80s sports cars. Were the RX7 and 300Z (Z32) legit? How do they compare today?

[PushingMyLuck]

Mid 1980s RX7.
Early 1990s 300Z (Z32)
I'll add another: TSI Conquest. These were the "hot" car for a brief time in the early 90s.

At $30,000, I recall the 1990 300Z was considered a serious sports car back then.
A big step up from an RX7.
My friend got one as a gift, and I remember the insurance was $6k.

Back then, were they considered a legitimate sports car by adults?
Rear wheel drive? Strong motor?

What is the modern day postmortem on this?
How would they compare to today's sport coupes?

Why is there almost no significant enthusiast community for these cars?
They are basically forgotten.
It's like the decade was just skipped over in car circles.

[look 171]

I don't about you, but I wanted a Supra when they came out in the earily part of the 90s. Instead, in 97, I bought a 93 Mist. 3000GT VR4. It had 4WD, twin turbo adj. suspension, chin and tail spoiler that retracts, and I think it has a little over 300 HP. It was a fun car. it killed a lot of cars on paper of course.

[scottmandue]

I have not driven a 300Z however I was very zealous about reading all the car mags back then...

Consensus was that it was a very nice car but a little on the heavy side.

Not sure how the 951 stacks up against the 300Z? (Not fair I know because the Porsche was probably more $$$ than the Nissan).

I was shopping for a RX7 when I bought my 944... not sure which was the better car... pretty sure they are both more fun than a barrel full of lesbians.

YMMV

[pavulon]

Had an '85 Rx-7 GSL. Very reliable, handled well, no complaint beyond acceleration which was mediocre. Would buy another if it fell into my lap.

[nynor]

i've heard, but not experienced, that the twin turbo 300ZX's were wicked fast.

[black_falcon]

Before my 944, I had an RX-7 and Supra, both were 1988 model years. Very nice sports cars.

RX-7: That 1.3b Wankel was dead smooth and revved to the moon. Perfect driving position and one of the best instrument clusters. The redline warning buzzer always made me smile, typical 80's gizmos. Reliable and a hoot to drive. Poor MPG and very rust prone however.

Supra: More of a GT than a sports car, but with the TEMS adjustable sport suspension, you could hustle it around the bends. 7M-GE straight six was torque laden and very smooth. Car was heavy but reasonably quick for its day. Loved the lift off t-top. The turbo would still keep pace with most modern cars. Lots of fun to drive, supremely comfortable, nice driving position. IMO, a low mileage MKIII or MKIV Supra would make an excellent daily driver. Still modern by today's standards in many ways. I would buy another in a heart beat.

I've also had seat time in the twin turbo RX7s, Supras, and Z-Cars. Very underrated forgotten cars. They all lack the typical engineering excellence feel that you grow fond of with German engineering, but they all have their own character and even a cool 90's nostalgia. Too bad most have been modified to death.

[enzo1]

early 300's love to swap ends,(140mph) ask me how I know, lol....turbos =worse. Led me to my first Porsche 928....

[scottmandue]

Originally Posted by black_falcon

Before my 944, I had an RX-7 and Supra, both were 1988 model years. Very nice sports cars.

I'm dieing to know how the 944 compares to the RX-7?

[mattdavis11]

There were a couple of kids in high school (early 90's) that had nice cars. The two that routinely whipped the others were the Toyota Supra T and the the Mitsubishi Eclipse AWD T. One kid had a 300ZX T, an 86 I think, and I didn't think it was particularly fast and had driven it. Suspension was really loose.

With that said, I would roll up on the other boys in my pops 944 (now mine), they'd look at the speedo and decline to challenge. I knew I'd get whipped though. A friend had an 86 951, but he never pressed the limits of the car.

Of course there were the Mustang and Camaro guys that had fast cars, but couldn't turn.

Some of the cars back then were pretty quick. 0-60mph in 6.1, that was impressive.

[cashflyer]

I have had two SA22 Mazda RX-7s... one a street car, and the other set up for racing with a full cage, etc. They lack torque and acceleration, but handling was not bad.

I also had an '88 Chrysler Conquest TSI, which was a re-badged Misubishi Starion ESI-r.
I felt that this was a much better car. The turbo came in strong for the 2.6 engine, and the wide tires gave it much better grip on the curves.

I also had a 924. Plain... non, turbo, non everything, Audi powered car. Acceleration was better than the RX-7, because it used pistons rather than magic triangles. But I felt the handling was about the same as the RX.


My 924:

[Dantilla]

I've had an RX-7, several 944s, and a good friend had a 300ZX Turbo.

I thought the 300ZX was faster than the 944 Turbo, my friend thought my 944 Turbo was faster than his 300ZX. So there ya go.....

The RX-7 was a great car. Not much torque, but once that little rotary spooled up, the car was great fun.

The problem with the RX-7 is that the rotary suffers from poor volumetric efficiency with its crescent-shaped combustion chamber. Relatively poor fuel economy, and it barely passes a smog inspection when bone-stock and running perfectly. Any engine mods just about guarentee failing a smog test, so RX-7 mods are pretty much restricted to suspension goodies.

RX-7 performance is probably close to a non-turbo 944. They are both light, nimble cars, where the 300ZX and Supra do suffer from somewhat excess weight.

[PushingMyLuck]

What's the difference between a GT and a sports car?

[PushingMyLuck]

I'll add another forgotten car that was considered "cool" back in the day.
This was from the mid 1990's, I think.
How does the Mitsubishi 3000gt hold up over the test of time?
Fast car? Overrated junk?

[PushingMyLuck]

The RX-7 got 15/20 mile per gallon.
Hardly as terrible as its bad reputation would deserve.
Tons of cars only get 15/20 mpg

Fuel Economy of the 1985 Mazda RX-7

[black_falcon]

Originally Posted by scottmandue

I'm dieing to know how the 944 compares to the RX-7?

I don't want to say the RX-7 felt like a tin can compared to the 944, but in comparison the 944 has a very pronounced carved from granite, bank vault type solidity about it which the Mazda lacked (kind of like the old school Mercs). Hands down better build quality in the 944. The Mazda wasn't a rattle trap by any means, the Porsche was just better.

It's been 10 years now, but when I drove the two back to back for a couple months, I recall thinking that the RX-7 was a little faster off the mark. The rotory wound up fast and the car felt a little lighter. From 3rd gear up the 944 pulls harder.

The 944 handled better, that goes without saying. Braking felt pretty similar, any difference was negligible.

Here's a difference.. I enjoyed the RX-7 for 20,000 relatively trouble free miles; drive and enjoy. The 944 always seems to have a nagging problem to fix or costly major serving looming nearby. That's ok, because the 944 was the car I always aspired to have, such an 80's icon that looks better by the day.

[HardDrive]

Originally Posted by nynor

i've heard, but not experienced, that the twin turbo 300ZX's were wicked fast.

When I was 18, my girlfriends father made the highly questionable choice of letting me drive his brand new turbo 300zx to the gas station and fuel it up. This was a rural area, so it was about 8 miles away. I would like to say I was responsible, but I was not. I flogged it. It was fast, but there was a bit of turbo lag, and I had never experienced that before.

[masraum]

I haven't driven any of them. I was never a huge fan of the 3000GT although I understand the top model had impressive performance for the day.

The twin turbo 300Z had 4 wheel steering for a couple of years, and I think posted the best slalom times of any car at the time.

I also thought the Talon/Eclipse from the early-mid-90s was cool.

THere is someone that works in this building that's got a really clean looking 300Z. I'm impressed with how their looks aren't as dated as a lot of the cars from that era. Another car that still looks good are the last gen of RX-7 (FD). I'd consider those pretty timeless, but I think they are a bit later production than the OP is talking about.

[BernieP]

I had an 83 RX7 and went from it to an 87 924S. Both were fun to drive and trouble free. The 924 got way better gas mileage and felt more solid. The Mazda was slow off the line and very rust prone. The mazda started to burn oil at around 100k when the motor was cold. Every thing worked even the AC with 130,000 on the clock. Both were fun cars.

Bernie P

[nynor]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

I'll add another forgotten car that was considered "cool" back in the day.
This was from the mid 1990's, I think.
How does the Mitsubishi 3000gt hold up over the test of time?
Fast car? Overrated junk?

i drove one, once. i didn't like how it felt. the feel of the steering seemed flimsy, for lack of a better word.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by look 171

I don't about you, but I wanted a Supra when they came out in the earily part of the 90s. ....

I bought a new '87 Supra Turbo (first year they appeared)...totally different than my 911 but every bit as fun and fast (for IT'S day)....just like the 911. Same quality as my Carrera imo...and I've never had my 911 up to 140 mph (no tail) with another K to go before redline before I backed off....fun times in that car