MR2 mk2 NA - any good?
Discussion
Out of casual interest, I'm idly contemplating (aka exam procrastination) picking up a cheap MR2 or something similar as a toy sometime in the next year or so (finish uni end of the year), Theres plenty of Mk2 NA's around from $3k NZ (1100 pounds) or even less which is quite tempting - How good are they? I know most people prefer the turbos but they're more like $10k which is getting out of 'cheap toy' territory (and for that money I might swing towards an S14 200SX instead). Also Mk1's often seem to be more expensive than Mk2 NA's, despite the extra 250ish kg I think I'd probably prefer to pay less for a newer, quicker car.
Having a look at the stats the NA's vary between 160-200 bhp depending on age/spec, with 1250kg I presume this should still give reasonable performance and decent fuel economy too? Not that thirst is that important in a toy but less fuel used = more driving time per $.
Just looking for some real-world experiences of performance, handling, usability etc really - any opinions?
P.S. practicality isn't a huge concern as with any coupe I think I'd have to keep the Legacy as a useful car to go with it anyway
Having a look at the stats the NA's vary between 160-200 bhp depending on age/spec, with 1250kg I presume this should still give reasonable performance and decent fuel economy too? Not that thirst is that important in a toy but less fuel used = more driving time per $.
Just looking for some real-world experiences of performance, handling, usability etc really - any opinions?
P.S. practicality isn't a huge concern as with any coupe I think I'd have to keep the Legacy as a useful car to go with it anyway
Edited by GravelBen on Saturday 16th June 23:55
I had an N/A before I had the turbo. It was a rev 2. It was a good car. Identical in every way to the Turbo, IMHO, except for the power. The NA was about 154 bhp, (but to be honest it felt like more), and only really lost out to the tubbies on the straights. On a tight road the Turbo would not be able to utilize the extra power.
If it was a choice between the N/A and a 200 sx, then I would go for the 200. It's a faster car on the straight, and although it doesn't handle as well in the corners, (by handle i mean it doesn't have as good turn in, and stability in the corner), it is a hoot to drive, and is very driftable. It is comfy, and has all the toys. Tunable, should you feel the urge, whereas the MR2 isn't really.
So, MR2 N/A is a very good car, on a par with an MX5 in my mind. Slightly faster, and more composed in corners. However the 200 SX gives you more scope for future mods, and is a fantastic car in itself. Go for the 200
If it was a choice between the N/A and a 200 sx, then I would go for the 200. It's a faster car on the straight, and although it doesn't handle as well in the corners, (by handle i mean it doesn't have as good turn in, and stability in the corner), it is a hoot to drive, and is very driftable. It is comfy, and has all the toys. Tunable, should you feel the urge, whereas the MR2 isn't really.
So, MR2 N/A is a very good car, on a par with an MX5 in my mind. Slightly faster, and more composed in corners. However the 200 SX gives you more scope for future mods, and is a fantastic car in itself. Go for the 200
Thanks - the MR2 NA is still far cheaper than even an NA S14 which are similarly priced to a good MR2 turbo, (and MR2 NA is also about half the price of a cheap MX5), which is why I was looking at them.
If I upped the budget to $10-15k NZ it would bring in a number of options - MR2T/ S14/ STi-RA/ 944/ nice MX5 are all around that price range - but I like the idea of having much less money tied up in a toy so I wouldn't feel bad about thrashing it.
What sort of fuel economy did yours give? (and how did that compare to the turbo)
If I upped the budget to $10-15k NZ it would bring in a number of options - MR2T/ S14/ STi-RA/ 944/ nice MX5 are all around that price range - but I like the idea of having much less money tied up in a toy so I wouldn't feel bad about thrashing it.
What sort of fuel economy did yours give? (and how did that compare to the turbo)
Edited by GravelBen on Saturday 16th June 23:57
The good thing about the turbo was that you could quite happily drive around normally, without the turbo ever spooling up to any degree, so it had great mileage, (about 25 mpg, maybe more on a long trip). The N/A was a bit better iirc. If I was you, go and test them out, take them for a drive and see which you like. Just remember that the MR2 is mid engined, so feels different to the others. Get used to it, and it's an absolute stonker around corners. You can just plant your foot to the floor and it will stick like glue! I'm sure you won't be dissappointed. Also remember that the Mr2 has a cracking boot. Far bigger than you'd expect. Take one for a spin, and see what you think. I would certainly have one over an MX5.
My wife has had her MR2 for two years now. She absolutely loves it and I have to say I like it, too. It's the 1995 N/A, which I believe had the max 174 bhp new. It doesn't have the low-down torque of my GTO turbo but, give it some revs and it's speedy enough. Not too expensive to insure, excellent fuel economy; 30 mpg average and 38 mpg on a good run. We always use it for the Booze cruise to France because of its boot.
Fingers crossed, very reliable, too.
Fingers crossed, very reliable, too.
I had a 1990 G-Limited that I had de-resricted and loved it, It was lowered on 17s and still out cornered most of the cars i came up against. The only problems I had with it in 2yrs was a leaking roof (big surprise) and problems with the wheels studs which snapped when taking off a wheel (due to them being put on with no lube) I am on the lookout for a 2nd car and i think i'm going to get another MR2. My mates got a 1995 GTI and my parents had a 1998 GTI they both loved them too.
Before the last 2 cars (Eunos turbo 210bhp & MR2 Turbo 260bhp) I had a rev2 n/a with decat, coilovers, cold air induction. It was a good car I liked it alot, but having sampled the turbo I'd not go back to one. At the time it didn't seem too slow but that was about 5 years ago before the current rash of shopping hatchbacks with far more power. The last 2 weeks i've been driving the Eunos with a boost leak only making 5 psi so running about 170bhp so 10bhp more power and 300kg less weight than the MR2 n/a and I find it dreadfully slow. The n/a and turbo MR2s handled very differently as well, the turbos have LSD's and n/a's don't so the n/as don't have the traction or go sideways like the turbos, they just spin the inner wheel (except last of the line 1998? cars that also got LSD so I've heard).
As a cheap no frills commuting car a n/a MR2 would be ok, I'd go for a tin top, that way it looks better, won't leak and weighs less. What are the prices like for 1994 onward n/a MR2's as once rolling the 173bhp engined cars are noticably faster than the 158bhp cars, that oddly can hit 60mph a split second faster due to torque curve.
p.s. Eunos is a far better handling car overall, hence i ditched the mr2's for one.
As a cheap no frills commuting car a n/a MR2 would be ok, I'd go for a tin top, that way it looks better, won't leak and weighs less. What are the prices like for 1994 onward n/a MR2's as once rolling the 173bhp engined cars are noticably faster than the 158bhp cars, that oddly can hit 60mph a split second faster due to torque curve.
p.s. Eunos is a far better handling car overall, hence i ditched the mr2's for one.
Thanks for input guys, sounds like they're pretty good for what they are. For boot size its never going to compare to the Legacy but its good to know you can still fit a bit of stuff in it. I'd be looking for a hard-top rather than a T-bar I'm pretty sure.
re: prices, the only ones which seem to have a significantly higher price are the 98/99 cars and tidy turbos, I've been finding a few reasonable turbos overlapping in price with the higher end of NA cars, most of the cheaper turbos seem to have been modified without any sense of taste but theres still a chance of finding a good one.
Prices range from $2k needing significant work - $3k ok condition but high Km's - $5k nice tidy NA or rough turbo - $7k very nice later NA or reasonable turbo - $10k lots of decent turbos - $15k highest I've seen, a mint '99 Turbo with a few tweaks and low Km's.
To compare:
So you can see why the MR2 looks a bit of a bargain at the moment. I'd quite like to get some experience in a mid-engined car, good training for potential ownership of Lotus/Porsche or something along those lines later in life. I'm no stranger to playing round with weight transfer & dynamics of cars but mostly in AWDs (especially on gravel) so I'm thinking an MR will require a bit more sensitivity.
re: prices, the only ones which seem to have a significantly higher price are the 98/99 cars and tidy turbos, I've been finding a few reasonable turbos overlapping in price with the higher end of NA cars, most of the cheaper turbos seem to have been modified without any sense of taste but theres still a chance of finding a good one.
Prices range from $2k needing significant work - $3k ok condition but high Km's - $5k nice tidy NA or rough turbo - $7k very nice later NA or reasonable turbo - $10k lots of decent turbos - $15k highest I've seen, a mint '99 Turbo with a few tweaks and low Km's.
To compare:
- MX5 maybe $7-8k rough, $10k+ for a good one
- 200SX S14 $8-12k Na, $10-15k turbo, $20k S15
- STi-RA V-ltd $12-16k
- 944 $15-20k S2, $18-25k turbo
So you can see why the MR2 looks a bit of a bargain at the moment. I'd quite like to get some experience in a mid-engined car, good training for potential ownership of Lotus/Porsche or something along those lines later in life. I'm no stranger to playing round with weight transfer & dynamics of cars but mostly in AWDs (especially on gravel) so I'm thinking an MR will require a bit more sensitivity.
Hmmm... ...After all my good ideas about keeping the Legacy and buying an MR2 or something as a toy to go with it, I'm getting very tempted by this:
CLICKY
A very tidy '96 STi-RA V-ltd, 80k Km for $14k - 280 bhp, 64R:36F DCCD, close-ratio box etc, all the good bits
(actually almost identical to the one I came very very close to buying a year and a half ago when I took the 'sensible' option and got the Legacy instead). It has the advantage of being practical enough to replace the Legacy whereas a coupe would have to be a 2nd car to go with it.
Decisions, decisions...though I'll probably still try and make myself wait until I start work in November before doing anything about it.
CLICKY
A very tidy '96 STi-RA V-ltd, 80k Km for $14k - 280 bhp, 64R:36F DCCD, close-ratio box etc, all the good bits
(actually almost identical to the one I came very very close to buying a year and a half ago when I took the 'sensible' option and got the Legacy instead). It has the advantage of being practical enough to replace the Legacy whereas a coupe would have to be a 2nd car to go with it.Decisions, decisions...though I'll probably still try and make myself wait until I start work in November before doing anything about it.
Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 19th June 07:22
Andy Mac said:
You might find the MR2 a little more rewarding though! 
On some roads I suspect you may be right. On other roads though I think it would well and truly piss on an MR2 for fun-factor though. It all depends really, I'm a long way from making up my mind.Got some insurance quotes and did some rough calculations, [Legacy + MR2] and [STi] work out pretty similar for cost - insuring the STi is cheaper than the other 2 together, then you have costs of Reg, WOF etc (tax, MOT to you I think) for a second car, and balancing it out the other way is the drinking habit of the STi.
I'll let you all know how things turn out when I get round to actually doing something.
Inspect any potential purchase VERY VERY carefully!
I spent about 12months looking for a good MR2 Turbo and never actually found one (I got a MK1 Supercharged instead). The most common generations are getting on in years.
Pay attention to the service history in particular anything that involved messing with the coolant system. They are NOT as simple as just draining and refilling. The car has to be on a slope and there is a set procedure to follow to ensure that there are no airlocks in the system.
Most red ones have had a respray done...early ones suffer horribly with fading red paint. Obviously a respray is fine if it was just to tidy the car up but obviously look for accident damage!
I would also only look to buy a completely standard model, as I mentioned they are getting on in years and a potentially dodgy mod could have been done at some point but lost in the ether.
I spent about 12months looking for a good MR2 Turbo and never actually found one (I got a MK1 Supercharged instead). The most common generations are getting on in years.
Pay attention to the service history in particular anything that involved messing with the coolant system. They are NOT as simple as just draining and refilling. The car has to be on a slope and there is a set procedure to follow to ensure that there are no airlocks in the system.
Most red ones have had a respray done...early ones suffer horribly with fading red paint. Obviously a respray is fine if it was just to tidy the car up but obviously look for accident damage!
I would also only look to buy a completely standard model, as I mentioned they are getting on in years and a potentially dodgy mod could have been done at some point but lost in the ether.
Andy Mac said:
cheesesliceking said:
If u r after a rev one then be careful to get one with the 3S-GE not the 3S-FE engine. the FE was Toyota's "economy" engine.. it sucks. has about 120bhp.
...and is the only one with an auto box afaik...cheesesliceking said:
Andy Mac said:
cheesesliceking said:
If u r after a rev one then be careful to get one with the 3S-GE not the 3S-FE engine. the FE was Toyota's "economy" engine.. it sucks. has about 120bhp.
...and is the only one with an auto box afaik...Spent a while today going for a blat along some backroads in a mates AW11 - its a bit tired in some ways (216,000 km) but still good fun, I found it a very enjoyable car to drive. Still haven't found an SW20 to drive yet, but they're sounding pretty good so far.
Would it be a good idea going for a rev1 as it would be mainly just a fun car (I'd still keep the Legacy for practicality) - some people seem to think they're impossible to drive without going backwards off every corner, while others seem to love the better agility and higher outright cornering limits, and complain about the understeer of the rev 2 and 3. Hypothetical situation, $3k for a rev1 or $5k for a rev2/3, would the extra $2k be worth it for the extra power (if rev3 I think, iirv rev1&2 are both same power) and possibly more resolved issues, or would it be better to take the less powerful but more agile (maybe more entertaining) car, keeping $2k spare for fixing any age-related issues?
There also seem to be a good few more MX5's selling cheaper than last time I checked too, starting from around $5k with generally less km's than most of the MR2's I see. I guess they may be cheaper as its winter here. No doubt the market will change again by the time I get round to doing anything, so we'll see how things go.
Would it be a good idea going for a rev1 as it would be mainly just a fun car (I'd still keep the Legacy for practicality) - some people seem to think they're impossible to drive without going backwards off every corner, while others seem to love the better agility and higher outright cornering limits, and complain about the understeer of the rev 2 and 3. Hypothetical situation, $3k for a rev1 or $5k for a rev2/3, would the extra $2k be worth it for the extra power (if rev3 I think, iirv rev1&2 are both same power) and possibly more resolved issues, or would it be better to take the less powerful but more agile (maybe more entertaining) car, keeping $2k spare for fixing any age-related issues?
There also seem to be a good few more MX5's selling cheaper than last time I checked too, starting from around $5k with generally less km's than most of the MR2's I see. I guess they may be cheaper as its winter here. No doubt the market will change again by the time I get round to doing anything, so we'll see how things go.
Edited by GravelBen on Saturday 23 June 15:29
The rev 1 engine actually has it's weight a bit more biased towards the rear of the car. Journo's reported hedge trips, etc, at the time, but they are more of a 'purists' car. They handle very well indeed, but as with any mid engined car, if you spin out you'll be in a hedge. The suspension was modified when the rev 2 came out, as well as the brakes. Personally I'd go rev 2, or rev 3, and most niggles had been removed.
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff