talk to me about mk3 MR2's
Discussion
after another member mentioned them in a thread it got me thinking...
had a quick look in the classifieds and didnt realise how cheap they were!
having bought an alfa GT in september, im not sure if i like the way diesels drive, its an awesome car just not sure if its for me.
anyone had any experiance of these, handling? feel? i would be looking to do the occasional trackday too.
im assuming there reliablity is up to usual toyota standards?
if i do go through with this i would be looking to spend about 4k and hopefully get a facelift 03/04
cheers
had a quick look in the classifieds and didnt realise how cheap they were!
having bought an alfa GT in september, im not sure if i like the way diesels drive, its an awesome car just not sure if its for me.
anyone had any experiance of these, handling? feel? i would be looking to do the occasional trackday too.
im assuming there reliablity is up to usual toyota standards?
if i do go through with this i would be looking to spend about 4k and hopefully get a facelift 03/04
cheers
Edited by k15tox on Friday 2nd December 16:31
A nice alternative if the insurers won't touch you on a mk2 Turbo!
I quite like the mk3 model, though it has some serious flaws. It's much, much better than the mk3 MX5, which would seem to be it's main competitor.
The good things about the MR2 mk3 are the chassis and the handling. It feels superb and it handles beautifully, but I suppose this is also where it shows it's weakness; that underpowered engine. The car never feels pushed in the slightest as far as handling is concerned, which is a bit of a shame if you're looking to have loads of fun in it. The interior is nice too, it's a comfortable car to sit in and the quality of the materials is good. The storage space is fairly limited though, a step back over the mk2 IIRC which has a big boot in spite of the mid mounted engine.
I'd stay away from the auto/tiptronic model, it didn't strike me as a great box. The changes felt a bit slow and with the underpowered engine, you really need to work the gears to keep the meagre power on tap flowing. A lot of them have bubbled, corroded alloys as well though a strip and refinish shouldn't cost the world on the little MR2 wheels. If you can do without the speed it'd be a great little car to throw about. Just remember that you won't be doing any MX5 style slides round roundabouts! I came pretty close to buying a mk3 when I bought my MX5 and a friend had one at the time, I quite like the car but it begs for more power.
If you can stretch to it, and you're prepared to buy an older car I'd look for a good mk2 Turbo. It looks fantastic, and you can get a T-bar if you want that 'roof down' experience. Where it really comes to life is with it's fantastic engine, which deliver bag loads of power and pushes the car into that zone of being something very special to drive. With it being mid-engined, you can rule out long difty powerslides (unless you're looking to park in a bush or hedge) so making the most of the accurate handling and excellent road-holding ability provided by having an engine over the back wheels seems like a good idea. You also have to ask yourself when else you'll be getting into a mid engined, turbocharged car any time soon!
I quite like the mk3 model, though it has some serious flaws. It's much, much better than the mk3 MX5, which would seem to be it's main competitor.
The good things about the MR2 mk3 are the chassis and the handling. It feels superb and it handles beautifully, but I suppose this is also where it shows it's weakness; that underpowered engine. The car never feels pushed in the slightest as far as handling is concerned, which is a bit of a shame if you're looking to have loads of fun in it. The interior is nice too, it's a comfortable car to sit in and the quality of the materials is good. The storage space is fairly limited though, a step back over the mk2 IIRC which has a big boot in spite of the mid mounted engine.
I'd stay away from the auto/tiptronic model, it didn't strike me as a great box. The changes felt a bit slow and with the underpowered engine, you really need to work the gears to keep the meagre power on tap flowing. A lot of them have bubbled, corroded alloys as well though a strip and refinish shouldn't cost the world on the little MR2 wheels. If you can do without the speed it'd be a great little car to throw about. Just remember that you won't be doing any MX5 style slides round roundabouts! I came pretty close to buying a mk3 when I bought my MX5 and a friend had one at the time, I quite like the car but it begs for more power.
If you can stretch to it, and you're prepared to buy an older car I'd look for a good mk2 Turbo. It looks fantastic, and you can get a T-bar if you want that 'roof down' experience. Where it really comes to life is with it's fantastic engine, which deliver bag loads of power and pushes the car into that zone of being something very special to drive. With it being mid-engined, you can rule out long difty powerslides (unless you're looking to park in a bush or hedge) so making the most of the accurate handling and excellent road-holding ability provided by having an engine over the back wheels seems like a good idea. You also have to ask yourself when else you'll be getting into a mid engined, turbocharged car any time soon!
The drive/feel is absolutly fantastic. Poor mans Elise.
Really tyre sensitive make sure the one your looking at has 4 decent tyres. Buying a later facelift (post 2003) ensures you avoid the engine issues of the first model. The early engine can ingest the pre cats and this ruins bores/rings. A very knowledgeable member here puts v6's into them and im sure he said the early engines have chocolate cranks.
Also there is no storage space! Not like a boxster with a boot at the front etc. There is a little cubby hole behind the driver and thats it.
Brilliant cars!
Really tyre sensitive make sure the one your looking at has 4 decent tyres. Buying a later facelift (post 2003) ensures you avoid the engine issues of the first model. The early engine can ingest the pre cats and this ruins bores/rings. A very knowledgeable member here puts v6's into them and im sure he said the early engines have chocolate cranks.
Also there is no storage space! Not like a boxster with a boot at the front etc. There is a little cubby hole behind the driver and thats it.
Brilliant cars!
Baryonyx said:
A nice alternative if the insurers won't touch you on a mk2 Turbo!
I quite like the mk3 model, though it has some serious flaws. It's much, much better than the mk3 MX5, which would seem to be it's main competitor.
The good things about the MR2 mk3 are the chassis and the handling. It feels superb and it handles beautifully, but I suppose this is also where it shows it's weakness; that underpowered engine. The car never feels pushed in the slightest as far as handling is concerned, which is a bit of a shame if you're looking to have loads of fun in it. The interior is nice too, it's a comfortable car to sit in and the quality of the materials is good. The storage space is fairly limited though, a step back over the mk2 IIRC which has a big boot in spite of the mid mounted engine.
I'd stay away from the auto/tiptronic model, it didn't strike me as a great box. The changes felt a bit slow and with the underpowered engine, you really need to work the gears to keep the meagre power on tap flowing. A lot of them have bubbled, corroded alloys as well though a strip and refinish shouldn't cost the world on the little MR2 wheels. If you can do without the speed it'd be a great little car to throw about. Just remember that you won't be doing any MX5 style slides round roundabouts! I came pretty close to buying a mk3 when I bought my MX5 and a friend had one at the time, I quite like the car but it begs for more power.
If you can stretch to it, and you're prepared to buy an older car I'd look for a good mk2 Turbo. It looks fantastic, and you can get a T-bar if you want that 'roof down' experience. Where it really comes to life is with it's fantastic engine, which deliver bag loads of power and pushes the car into that zone of being something very special to drive. With it being mid-engined, you can rule out long difty powerslides (unless you're looking to park in a bush or hedge) so making the most of the accurate handling and excellent road-holding ability provided by having an engine over the back wheels seems like a good idea. You also have to ask yourself when else you'll be getting into a mid engined, turbocharged car any time soon!
excellent info, cheers.I quite like the mk3 model, though it has some serious flaws. It's much, much better than the mk3 MX5, which would seem to be it's main competitor.
The good things about the MR2 mk3 are the chassis and the handling. It feels superb and it handles beautifully, but I suppose this is also where it shows it's weakness; that underpowered engine. The car never feels pushed in the slightest as far as handling is concerned, which is a bit of a shame if you're looking to have loads of fun in it. The interior is nice too, it's a comfortable car to sit in and the quality of the materials is good. The storage space is fairly limited though, a step back over the mk2 IIRC which has a big boot in spite of the mid mounted engine.
I'd stay away from the auto/tiptronic model, it didn't strike me as a great box. The changes felt a bit slow and with the underpowered engine, you really need to work the gears to keep the meagre power on tap flowing. A lot of them have bubbled, corroded alloys as well though a strip and refinish shouldn't cost the world on the little MR2 wheels. If you can do without the speed it'd be a great little car to throw about. Just remember that you won't be doing any MX5 style slides round roundabouts! I came pretty close to buying a mk3 when I bought my MX5 and a friend had one at the time, I quite like the car but it begs for more power.
If you can stretch to it, and you're prepared to buy an older car I'd look for a good mk2 Turbo. It looks fantastic, and you can get a T-bar if you want that 'roof down' experience. Where it really comes to life is with it's fantastic engine, which deliver bag loads of power and pushes the car into that zone of being something very special to drive. With it being mid-engined, you can rule out long difty powerslides (unless you're looking to park in a bush or hedge) so making the most of the accurate handling and excellent road-holding ability provided by having an engine over the back wheels seems like a good idea. You also have to ask yourself when else you'll be getting into a mid engined, turbocharged car any time soon!
not really bothered about the older car as id like something newer and a bit more reliable. and there insurance.
im sure they are great cars though. outright speed doesnt really concern me anymore, i have a sportsbike for that.
id just like something which is fun to drive, and a can reliably track a couple of times a year.
Go get yourself over to MR2ROC loads of info on there. The comment about lack of storage space above is true but not totally accurate. Theres also a frunk under the bonnet. Some peeps loose the spare tyre in there for more space but it can affect the handling.
I'm onto my 2nd mk3 MR2 now. Love it, even after comming from a more powerful and new hot hatch! As its been said not the fastest thing but enough power given its weight. They will still do 0-60 in just over 7 seconds.
Main 2 watchouts;
Tyres! maintain the front rear staggerand get the pressures right or it will try to kill you.
Precat/oval bore failure - engines can grenade mostly on older pre 2003 pre facelift cars. MR2ROC will tell you all about it.
I'm onto my 2nd mk3 MR2 now. Love it, even after comming from a more powerful and new hot hatch! As its been said not the fastest thing but enough power given its weight. They will still do 0-60 in just over 7 seconds.
Main 2 watchouts;
Tyres! maintain the front rear staggerand get the pressures right or it will try to kill you.
Precat/oval bore failure - engines can grenade mostly on older pre 2003 pre facelift cars. MR2ROC will tell you all about it.
I bought the wife one a few months ago. A 2001 66k mile black one with a hard top.
We were amazed just how much fun they really are. Think go kart for the road, lovely handling.
Drawbacks are the lack of storage space and outright pace. Its only as quick as a MK1 MR2.
As ours was an early car I binned the precats in favour of a stainless manifold. Changed 2x O2 sensors which are prone to fail.
Also a set of Bosch discs replaced the corroded ones, and a new rear cross member as the old one was pretty corroded in one area, again quite common.
Careful whats said about early car engine problems as there are a few cases of later cars failing.
It has no driver aids, so is pretty raw. It would benefit from a LSD as can slip in poor weather.
Where as my Boxster S would cut power this does nothing, so you need your wits about you on slippy roads as a dab of opposite lock is not an uncommon occurance........great fun.
We were amazed just how much fun they really are. Think go kart for the road, lovely handling.
Drawbacks are the lack of storage space and outright pace. Its only as quick as a MK1 MR2.
As ours was an early car I binned the precats in favour of a stainless manifold. Changed 2x O2 sensors which are prone to fail.
Also a set of Bosch discs replaced the corroded ones, and a new rear cross member as the old one was pretty corroded in one area, again quite common.
Careful whats said about early car engine problems as there are a few cases of later cars failing.
It has no driver aids, so is pretty raw. It would benefit from a LSD as can slip in poor weather.
Where as my Boxster S would cut power this does nothing, so you need your wits about you on slippy roads as a dab of opposite lock is not an uncommon occurance........great fun.
Edited by nottyash on Friday 2nd December 17:18
PH member OlberJ knows a fair bit about these, I enjoyed reading his V6 conversion with F355 exhaust thread. Apparently early engines are crap.
I've never driven one, but have had passenger rides and read a lot, and they seem fantastic value little cars. Watch the twitchy wet weather handling and note the lack of storage.
I've never driven one, but have had passenger rides and read a lot, and they seem fantastic value little cars. Watch the twitchy wet weather handling and note the lack of storage.
k15tox said:
seems from 2000 toyota have gone a bit soft!
I think that was the Project Genesis thing, Toyota trying to make their cars popular to the youth market. They probably thought their previous generation cars were a bit vulgar and decided to move away from that.Mind you, the Japanese economy was very, very strong in the 90's which led to loads of amazing car's being made there. Toyota performed very strongly indeed. The twin turbo Supra could be tuned for incredible power, the Celica was rallying and the MR2 Turbo was providing a supercar experience on the cheap!
I do like the mk3 MR2, just looking at one near me that has been for sale for ages. Looks like a nice one, but I suspect I may have spoiled myself by going in at the top with the turbo model. Where else is there to go then? I could happily live with the lower petrol costs of the Mk3 but I'd miss the excitement it provides. Every manoeuvre feeling like something off the racing track as you balance the throttle to power yourself through it. Even the motorways aren't too tiring as the response in 5th gear is strong. I want to go and drive it now...
Early engines eat catalytic convertors and suffer from bore wear - avoid if you can (unless you know its been modified to cure this).
They handle really well, but are really not fast at all. I remember planting my foot to the floor and hearing lots of noise, but feeling no noticeable change in speed.
Considered an early 2.5 Boxster, too? They are very cheap as most people want the faster versions.
They handle really well, but are really not fast at all. I remember planting my foot to the floor and hearing lots of noise, but feeling no noticeable change in speed.
Considered an early 2.5 Boxster, too? They are very cheap as most people want the faster versions.
Wadeski said:
Early engines eat catalytic convertors and suffer from bore wear - avoid if you can (unless you know its been modified to cure this).
Just to reiterate a point made earlier, the post 2003 engines can also suffer from pre cat failure so something to be aware of. The pre cats can be taken out for a couple of hours labour at a garage so not too much of a worry.N88 said:
Interesting point, can you explain? I had one for over a year and didn't have any trouble!
OP, best advice would be to head across to MR2-ROC, great bunch of people.
