NSX vs RX7

[peiserg]

This is true up to a certain point. It is roughly $2k-$4k cheaper to upgrade an Rx-7, 300ZXTT, or Supra TT up to 350-425rwhp than it is to upgrade an NSX to those levels. However, for power levels above that, the prices are remarkably similar. In the stock turbo cars, you need to buy all new injectors, bigger turbos, and bigger intercoolers to get above those levels anyway. The only difference is with the NSX, you need to do all these upgrades AT ONCE, not in stages.
-Tony
'91 NSX (All stock except 17" Blitz Type 03's)
'93 TTZ (502rwhp @ 22psi)

P.S. When launching at a drag strip, Car & Driver said to launch the NSX at 4000rpm with the TCS "off" while dumping the clutch. I wouldn't dump the clutch on my NSX but it is what they recommended.

I don't know where you shop, but my friend has a tt supra, it cost him under 2 grand total to hit 408 RWHP. To hit that in an nsx you need minimum a supercharger, and more likely than not, headers, exhaust, intake etc depending on the brand of supercharger.... and at that point, you are most likely in excess of 10k for SC or turbo alone, not to mention exhaust, etc..

anything above that, and you have to build the engine up, iirc... an additional 10k?

 

[kickascii]

Through experience I offer these words:

Stock, both cars are almost identical in 1/4 mile times. Driver input could make either win that race.. Now, here is one thing to think about. RX-7's are easy to build up and even small changes make big gains in power. Being a turbo, if it were cold outside, that makes BIG power on a turbo car.

Now, my buddy had a 93 RX-7 and did most of the work himself until he took it to someplace in Pennsylvania (RX-7 shop; cant think of name) and they did everything else. Bigger turbo, injectors, giant intercooler, fuel pump, dyno tune onsite. It went from 294HP at the wheels to 480 at the wheels at 20psi. Now, how long did it last? About a month. Apex seals died.

Any car you mod to create way more horsepower than stock is going to be comprimised with failure alot sooner than normal. Rotary's are just to finiky to expect durability when you make that much more power than stock. He went through 3 engines in 1 year..... Put two in himself. . Lotsa wasted time and aggrevation. Fun car though. It ran a best of 11.2 at @129MPH on sticky street tires.


I personally have a 95 Auto NSX and did not buy it for speed. Just the looks of people around here cuz there isn't but 1 other NSX within a half hour...

 

[Jasil]

"All show and no go" would be a good bumper sticker for you then.

 

[kickascii]

"All show and no go" would be a good bumper sticker for you then.

Dude man, chill. When I want to go fast, I have a 1985 Mercury Capri sitting in my garage that runs low 11's at the track. Speed is not everything.

 

[MASK]

NSX VS RX7 VS EVO VS GTR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k6s73bntKE

 

[heathbar0]

NSX VS RX7 VS EVO VS GTR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k6s73bntKE

Keep in mind, the current RX-7 sold in Japan behaves almost nothing like the 93-95 RX-7 we have in the US. The turbo system was refined, it produces 30+ more horse power from the factory, the torque curve is much nicer, and most importantly, the car has an even more balanced and refined suspension.
However, add an estimated $15000-$25000 in modifications to make the car street legal in the US, and the cost is now in around $45,000 - $55,000. Add in shipping, prep, dealer fees, etc... and a new RX-7 could easily be $60,000.

From Wikopedia:
The top-of-the-line "Type RS" came equipped with a Bilstein suspension and 17" wheels as standard equipment, and reduced weight to 1280 kg(2822 pounds). Power was officially claimed as 280 ps (276 hp, 208 kW) (with 330 N·m (243 ft·lbf) of torque) as per the maximum Japanese limit, though realistic power was more likely 220–230 kW (290–308 hp).

And the NSX S Zero:
From NSXPrime

At 2800 pounds, the S.Zero is lighter by 212 pounds than the stock coupe, and it can lap Honda's Suzuka F1 circuit 1.5 seconds faster than the NSX-R, the original, legendary NSX lightweight, born in Japan in 1992. 0-60 mph in 4.5 seconds and 13 seconds flat for the quarter mile. Like the NSX-R, it was developed primarily for the track. (Honda sees it as a kind of weekend racer.) But it's not as extreme as the R so, yes, you could even use it for commuting. The carbon-fiber Recaros are finished in orange and black. Front spring rates are more than double those of the new 3.2 (at the back, rates are up two-thirds). Shock rates are beefed up correspondingly. It has a lighter, single-mass flywheel. Much of the sound deadening material has been removed to reduce weight.


Amazing...up to 300hp from a 1.3 L engine. Wow!
TRIVIA: What "American" car had a 1.3L Engine, with 1/4 the Hp?

 

[jond]

I love the 93 RX7s. Almost bought one, but when I started reading their forums, their owners talked me out of it.
I remember one guy who hated his RX7 that said he bought the car, and in 1 year droped $11,000 into it, just fixing things that broke. Plus I do around 20,000 miles a year, so that would mean an engine rebuild every 2-3 years which is kind of harsh.

Really, ANY car can be fast if you're willing to sacrifice reliability and cost of ownership. Just hook up a 200hp nitrous shot. lol

 

[Herblenny]

Back in 2000, I almost bought a used 92 for mid 20s. Instead, I got sucked into buying 93 RX7 for the half of the price and used remainder buying performance parts. I guess, I'm now a "rotorhead".

To clearify some of the information that was given so far.

Yes, its true that in 1999 and up RX7 did come with 30 more HPs and faster spool. But those mods could be easily put on to 93-95 US models. The engine and all the portings are exactly the same from 1992-2003 RX7s... just few add ons have changed.

I think FD3S RX7 (93-95) tends to have a bad rep because very few really know how to take care of them and service them. I mean, Mazda dealership was the worse place to take them, because service tech didnt know how to fix them.

Far as power, Just taking out stock precat will increase the HP by 20-30. When you add Stand alone ECU such as PowerFC, you could go full exhaust, increase couple of pounds of boost, and get it tune to get another 60+ HP. Also, when you take the emissions off, you loose 50-100lbs.

Stock for stock, I agree that they are both very similar, but when modified, I believe RX7 give more possibilities.

 

[sb_fd3s]

1. The RX 7 (stock) is not faster than a NSX (stock) - especialy not on the track. The NSX is already fast when you think you drive moderate.

the nsx and rx7 are very close in performance, it will pretty much come down to driver in a race.

please excuse the magazine racing, but its the only source i have for comparisons of stock cars, with the same driver, and on the same day.

frome road and track march 92. "Danny Sullivan Tests: The best-handling sports cars" in that test the rx-7 got the fastest lap time beating cars like the nsx, and 911 turbo. the rx7 got a lap time of 1:05.64 to the nsx's 1:07.14.

http://fd3s.net/magazine_articles/road&track_article02.html

that being said id take an nsx over my rx7 anyday. the driving experience is so much better in the nsx. i love the feel of a mid engine car. one day, after college, i will own an nsx

 

[MoreRPMs]

from road and track march 92. "Danny Sullivan Tests: The best-handling sports cars" in that test the rx-7 got the fastest lap time beating cars like the nsx, and 911 turbo. the rx7 got a lap time of 1:05.64 to the nsx's 1:07.14.

http://fd3s.net/magazine_articles/road&track_article02.html

One of the few tests in a U.S. auto publication that pits the two cars on the SAME day, STOCK vs. STOCK and the RX-7, as it always did, smokes the Honda in every performance parameter. Cornering, slalom, autoX, and to rub it in...racetrack. And to add to that, the pre-production Mazda was suffering a fuel delivery problem; so intead of 1.5 seconds a lap quicker, it could very easily have been 2.5 or more. After a little 30 minute race, the little beer-keg-engined car would've been lapping the Japanese-technical-tour-de-force showing its tail lights once again.

{This really belongs in the thread that was deleted earlier as proof to a senior member here (who incidentally plagiarized my post) that insisted the NSX was dominant over the 1/2 as costly Mazda}

Also want to add that there is NOT one single test in a U.S. magazine in all the years that shows the NSX having any better handling capabilities than the RX-7. The Mazda simply stomps the exotic-wannabe into the ground; as proof check out AutocrossX results since 1992.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[pach]

One of the few tests in a U.S. auto publication that pits the two cars on the SAME day, STOCK vs. STOCK and the RX-7, BLAH BLAH BLAH

First of all, You really cant compare the rotary engine to a piston engine in terms of displacement.. that 1.3l comparison is ridiculous..I always hear rotary guys talk about so much power for just a 1.3l,yet they never talk about why their 1.3l gets the same gas mileage as a big block V8. A rotary gets a combustion cycle out of every rotation, unlike a 4 cycle piston engine.

If the RX-7 was so great, why is a car thats on its second engine considered a "pristine" condition car.. My NSX doesnt have an alarm/warning light from factory that tells me my exhaust system is about to melt.

The RX-7 is a great chassis, waiting for a LSx V-8.. :biggrin:

 

[MoreRPMs]

First of all, You really cant compare the rotary engine to a piston engine in terms of displacement.. that 1.3l comparison is ridiculous. I always hear rotary guys talk about so much power for just a 1.3l,yet they never talk about why their 1.3l gets the same gas mileage as a big block V8.

True about the combustion cycles. Fact is, those big block 8s get some great gas mileage when they're cruising in top gear, running 1200 or 1500 revs. Run 100% throttle and tell me what they are then. The only time I ran almost all highway miles on a tank with my rotary I got 26 mpg; and that was averaging between 75 and 85 mph. The NSX fares just about the same. So much for the "gas guzzler" stigma associated with the Wankel.

My NSX doesnt have an alarm/warning light from factory that tells me my exhaust system is about to melt.

Rotaries run hot, and they don't melt their exhausts. Shouldn't the NSX have a warning light that tells you your 20K mile, barely abused, $3500 clutch needs replacing? Or that the Acura "luxury" dealer is gonna hose you even more because your A/C just went south.

 

[WA-NSX]

Since I happen to be an original owner of both an RX-7 (1995) and an NSX, I think I have fairly good insight to offer.

I won't for a moment get into the tiny minutia as to what is better - or for what reason. Truth is, both of these cars fall into the 'supercar' status from Japan. There are two others that genuinely fall into that catagory as well ... the Toyota Supra (final model) and the Toyota 2000GT from the late 1960's.

While I have always been impressed with the 3rd Generation RX-7, the NSX is a step beyond that - it is simply amazing. Comments have been made as to what one is better constructed, and it is easily the NSX. They both are fast, and for their time, one of the fastest cars on the road. Personally, I don't care what one is fastest (or quickest), as it really doesn't matter. For me they are fast enough, and I have never been disapppointed with the strength that either car delivers.

And as far as looks, both cars are stunning.

I have never had ANY problems with my 1995 RX-7. However, I have kept mine 100% stock. In fact, mine might just one of the few on the planet that are just as stock now - as when it was delivered when new. I personally believe that this has helped in its reliability. At this point many (many!) of the 3rd generation RX-7's have been messed with so much that they are almost rolling time-bombs.

Mine has been so faithful, it is surely one of the reasons I have kept it so long. Also, my wife really likes it, as we went out in it early on - so that helps too.

However, if today I was to buy one (and only one), it would be the NSX. Whether an early model in the mid-20's, or a later one for 60 grand, simply an amazing car for the money.

Any of the above is not meant to be gospel fact ... but just an obversation from a person who has one of each sitting just a few feet away.

Cheers!

 

[heathbar0]

However, if today I was to buy one (and only one)

I know this is a NSX site but,

All things being equal - Two cars sit in front of you, a RX-7 and an NSX, free for you to choose, which one do you take?

I have had both, both cars I love.

I think the choice is simple.

 

[khappucino]

i love the RX7.
if there was a RX7 with the LS1 i'd take it in a heartbeat.
other than the volatile turbo rotary part (i think mainly 93-94 suck it) i think its a great ride (my friend went through his first engine in 6 months, and we've had to pull over more than once to fix a loose vaccum hose) =)

also the NSX 1st gear, 2nd gear ratio in the US version make it extra terrible for SCCA
i hate driving around the auto-x course at 5000 rpm in 2nd.... (2nd gear tops at ~85 mph)

 

[nsxtcy85]

Sorry Guys but. Actual track times Emerald coast 1/8th mile drag track.
RX7 9.682 NSX 11.364

Do you have an automatic with a rag in your filter?

I have a stock nsx besides a exedy clutch that didnt help much and a uni-foam intake filter just a filter mind you. And i pulled 8.7 at 82mph you need more practice.

 

[ChopsJazz]

Shouldn't the NSX have a warning light that tells you your 20K mile, barely abused, $3500 clutch needs replacing?

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. I have over 85K miles on my OEM clutch, the car has 138K on the clock, and the car gets driven hard with many track sessions on it. When I replaced the clutch it only cost $2100.

Maybe this thread should have a warning light that says, "Warning, some posters don't know a shred about the NSX!"

 

[PLZ]

I read a lot of these threads on this site, and while many of them lend insights into the car that's being compared to the NSX, pretty much all of them end up missing the point. Let me try to illustrate/articulate what I mean.

First, I learned a long time ago that pretty much any car can be modified to out-perform any other car in a given situation. There are hundreds of modified Civics that will out-accelerate an NSX, RX7, Ferrari F430, Enzo, etc. Likewise a stock Lotus Super Seven will crush an NSX or RX7 on an autocross course.

Next, consider this: a stock Aston Martin DB9 that costs $170K won't out-accelerate an NSX (or RX7), will be hopelessly behind in a track race, gets worse gas mileage, and costs more to maintain. Yet Aston Martin has no problem selling reasonable quantities of DB9s to willing buyers.

What's my point? It's simple: an individual makes his/her decision about what car to buy based on **their own** criteria. For some individuals, there are only a very small number of features that they care about (e.g., price, acceleration, handling on a track, etc.). For other individuals, there are a large number of features (low maintenance, excellent acceleration, great handling, good looks, easy availability of service, reliability, etc.).

These threads are NOT about comparing CARS, they're about comparing INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCES, and obviously NSX owners prefer the overall "feature set" offered by the NSX.

As heathbar0 wrote: "Two cars sit in front of you, a RX-7 and an NSX, free for you to choose, which one do you take?" Since most of us will own only one performance sports car, we'll choose the one that fulfills the most criteria (overall) that we value in a car, even if other cars (like the RX7) are superior in one or more categories.

Let's keep that in mind when we contribute to these threads.

 

[JeffShoots]

However, if today I was to buy one (and only one), it would be.......

I have both too and 5 other cars. Yes, Allstate insurance loves me. I do like the FD Rx for the looks and the power is just amazing. This may be trivial to some but the FD (being a hatch) can also haul a bunch of stuff. I won't say what I teach for a living but I need tools for what I do and the NSX can't hold much of a weekend bag for a trip.

The stock FD body will accommodate 18"x10" wheels all the way around and having the 3-way Penske (by Guy Ankeny) coil-overs help:biggrin:

If you want to SCCA Solo2 the cars are not compatible as the Rx is in SS and NSX is an AS.............If you want a fast Autox car try: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=017&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=270036672682&rd=1,1

If you like a Drag car try: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/700-HP-9-SEC-STREETCAR-WIDEBODY-FEATURED-IN-MAG_W0QQitemZ270041118594QQihZ017QQcategoryZ6327QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

But the question "to buy one (and only one)" it would have to be my H1 because in all cases of sand, sleet, snow, mud, wind, or rain it's never let me down

BTW: WA-NSX, I'm, jealous, I would love to have a late model 6-speed Turbo Toyota Supra. If somebody here has not ridden in a 900+RWHP Supra on the HWY/long track. Go to a meet, here in Nor-Cal (if you can) just ask for a ride. Watch how at 100mph plus speeds the car will spin the rear tires (Hoosier slicks) and get sideways before the tracking control takes over. The car may not track the best in the twisties but that's a FAST car.

That's all I have to add to this little NSX Vs. the world thread.

 

[heathbar0]

But the question "to buy one (and only one)" it would have to be my H1 because in all cases of sand, sleet, snow, mud, wind, or rain it's never let me down

in all cases of sand, sleet, snow, mud, wind, or rain it's never let me down
..................................................^
............................................Gas station.
..................................................:biggrin:

 

[nsxsimon]

bang for buck...comptech supercharger

I second that

 

[JeffShoots]

in all cases of sand, sleet, snow, mud, wind, or rain it's never let me down
..................................................^
............................................Gas station.
..................................................:biggrin:

I you are the GREEEN Guy:biggrin: on this site

Just a quick piece of advise. If you don't own oil refinery stocks (Exxon or ?) in Ca. well as the saying goes "if you can't beat them (and you can't) join......."

I think they made what 10-11 billion this quarter. So with dividends I made....and you made?

Please burn more oil, add an SC, or turbo, maybe BIGGER injectors. Every little bit helps:smile:

 

[Immanuel]

All I can say is I used to own one and loved it. And hey the 3rd-gen RX7 is a true front mid-engine based sports car. Great handling car and if tuned right it can be made really fast for cheap. (I have done it) And the RX-8 is pure Junk......... Open up a Auto Trader and see how many people are trying to offload that problem. The RX7 will run rings around the RX8 even in stock form. And everybody has it wrong why the RX7 feels faster. It is becuase the stock twin-turbo is Sequtenal (sorry for spelling). Meaning that the first turbo is on till about 3500to 4000rpm and then the second turbo kicks in. So when the second turbo kicks in you feel like you are about to leave the ground. It's a great turbo system, it was designed after the porsche 959 (another great car). But performance wise with the RX7 and the NSX, I say it's about even.

 

[NSSEX91]

I don't think any of you guy's give the 3rd gen credit for what it is. It's arguably the best pure bred Japanese sports car of all time. The NSX IS NOT! I own an NSX but will only give credit were credit is due. Saying that stock for stock the NSX wins is a farse. They are very close in performance but the potential for the 3rd gen to pull ahead is always greater. Also, simple laws of physics say that the lighter car should handle better.

For every track slip or video of an NSX beating a 7 you will find one with a 7 beating an NSX but the race results don't lie the RX7 has a much larger history of proven race results.

I can't believe how biased you guy's are it's an RX7 for christ sake.

As far as pleasure of driving the RX7 is great because turbo's are always fun pluss with the smooth reving rotary and sound you really feel like your driving something special. Same thing can be said about the NSX only in a different way. I like the exotic feel, quality of construction and mileage is a bit better for longer trips but I suggest driving both for a week or so and figuring it out. I chose the NSX because I use to own a 7 and just trying new things.

 

[MoreRPMs]

All I can say is I used to own one and loved it. And hey the 3rd-gen RX7 is a true front mid-engine based sports car. Great handling car and if tuned right it can be made really fast for cheap. (I have done it) And the RX-8 is pure Junk.........

Totally DISAGREE with your assessment of the RX-8. The feel of the car, even from only driving it for 5 minutes around the block on a test drive, it easily obliterates all cars in its class in the ride quality/handling department. It has that special intangible of just feeling right (obviously the NSX also has that feel, IMO); unlike the 350Z, which rides like a boring sedan, and unlike the STi which is just a spruced-up econobox, and it certainly shows the minute you begin driving it.