Track and occasional road car options - £5k
Discussion
C70R said:
If we're talking about the MR2 Turbo, how do they compare to the later shape Nissan 200SX?
Whereabouts in London are you C70R? You're welcome to come have a look at my 200sx (I'm in Docklands), absolutely great cars. I can't compare to an MR2, but with some suspension and brake upgrades they're great fun for very little money and can be made significantly quicker with a bit more. Surprisingly practical too given the back seat and boot.
arch stant0n said:
C70R said:
If we're talking about the MR2 Turbo, how do they compare to the later shape Nissan 200SX?
Whereabouts in London are you C70R? You're welcome to come have a look at my 200sx (I'm in Docklands), absolutely great cars. I can't compare to an MR2, but with some suspension and brake upgrades they're great fun for very little money and can be made significantly quicker with a bit more. Surprisingly practical too given the back seat and boot.Carfolio (not that I'm holding it up as gospel) suggests that the 200sx actually has a BETTER F/R weight distribution than the MR2 Turbo (53% vs 42% front), which might go some way to explain why the Toyota has caught so many out.
Having said that, I'd hope that the having the engine over the rear of the MR2 would help with traction in slower corners.
Edited by C70R on Friday 19th August 17:23
I get that mx5's are light well balanced cars. The fact I can't fit in them is a problem for me, but I have never come across one that's rapid on the track. I've done about 15-20 days now and have overtaken a number but have never been overtaken by one and my track car is hardly quick. An e30 325i.
Sohlman said:
I get that mx5's are light well balanced cars. The fact I can't fit in them is a problem for me, but I have never come across one that's rapid on the track. I've done about 15-20 days now and have overtaken a number but have never been overtaken by one and my track car is hardly quick. An e30 325i.
over a whole lap maybe not. track days are about fun, skill and handling imo, not whole lap times based on point and squirt. the battles i enjoy are at smaller circuits like Brands, get overtaken on the pit straight and then hang on to a faster car's tail through paddock, druids, graham, clearways right up to the straight again. If you look out for that type of behaviour you might see it next time. with 115 horses that's fulfilling, but it's unlikely for a 5 to actually overtake faster cars unless they really are slow. if you're pedalling a 325 at all competently you should be overtaking a 5. Shocking how many fast cars are slow through the corners, hardly a satisfying way to spend a day but maybe they're not regulars.Mr2 turbo is definitely fun to track, but a near stock one will need a bit of work.
A 94 and upward model is the best bet with the revised engine and better turbo, however I would budget for a suspension refresh, uprated arb's, brake refresh with good pads, braided lines and caliper refurbs (they do tend to stick on occasion).
Power is easily boosted to around 300bhp with the 94+ ones with the addition of a boost controller, however the standard intercooler will heatsoak quickly, so is best replaced with an uprated sidemount (ok) or an air to water ic (much better) fortunately the celica gt4 has the same engine and uses an air to water ic which is the most simple solution.
If you can find a nice one for 2.5/3k and then spend the rest of the budget on getting it up to snuff it might be worth it.
The boot is pretty big for a mid engined car too. I can fit all of my tools in it, jack, stands and fluids etc.
A 94 and upward model is the best bet with the revised engine and better turbo, however I would budget for a suspension refresh, uprated arb's, brake refresh with good pads, braided lines and caliper refurbs (they do tend to stick on occasion).
Power is easily boosted to around 300bhp with the 94+ ones with the addition of a boost controller, however the standard intercooler will heatsoak quickly, so is best replaced with an uprated sidemount (ok) or an air to water ic (much better) fortunately the celica gt4 has the same engine and uses an air to water ic which is the most simple solution.
If you can find a nice one for 2.5/3k and then spend the rest of the budget on getting it up to snuff it might be worth it.
The boot is pretty big for a mid engined car too. I can fit all of my tools in it, jack, stands and fluids etc.
Edited by IdiotRace on Monday 22 August 10:40
Boosted LS1 said:
Just out of interest for the guys that use their cars on track. Are there insurance policies to get you home if the car has a serious mishap?
I'm not sure the AA would recover you in some circumstances.
Generally carry a credit card in your back pocket and be prepared to pay the AA their full price for a relay home - the track normally has a deal with a local company - but there is no guarantee they can get you & your twisted lump of metal that used to be a working car home. I'm not sure the AA would recover you in some circumstances.
james_gt3rs said:
I reckon you'd need a seriously modded MX5 to keep up with a Boxster... they are faster than people give them credit for.
Do you think so? I drove a 3.4 around Thruxton a couple of years ago, and while it had a decent lick of pace it felt soft and heavy compared to 'proper' track cars.CABC said:
one of the mags spent 5k tuning an old 5 and it beat a new boxster round a track. doesn't surprise me one bit. common sense when you look at the numbers.
Hmm the video I saw (think it was AutoExpress) they put a supercharger and suspension on a mk2 MX5 and it couldn't beat the 2.7 Boxster. I reckon a 3.4 would destroy it!i have a turbocharged mk1 mx5 (the flyin miata kit) which is very much a track focused car. it's got a full cage, no soft top, no speakers/headunit, sound deadening removed and just the carpet in it to keep it semi presentable. for the money i cant see there being many cars as fast, capable and fun on the road or especially on track.
it's not crazy fast but will manage around the same lap times as the likes of lotus elise, bmw 328/330 track cars etc (i was actually slightly quicker than these cars round croft last year). that's on 195/50 tyres at 50 quid a corner semi slicks and 70 quid 'track' brake pads. i'd imagine the equivalent consumables on the similarly paced cars i mentioned would be a fair bit more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOhpcRJ0_BY
it's not crazy fast but will manage around the same lap times as the likes of lotus elise, bmw 328/330 track cars etc (i was actually slightly quicker than these cars round croft last year). that's on 195/50 tyres at 50 quid a corner semi slicks and 70 quid 'track' brake pads. i'd imagine the equivalent consumables on the similarly paced cars i mentioned would be a fair bit more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOhpcRJ0_BY
Rather depends on the track I suspect..
Boxster has more top end speed and grip - at high speed weight counts for less. Mx5 is however an awesome track car, and both are very different driving experiences. Having run a stock 3.2S and a 115 1.6 mk 1 mx5 on track:
The MX (predictably) lacked straight line speed, but was playful and easy to drive - back end out on demand, passed a lot of much faster stuff, especially when damp.
The boxster was also brilliant, but needed driving neatly to be fast, and tended to understeer a little on exits - so needed rotating more before you got on it. Overall grip and braking was massive, and it just kept going. I appreciate adding power to the mx would redress some of that, but once you're into 3 digit speeds, power vs cda is more important than power vs weight. Not sure how the MX would fare at big speed, mine started to feel a little unstable/light at high speed.
Boxster has more top end speed and grip - at high speed weight counts for less. Mx5 is however an awesome track car, and both are very different driving experiences. Having run a stock 3.2S and a 115 1.6 mk 1 mx5 on track:
The MX (predictably) lacked straight line speed, but was playful and easy to drive - back end out on demand, passed a lot of much faster stuff, especially when damp.
The boxster was also brilliant, but needed driving neatly to be fast, and tended to understeer a little on exits - so needed rotating more before you got on it. Overall grip and braking was massive, and it just kept going. I appreciate adding power to the mx would redress some of that, but once you're into 3 digit speeds, power vs cda is more important than power vs weight. Not sure how the MX would fare at big speed, mine started to feel a little unstable/light at high speed.
dlockhart said:
Generally carry a credit card in your back pocket and be prepared to pay the AA their full price for a relay home - the track normally has a deal with a local company - but there is no guarantee they can get you & your twisted lump of metal that used to be a working car home.
Thanks. Some cars will be so bent they just can't be pushed out onto the street. AutoExpress, that was it. Ok it was a 2.7, but then the 5 beat it by 3 seconds, so quite some margin for the 3.4 to claw back which it probably would, but still it was a point made. i think that if you put ego to one side a 5 offers so much on most uk tracks. At faster ones like Dony you need extra grunt and for the truly big circuits like silverstone, ring and spa then a stable high speed machine comes into its own
CABC said:
AutoExpress, that was it. Ok it was a 2.7, but then the 5 beat it by 3 seconds, so quite some margin for the 3.4 to claw back which it probably would, but still it was a point made. i think that if you put ego to one side a 5 offers so much on most uk tracks. At faster ones like Dony you need extra grunt and for the truly big circuits like silverstone, ring and spa then a stable high speed machine comes into its own
Nope, the video shows it's the other way round... Boxster 2.5 secs faster than supercharged 5.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSsJqFYfQrU
james_gt3rs said:
CABC said:
AutoExpress, that was it. Ok it was a 2.7, but then the 5 beat it by 3 seconds, so quite some margin for the 3.4 to claw back which it probably would, but still it was a point made. i think that if you put ego to one side a 5 offers so much on most uk tracks. At faster ones like Dony you need extra grunt and for the truly big circuits like silverstone, ring and spa then a stable high speed machine comes into its own
Nope, the video shows it's the other way round... Boxster 2.5 secs faster than supercharged 5.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSsJqFYfQrU
Hardly a real world comparison, due to massively different values.
I suspect it would be ever so close if a £5k boxster was used.
they're quite different cars really.
mostly road, occasional track - boxster
mostly track - mx5 every time, way more fun. but a good track 5 is necessarily a poor road car.
one of the worst parts of a track car is the bucket seats. race seats are upright, non-adjustable and just not comfy!
the boxster seats aren't good enough for feel on track. Most road seats aren't, for good reason.
modern track road cars like the Renaults, Porsche GTs and others are great hybrids, but a tad more expensive.
mostly road, occasional track - boxster
mostly track - mx5 every time, way more fun. but a good track 5 is necessarily a poor road car.
one of the worst parts of a track car is the bucket seats. race seats are upright, non-adjustable and just not comfy!
the boxster seats aren't good enough for feel on track. Most road seats aren't, for good reason.
modern track road cars like the Renaults, Porsche GTs and others are great hybrids, but a tad more expensive.
To be honest, a Boxster isn't really what I'm after. I don't need a daily, I don't need a civilised drive or a commuter tool.
I want something that's a bit more raw, lightweight and pointy than a Boxster. And, to be frank, the potential for expensive failure on the Boxster puts me off alone.
I want something that's a bit more raw, lightweight and pointy than a Boxster. And, to be frank, the potential for expensive failure on the Boxster puts me off alone.
Gassing Station | Track Days | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff