MR2 Turbo a step down?
MR2 Turbo a step down?
Author
Discussion

mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Saturday 1st October 2011
quotequote all
I am buying a house and dont use my current car enough to warrant keeping it so thinking of selling up and buying a less costly toy.

MX5 came to mind, but they are too slow compared to the m unless I chuck money at it which defeats the point of it in the first place.

then the obvious choice of an e36 2.8 was on the cards but then I remembered the MR2's. Quick out of the box and cheap.

From a bit of quick research mk2 rev3 seems to be a good option. however will i feel its underpowered and somewhat disappointed with the move to the toyota?

Cheers

wackojacko

8,581 posts

219 months

Saturday 1st October 2011
quotequote all
mractive said:
I am buying a house and dont use my current car enough to warrant keeping it so thinking of selling up and buying a less costly toy.

MX5 came to mind, but they are too slow compared to the m unless I chuck money at it which defeats the point of it in the first place.

then the obvious choice of an e36 2.8 was on the cards but then I remembered the MR2's. Quick out of the box and cheap.

From a bit of quick research mk2 rev3 seems to be a good option. however will i feel its underpowered and somewhat disappointed with the move to the toyota?

Cheers
Funny you mention this, I just bought a n/a Rev2 track car, you have to ring it's neck but it does shift aswell as being great to drive.
A Turbo will be broadly similar but with a third more power.

Melvin Udall

73,668 posts

284 months

Saturday 1st October 2011
quotequote all
Underpowered? Well, of you get the NA, maybe. The turbo is far from underpowered. 0-60 in about 5.2, and on to 160+. 1/4 mile in about 13.5. Hardly an underpowered car.

The NA is about the same as an MX5, probably a touch quicker.

mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Saturday 1st October 2011
quotequote all
am i right in thinking i shouldnt be looking at any turbos below rev3?

Melvin Udall

73,668 posts

284 months

Saturday 1st October 2011
quotequote all
mractive said:
am i right in thinking i shouldnt be looking at any turbos below rev3?
Well, you can, but the rev 3's + are the ones with the upgraded suspension, brakes, etc, as well as the more powerful engines.

Marf

22,907 posts

270 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
Yep they're hardly slow, mine put out 285hp with just a a decat, exhaust and induction kit. smile


swiftpete

1,894 posts

222 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
What do you have at the moment?

mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
bmw z3m with handling as well as brake upgrades. It's very capable especially with sticky tyres.

I would prefer to keep whatever i buy as reliable as possible so not interested in turboing something up to the limit so it has to be quick as possible standard.

Perhaps a striped 328 will be relatively comparable...

Melvin Udall

73,668 posts

284 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
A rev 3 is a 15 year old car. Stillness a low 5's to 60, and plenty of oomph in gear for a 2.0, even stock. 245 BHP/240ftlb is notto be sniffed at. Go and test drive one. You could strip the MR2 down as well, you know.

Marf

22,907 posts

270 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
mractive said:
Perhaps a striped 328 will be relatively comparable...
Not without some engine work, what are they 192bhp standard?

mikey P 500

1,243 posts

216 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
OP mr2 turbo’s are a very cheap car for their performance almost nothing as cheap let alone cheaper can compared to the straight line performance.
You state you hardly every use your current car so it can’t be costing you much in running costs just sitting there, and it will not be worth a lot these days so you might as well keep if you want to own a similar performance car without spending more.
If you want a cheaper to run car it will have less straight line performance, that said you can still have a fun car that costs less (ie MX5) but it will feel underpowered in a straight line relative to a mr2 turbo no getting away from that.

Herman Toothrot

6,702 posts

227 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
mractive said:
bmw z3m with handling as well as brake upgrades. It's very capable especially with sticky tyres.

I would prefer to keep whatever i buy as reliable as possible so not interested in turboing something up to the limit so it has to be quick as possible standard.

Perhaps a striped 328 will be relatively comparable...
A normally aspirated rev3 is comparable to a 328i, a turbo wil be a lot faster.

Melvin Udall

73,668 posts

284 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
There is an MR2 championship that runs NA cars, (or used to before it went mantal). They are stripped, and race prepped. They have good pace. Should be footage on YouTube for you to have a look at.

jt racing

561 posts

203 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
They are a great car, especially the turbo, but the na isn't to be sniffed at either.
What I mean by that they are pretty heavy to start with, so even a stripped na would be handy...
Now a stripped turbo... Well a different animal altogether!

mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Sunday 2nd October 2011
quotequote all
thanks, well its still worth circa 8-10k so a bit of difference to the mr2 costs and i presumed i wouldn't be going through tyres etc as much as i do. iv had this dillema before and kept the z3m so maybe il just end up doing that?

chris7676

2,685 posts

249 months

Monday 3rd October 2011
quotequote all
Step down FROM WHAT ?
Great car, but not sure if the turbo is ideal for track work (heat soak, etc), at least start looking at Rev-3 or higher.

832ark

1,247 posts

185 months

Monday 3rd October 2011
quotequote all
An MR2 Turbo with a few mods is probably similar 0-100 as a 355 so its hardly going to be slow but I guess its all relative, if you're coming from a 600BHP Skyline then its going to feel slightly lethargic!

Snowboy

8,028 posts

180 months

Monday 3rd October 2011
quotequote all
Budget and Mileage?

You can get an S2000 for 4k.
It's a bit of a punt on the reliability and running costs though – but for that money most cars are.
Although it might be too similar to the Z4, so you'll keep comparing the two.

mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Monday 3rd October 2011
quotequote all
chris7676 said:
Step down FROM WHAT ?
Great car, but not sure if the turbo is ideal for track work (heat soak, etc), at least start looking at Rev-3 or higher.
Sorry you must of missed it I currently own a Bmw Z3m. its basically a z3 with an m3 engine in it. have 3 way adjustable coilovers, uprated brakes and sticky tyres.

I was after something cheaper to run and if it gives up I can get out and buy a new one. like a golf VR6 or a sorted gti but RWD. 328 is the obvious choice but i was after something a little different.




mractive

Original Poster:

58 posts

210 months

Monday 3rd October 2011
quotequote all
chris7676 said:
Step down FROM WHAT ?
Great car, but not sure if the turbo is ideal for track work (heat soak, etc), at least start looking at Rev-3 or higher.
Sorry you must of missed it I currently own a Bmw Z3m. its basically a z3 with an m3 engine in it. have 3 way adjustable coilovers, uprated brakes and sticky tyres.

I was after something cheaper to run and if it gives up I can get out and buy a new one. like a golf VR6 or a sorted gti but RWD. 328 is the obvious choice but i was after something a little different.