With the MX5, you've got that delicate, front engine RWD layout. So your weight balance is pretty much equal and you can easily pitch it into a decent slide, especially if you've got a decent camber helping you out (thinking of some good superelevated roundabouts that I used to love doing in my MX5). OP, best advice would be to head across to MR2-ROC, great bunch of people.
With the MR2, the mid-engine changes things completely. You can still slide quite easily, but it needs to be pushed much harder to break it's traction and get sideways. The MX5 was easily trail-able with it's even weight balance. The MR2 also requires a more delicate touch in the slide, with it's wheel base felt, to me, noticeably shorter though I have not compared specs so I can only comment on how it felt to me.
By all means, you'll be able to get a mk3 MR2 sideways though I wouldn't get into one expecting the drifty fun you can have in an MX5. You'd be better off taking advantage of the weight over the rear wheels and adapting your power inputs to keep the car straight, as this is it's strength. It's extremely accurate and pointable. Not to mention, when you stack it in a mid-engined car they are harder to catch than the MX5...!
That said, my MR2 Turbo is much more responsive than my MX5 was at the start of a skid. If you've made a mistake, the MR2 corrects fairly quickly with smaller steering inputs, whereas my MX5 felt a little slower at that. Mind you, the steering wheel in the MR2 is smaller and angled much better for rapid changes of lock. The MR2 Turbo is not one to drift though. As I mentioned earlier, your cornering has to be smooth and accurate and you need to balance the throttle. You're looking for that point between lifting off and spinning, or spooling the turbo into life and spinning at times! On wide, double lane roundabouts it can be fun to let the back end hang a little bit, though I never throw the weight transfer around in the MR2 like I did with my MX5, or a mk3 MR2. The Turbo is best set when you're keeping traction under control. Scrubbing speed off, getting your nose going the right way and balancing the power until you're clear to get your foot down again.
I find the MR2 very entertaining for that reason, because day to day you can enjoy that fine handling and balance along pretty much any road, whereas my MX5 was at it's best in the night, on empty roads and wet roundabouts. I never cared a great deal for having the roof down!
k15tox said:
Are the engine problems that bad? Or is it mostly internet scaremongering?
Judging by the surprisingly frank admission from the main dealer service manager when my 2001 MK3 began consuming a litre of oil every couple of hundred miles and the fact that I've met 3 others who had the same problem with that engine I'd say yes, they really are that bad.ETA - also had problems with failing O2 sensors and a MAF went during the 12 months of ownership, the car was not a lemon it was on 20K with Full Toyota history when I got it. Scanning mr2roc will show you that these are also fairly common issues.
It also flooded itself in the cabin as the storage bins filled with rainwater thanks to almost inaccessible soft top drains. Another common occurrence apparently.
And just wait until you have to change a sidelight bulb, the whole f
king bumper has to come off...Edited by Babu 01 on Friday 2nd December 18:56
Baryonyx said:
The good things about the MR2 mk3 are the chassis and the handling. It feels superb and it handles beautifully, but I suppose this is also where it shows it's weakness; that underpowered engine. The car never feels pushed in the slightest as far as handling is concerned, which is a bit of a shame if you're looking to have loads of fun in it.
Yes, a great little car and very "Elise-like" in many respects. Just a bit softer than Elise and somehow the styling ended up "dainty" compared with earlier MR2s. I prefer the car over the much more successful MX5 which was targeting exactly the same market.Ozzie Osmond said:
Yes, a great little car and very "Elise-like" in many respects. Just a bit softer than Elise and somehow the styling ended up "dainty" compared with earlier MR2s. I prefer the car over the much more successful MX5 which was targeting exactly the same market.
The Mk3 styling leaves me a little bit cold. It's lost some of that Japanese cool it had, though it's still a very nice looking car. The headlights are a little large, I'd have preferred something a bit smaller, maybe a Mitsubishi Galant style 'bar' light, since pop-ups were not an option. Overall though, it's a good looking car. I think the first ones had a few problems though, maybe they're not quite as disastrous as some would make out as you still see a lot of them around. When my mate got rid of his, he said it had "a problem with the hydraulics". Essentially, it seemed that something was going wrong with the tiptronic box and Toyota wanted £1000 to put it right. He ended up part-exing it with the fault against a Mazda MX5 (his second MX5). He preferred the MR2 though, save for the problem it had.I think the MR2 has always been a bit more of a driver's car though. Maybe it's the mid-engined design that imparts this impression, but I suspect it runs deeper. I had a mk2 MX5 and currently, a mk2 MR2 Turbo. Both cars are the second iterations of their design. The MR2 strikes me as a better car, despite being a 1989 design. I suppose I should really compare it to the mk1 MX5! It's a better drive, the cabin layout is far superior, it just feels like a much better product. Mind you, MR2's do attract a stiffer insurance premium than MX5's, but they offer far more driving pleasure.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff