Are FC's good cars?

>>15913388
well it's a rotary so reliability is not that great especially in the 13 over the 12

>>15913388
Yes

No. If FCs were good, they wouldn't have made the FD. And there's a reason there was no FE.

>>15913454
i was considering this, if i were to buy one and change the seals would that increase my chances of it lasting longer. and how would i know if it were shit or not, ive only ever owned 4clys

>>15913539
Lol this logic is god tier and cannot be proven incorrect

>Sky-R
>290hp
>2700lbs

>>15913388
fbs are way more reliable and look better and fds are faster, better handling, and look way better so no

Man I'm diggin those steelies. Utilitarian yet with a sporty flair.

File: 6187667577_9889fca4ee_b.jpg (345KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1024x682px

>>15913454
Rotaries being unreliable is a meme, especially so with NA ones. Maintain it right and it will last forever, just like your corolla. Only difference is instead of a timing belt at 90k you'll need apex seals.

>>15913575
FCs have fuel injection, rack and pinion steering, and independent rears though. They handle much better than FBs with their recirculating ball steering and solid rears, in addition to starting easier since they're not carbureted. (except FB GSL-SE models) An unmolested white Turbo II is my attainable dream car.

Looking better is subjective obviously, I prefer the FC to the FB, and especially to the SA22. I don't like the way the rear end looks on the SA22, nor do I really care for the 3 piece glass on both.

>>15913388

First car ever bought in gran autismo. Feel me bro.

>>15913644
would the apex seal be something i could do or would it be similar to a timing belt/chain, by which i mean it would be easier to take it and have someone with the correct tools to do it rather than try myself? I could change a timing belt but the labor and lack of tools would just be tedious compared to taking it to my guy to change it for me, is this so for the apex seals. also, what would be the cost of that

>>15913644
>implying there are unmolested white turbo IIs left

>>15913677
this unless youre willing to pay like 12k

>>15913677
There was one on my craigslist a while back for $10k.
>>15913675
You have to pull the motor and disassemble it, but that's not not as hard as with a piston engine since it's not nearly as heavy and has much fewer parts. If you did it yourself it would cost you only as much as the parts, brake cleaner, and whatever tools you'll need to buy/rent to do it. Labor would be very expensive if you paid someone else to do it since it's engine out and there aren't as many people trained on rotaries as there are piston engines.

>>15913748
does that mean the wear would be about equal compared to a piston engine if it was treated fairly. theres one one CL im looking at for 3k with 153k miles and i wouldnt know if that were alot or not

File: DSC_0006.jpg (2MB, 3920x2204px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3920x2204px

Just bought a 1988 fc naturally aspirated. It's in really great condition with only 88000 original miles and all oem. Paid 4.5k I got really lucky I think.

I would love to post pics but I only have some from my phone and my phone camera is shit I think from moisture.

>>15913541
Never buy an RX-7 without first taking it to a Mazda dealership to have them run a compression test on the engine.

>>15913822
how the fuck do i ask a guy on CL to take his car to a mazda dealership for me

>>15913783
Fairly is different for rotaries. You have to make sure it's warmed up fully before turning it off, redline it at least once every time you drive it to help stave off carbon deposits, and you need to check the oil and top off at least every two weeks.

You also can't use a synthetic oil in a rotary because synthetics have flame retardants, and that's bad for combustion since the oil injected to lubricate the apex seals is burned in the combustion "chamber".

You also need to get a compression test done on any used rotary before you buy it, to make sure of the condition of the apex seals. You should see 3 distinct rises in compression for every rotation of the eccentric shaft.

>>15913828
You can get a compression tester from autozone for around $40. It plugs into one of the spark plug holes, test both rotors.

>>15913822
Or take the schrader valve out of a regular compression tester and do it yourself.

>>15913822
>>15913847
what is good compression, or ever fair compression, like 180psi?

>>15913880
Normal compression - 110-150 PSI
Minimum acceptable pressure - 75 PSI
Maximum acceptable pressure difference between chambers - 20 PSI

>>15913890
wow, thanks
/o/ is honestly the best board

I'm looking to buy an FC near me. It's about $4,500 dollars. I don't know the mileage yet, I just kind of saw it driving down the street. I just kinda wanna move on from my piece of shit autotragic.

Do rotaries take premium only? How does the gas situation work with them?

>>15913920
i believe FCs take regular and get about 20mpg

>>15913941
Wow. And people were bitching rotaries get shit gas mileage.

My mom's Jeep gets like 15 miles per gallon and she can go a week without refuelling.

>>15913958
because when you drive it for "fun" it gets about 15. and for not being a jeep thats pretty bad

>>15913958
>she can go a week without refuelling
That means nothing since she probably drives a different amount than most people on /o/.

File: 8455576736_5489f0be74_o.jpg (550KB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1920x1440px

hijacking OP's thread since there seems to be Rotary experts ITT.

What do you guys think of these following FC's

1990 Rx7 non turbo

>111k miles
>stock other than catback exhaust
>$3800 obo
>AC works
http://newyork.craigslist.org/que/cto/5797059934.html

1990 Rx7 non turbo

>$3500
http://newyork.craigslist.org/que/cto/5800455755.html

1991 RX-7 turbo II

>$6500
http://providence.craigslist.org/cto/5777264331.html

would the first one be the best bet to be a decent daily?

>>15914087
I would go for the first one if I were you man. The turbo looks cool but if you're looking for a daily definitely don't go for the turbo, it says in the ad that it still needs a dyno tune and that the stand alone is just good enough for it to start right now and since you had to ask this question I'm assuming you don't know how to remap or tune an ECU

>>15914167
Ok cool Im going to hit him up and check it out soon.

>>15913847
>redline it at least once every time you drive it to help stave off carbon deposits
Sounds like my kinda car.

>>15914087
I was looking at the second one a few weeks back and desu it seems pretty sketchy.

Damn missed a thread. Looks like you guys gave good advice though

Whaddya think, friends?

https://milwaukee.craigslist.org/cto/5780702554.html

I see there's a big dent by the left headlight

Also
https://milwaukee.craigslist.org/ctd/5789267676.html

And this one is out of my range but pretty cool anyway
https://milwaukee.craigslist.org/cto/5770493675.html

>>15913539
RX-8 was the FE

File: 032715_1831[00].jpg (271KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1200x1600px

>>15913675
Apex seals are the things in the corners of the rotor. Replacing them isn't difficult but you do have to take the engine apart.

>>15917701
No

File: image.jpg (29KB, 552x552px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 552x552px

>>15913388
>Mfw there's one at a junk yard close by where I live
>Mfw all the interior was stripped besides the dash and steering wheel
>Mfw engine and transmission are still there
>Mfw the person thought the engine blew out but all it probably needs is new apex seals

File: 20160723_204121.jpg (2MB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1152px

>>15913388
Yes, yes they are.

>fun as shit to drive
>handling is just retardedly good
>look cool, especially the S5
>look awesome lowered
>sound mad
>not great on fuel, but definitely dailyable
>take abuse with a smile

Don't let the reliability meme get to you. They're fine. There's an easy test you can do for compression, too.

>start car, let it warm up (preferably take it for a run)
>shut off for 5 minutes
>restart the car
If it stumbles or anything, it's got bad compression. If not, you're golden. Remember they cost $1000 to FULLY rebuild--and then you've got a fresh motherfucking engine. No guess work as to whether your 200k mile piston engine still makes 240 horsepower, and if you should shell out 5 grand for a rebuild that you can't do yourself

>>15918096
>If it stumbles or anything, it's got bad compression
This is not true. It could be any number of things.
Ive had guys bring me cars and claim bad compression.
Go to start the car and it cranks slow.
Check battery. Its good.
Check starter. Tests good but is actually bad. (Factory starter with 150,000+ miles)
Saved the owner a bucket of money by just replacing brushes.
Car started perfectly after that.

>>15918096
Not OP but it costs $1000 just in parts, or also includes the service? I'm a poorfag who lives in an apartment complex, can't wrench in my parking spot.

>>15918138
>>15918138
Well, you'd know if the starter or battery was the problem because you started the car before. Assuming it started up fine the first time, and had trouble starting after warming up and sitting for 5 minutes, I'd wager an imminent rebuild rather than a vacuum leak or starter problem.

>>15918159
1000 or less for the parts. It's very easy to do yourself, you don't have to worry about much. You can do just the apex and coolant seals if you want, which will run you less than 400.

Can't wrench in your spot, huh? If you could take it to your friend's house you could do it in a weekend, you can literally pull the engine out by hand as it weighs 150 lbs

>>15918160
Youre missing the point.
There are 100 reasons the car wouldnt start besides compression.
The starter was just an example.

>>15918170
I think you're missing the point. This test assumes that the car started up fine the first time, and had trouble starting after letting it sit. I think it's safe to rule out vacuum leaks, ignition, battery, fuel supply, and starter in that case. And I didn't say the car wouldn't start, but it will have trouble starting whereas it -should- start easier than it did cold.

>>15918195
There are still MANY reasons it would start the second time.

>>15918239
Yeah, I guess you're right.

>foot not on clutch pedal
>battery unhooked
>no gas left
>your wife unplugged the leading coil pack while you weren't looking
>the owner was hoping you wouldn't run the car enough to suck up the diesel he accidentally put in there
>you're some tripfag on a Filipino bedmaking forum who's too busy plodding for some support to his weak naysaying to turn the key

Yeah, there are many reasons. I think we can rule most of those out, though.

>>15918239
Aren't you the guy who's pretending to be a rotary enthusiast but shit talks them all the time? Fuck right off m8 i'll hook you in the gabber

no

easily the worst RX

>>15913388

I love my FC, its a great car when its actually working.

>>15918277
No. I actualky work on them constantly and never talk poorly of them unless its truthfull

>>15918286
How?
>looks cool
>handles much better than predecessor and not much worse than successor (not knocking the FD, but the FC handles great)
>reliable
>cool interior

And most importantly
>can be had for cheap

>>15913677

> No shit found one in a barn
> Was listed on CL of a town I wasn't from as "White Mazda"
> Dude says "Bought this warehouse. I don't want the cars. I have the salvage titles for them all."
> Buncha broken down, cheap cars mostly disassembled. Like cavaliers and stuff
> White RX-7 which looked grey from all the dust
> Was last inspected in 2000, in another state
> It's 2016
> Great body panels, no real rust on them
> Something was seized up, couldn't even roll it around
> Had no real way to get it home
> Had a salvage title because the owner and the title were long gone

Someone who had a trailer and some will to work on it got it for cheap I bet

>>15913847
Keep in mind there is a different procedure for testing compression on rotaries, because it varies based on rpm

>>15913808

I love the interior of old RX7. So clean.

File: 1460162991087.jpg (34KB, 600x549px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x549px

>mfw there was a (nonrunning) turbo 2 FC in my town for sale
>mfw it was $2k
>mfw I didn't buy it because I'm saving all i can due to immediate life expenses

>>15914087
bump

>>15918348
ugly
FC isnt anywhere near as nimble as an FB
lol if you keep it NA
meh

File: hahawhat.png (3KB, 433x27px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 433x27px

>>15914087
>http://newyork.craigslist.org/que/cto/5797059934.html
>south ozone
>ozone
w h a t

>>15920966
>south ozone
That's called the troposphere

>>15913941

what FC did you find that gets 20mpg, no rotary engine car except the RX-8 get anywhere near that

>>15920847
you have terrible taste in cars you fucking moron
the FC and FB are not even that different looking

>>15921010
>the FC and FB are not even that different looking
Are you high?
The FC looks more like a 944 than an FB.

i love rotary cars but the old engines suck so much for reliablity, slap a turbo on there and it will spend more time in the garage than you driving it. there are people with FD's that drive it 2 weeks out of the year cause all the other times it failed and they are working on it.

with the old engines you have to let it warm up or else you will flood the engine and then maybe just maybe you can get it started again assuming you dont ruin the starter or the seals by doing that. there is a fix that will deflood the car that you can DIY.

they get horrible gas milage, i had the FC Convertible and got around 12-15mpg.

there should be more rotary places but after the fall of the RX-8 there seems to be less places to go fix your car so be prepared to fix everything yourself or pay alot to someone that can fix it.

but man dispite all the setbacks, i still love the rotary engine, there is no other engine that feels or sounds like it. ive own an FC and the RX-8, would love to get an RX-3 or 1st gen RX-7 but i will def. be getting the next rotary engines that Mazda will be putting out.

>>15918096
bc bro

File: Screenshot_20161001-001147.png (388KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1920x1080px

>>15913541
>>15913644
>>15913675
This fixation on apex seals is fucking stupid. They're not a problem and they haven't been since the Ro80. The biggest flaw with the S4/S5 engines is with the coolant seals; the equivalent of a piston engine head gasket. A preventative rebuild might not be a terrible idea, but unless you're blowing steam out the exhaust or getting bubbles in the coolant after burping the system, it's not strictly necessary.

HOWEVER, it is absolutely imperative that you tear the engine down as soon as you see any signs of coolant seal failure. If you let it sit for any period of time, it WILL destroy your engine. If you go to buy a car and it has signs of coolant seal failure, consider the entire engine trash, even if it still runs.

>>15921007
It's not unheard of if you do a fair amount of freeway driving. And keep in mind that these are the new "AC blasting 100% all day long" numbers.

I M P O R T
M
P
O
R
T

You can import a clean TII for under $5000 total

>>15923454
Do you have an honest importer you'd recommend? (I know, it varies by state. I'd still like to know though.)

>>15918063
Um, yes... RX8 VIN begins with JM1FE.......

>>15924939
Better than your pigfat shitbox

>>15923454
>tfw california

>>15925052
Do jap turbo II's have different emissions equipment?

Rotarymech:
It's me, gold S4 faggot.

I tore the UIM off to service the ground and it was perfectly fine, but my front auxillary port sleeve was seized. The shaft broke when I tried to unseize it. If we operate on the assumption that the ECU ground wasn't causing my problem, could it be that aux port not opening? If so, what do now? Or could it be fuelling related?

>>15923537
I don't have any experience with them, but Pacific Coast JDM seems really good. They have a youtube channel where they post all kinds of stuff about it, and they post reviews of a lot of the cars they get at auction

>>15918322
>>15925294
Pls. Do you know the part number of that actuator shaft, also? I'm having trouble finding it in the FSM. Atkins has S5 actuator rods, but I think the S5 opened the other way around?

>>15913388
they are better than the rx8 in some ways

>>15926881
Can you elaborate?
I'm deciding between the two.

>>15926899
Just get the FC unless you really want OBDII and four seats and bloat and a stretched miats chassis.

>>15926899
12a rotary is a more respected than the 13b msp
but that could just be old fag bs

that said the rx8 does have a good chassis
and a fair amount of room in the back seats

>>15926928
People like the older rotaries because they're more tuneable than the renesis.

>>15926912
>bloat
If you are referring to weight, the rx-8 averages 2950lbs and the s5 is the same. S4 is 100lbs lighter on average.

File: 143182_54_news_hub_131510_588x448.jpg (69KB, 588x448px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 588x448px

>>15926946
>tfw people put 12a carb on 13b

>>15927047
That's closer to heaviest FC vs. lightest 8, honestly. Any NA FC you find should weigh a solid 200 pounds less than any RX8 that wasn't optioned to be light.