Nissan 200sx V Celica GT4 V ???
Discussion
A 'what car?' in disguise here. Will be in the market for a new car in the next month or two, looking to spend around £3-5K. Being 21 insurance is still a factor and whilst I'd love something around the 300bhp mark in terms of power, the less it costs to run the better.
The two main cars I've been considering are a Celica GT4 and a Nissan 200sx.
The Celica appeals to me as a pretty pedigree car which would probably be less of a handful to drive quickly, also Toyota reliability. Downside is fuel consumption and that quite a lot of examples for sale can be a bit leggy.
The Nissan appeals to me as the better looking of the two (or has the potential to) cars as well as being better on fuel and would probably the easier to live with on a long drive. I love the idea of getting into a RWD car but would be a bit cautious of spinning my pride and joy within a week of owning it as you often hear the 'wet roundabout' comments.
Can anyone offer any insight into the two cars or suggest any alternatives? MR2 tubby is a no-go as insurance would most likely be through the roof, ideally looking for a rear or all wheel drive coupe of some sort.
Cheers.
The two main cars I've been considering are a Celica GT4 and a Nissan 200sx.
The Celica appeals to me as a pretty pedigree car which would probably be less of a handful to drive quickly, also Toyota reliability. Downside is fuel consumption and that quite a lot of examples for sale can be a bit leggy.
The Nissan appeals to me as the better looking of the two (or has the potential to) cars as well as being better on fuel and would probably the easier to live with on a long drive. I love the idea of getting into a RWD car but would be a bit cautious of spinning my pride and joy within a week of owning it as you often hear the 'wet roundabout' comments.
Can anyone offer any insight into the two cars or suggest any alternatives? MR2 tubby is a no-go as insurance would most likely be through the roof, ideally looking for a rear or all wheel drive coupe of some sort.
Cheers.
Edited by Sam1990 on Thursday 27th October 13:49
Edited by Sam1990 on Thursday 27th October 13:50
Im 22 and have looked at both of these cars, however ive always found the Celica GT4 and MR2 Turbo to be really cheap on insurance when compared to similar cars.
I got a quote last week on a 94' GT4 WRC of £800 fc through a comparison website, ive been driving since I was 17 and have 4 years NCB. I then tried a 240SX and it came out at around £1500, considering ive had quotes on WRXs of £1100 it makes no sense!
I think the issue with insurance on 200sxs is that they are used for drifting, and the insurers know that!
In terms of reliability I think they are both strong cars, although id be wary of high mileage examples.
Im currently driving a 99 Celica SR with 111000 on the clock and it drives superbly, and also passed its MOT two weeks ago with no advisories! So they are well made cars, and the 3S-GTE in the GT/GT4 is pretty much bulletproof.
Hope that helps mate!
Al
I got a quote last week on a 94' GT4 WRC of £800 fc through a comparison website, ive been driving since I was 17 and have 4 years NCB. I then tried a 240SX and it came out at around £1500, considering ive had quotes on WRXs of £1100 it makes no sense!
I think the issue with insurance on 200sxs is that they are used for drifting, and the insurers know that!
In terms of reliability I think they are both strong cars, although id be wary of high mileage examples.
Im currently driving a 99 Celica SR with 111000 on the clock and it drives superbly, and also passed its MOT two weeks ago with no advisories! So they are well made cars, and the 3S-GTE in the GT/GT4 is pretty much bulletproof.
Hope that helps mate!
Al
Thanks for the info, MR2 tubby has always been the dream but after hearing about insurance in a lot of reviews I'd never even bothered to get a quote to save the disappointment of seeing a stupid price. Part of me also leans towards a Mitsubishi GTO but I don't think I'd have deep enough pockets to keep one on the road.
Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Sam1990 said:
Thanks for the info, MR2 tubby has always been the dream but after hearing about insurance in a lot of reviews I'd never even bothered to get a quote to save the disappointment of seeing a stupid price. Part of me also leans towards a Mitsubishi GTO but I don't think I'd have deep enough pockets to keep one on the road.
Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Now your talking, GTO TT is the way to go. Owned one for 7 years and never been any trouble at all. 4wd great for sticking to the black stuff and gets you through the snow.Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Sam1990 said:
Thanks for the info, MR2 tubby has always been the dream but after hearing about insurance in a lot of reviews I'd never even bothered to get a quote to save the disappointment of seeing a stupid price. Part of me also leans towards a Mitsubishi GTO but I don't think I'd have deep enough pockets to keep one on the road.
Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
I would be willing to bet a MR2 turbo would be cheaper to insure than both.Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Sam1990 said:
A 'what car?' in disguise here. Will be in the market for a new car in the next month or two, looking to spend around £3-5K. Being 21 insurance is still a factor and whilst I'd love something around the 300bhp mark in terms of power, the less it costs to run the better.
The two main cars I've been considering are a Celica GT4 and a Nissan 200sx.
The Celica appeals to me as a pretty pedigree car which would probably be less of a handful to drive quickly, also Toyota reliability. Downside is fuel consumption and that quite a lot of examples for sale can be a bit leggy.
The Nissan appeals to me as the better looking of the two (or has the potential to) cars as well as being better on fuel and would probably the easier to live with on a long drive. I love the idea of getting into a RWD car but would be a bit cautious of spinning my pride and joy within a week of owning it as you often hear the 'wet roundabout' comments.
Can anyone offer any insight into the two cars or suggest any alternatives? MR2 tubby is a no-go as insurance would most likely be through the roof, ideally looking for a rear or all wheel drive coupe of some sort.
Cheers.
What Celica and what 200SX?The two main cars I've been considering are a Celica GT4 and a Nissan 200sx.
The Celica appeals to me as a pretty pedigree car which would probably be less of a handful to drive quickly, also Toyota reliability. Downside is fuel consumption and that quite a lot of examples for sale can be a bit leggy.
The Nissan appeals to me as the better looking of the two (or has the potential to) cars as well as being better on fuel and would probably the easier to live with on a long drive. I love the idea of getting into a RWD car but would be a bit cautious of spinning my pride and joy within a week of owning it as you often hear the 'wet roundabout' comments.
Can anyone offer any insight into the two cars or suggest any alternatives? MR2 tubby is a no-go as insurance would most likely be through the roof, ideally looking for a rear or all wheel drive coupe of some sort.
Cheers.
Edited by Sam1990 on Thursday 27th October 13:49
Edited by Sam1990 on Thursday 27th October 13:50
Going to guess you are meaning st205 GT-Four and an S14 200SX?
Personally I think the Celica looks a lot nicer than the s14, although the Nissan isn't bad. The Toyota does have a slightly nicer interior and I believe was a more pricey car originally.
Stock the Celica is probably the quicker car and despite it's weight probably more focused too. The s14 is more a GT than a sports car and while people rave about them, in stock trim they aren't as quick as many make out.
The Celica also has the pucker rally pedigree, which personally appeals to me.
The down sides are the Celica, while tunable isn't anywhere near as cheap or easy to get BIG power from as many suggest a turbo car is. I think 280'ish HP is fairly easy, but then fairly heft money after that.
They also weigh more and aren't the sharpest tool in the box compared to something like an STI or Evo.
Watch out for Fig 8's and I think diff mounts. Apart from that they aren't bad reliability wise.
Also there are a lot of JDM ones for sale, these will want superunleaded. While I think most UK ones will run on 95 RON, personally I'd run any high performance turbo car on superunleaded though and will be a must for any tuned one. So factor this in on your fuel costs, e.g.
car doing 25mpg on superunleaded is cost per mile wise similar to a car doing 22-23mpg on 95 RON.
As for the Nissan, well I had an s13 and it was brilliant. But the interior is very much 1990's grey plastic. And while the rwd setup sounds ideal I personally thought they were very twitchy on the limit and hard to powerslide, especially with the laggy turbo motor. I'm sure they can be made a better drift car as they are popular with that scene, but not in stock trim and not on the public roads.
I doubt mpg will be much if any better than the Celica, 1-3mpg at most, but maybe nothing in it.
In terms of use, the GT-Four will be easily deployable all the time. Whereas the 200SX will be more fun when on it, but less usable at other times and more of a handful.
I think you're best bet is to drive both and see.
Oh BTW - since selling the 200SX I've moved onto some V8 powered muscle car. As good as the Nissan was, I wouldn't go back, not at all. The V8 simply walks all over the Nissan in every conceivable way.
Sam1990 said:
Than a GTO and a 200sx? Surely RWD and top whack insurance group would disagree?! I already had a quote for the GT4 which was about a fiver cheaper than my Prelude.
I remember when I bought my MR2 turbo a few years ago the insurance was very good, and hardly anything more than the 2.2vtec prelude I owned before.Run a few quotes, I bet a lot more 200sx's have been crashed.
Also, dont get a GTO...
i've had 2 X MR2 Turbos a highly tuned S14A SX, and 2 X GT4's both ST205s - one was a WRC edition.
To be honest all the above are SO different
Firstly the MR2 is by FAR the cheapest to run, the parts are cheaper than the others and much more easily available, i never found insurance expensive.
Insurance on the SX and GT4 were also not bad to be fair.
the GT4's are shocking on fuel but handle nicely, stock V's stock an MR2 feels much quicker (assuming rev3+)
S14A's are bit bland in factory trim, they don't have much power but there is a tried and tested upgrade route and most run around 300hp and at that point they really shift (standard 200hp models are rare), the engine sounds much nicer than the toyota engine and has more torque on tap. Parts are a little harder to come by as nissan seem truely stumped on these cars and i ended up having to buy a lot of parts from japan (i can assure you they take an age to arrive)
i doubt i'd have another GT4 everything seems pricey for them the stupid super strut suspension is problematic and stupidly expensive to fix and they are much heavier than their subaru/mitsi counterparts and terrible on fuel for their performance.
For me its MR2 or SX - they are both very fun cars, the MR2 is a sports car point to point its a faster car, the SX is a GT it feels better built and great to cruise around in - the steering on the SX is far too light to inspire confidence on back roads.
GT4 is boring by comparison, you'll find it a safe but sedate car to drive and you'll soon meet a subaru or something with circa 280hp and it will annoy you that its faster - not an issue for the MR2/SX (assuming the SX has had the usual mods)
To be honest all the above are SO different
Firstly the MR2 is by FAR the cheapest to run, the parts are cheaper than the others and much more easily available, i never found insurance expensive.
Insurance on the SX and GT4 were also not bad to be fair.
the GT4's are shocking on fuel but handle nicely, stock V's stock an MR2 feels much quicker (assuming rev3+)
S14A's are bit bland in factory trim, they don't have much power but there is a tried and tested upgrade route and most run around 300hp and at that point they really shift (standard 200hp models are rare), the engine sounds much nicer than the toyota engine and has more torque on tap. Parts are a little harder to come by as nissan seem truely stumped on these cars and i ended up having to buy a lot of parts from japan (i can assure you they take an age to arrive)
i doubt i'd have another GT4 everything seems pricey for them the stupid super strut suspension is problematic and stupidly expensive to fix and they are much heavier than their subaru/mitsi counterparts and terrible on fuel for their performance.
For me its MR2 or SX - they are both very fun cars, the MR2 is a sports car point to point its a faster car, the SX is a GT it feels better built and great to cruise around in - the steering on the SX is far too light to inspire confidence on back roads.
GT4 is boring by comparison, you'll find it a safe but sedate car to drive and you'll soon meet a subaru or something with circa 280hp and it will annoy you that its faster - not an issue for the MR2/SX (assuming the SX has had the usual mods)
My Carlos Sainz Celica certainly wasn't quick in a straight line. It didn't half corner though! The diffs did weird things in the snow, so I never really trusted it on the white stuff like a 2WD car, and the wide tyres didn't get much purchase either; I was far happier in the snow in my previous (and first) car, an AX GT.
