RE: Shed Of The Week: Toyota MR2 GT

[J4CKO]

Steamer said:

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

I'm sure 14 seconds was a fairly standard time for the turbo

Sounds more like it to feel as quick as the reputation, on a par with a Fiat Coupe Turbo which isn't a million miles away in weight and power, suppose that figure might be for the earlier ones, they gained a fair few bhp over the revisions I believe.

[iloveboost]

MarJay said:

I've had a rev3 and a rev5. Both great fun but neither hold up to modern cars in the NVH stakes. Great fun though, sweet handling and great looking cars.

A weak point of old cars is NVH. I used to think it was the dampers getting tired, but I think it's also the poor rigidity.
Some luxury and exotic cars from the mid-nineties onward seem to hold up really well. For example the E39 5 series is good.
Just out of curiosity I googled 'torsional rigidity' and I found this list of cars:
http://www.germancarforum.com/threads/the-list-tor...

I know the higher the chassis stiffness relative to the chassis weight, the better the handling and NVH.

[soad]

A tatty rust bucket...rust will only get worse. There must be better examples out there?

[kambites]

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

220bhp and 1300kg is only about 170bhp/tonne. 17 seconds to 100 sounds believable.

[SonicShadow]

Looks like there's a lot of work needed - sills and arches are not cheap. It's also missing the Rev5 wheels which are worth a fair price on their own - you're looking at around £250-£300 (with tyres) for a decent set. Rev 5 wheels:



You can get a better, earlier example for shed's money IMO. A good Rev5 will cost you £2k+.

[vtecyo]

kambites said:

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

220bhp and 1300kg is only about 170bhp/tonne. 17 seconds to 100 sounds believable.

Rev 3+ are 245bhp stock.

[kambites]

vtecyo said:

kambites said:

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

220bhp and 1300kg is only about 170bhp/tonne. 17 seconds to 100 sounds believable.

Rev 3+ are 245bhp stock.

So 190bhp/tonne. I'd imagine that should be more like 15 seconds to 100.

[TartanPaint]

My Sonic Shadow Mk2 was a peach. It was bought for pocketmoney as a plaything, not the only car in the stable. I had absolutely the most fun I have ever had in it! I recall 2 days open pit lane at Anglesey Coastal, in the pouring rain, with an extremely under-subscribed trackday crowd. The major contingent were the GT-R owners club who ran out of petrol every 10 laps and spent most of their time off to find more, or in the clubhouse drinking tea. So even the folks who did show up weren't on track much. I could do 10 laps at a time without catching anyone or being caught. Heaven!

So, a wet deserted open-pitlane circuit for 2 full days. An MR2 of around 2x shed money, and not a single care given if it ended up in the wall. Oh, the best bit was the tyres... healthy Dunlop Sports on the front, and cheap worn-out ditchfinders on the rear. To say it was oversteery is a bit of an understatement. It turned in nicely followed by armfulls of oppo. Every. Single. Corner.

It's the weekend of my life where I learned to go sideways consistently (only one spin in 2 days), and I will never, ever forget the fun!

Sold the car to go travelling, but would have it back in an instant. It got a Janspeed and the paint sorted and a smaller steering wheel, and a good service, but all that was optional. It never actually needed anything. Bombproof, comfortable, good looking, cheap as chips, Mid-Rear layout...

Top Shed, Shed. Well done!

[J4CKO]

kambites said:

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

220bhp and 1300kg is only about 170bhp/tonne. 17 seconds to 100 sounds believable.

Thought they would be a bit lighter than that, also, I suspect a lot will have had a remap and other stuff so will be 250 - 280 bhp.

Only been in one that a mate at work owned (turbo), it didn't feel all that fast and that was proven when he didn't manage to pull away from my 8 valve MK2 Golf GTI, I think it must have been broken as a N/A MR2 should easily pull away from an 8 valve Golf with 112 bhp.

[tezzer]

I'd rather have last week's shed, oh hang on I HAVE last week's shed. Made itself useful today, as being an auto I can drive it after my shoulder operation on Monday, a manual would have been impossible.

[SonicShadow]

J4CKO said:

Thought they would be a bit lighter than that, also, I suspect a lot will have had a remap and other stuff so will be 250 - 280 bhp.

Only been in one that a mate at work owned (turbo), it didn't feel all that fast and that was proven when he didn't manage to pull away from my 8 valve MK2 Golf GTI, I think it must have been broken as a N/A MR2 should easily pull away from an 8 valve Golf with 112 bhp.

Weight varies a little depending on spec and roof configuration - a T-Top weighs more than a hard top. The range is somewhere between 1200 and 1300KG.

[dukebox9reg]

J4CKO said:

kambites said:

J4CKO said:

I just looked about the turbo models performance, the only figure I can find is 0-100 mph in 16.7 seconds, that doesn't really seem all that quick these days, thought they would be quicker than that or are most of them generally fiddled with ?

220bhp and 1300kg is only about 170bhp/tonne. 17 seconds to 100 sounds believable.

Thought they would be a bit lighter than that, also, I suspect a lot will have had a remap and other stuff so will be 250 - 280 bhp.

Only been in one that a mate at work owned (turbo), it didn't feel all that fast and that was proven when he didn't manage to pull away from my 8 valve MK2 Golf GTI, I think it must have been broken as a N/A MR2 should easily pull away from an 8 valve Golf with 112 bhp.

Cant just remap these like standard cars. Its more of the piggy back route. Mates big turbo one with a berk exhaust and a screamer pipe was loud but I didnt really rate it.

I'm 31 and growing up this was one car I loved (that I knew would one day be affordable) and was one of my favourite cars in the early GT game series. Was quite disappointed by my friends Rev 3 though.

[PHMatt]

They're not Rev 5 wheels, looks more like a rev 4 to me..

[gavsdavs]

Its not the rust you can see, its whats behind it - which is usually worse.
N/A is a good learning platform as it won't try and put you backwards into a wall.
Turbos can be properly fast.
They're all deteriorating due to age - seals, gaitors, brakes (handbrake cables), hose from hell.
The n/a engine is pretty bulletproof.

If you are after one, buy on shell condition not age.

[10b0b]

Previously owned an import Rev3 Turbo GT. One car i wish i had never sold

A very understated car in my opinion, they drop in at less than 1300kg with the t-bars being a bit heavier than a tin top, but quite simply a rapid car off the blocks. That saud with lids off on a summer eveing with the 3S buzzing away behind your ears, theyre a lovelly thing.

Handling takes a bit of getting used to. You will get die hard enthusiasts exclaiming thats its the same configuration as an F1 car because its mid-rear (lol) but really the suspension is not that sophisticated. When you understand the dynamics of the car theyre a joy to drive.

As mentioned in the ad theyre a good cruiser, generally comfortable and the boot and 'frunk' have quite a respectable load space. Me and the missus could easily have 2 weeks zapping across europe

Front end gets light at speed as the nose lifts due to the radiator arrangement, and the wipers (as mentioned) are rubbish lol. The air pressure over around 60mph just tends to lift them off the screen

Nice shed, but a post turbo owner would feel lacking.

[Mr2Mike]

J4CKO said:

Sounds more like it to feel as quick as the reputation, on a par with a Fiat Coupe Turbo which isn't a million miles away in weight and power, suppose that figure might be for the earlier ones, they gained a fair few bhp over the revisions I believe.

My 20VT Coupe felt quicker than my Rev2 MR2 Turbo in the mid range and definitely at the top end where the Toyota was really gasping for breath. The MR2 has amazing traction though, you could really launch it hard.

[PJZ7]

Used to love the MK2 MR2 and nearly bought one before i bought my e36 318iS. I have an attraction to the MK1 MX-5 now though, would this be a suitable alternative considering mx5 prices are going past what you should be spending on a second car for spanner activities, weekend hooning and general shedness?

[soad]

A mini-Ferrari ?

"Grey Japanese second-hand imports may not pass UK emissions tests. (Turbos are all grey imports)."
http://classics.honestjohn.co.uk/reviews/toyota/mr...

Is that a myth?

[TheJimi]

Topical, since I'm going to view and drive a Rev 3 Turbo this afternoon

[J4CKO]

Mr2Mike said:

J4CKO said:

Sounds more like it to feel as quick as the reputation, on a par with a Fiat Coupe Turbo which isn't a million miles away in weight and power, suppose that figure might be for the earlier ones, they gained a fair few bhp over the revisions I believe.

My 20VT Coupe felt quicker than my Rev2 MR2 Turbo in the mid range and definitely at the top end where the Toyota was really gasping for breath. The MR2 has amazing traction though, you could really launch it hard.

5.5 to sixty for the MR2, Fiat was 6 ish, but, liek you say, that will be down to drive layout as much as anything, I had a Fiat Coupe turbo and traction could sometimes be an issue, but it was better than a 220 bhp old school turbo FWD had any right to be in that respect, think it had some kind of LSD arrangement that helped, Viscodrive was it ?