MaxAttack! cars - my thoughts on how to win it

rallyspecV Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Blah Blah Blah, who cares what JV recomends, I
> haven't see one of these xcars or bricks out and
> the cars that are going to win are the ones being
> driven. subars, vws, nissans, hondas, it will be
> one of these because that is what is be driven,
> not the old has been cars that are all on blocks
> in somebody's garage collecting dust. pedagree or
> not if its in the stable and not on the stage it
> ain't gonna win

And ain't it fuckin ironic that seems like there are quite a lot of people agreeing with the general outline of what I've been saying for 15 years.
Ironic as fuckin hell that just today Jake Himes writes a essentially compressed version of what I've been saying and somebody says "Jake must be the smartest guy in ......"

Peter, don't know if you're just trying to be a snotty sounding asshole, or if you actually are one cause I don't know you, but how about telling me how something I'm saying is wrong just because some people have drug out the building of their cars cause they WANT to build something BETTER than some POS stock, slow Nissan POS FWD POS, and then they all, me included, just happen to have been lucky enough to find wonderful wives, buy houses, build garages and start families----as so being adults, push the plaything, the car, to the back burner.

Let us not forget that the whole US rally scene has been going thru significant convulsions in the last 5-6 years, with constantly changing rules, new organisations and only one thing predictable---annual increases in costs for everthing.
That has wilted the willy for more than just these guys starting out.

You chose a simple route with a slow, stockish JapCrap fwd car, and as I have seen, now you find you're in a dead end, cause there is nothing made for you car. Are you bitter that guys can find stronger gearboxs all over the place and alternate diffs and ring and pinions for under $150?

Too bad you didn't listen, you wouldn't be moaning here, and maybe you could actually have a chance at some good placing---even overall.


Oh do this and show us you're a reasonable person: ask Jake Himes where the idea of using the entire subframe, hubs, control arms and steering rack from the second gen RX7 came from.

Ask Dave Hintz who built his PNW Region winning Subaru motor a years or so ago?

Ask the Tim Moser in CRS and Josh Wimpey in NASA WINNING in their VWs about the suspension they got?
Or Kris Scofield winning in CARS in Alberta with his AE86...

Then ask yourself whose advice YOU'VE been taking and who's worth listening to.

Then apologize for sounding like a stupid dipshit.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

to switch the subject back from the previously scheduled bashing....


Sounds like there are a few cars that would fit the first post reqs....

Xratty
Volvo 240
VW Golf

and my personal flava-o-preference-o-tha-moment

Merc 190e 2.3-16 (you dont want the 2.3-16 body/suspension, just the engine)

but what do I know, I've just been busy building $4000 rocking chairs, not rally cars.

BTW JVL, I graduate in like 3 weeks, and probably have a "real" job all lined up. Now the wife and I just need to find a house with a garage!

NVM



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2007 01:36AM by Greg Donovan.

Greg Donovan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NVM
>
>
>
> Edited 2 times. Last edit at Apr 14, 2007 by Greg
> Donovan.

Edited 2 times just to say NVM?
Don't be shy man spit it out, this is Rally Anarchy where any putz can post.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

john vanlandingham Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Greg Donovan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NVM
> >
> >
> >
> > Edited 2 times. Last edit at Apr 14, 2007 by
> Greg
> > Donovan.
>
> Edited 2 times just to say NVM?
> Don't be shy man spit it out, this is Rally
> Anarchy where any putz can post.
>
>
>
>
> John Vanlandingham
> Sleezattle, WA, USA
>
> Vive le Prole-le-ralliat
>
> www.jvab.f4.ca


it was nothing really i had some incorrect info about something. and when i found out the right info my post became irrelevant.

What cars can you think of that will meet these criteria? There is a way to the Triple Crown without spending more than the next guy.

You need a solid shell and nice suspension and a good final drive and gearset. You also need enough HP to get to a point of diminishing return on invested $$.

Time to bench build.

bodyshell:
1st Gen RX7 - cost $500 for shell and transport, also pick up a free parts car.
Drawbacks:
unequal length upper and lower control arms in rear

For these cars you need a proper 4 link or 5 link setup to get the power to the ground in the rear. The stock rear upper control arms are about 10 inches long while the lower arms are a bit over 2 feet long. <rimshot, laughter>

It's fairly labor intensive but if you know a good fabricator its not a problem to do it up like this.

http://cbradleymotorsport.co.uk/car%20build.htm
Scroll down to "fabrication/bodywork" and "brakes".

cost from your fabricator: let's be safe and say $2500 for parts and labor

WARNING:
Having it look pretty doesn't make you go any faster.

Suspension-steering-brakes drawbacks:
old outdated strut setup
steering box
small stuff up front, not tough

Solve it all at once: Get a 2nd gen TurboII crossmember, steering rack, hubs, uprights, brakes, and control arms. It's all attatched together. Voila, huge 4 piston calipers, modern, bigger suspension, 2.6 lock to lock r&p if you want it.
Get another one for spares.
Cost: $800 from RX7 Heaven and toss in another $250 for crossmember instalation for a total of $1050

At this point you have cleared up some serious issues with the 1st gen RX7 chassis. It was two simple but pretty major changes. The drawbacks were serious in terms of rally performance. After investing $4050 in the shell you now have a bodyshell with suspension links that will allow you to put great suspension on the car that will allow you to drive at MaxAttack! and will not be a limiting factor for the motor and drivetrain.

It's important to have this frame of mind where you can take an honest look at your plans for the car and what you have done. I ask myself here, "Will the choices I made with the bodyshell make it a competitive choice?" The answer is "yes" since the shells are plentiful and it is rigid and also is now setup with lots of travel available. It's just a question of picking the right springs and dampers for suspension and I'll have a rolling chassis that has very few LIMITING FACTORS BUILT INTO IT.

The rest is simple

Get an adapter plate for a T5 gearbox
Get a nice T5 gearbox with a 2.95 first gear
Get a nice 4.88 or 5.12 ring and pinion with a clutch type diff

Get a 13B Peripheral port and you've got 300 hp with a nice carb.

Now you have a very fast car with strong gears and great suspension and brakes. The ratios aren't great but they are good. A nice deep ring and pinion will really help this as well. It also will be easy to keep around 2350lbs. This chassis is also famous for it's 50/50 weight distribution.

Now you have a car that can just about hang with anything that it's going to see. It's not a dusty old car that no one will ever finish. It's actually a pretty easy build. The dollars get you is an incredibly competitive car.

I'll bet you could get one of these professionally built for less than $18,000. If you do everything but the fabrication yourself you could have this car for around $11500. That's buying everything like seats, belts, computer, lights, and tires all new.

So for $11500 and some averge guy work you could have what I think is an exceptionally fit car. Put in some slightly above average driving and you could finish top 3 for the MaxAttack! Triple Crown Rally Series. Put it in the hands of a good driver and you could win the whole thing

rallyspecV Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Blah Blah Blah, who cares what JV recomends, I
> haven't see one of these xcars or bricks out and
> the cars that are going to win are the ones being
> driven. subars, vws, nissans, hondas, it will be
> one of these because that is what is be driven,
> not the old has been cars that are all on blocks
> in somebody's garage collecting dust. pedagree or
> not if its in the stable and not on the stage it
> ain't gonna win

I agree that it's gotta be on the stages than in the garage to win. There is a quick guy in a volvo who just got on the entry list for OT last night.

It's unfortunate that you sound angry and bitter in your post. Fellow MaxAttackers should stick together. Part of our vision is developing a MaxAttack! community where we can all share ideas and help each other out. The world is a better place if we all bite our tongues from time to time.

sauna rocks Wrote:
> bodyshell:
> 1st Gen RX7 - cost $500 for shell and transport,
> also pick up a free parts car.
> Drawbacks:
> unequal length upper and lower control arms in
> rear
>
> For these cars you need a proper 4 link or 5 link
> setup to get the power to the ground in the rear.
> The stock rear upper control arms are about 10
> inches long while the lower arms are a bit over 2
> feet long. <rimshot, laughter>

The lowers are 19 or 21 inches long, still less than 24" but damn long.

I love my three link. Take off like a drag racer, no wheelhop, no bind.

I keep thinking that on my "new" car, though, that I'll just be cheap and simple (the 3 link was cheap but not simple) and get another pair of lower links (or rod ends and links) and locate off of the factory upper link axle mounts and go forward through the wheelwell with fabricated boxes kind of like the Gp4 Escort but on a MUCH smaller scale. Much much much less fabrication involved, easier to swap axles out since anything that bolts to factory design will work, no need for massive invasive chopping up the floor for clearance either. But I worry about being able to put power down.

It goes without saying that you'll have to hunt for a car that has wheelwells, this is remarkably hard to find for one of these cars, but then if it's rusty it should be a parts car only, right?

> It's fairly labor intensive but if you know a good
> fabricator its not a problem to do it up like
> this.

Buy a welder and basic metal mangling tools and have at it, it's not that hard.

> Solve it all at once: Get a 2nd gen TurboII
> crossmember, steering rack, hubs, uprights,
> brakes, and control arms. It's all attatched
> together. Voila, huge 4 piston calipers, modern,
> bigger suspension, 2.6 lock to lock r&p if you
> want it.
> Get another one for spares.
> Cost: $800 from RX7 Heaven and toss in another
> $250 for crossmember instalation for a total of
> $1050

Get the front crossmember from *any* '86-88 model with power steering. Finding a Turbo is great but not world-ending if you can only find base model stuff. (GXL were the same as Turbo suspension wise, except for electronic struts that you'll be tossing anyway)

The spindles are the same so you can put the bigger OEM brakes even on a base car's parts. The power rack in the '86-88 is 15.something:1 (whatever the hell that means) as compared to the manual rack 20:1. BUT the power rack from '89-up models is 17:1, so beware.

I got a parts FC for free. It's an '86 with power steering. Every panel is bent and the transmission has only 4th gear, but the crossmember/spindles/rack are intact. Plus, the engine runs!

>This chassis
> is also famous for it's 50/50 weight
> distribution.

Which none of the various RX-7s I have owned ever had... they all were 100-200lb nose heavy relative to 50/50 even with me in the car and removal of much mass in the front. Marketing monkeyspankery, almost as bad as the "front mid engine" bullshit that has all the teen wankers foaming at the mouth.

Seeing pics of Andrew Havas's car in various stages of disassembly gives me more ideas for mass removal - what is under his front fenders is very very far removed from what is under a box stock shell.

> I'll bet you could get one of these professionally
> built for less than $18,000. If you do
> everything but the fabrication yourself you could
> have this car for around $11500. That's buying
> everything like seats, belts, computer, lights,
> and tires all new.

If you can't find one used for under that. I recently saw one for sale for around $10k. Too bad it was in California, and about $9900 more than I had...


One thing you didn't touch on is that they are pretty f'ing cramped inside with a rollcage. Not a problem for most people.

---

Pete Remner
Cleveland, Ohio

1984 RX-7 (rallycross thing)
1978
Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver.

The crampedness of the RX7 is where it fails me.

The weight sounds appealing.

What about new cars. I haven't had the chance, but the Chevy Aveo is a Suzuki Swift Plus rebadged and we all say what Sprongl's did with it. Suspension must be out there and light weight and okay snort must be possible. Anyone looked at the new Yaris or Fit? Or even a Scion maybe. If this goes like I hope it will, hopefully there will be some future manufacturer support in Max Attack.

---

Grant Hughes

I agree with Jake on the RX build, but what most people skip is the second gen shell. Yes it's heavier, but the brakes are far better, the interior room is much more, and with a turbo or built motor, these cars are very competitive. You can easily get 250Hp for less than 2k out of turbo motor. Granted, I have not run mine for quite a while, but if you look at the results I have gotten out of a car I built completely alone, it's hard to argue that an 2nd gen RX-7 is not a great option. Then consider that you can pick em up for cheap, race parts are more than plentiful 2nd hand, and building the engine will probably cost less than most other race engine builds, it's a slam dunk! If anyone would like links to various sites or or suggestions on building one, let me know. I have close to 10 races on my shell, no DNF's, all of them on the same suspension, including a CRNC championship. Also, most came with a limited slip, and the gearing is good enough to not necessitate a gear change. The trannies are bulletproof. I built the car for less than 10K. I only wish I could run OT to find out how competitive it would be against people that are actually competing for cash. Maybe next year.

This Maxattack program is great for rally. I only wish I was in a position to run this year! Good luck to all who are competing! We finished 9th OA that year at Laughlin, first 2wd car to finsh.

Cable

The shell I have cost me $350, and I drove it home. Killer deal, yes. Also on a side note, that's Ole Holter navigating for me! Had to drop the name bomb!

---

Cable Rhodes
Boise, Idaho
'87 Mazda RX-7 Turbo



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2007 12:07PM by cablerhodes.

The brakes are better but we're putting them on the early cars anyway so what's the difference there?

They're even more cramped up and down, but they do have bunches more side to side, depending on where you want the space. They're also somewhat easier to find.

The main reason I don't like them (besides headroom) is the rear suspension, which is like the XR4Ti's only with five bazillion little links and compliance bushings. The bushings can be fixed, the links can be beefed, but you're still stuck with an IRS. Gearsets for the diff are hideously expensive to nonexistent because they have a special pinion length relative to other Maxda 7". Supposedly some people have tried/are trying putting the Miata short-nose diff housing in (easy 4.78 gears, got mine for $27 from a Sportage at a u-pull-it) but it requires crossmember "clearancing" and no word back yet on reliabilty.

1st-generation... grab any axle from anything and use it. Solid axle is a wonderful thing.

---

Pete Remner
Cleveland, Ohio

1984 RX-7 (rallycross thing)
1978
Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver.

I've run 1st gen rx's as rally cars. Room inside is cramped everywhere. The 2nd gen is much roomier, of course it all has to with how the cage is built. If you don't slam the cage against the body, your screwed, and that goes for just about any car built for racing purposes. As far as the rear IRS, what's wrong with stock. The ONLY problem I've had is bending a link when crashing the car into a tree at speed. All the bushings are the stock bushings, IE never been replaced. Reliability of the rear is great IMO. Like I posted, the rear gear ratios are great, and should not need changed, 10 races worth of results have proven that. If you still feel the need for better ratios, the gear set from a Miata trans will supposedly fit in the RX-7 case. From what I found racing a first gen, the added weight of the 2nd gen is very positive when it comes to putting the power to the ground. I found that the first gen was darty at speed, and with the vague feeling from the steering box, hard to control. IMO, the geometry of the rearend of the first is less than desirable. As for grabbing an axle from anything, unless you have all of the tools to do an axles narrowing, the cost is going to put you in the "unaffordable" range of the regular ralliest.

Don't get me wrong, one of the biggest mistakes I made was selling my GSL-SE. I really wish I would have kept it. Anything RX-7 is very close to my heart!

Let's keep the friendly banter continuing! It's bound to inspire someone else to build an RX-7 rally car!

Cable

---

Cable Rhodes
Boise, Idaho
'87 Mazda RX-7 Turbo

If you don't slam the cage against the
> body, your screwed, and that goes for just about
> any car built for racing purposes.

This thread producing a vehicle that does not limit itself. The cage should be done well enough that it's completely slammed up against the body of the car. The time should be taken to do it. Why not?


As far as the
> rear IRS, what's wrong with stock. The ONLY
> problem I've had is bending a link when crashing
> the car into a tree at speed. All the bushings are
> the stock bushings, IE never been replaced.
> Reliability of the rear is great IMO. Like I
> posted, the rear gear ratios are great, and should
> not need changed, 10 races worth of results have
> proven that.

Cable those results are in a less than competitive field. We've never had truly competitive fields here. How would your car run against Havas's or Hurst's old RX7? Driver being equal it would have a tough time keeping up.

If you still feel the need for better
> ratios, the gear set from a Miata trans will
> supposedly fit in the RX-7 case.

The ratios in the stock turbo trannies as well as other stock RX7 trannies leave a lot to be desired when compared to a real race box. I know I've had both. The difference is night and day. Even with a broad torque curve good ratios are important to have.

From what I found
> racing a first gen, the added weight of the 2nd
> gen is very positive when it comes to putting the
> power to the ground.

Did you first gen have stock suspension geometry in the rear?

I found that the first gen
> was darty at speed, and with the vague feeling
> from the steering box,

Look at where I address these with the discussion on getting rid of the steering box and going to rack and pinion. These problems can be worked out of the shell.

hard to control. IMO, the
> geometry of the rearend of the first is less than
> desirable. As for grabbing an axle from anything,
> unless you have all of the tools to do an axles
> narrowing, the cost is going to put you in the
> "unaffordable" range of the regular ralliest.

I think that if the regular ralliest sees the value in the MaxAttack! Triple Crown Rally Series they might consider changing their strategy. My Mazda summary only showed $4050 in cost to build a really competitive chassis. The rest is easy as pie. It's not a beginner car and it's not supposed to be cheap. It is an excellent value though because it will be a very competitive car for not a lot of money

>
> Don't get me wrong, one of the biggest mistakes I
> made was selling my GSL-SE. I really wish I would
> have kept it. Anything RX-7 is very close to my
> heart!

Me to, those silly wankels.
>
> Let's keep the friendly banter continuing! It's
> bound to inspire someone else to build an RX-7
> rally car

Cable, I remember you telling me the virtues of your 2nd gen at 100 AW 2 years ago. I know that you ran very well and have done so many times since then. I'm sure a lot of people know that you have had good results.

However, with MaxAttack! things have changed and a new era is here. We are going to see 2wd competition like we have never seen it. This thread is about building cars that can put a good driver in a position to win the series. You have had great results and I know you can drive. However, we can't look at our results to justify our cars. We had great results in our Sentra but really it was a flawed car. I've had great results in my Rx7 but it's got some series rear suspension issues that I need to deal with. I've still got those silly stock rear control arms.

When JV talks about results from competitive fields that is exactly what we are going to start to see. So far we just haven't had them in the states. By competitive I mean 15 to 20 STRONG entries. When we have this the cars will start to evolve.

I hope to see you at OT, too bad you aren't running cause I know you would do well.
>
> Cable
>
>
>
> &amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br
> /&gt;<br />

john vanlandingham Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rallyspecV Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Blah Blah Blah, who cares what JV recomends,
> I
> > haven't see one of these xcars or bricks out
> and
> > the cars that are going to win are the ones
> being
> > driven. subars, vws, nissans, hondas, it
> will be
> > one of these because that is what is be
> driven,
> > not the old has been cars that are all on
> blocks
> > in somebody's garage collecting dust.
> pedagree or
> > not if its in the stable and not on the stage
> it
> > ain't gonna win
>
> And ain't it fuckin ironic that seems like there
> are quite a lot of people agreeing with the
> general outline of what I've been saying for 15
> years.
> Ironic as fuckin hell that just today Jake Himes
> writes a essentially compressed version of what
> I've been saying and somebody says "Jake must be
> the smartest guy in ......"
>
> Peter, don't know if you're just trying to be a
> snotty sounding asshole, or if you actually are
> one cause I don't know you, but how about telling
> me how something I'm saying is wrong just because
> some people have drug out the building of their
> cars cause they WANT to build something BETTER
> than some POS stock, slow Nissan POS FWD POS, and
> then they all, me included, just happen to have
> been lucky enough to find wonderful wives, buy
> houses, build garages and start families----as so
> being adults, push the plaything, the car, to the
> back burner.
>

Well I see that I have hit a nerve John and that was not my intention, I was merely making a point that the "Ideal" rally car and the car that gets Rallied are two different things. I would love to have a propper car prepped and built by the best and brightest such as yourself but when I was handed a car that already had a stong motor (195hp) a 6speed tranny, and a LSD, i figured it would be more fun to build it and drive than keep surching for the perfect car. I am 35 and have a house and a wife and two children and a buisiness that is successfull so for me just driving was the goal. I know that I am not finishing for reasons that are both car related and mostly driver related. my times are not as good as some but better than most and being agressive has taught me the importance of a stong car.

> Let us not forget that the whole US rally scene
> has been going thru significant convulsions in the
> last 5-6 years, with constantly changing rules,
> new organisations and only one thing
> predictable---annual increases in costs for
> everthing.
> That has wilted the willy for more than just these
> guys starting out.
>
> You chose a simple route with a slow, stockish
> JapCrap fwd car, and as I have seen, now you find
> you're in a dead end, cause there is nothing made
> for you car. Are you bitter that guys can find
> stronger gearboxs all over the place and alternate
> diffs and ring and pinions for under $150?
>
The reason there is nothing for my car is because good people are doing nothing, if we are out ther making stuff and exposing our car like the ones that have all of the stuff maybe we can get stuff. I am mostly being an R and D ginnie pig but maybe through my troubles someone else can build another one that is faster and better. You are correct that in the USDM we are so limited on good platforms from which to build great cars that maybe by some of us building OK cars on what we have available that the parts market and the reasurch will open more dores for other to improve upon.

> Too bad you didn't listen, you wouldn't be moaning
> here, and maybe you could actually have a chance
> at some good placing---even overall.
>

I am not moaning persay but it is a chalange to be one of the first to try something new but the world would void of a lot great things if no one tryed to acomplish anything untryed.
>
> Oh do this and show us you're a reasonable person:
> ask Jake Himes where the idea of using the entire
> subframe, hubs, control arms and steering rack
> from the second gen RX7 came from.
>
> Ask Dave Hintz who built his PNW Region winning
> Subaru motor a years or so ago?
>
> Ask the Tim Moser in CRS and Josh Wimpey in NASA
> WINNING in their VWs about the suspension they
> got
> Or Kris Scofield winning in CARS in Alberta with
> his AE86...
>
> Then ask yourself whose advice YOU'VE been taking
> and who's worth listening to.
>
The answer is, someone who through love of his sport and his craft took the time to take something that lacked and make it better. That is my hope that as we all move into this new era of rally that instead of drawing lines in the gravel and choosing sides, that maybe we can all work on what we have to make it the best it can be. I just want to go drive and have fun and I can keep that Japanize POS out of the ditch I think I can win.

> Then apologize for sounding like a stupid
> dipshit.
>
>
I may be a dipshit but I ain't stupid, just a little ignorant as to the reason why we can't stive to make lemonade out the lemons we get in the US.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> John Vanlandingham
> Sleezattle, WA, USA
>
> Vive le Prole-le-ralliat
>
> www.jvab.f4.ca


Peter Barnes
Bend OR, USA
Antagonist extraordiaire

cablerhodes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've run 1st gen rx's as rally cars. Room inside
> is cramped everywhere. The 2nd gen is much
> roomier, of course it all has to with how the cage
> is built.

I can't sit up in a 2nd gen even with no seat in the car, the cage doesn't even enter into that yet. With a seat, but still no rollcage, the driving position becomes horrible, reminds me of a drive in an IT Miata. That is where my statement comes from.

>As far as the
> rear IRS, what's wrong with stock. The ONLY
> problem I've had is bending a link when crashing
> the car into a tree at speed. All the bushings are
> the stock bushings, IE never been replaced.

I have only experienced about ten of these cars, but all but one had seriously deranged rear suspension because all of the rubber bushings and compliance bushings fail. That is a guaranteed expense just to being it back up to marginal, plus regular servicing/failure points. Good on you for having no trouble with yours, though!

> supposedly fit in the RX-7 case. From what I found
> racing a first gen, the added weight of the 2nd
> gen is very positive when it comes to putting the
> power to the ground.

That is the awful rear suspension geometry. Lots of wheelhop and it doesn't like to move much. Fortunately, that is at the top of the list of things to sort out, and it can be sorted out cheaply and expediently...

I have never heard of additional weight being a good thing before.

> desirable. As for grabbing an axle from anything,
> unless you have all of the tools to do an axles
> narrowing, the cost is going to put you in the
> "unaffordable" range of the regular ralliest.

They aren't that narrow, and you'll be wanting FWD-offset wheels to go along with that FC front end anyway. IIRC the Jeep Cherokee rearend makes for a nice fit, bolt pattern matches the 5-lug front, but I'd personally get a pre-1990 axle because they went to C-clip axle retention after that. C-clip axles scare the bejeezus out of me... nothing holding the axle in but a little clip and a maybe 5-6mm flange at the differential end.

> Don't get me wrong, one of the biggest mistakes I
> made was selling my GSL-SE. I really wish I would
> have kept it. Anything RX-7 is very close to my
> heart!

GAK! No wonder you had trouble, those had even worse rear geometry than the '83-earlier cars. And were general pigs to boot.

---

Pete Remner
Cleveland, Ohio

1984 RX-7 (rallycross thing)
1978
Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver.