Talk:Mazda RX-7

message: I believe that the following line is technically incorrect:
:"The compact and light-weight Wankel engine, also known as a rotary engine is situated slightly behind the front axle."
Specifically, that it is not that the Wankel engine is known as a rotary engine but is rather a form of rotary engine (a class which also includes, for example, turbines). It is, however, probably the most common form of rotary in automotive use, if not the only remaining form. Perhaps the following alternate version would be better:
:"The compact and light-weight Wankel engine, the most common automotive form of rotary engine, is situated slightly behind the front axle."
As I said, pedantic, but technically an error.
Des Curly 23:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Technical (though pedantic) error

message: I feel the inclusion of two nearly identical cars (Mitsubishi 3000GT and Dodge) in the similar section is redundant.  Especially as neither of these are all that similar to the RX-7 as they are much heavier, front or 4wd with a transverse engine and at least in my opinion less sporty.  I think there are a number of cars that would be better suited to this section: Porsche 944, Mitsubishi Starion, even something like the Nissan 240SX is more similarly configured.  I feel an arguement can be made that the 3000GT deserves a spot as it was intended at least to compete with the RX-7.  Any comments?Daniel J. Leivick 20:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Similar

message: As of 2006, the fourth generation Mazda RX-7 is only a concept.  Some images of the industrial design are available—Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
*I don't believe Mazda has released even concept designs, several magazines have releases their artists conceptions. SchmuckyTheCat 04:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fourth Generation

message: Many who come to this page are RX-7 enthusiasts looking for help.  I'd suggest at least two links added to the external links section, mainly for point 4 under "What should be linked?" in WP:EL:
"4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews."
First, perhaps the most active online RX-7 community: "RX7 Club Discussion forums for all RX-7 generations"
Second, for the most active community-maintained RX-7 how-to library: "RX-7 How-To Pages A community-maintained RX-7 service and modification manual."
A potential issue with the how-to pages is point 12 under "Links normally avoided" in WP:EL:
"Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors."
The page is a semi-open wiki, quite relevant to this topic, quite active considering the narrow focus, and it's been stable for over a year.  For background, I am an active member of the forum, and an admin for the how-to pages.  I ask fellow neutral editors to please consider these suggestions.
---
Also:
2nd-generation RX-7 buyers guide  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.81.105.213 (talk) 13:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think links to external sites would be very valuable to users coming to this page for the exact reason stated above.  Being an RX-7 owner and active member of the community I would like to see links to 1300cc.com, NoPistons.com and RotaryCarClub.com.  In my opinion these sites are incredibly valuable to current or potential owners of these cars. MirageJKL (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that WP:EL recommends against links to discussion forums/groups.  NoPistons.com and RotaryCarClub.com would fall under this category.  1300cc.com looks very unprofessional and unfinished.  I see at least a couple "Sorry, this is not finished" notices on that site.  I have nothing against any of those sites, but I don't think they should be included in the external links section.  There is already a link to the open directory, which should be sufficient for those sites. swaq 19:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's very unfortunate.  Definitely missing out on a lot of info.  Thanks for the quick response 98.207.117.222 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Community-Oriented External Link Suggestions

message: I'm trying to settle an argument with a former colleague of mines that she says it's a Sports Car. Do all sports cars have not only a backseat in them? (Despite it's appearance that it does not) Do all sports cars have a Hatchback in them? Ryou-kun16 (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a sports car.  It is one of the purest sports designs of the last part of the 20th century.  Hatchback is irrelevant. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Well, it actually is a hatchback as its older predecessors never had the design/look of a sports car (I.e. SA Model). And it's also classified as a Hatchback. Ryou-kun16 (talk) 18:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm pretty sure just about every source you could find would call all generations of RX-7 sports cars or perhaps a GTs.  No reason it can't be a sports car and a hatch back, plenty of other similar vehicles are both: Porsche 944, Renault Alpine and Toyota Supra all come to mind. --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 23:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it a sports car? 

message: Since the RX-7's rival is the Toyota Supra, should this be added? 70.45.182.210 (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not, unless you have a reliable source that mentions this.  But even then it's borderline trivia and I don't think it's important to mention in the article unless there is some special significance to it. swaq 20:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add RX-7's rival (Request) 

message: The optional "occasional" rear seats were offered in America as an option on the second generation.  It was very rarely taken, but few did.  I have one in my shop right now.  I'll get pictures of it installed in the car it came out of when I'm done removing the sound deadening tar from the floor pan. I am unsure as to whether or not the option was available on the third generation in the states as I personally have yet to see one "in the wild", so to speak. Andrew Michael Medina (talk) 17:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the US, rear seats were not available in the 3rd gen RX-7.  They did not meet DOT crash standards.204.95.48.184 (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rear Seats in America 

message: The pictures used for the FC and FD sections are non-OEM, the FC is close but has aftermarket wheels and the FD has what looks like a Mazdaspeed A-Spec front bumper.  Though still from Mazda, it was not offered on any production version. --Dinnercoat (talk) 17:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, although it might be nice not to use a convertible for the FC as they weren't that common. --Leivick (talk) 06:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-OEM pictures of FC and FD 

message: The current picture looks a bit n00bish . A picture of the Spirit R type A would be better. Any one know were we can get one? Spinodontosaurus (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  main picture 

message: There's a problem with the FC's Main Picture, this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tuned_%2786-%2788_Mazda_RX-7_%28Orange_Julep_%2710%29.jpg
The car we see in that picture isn't just "tuned", in fact, it doesn't even have a Wankel Engine at all. What you see under that hood is a V8.
That picture should be replaced as soon as possible, since all RX-7's had Wankel Rotary Engines.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mushiki (talk • contribs) 18:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem Second Generation (FC)'s Main Picture 

message: These kerb weights, as listed, are a complete joke.  A spirit R type A did not get down anywhere close to 2500lbs (Motortrend weighed one at exactly 2880 here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGxWdAG7fIw - with fuel and liquids though), and neither did the US market version.  In fact, the lightest of the bunch, the Bathhurst R, is listed here at 2200 lbs!  What a joke.  Perhaps the actual race version did get that low, but the homologation vehicle?  It weighed in at 1218kg, which was down from the original models 1310kg - which I assume is a 'loaded model' - things like leather or sunroof add weight.  I'm pretty sure 1218kb is around 2680lbs, so someone needs to clean this mess up - from top to bottom. Note the Bathhurst R, at 1218kb, is listed everywhere online as the "highest stock power to weight ratio RX-7" so there is zero possibility that any of these models weigh just "2500lbs." (Such a nice round number, isn't it, pulled from someone's ass clearly.)
It's hard to find testing/legitimate reviews of the US versions, but they weigh around the previously quoted 1318kg.  BTW - both these numbers were originally listed here at wiki - until someone came along and ruined the section with (Gran Turismo?) 'gaming numbers' and zero, I mean ZERO citations.  As an RX-7 enthusiast, I'd love to see this section properly written and cited.
To start with, the US model '95 (last year sold there) is listed here http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/rx-7/1995/features-specs.html?style=2790 with a kerb weight of 2824lbs.  Or, roughly 1284 kg.  As we can clearly see, the "2500lbs" quoted in the box just doesn't make sense.  There's no way these cars were that light.  Please someone with more knowledge of how wiki works get on this - ASAP please?
If it's not fixed in a few weeks, I'm deleting the entire section due to lack of citations.  Either prove the car was as light as a feather, or have the "GT5 with racing modifications" numbers thrown away.  I've given 2 serious, reliable sources that prove the numbers are DREADFULLY WRONG. Meanwhileatwiki (talk) 23:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listed kerb weights hilariously wrong. 

message: I own one that came out of Arizona and has never be driven in snow.  The one I have is rust free and I keep it in a garage with a canvas underneath it so the concrete floor does not draw moisture and rust the underneath of the car.  In the winter I jack up the car and set it on stands to take the weight off the tires, and I place a charger on the battery to keep the battery charged over the winter.  
Thank you,
Bill Diersen
26 Marigold Court
Appleton, WI 54914  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.217.185 (talk) 21:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The number of 1983 Mazda RX7 Limited Edition - How many were made, and how many are in the world to day? 

message: Hey guys I have an 89 turbo II rx7 and I got it from a guy that had it sitting dwn for a year. Its starts every single time but won't hold any load..
Im 23yrs old and I don't know about rx7 period but I got 1 anyways. I changed the fuel pump and filter and I took the air pump and the mas air flow sensor off and its it still does the same thing,starts fine then I can go up to 3,000 rpms on idle then if I go over it it stalls and wants to shut off..
When on any gear as soon as I hit the throttle it does the same,stalls and if I let go its fine.. Please HELP
Mike Ortiz is my name and email is
mortiz_2207@yahoo.com
Thanks and I hope someone had the same problem and solve it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.163.74.18 (talk) 01:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  1989 Mazda rx7 Turbo II 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mazda RX-7. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100116091730/http://www.mazda.com/mazdaspirit/rotary/story/p4.html to http://www.mazda.com/mazdaspirit/rotary/story/p4.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I recently changed the lead image for the FB's infobox. However, there are actually a few candidates I was considering and I wanted to ask you guys which one y'all prefer. The 4 pictures I was thinking of changing it to are 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1980_Mazda_RX-7_SE_Limited_(17888386539).jpg (the current one)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1981_MAZDA_RX-7,_licence_GV-78-NX,_pic5.JPG
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1984_Mazda_RX-7_(FB_Series_3)_coupe_(23525716940).jpg
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mazda_RX7_(38794806682).jpg
So do you guys still prefer the current one? Or do you think it should be one of the other 3? (or even another image entirely if you've got one you think is better)
TKOIII (talk) 16:08, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  FB Lead Image 

message: Efini RX-7 (Mazda RX-7 deluxe version)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C6%90%CC%83fini 
  https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/cars/detail_025_rx7.html 
Needs to be added. Sorry by my ignorance of made correct adition to this. 2.136.173.47 (talk) 15:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Efini RX-7 (Mazda RX-7 deluxe version) 

message: I just uploaded this picture that I took at the Petersen of the FD RX7 concept car (the model of the final winning design) by Wu-huang Chin. I was wondering if other editors think this should be included in the FD section. 
:File:Mazda RX-7 FD concept car in the Petersen Museum Vault.jpg
TKOIII (talk) 22:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RX7 FD concept car model