Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Transportation 
Thread started 24 Jan 2012 (Tuesday) 00:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1993 Mazda RX-7 FD3SLSX

 
CaptainTonus
Goldmember
Avatar
1,388 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA.
     
Jan 24, 2012 00:42 |  #1

Ever since I can remember, the FD3S Mazda RX7 has been one of my favorite cars of all time. Dare I say, it is the sexiest car to come out of the 90's, and probably one of the sexiest cars of all-time. Aside from that, it is also one of the most capable chassis of all-time, excelling in just about anything you can throw at it.

Back when I first heard about people swapping V8's into these cars, I thought it was crazy-talk. It boggled my mind! I figured a swap like that would totally ruin the car's balance. Boy, was I wrong! It actually improves the balance in most cases, and in the case of this particular car, makes it haul some serious a**! Ok, time for the pics.

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_0990small.jpg?m=1327220134

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_0981small.jpg?m=1327221036

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1013small.jpg?m=1327385298

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1044small.jpg?m=13273822902

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1037small.jpg?m=1327382287

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1052small.jpg?m=1327384881

IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1036small.jpg?m=1327382285

What you're looking at here is a stroked, 408 cu. in. LSX. Fully-built, top and bottom. Will make ~500whp naturally aspirated. In a car that weighs ~2,800lbs., that's pretty insane!
IMAGE: http://birdphotographic.com/gallery/var/albums/FD/IMG_1077small.jpg?m=1327384887

5D Mk2 + BG-E6 | Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L | Canon EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM | 580EX II | Manfrotto 3021N/3030/RC2 | B+W Filters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
VisualEchos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,680 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 162
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Missouri
     
Jan 24, 2012 00:52 |  #2

LOVE me some FD's, but I can't agree with the Redneck V8, no matter how much sense it makes.


~Andrew from Rig-Pro (external link) Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaptainTonus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,388 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA.
     
Jan 24, 2012 01:00 |  #3

VisualEchos wrote in post #13758204 (external link)
LOVE me some FD's, but I can't agree with the Redneck V8, no matter how much sense it makes.

It's definitely controversial. I've ridden in both varieties of FD, and they are both amazing in their own special ways.


5D Mk2 + BG-E6 | Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L | Canon EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM | 580EX II | Manfrotto 3021N/3030/RC2 | B+W Filters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kit ­ lens
Goldmember
Avatar
1,150 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Durham, NC
     
Jan 24, 2012 01:32 as a reply to  @ CaptainTonus's post |  #4

VisualEchos wrote in post #13758204 (external link)
LOVE me some FD's, but I can't agree with the Redneck V8, no matter how much sense it makes.

Ha......ignorance is rampant everywhere. It actually amuses me that people are so hardheaded. :lol:

Clean looking car. Thats a lot of cubes for a stock LS intake manifold, with that power goal.......


My flickr (external link)
rick_reno is a postwhore

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
VisualEchos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,680 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 162
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Missouri
     
Jan 24, 2012 07:38 |  #5

kit lens wrote in post #13758302 (external link)
Ha......ignorance is rampant everywhere. It actually amuses me that people are so hardheaded. :lol:

I hope the implication isn't that I'm ignorant, otherwise you won't like the outcome. The FD is a handling car, and was meant to be a handling car from day one, so a huge, heavy V8 (compared to the rotary it once had) would destroy that, and turn it into something it's not.

Let me see if I can put it into easier terms. Take a Superbee and fit it with a Honda 4 cylinder, and a coil-over suspension. Yes, it might have made sense to the owner for cost, or aesthetics, but it simply doesn't work for the car as a whole.

If you've ever driven an FD, it's very tail-happy because of how light the back is, and with a short wheel-base, it's a handful. Adding weight and power can only make it worse, unless you're using it for professional drifting events, and even then it's a stretch, as there are much better powerplants, they're just not as CHEAP.


~Andrew from Rig-Pro (external link) Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaptainTonus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,388 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA.
     
Jan 24, 2012 09:37 |  #6

kit lens wrote in post #13758302 (external link)
Clean looking car. Thats a lot of cubes for a stock LS intake manifold, with that power goal.......

It will eventually get a FAST manifold, I'm sure. Once the owner gets bored with only 500whp on-tap, he will probably end up boosting it. :lol:

VisualEchos wrote in post #13759039 (external link)
If you've ever driven an FD, it's very tail-happy because of how light the back is, and with a short wheel-base, it's a handful. Adding weight and power can only make it worse, unless you're using it for professional drifting events, and even then it's a stretch, as there are much better powerplants, they're just not as CHEAP.

Not to take this totally off-topic, but the LS swap does not add significant weight to the FD, and it actually improves weight distribution. There have been a lot of comparison tests done by various car magazines over the years that show the breakdown of weight. Rotaries are NOT light by any stretch of the imagination, and the LS is all-aluminum. With all that said, I can still understand why it would bother some people.


5D Mk2 + BG-E6 | Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L | Canon EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM | 580EX II | Manfrotto 3021N/3030/RC2 | B+W Filters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WolfAmongSheep
Senior Member
Avatar
788 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2011
Location: San Diego
     
Jan 24, 2012 10:29 |  #7

aside from all that^ nice pics of a sweet car. now i know what not to try to race when im down south in sd. that thing will light up my sti. lol


Nikon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
VisualEchos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,680 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 162
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Missouri
     
Jan 24, 2012 11:05 |  #8

CaptainTonus wrote in post #13759602 (external link)
Not to take this totally off-topic, but the LS swap does not add significant weight to the FD, and it actually improves weight distribution. There have been a lot of comparison tests done by various car magazines over the years that show the breakdown of weight. Rotaries are NOT light by any stretch of the imagination, and the LS is all-aluminum. With all that said, I can still understand why it would bother some people.

I agree, we don't want to take this fully OT, so I'll say one last thing and be done with it.

13B-REW: 388 lbs (everything included)
LS1: 430 lbs (everything included)

+42 lbs on the front end, not including the weight of the extra bits to make it work, and the trans used, would put you at 75 lbs additional weight, MINIMUM.

Stock weight distribution was 50/50, so adding 75 lbs to it would NOT improve it for handling purposes, it'd make it nose heavy.

Enjoy your burnouts :cool:.


~Andrew from Rig-Pro (external link) Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaptainTonus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,388 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA.
     
Jan 24, 2012 11:09 |  #9

VisualEchos wrote in post #13760016 (external link)
I agree, we don't want to take this fully OT, so I'll say one last thing and be done with it.

13B-REW: 388 lbs (everything included)
LS1: 430 lbs (everything included)

+42 lbs on the front end, not including the weight of the extra bits to make it work, and the trans used, would put you at 75 lbs additional weight, MINIMUM.

Stock weight distribution was 50/50, so adding 75 lbs to it would NOT improve it for handling purposes, it'd make it nose heavy.

Enjoy your burnouts :cool:.

This is correct, however, the T56 is transmission is SO much larger that it goes further back into the chassis, and helps you maintain a perfect 50/50 weight distribution. An extra 75lbs. is pretty measly in the great scheme of things.


5D Mk2 + BG-E6 | Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L | Canon EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM | 580EX II | Manfrotto 3021N/3030/RC2 | B+W Filters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sigma ­ pi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,204 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Los Angeles
     
Jan 24, 2012 12:17 |  #10

I like #3 and the car :D


Don't try to confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up.
http://www.flickr.com …6850267535/in/p​hotostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jkru617
Member
220 posts
Joined Sep 2010
     
Jan 24, 2012 13:20 |  #11

Sweet ride. LS motor reliability>*




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
morpheus6d9
Senior Member
Avatar
433 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Jan 24, 2012 15:09 |  #12

nice pics i saw so many rx7/lsx swaps when i went to nopi a few yrs back blew my mind


50D | 60mm f/2.8 macro |Tokina 12-24 f/4 | Nifty-Fifty | SB-20 | 580 EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mosephus
Senior Member
Avatar
774 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Duncanville, TX
     
Jan 24, 2012 17:56 |  #13

CaptainTonus wrote in post #13759602 (external link)
Not to take this totally off-topic, but the LS swap does not add significant weight to the FD, and it actually improves weight distribution. There have been a lot of comparison tests done by various car magazines over the years that show the breakdown of weight. Rotaries are NOT light by any stretch of the imagination, and the LS is all-aluminum. With all that said, I can still understand why it would bother some people.

Ditto, it's almost as if they were made for each other. I also don't consider an LS engine to be a redneck engine, now if it were a carbed 350 with a th350 behind it you've ruined the car.

Nice pics, and good clean tasteful (and sick) RX-7


Dallas Pet Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kit ­ lens
Goldmember
Avatar
1,150 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Durham, NC
     
Jan 25, 2012 00:54 as a reply to  @ Mosephus's post |  #14

VisualEchos wrote in post #13759039 (external link)
I hope the implication isn't that I'm ignorant, otherwise you won't like the outcome. The FD is a handling car, and was meant to be a handling car from day one, so a huge, heavy V8 (compared to the rotary it once had) would destroy that, and turn it into something it's not.

Let me see if I can put it into easier terms. Take a Superbee and fit it with a Honda 4 cylinder, and a coil-over suspension. Yes, it might have made sense to the owner for cost, or aesthetics, but it simply doesn't work for the car as a whole.

If you've ever driven an FD, it's very tail-happy because of how light the back is, and with a short wheel-base, it's a handful. Adding weight and power can only make it worse, unless you're using it for professional drifting events, and even then it's a stretch, as there are much better powerplants, they're just not as CHEAP.

Your example for comparison is very poor, and is considered apples to oranges. You seem a bit opinionated, rather than usually actual facts here........evident with your comparison. You should read more car forums and magazines......open yourself up to change. Its been stated in this thread, and it is a well known fact in the world of the 3rd gens with this same swap.....that it doesn't add any more weight. Besides that, you are adding a much more reliable engine, an engine with a much easier powerband to tame, and you also have an engine with parts readily available to you now......from stock to top shelf aftermarket.

Also, the power level of the swap is really dependant on how the car is setup, and the intentions of the use.......you are leaving out some major details there, don't you think? ;) The capabilities of that swap ......I have no doubt will meet or exceed the performance levels of the original powerplant (13B, right?).


My flickr (external link)
rick_reno is a postwhore

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RadAL
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,633 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Spanish Fort, AL
     
Jan 25, 2012 05:51 |  #15

it would be awesome with 4 rotor..... but the engine would be more expensive than the car lol


Equipment: Canon PowerShot A650IS (semi retired) and Canon Powershot G10 (primary) and Rebel XT 350D w/18-55mm kit lens and Quanterey 18-200mm-- www.youtube.com/alexan​der1485 (external link) (has links to some of my pictures on the main page)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,319 views & 0 likes for this thread
1993 Mazda RX-7 FD3SLSX
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Transportation 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is peggyzander
785 guests, 295 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.