[lengnert]

Well seeing as how I haven't posted this topic in quite some time, I decided it was high time to do just that.

I love some of the new Topics that have been put up (Kinda' Car etc) and thought it appropriate to join in the fray, as it were.



What choices we have below are some very good examples of what a car company can do when they adhere to their philosophy of making compact, light, smooth and reasonably affordable (a little bit less so with succeeding models but never too out of reach) sports coupes.

I give to you the Mazda RX-7 for your voting pleasure. Since there are basically three generations of the RX-7 I am putting up the last of the model years of each as a means of showing what one would assume to be the best of each generation.


1985 Mazda RX-7:




1991 Mazda RX-7:



2002 Mazda RX-7:





Pick one and tell us why.

[Thed]

All are fantastic, IMO.

But there's something about the Gen III that gets me goin.....

[jaybird]

I just always loved the lines of the first Gen.

[lengnert]

First of all, there isn't one here that I do not love.

The RX-8 is one heck of a good ride. However, the RX-7 is/was a little more pure to the Mazda formula.

And I say this knowing that in almost every way the RX-8 is a better car.

For me, the second generation model is the one that I lusted for more than the others.

It came out just at the tail end of my high school years and took me through college.

Whereas, the first gen was great and the third gen was the best of the 7's, the second gen hit the sweet spot.

It improved on the looks of the first generation and had better performance, but it didn't move too far price wise.

Loved them all, though!

[GotMopar?]

All of them are nice in their own way but for me, first impressions are the lasting ones and the 2002 is one sweet looking car. Truth is, it was far better looking than anything D3 could come up with at the time in my opinion.
Thanks lengnert for a thread other than the Shelby vs ZL1 love/hate fest, no matter how much fun it has been.

[BasiliskSt]

Gen I was light and small. I drove several of these and every one was fun.

Gen III has nice styling, but had grown in weight (probably safer).

Gen II was too derivative in styling, mimicking Porsche's 924.

I'll stay with Gen I.

[lengnert]

GotMopar?;218678 Wrote:All of them are nice in their own way but for me, first impressions are the lasting ones and the 2002 is one sweet looking car. Truth is, it was far better looking than anything D3 could come up with at the time in my opinion.
Thanks lengnert for a thread other than the Shelby vs ZL1 love/hate fest, no matter how much fun it has been.

It is these types of threads that are the best for keeping the peace, I 'spose, as they (Kinda' threads, Same Car etc) encourage mostly objective opinions.

I still love the chaos of the others from time to time.

[lengnert]

BasiliskSt;218680 Wrote:Gen I was light and small. I drove several of these and every one was fun.

Gen III has nice styling, but had grown in weight (probably safer).

Gen II was too derivative in styling, mimicking Porsche's 924.

I'll stay with Gen I.

Call my favorite pick here's styling derivative will ya', Bas?!!!!! Well, your Gen I pick can suck an egg as far as I am concerned!!!! Generation I of the RX-7 was simply too old school for any "Real" car fan to vote for!


















{Is it possible to start a 'Flame War' in a more tame thread?}
- First, take way too great of an offense to a post that 'insults' a favorite car you have voted for. CHECK
- Second, respond with an 'over the top' retort. CHECK
- Third, sit back and watch what happens.

[Gixser995]

Gen III's are an amazing car, but they're played out.

I'll take the second gen. I'm an 80's Jap sports car junkie.

[BasiliskSt]

lengnert;218687 Wrote:

BasiliskSt;218680 Wrote:Gen I was light and small. I drove several of these and every one was fun.

Gen III has nice styling, but had grown in weight (probably safer).

Gen II was too derivative in styling, mimicking Porsche's 924.

I'll stay with Gen I.

Call my favorite pick here's styling derivative will ya', Bas?!!!!! Well, your Gen I pick can suck an egg as far as I am concerned!!!! Generation I of the RX-7 was simply too old school for any "Real" car fan to vote for!


Real? An imitation Porsche? You call that real? Real sick.

The Gen I RX-7 is iconic. It was Mazda and rotary in one bold statement of affordable fun. Even a drunk idiot can tell a Gen I is a Mazda RX-7. Stone, sober you might confuse a Gen II with a Stuttgart 924. Except of course the Mazda was reliable.

If I wanted German I'd buy German.

Now, is the Gen II a better car? Even a better RX-7? Yes. The Gen I was pretty simple and that was part of its charm and low cost. But it lost the distinctive looks along the way to maturity. Are you blind or biased that you can't see that?

TIC.















{Is it possible to start a 'Flame War' in a more tame thread?}
- First, take way too great of an offense to a post that 'insults' a favorite car you have voted for. CHECK
- Second, respond with an 'over the top' retort. CHECK
- Third, sit back and watch what happens.

[lengnert]

BasiliskSt;218693 Wrote:

lengnert;218687 Wrote:

BasiliskSt;218680 Wrote:Gen I was light and small. I drove several of these and every one was fun.

Gen III has nice styling, but had grown in weight (probably safer).

Gen II was too derivative in styling, mimicking Porsche's 924.

I'll stay with Gen I.

Call my favorite pick here's styling derivative will ya', Bas?!!!!! Well, your Gen I pick can suck an egg as far as I am concerned!!!! Generation I of the RX-7 was simply too old school for any "Real" car fan to vote for!


Real? An imitation Porsche? You call that real? Real sick.

The Gen I RX-7 is iconic. It was Mazda and rotary in one bold statement of affordable fun. Even a drunk idiot can tell a Gen I is a Mazda RX-7. Stone, sober you might confuse a Gen II with a Stuttgart 924. Except of course the Mazda was reliable.

If I wanted German I'd buy German.

Now, is the Gen II a better car? Even a better RX-7? Yes. The Gen I was pretty simple and that was part of its charm and low cost. But it lost the distinctive looks along the way to maturity. Are you blind or biased that you can't see that?

TIC.















{Is it possible to start a 'Flame War' in a more tame thread?}
- First, take way too great of an offense to a post that 'insults' a favorite car you have voted for. CHECK
- Second, respond with an 'over the top' retort. CHECK
- Third, sit back and watch what happens.

Oh, so that's the way it's goin' down, is it?

Your feint praise for the Gen II notwithstanding, Mr. ST, the Gen I (while I acknowledge the fact that being the precursor to the infinitely better Gen II, makes it praiseworthy in and of itself), still had a lot of room for improvement. Incidentally, those improvements were accomplished by Gen II.

But at least with can live with the knowledge that we did not so foolishly glam onto the Gen III here. What the heck were they thinking? LMAO, ,

[BasiliskSt]

Rotary reliability > Porsche reliability

What's that say about Porsche?

[The Voice of Doom]

Gotta be Gen III. Compared to the Supras and Z-cars (and yes, the C4 Corvette) it was a much edgier car. It offered similar performance as the others but in a more direct fashion. Yes, rotaries swill gas and oil, and yes Mazda probably cut back on materials too far (the interior had quality issues with the plastic trim). But of the Big Four, it was the most raw. And that made it funner.

[zeep]

Although the third generation was of course heavily glamorized from NFS and Fast and Furious, I think it's the best of them all. The other 2 are too blocky and 80s for my tastes, especially since grew up around the third gen from grand turismo, Sega GT and need for speed underground.

[ArtRiX]

Gen III