tune it for beans, or find anyone who can, in reasonable distance from me.

Terrh

iTrader: (7)

12A powered FB = cheapest, most reliable and best on gas rx7 there is.

Alak

iTrader: (9)

Agreed.

Bass

Plus, FB= a lot more looks and conversations at parking lots and gas stations.

Aviator 902S

If you live in Ontario the only decent FBs (or older FCs) that have not been completely consumed by rust are those that have been driven only during months when there is no snow/ road salt.

These same survivors are likely to have been well cared for so their age is almost irrelevant, accumulated mileage notwithstanding. And since they're not driven in winter the cold-start problem mentioned for carbed rotaries is a non-issue.

The (non-turbo) FCs are either 146-hp ('86 to '88) or 161-hp ('89 to '91) and have a more updated and efficient suspension than that of the FBs.

In spite of this, these cars are no quicker to accelerate than the 101-hp (12A) and 135-hp (13B GSL-SE) 1st gens--- due to the 1st gens' lighter weight. Extra horsepower costs fuel, which explains why the FCs don't get as good fuel economy as FBs do---this in spite of the updated and more efficient fuel delivery and ignition systems on the FCs.

So it comes down to what you want the car to do for you. If you want a car that you intend to modify for performance on the track and don't care about fuel economy it makes sense to go with the FC. The car already has the more powerful 13B (especially if it's an '89 or later model) and the steering and suspension are superior to that of the FB. Besides, the styling of these cars is generic in the same way as that of say, a Porsche 944 or a Dodge Daytona of the same vintage--- which means you won't be hacking up and modding a rare and priceless gem.

But if you want an unmolested and stock daily driver that's reliable, fun to drive and has the rare classic sports car styling that gets noticed at show-and-shines (and in the next decade by judges at auto auctions) the FB is the best choice. They are already noticably less common than FCs so their prices have now caught up to (and in the case of the GSL-SE, surpassed) that of the N/A 2nd gens.

If you can, try to find an FB that is either a): an '85 GSL-SE ( the last model year FB and which has every conceivable option--- including the fuel-injected 13B and better suspension and brakes vs. other FBs); or b): a 1979 (the first model year that RX7s were built) with all available options. These cars will command higher prices in future years than any other stock 1st or 2nd gen RX7.