The cornering of the Sainz was indeed rather staid and sensible. It could be made to play tricks if you barrelled into corners and flicked it in, but even for a 22 year old nutter, I found the opportunies to drive like that few and far between. The 200SX on the other hand was beautifully balanced and RWD only, so more entertaining. I should imagine the MR2 turbo would top the both of them, but sadly I missed out and never actually drove one.
The cornering of the Sainz was indeed rather staid and sensible. It could be made to play tricks if you barrelled into corners and flicked it in, but even for a 22 year old nutter, I found the opportunies to drive like that few and far between. The 200SX on the other hand was beautifully balanced and RWD only, so more entertaining. I should imagine the MR2 turbo would top the both of them, but sadly I missed out and never actually drove one.
Kenny-Mack said:
i've had 2 X MR2 Turbos a highly tuned S14A SX, and 2 X GT4's both ST205s - one was a WRC edition.
To be honest all the above are SO different
Firstly the MR2 is by FAR the cheapest to run, the parts are cheaper than the others and much more easily available, i never found insurance expensive.
Insurance on the SX and GT4 were also not bad to be fair.
the GT4's are shocking on fuel but handle nicely, stock V's stock an MR2 feels much quicker (assuming rev3+)
S14A's are bit bland in factory trim, they don't have much power but there is a tried and tested upgrade route and most run around 300hp and at that point they really shift (standard 200hp models are rare), the engine sounds much nicer than the toyota engine and has more torque on tap. Parts are a little harder to come by as nissan seem truely stumped on these cars and i ended up having to buy a lot of parts from japan (i can assure you they take an age to arrive)
i doubt i'd have another GT4 everything seems pricey for them the stupid super strut suspension is problematic and stupidly expensive to fix and they are much heavier than their subaru/mitsi counterparts and terrible on fuel for their performance.
For me its MR2 or SX - they are both very fun cars, the MR2 is a sports car point to point its a faster car, the SX is a GT it feels better built and great to cruise around in - the steering on the SX is far too light to inspire confidence on back roads.
GT4 is boring by comparison, you'll find it a safe but sedate car to drive and you'll soon meet a subaru or something with circa 280hp and it will annoy you that its faster - not an issue for the MR2/SX (assuming the SX has had the usual mods)
Agree with most of what you say except for the bit about sound! I thought the SR20DET sounded like a sewing machine, but the 3sGTE sounds really nice in the MR2, with the turbo whistling and chuffing behind your head, nicer exhaust note too IMO.To be honest all the above are SO different
Firstly the MR2 is by FAR the cheapest to run, the parts are cheaper than the others and much more easily available, i never found insurance expensive.
Insurance on the SX and GT4 were also not bad to be fair.
the GT4's are shocking on fuel but handle nicely, stock V's stock an MR2 feels much quicker (assuming rev3+)
S14A's are bit bland in factory trim, they don't have much power but there is a tried and tested upgrade route and most run around 300hp and at that point they really shift (standard 200hp models are rare), the engine sounds much nicer than the toyota engine and has more torque on tap. Parts are a little harder to come by as nissan seem truely stumped on these cars and i ended up having to buy a lot of parts from japan (i can assure you they take an age to arrive)
i doubt i'd have another GT4 everything seems pricey for them the stupid super strut suspension is problematic and stupidly expensive to fix and they are much heavier than their subaru/mitsi counterparts and terrible on fuel for their performance.
For me its MR2 or SX - they are both very fun cars, the MR2 is a sports car point to point its a faster car, the SX is a GT it feels better built and great to cruise around in - the steering on the SX is far too light to inspire confidence on back roads.
GT4 is boring by comparison, you'll find it a safe but sedate car to drive and you'll soon meet a subaru or something with circa 280hp and it will annoy you that its faster - not an issue for the MR2/SX (assuming the SX has had the usual mods)
Sam1990 said:
Any other alternatives that may have been missed?
Sure, but it depends what you are after.I sold my 200SX to buy a carb, big cam and finish off some other bits on this:
It's about the same pace as the s13 but makes a better noise and is a lot more fun. Very easy to get more from them these days too if you don't mind tinkering.
I also own this (which if you look about you should be able to buy something similar for £4-5.5k).
It is a LOT faster than the 200SX and sounds way, way better. More practical too and arguably better on fuel.
Up to £5k would allow you to look at these kinds of things too:
Stunning Low mileage 350i (1990/G)
34,000 miles £5,750
PORSCHE 944 TURBO FH 2DR 2+2 (1991/J)
117,000 miles £4,994
Nissan Skyline R33 gts-t (1995)
70,000 miles £3,000
RARE > FULL WIDE BODIED SWB 2 SEATER TWIN TURBO TARGA (1992)
80,000 miles £5,995
Mazda RX-8 231ps With BOSE stereo (2004)
50,121 miles £3,950
Mazda RX7 FD3S 1992 Silver- only £2950 (1992)
61,000 miles £2,950
Lotus Excel SE (1986)
68,000 miles £4,950
GTM Spyder 1.8 VVC 160 (2006)
10,600 miles £6,300
Honda Integra Type R Uk 1998 (1998)
89,000 miles £4,495
1996 FORD MUSTANG GT. (1996)
48,000 miles £5,400
BMW M3 COUPE 3.2 EVOLUTION 6 SPEED MANUAL (1998/S)
71,000 miles £5,350
3.0 V6 24V GTV STUNNING! (1998)
72,600 miles £2,995
Audi S4 2.7V6 Bi-Turbo B5 1999 AMD Tuned 330+BHP (1999)
103,810 miles £3,900
Fiat Coupe 20v turbo (1997)
100,000 miles £2,995
It's worth bearing in mind, with classics, kits and niche cars you might well need to phone around for the best insurance quote, rather than just reply on internet comparison sites.
RobCrezz said:
Agree with most of what you say except for the bit about sound! I thought the SR20DET sounded like a sewing machine, but the 3sGTE sounds really nice in the MR2, with the turbo whistling and chuffing behind your head, nicer exhaust note too IMO.
really? ... i'm surprised, i have always felt the 3S sounded very harsh while the SR20 sounded to smooth and grunty, although to be fair i had a forged engine pushing out 400hp lol ... but been in other SX's and they sounded nice too!Sam1990 said:
Thanks for the info, MR2 tubby has always been the dream but after hearing about insurance in a lot of reviews I'd never even bothered to get a quote to save the disappointment of seeing a stupid price
Insurance on an MR2T should be in line with the quotes you're seeing for the GT4. I pay £550 fully comprehensive for my Revision 3 Turbo with BPU, roughly 40% cheaper than a Subaru or Evo.Edited by Marf on Thursday 27th October 15:21
Kenny-Mack said:
RobCrezz said:
Agree with most of what you say except for the bit about sound! I thought the SR20DET sounded like a sewing machine, but the 3sGTE sounds really nice in the MR2, with the turbo whistling and chuffing behind your head, nicer exhaust note too IMO.
really? ... i'm surprised, i have always felt the 3S sounded very harsh while the SR20 sounded to smooth and grunty, although to be fair i had a forged engine pushing out 400hp lol ... but been in other SX's and they sounded nice too!
Sam1990 said:
Great list there, loads of cars I'd never considered. You've made my choice a lot harder now, will have to do some read ups on a few of those.
In all honesty if you can live with a 2 seater the MR2T is a heck of a car.But it won't suit everyone, it's a M/R setup so will reward finesse and a smooth driving style. It's not a hooligans car and will punish most that treat it as such.
But for this money you do have a lot of choice.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff