[Editor's Note: This article first appeared in our May 2016 issue. Some information and pricing may be different. Hagerty values a No. 2 condition Turbo at around $16,000 in 2019.]
That original Mazda RX-7 revolutionized our little corner of the world, but you can argue that it was a little primitive for the second half of the 1980s. Carburetors, stick rear axles and recirculating ball steering …
Just this morning I saw a GTU sitting on Jack stands, outside a small office building. I can't say for sure, but it looked abandoned, definitely had seen better days.
I still like the looks of these cars, 30 years after they hit showrooms, even if they look like a front-engined Porsche that has had it's styling "toned down".
The first FCs also had a Sport model, that became the GTUs. I had an '86 (first year) Sport and unlike the base version it had the 5 lug wheels with the brakes from the Turbo, stock, an aluminum hood and very little in other options, where the GXL had a lot of fancy options that weighed the car down.
This is an '86 Sport, with the rear spoiler, aero bits in front of the rear wheels, and no sunroof:
My V8 RX7 started life as an '86 Sport, so it was quite light to begin with, and contributed to the fact that it ended up weight 2720lbs with the V8 (coming in less than the RX7 Turbo).
Mine:
And after the V8:
People asked me why build/ruin the RX7. 1. because it died and I owned it. 2. because I loved the looks of the car, the ergonomics, looks, build quality, looks, suspension, looks, and brakes. It's got an absolutely great chassis, and retained perfect balance. And incredible style. So what if it was the heavier RX7 in stock form? It's a lightweight in todays market.
It's easy to reduce their weight. Mine weighs 2,200lbs wet with driver.
You forgot to mention the GTUs as mentioned above and convertible, okay nobody cares about the convertible and 5-8 psi is pretty strict, the differential limit of chambers is 21 psi per the service manual. I think 13 or less is ideal.
also a little sour you didn't ask me for input...
:P
I had an 88 gxl for years .I beat on that car pretty hard , the beepbeepbeep of rev limit happened frequently .I averaged 25 mpg ,mixed driving with a fair amount of it country roads at ahem supra60mph .even my wife at the time liked it ,There were nearly no problems , I had a headlight motor pack it in at 145000 , I flooded it 2x in 8 years .The brakes worked fine but tended to like to seize every 50k when driven in winters ,which i did in the snowbelt for all the time I had it .The stock mufflers lasted until 156000 then I got 3 sets of free lifetime mufflers from napa, yep they lasted 8-9 months each lol. cheap steel , hot wankel exhaust not good. the adjustable shocks worked great ,though sport was pretty hard . I hauled all kinds of stuff , mine was a 2+2 tiny seat , but folded it held a bunch . I used a quart of oil every 1000-1500 miles as expected until the oil injector pump for the rotors seized open , at 160k no issue except more oil use . quick fix . body held up well , My bro in law borrowed it once while his cavalier was being fixed , he came back grinning saying holy Chit that thing is awesome lol. I had 3 kids by then and needed a bit more room but still fun I got a saab 900 turbo convertible and I sold it to a young guy who beat on it more than me ,he got it at 183k added 35k more until the tip seals went . All in all i say a fine piece of equipment with relatively low cost .I will buy another sometime in my codgerhood ,maybe an fd though to get the best ever made .
Our neighbors down the street have an FC and an RX-8. Honestly, I have never seen either car move. Ever.
Raced the FC in SCCA improved touring s class for many years, great dependable car and very easy to work on. Always admired the Speedsource RX7 at the time which showed the road race capabilities of that little wankel. I was always intrigued by the length and size of the engine bay for a car with such a small motor.
FC Turbo II was the first "good" sports car I ever drove. Had a beat up 240sx to prepare me for sports cars in general, and to drive the FC was a bit of a revelation. This particular car was in really, really good shape. Found ouf that if you drive faster than everyone else on the freeway, that nasty blindspot goes away! =P
Had the opportunity to buy the car for what he owed on the loan in I think 2007 it was. Mint FC for about $1800, but I had just bought my first Miata, so I missed out on that...
The spec panel says it has a "2-chamber" engine. That would be very difficult in an engine design which has three combustion chambers per rotor! It's a 2-rotor engine... and as usual the displacement shown is for only 2 of the 6 chambers.
Sport or GTU or Turbo perfect candidates for an LS376 Transplant.
Back in the day me at NHIS for a test and tune day. I had hair then LOL.
I would have enjoyed my FC a lot more if there was about three inches more headroom. The problem was mainly the stupid skylight which went on almost all versions except the GTUs. Dumbass stuff like that is hard for me to get over. I kept thinking "I know Japanese people are small, but I'm 5'-11" for crying out loud!" The stylists trumped the engineers.
I still miss my FC-3C, even without a turbo engine that car was an absolute blast to drive, especially with the top down.
David S. Wallens said:Our neighbors down the street have an FC and an RX-8. Honestly, I have never seen either car move. Ever.
Time to make them an offer? :)
My FC was a piece of crap- a loud, slow, completely indestructible, glorious piece of crap seemingly incapable of getting a DNF. I miss it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:My FC was a piece of crap- a loud, slow, completely indestructible, glorious piece of crap seemingly incapable of getting a DNF. I miss it.
I like how some of the body panels look more like suggestions than body panels. =) Looks fun!
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:My FC was a piece of crap- a loud, slow, completely indestructible, glorious piece of crap seemingly incapable of getting a DNF. I miss it.
Could old rotaries be the ultimate "slow car fast" scenario? Back before ubiquitous torque when we'd buy hot cams that required revs to extract the power. Wasn't necessarily fast, but there was a definite thrill to it. Being able to rev to the hills constantly without worrying about throwing a rod is one of the basic appeals of the RX cars.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:My FC was a piece of crap- a loud, slow, completely indestructible, glorious piece of crap seemingly incapable of getting a DNF. I miss it.
Good God that looks fun
+1 on the '86 sport model. I had one. easy to work on with the Haynes manual (before youtube). No luxury items but a non functioning A/C. Manual windows, aluminum hood, 5 lug wheels, 4 POT calipers, LSD. Sold it to a co-workers kid when he turned 18 (and I remember when he was pushed around the neighborhood in a stroller by his mother). He rebuilt the motor and handed it down to his younger brothers. I think it is still running. Fond memories.
Yikes... I'm old.
i've always done compression checks from the trailing side as the leading edge is meant to push the rotor further where the trailing plug is doing the actual combustion firing.
oops...
did I just zombie thread this? saw something on the side that had details of a new article and I pounced...
It popped up as an article on the web page for me, too.
If I see a minty S4 Sport, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
In reply to fidelity101 :
No worries! Any time is a good time to discuss the FC RX-7! 
In reply to fidelity101 :
You're fine! I revised and bumped it up today. (Note the editor's note on the original post.)
You'll need to log in to post.
