Rev 2 Vs Rev3 MR2 Turbos...

[andy mac]

Just for anyone who may be interested, I found this while I was on a site, and thought it showed the difference straightline the difference between rev 2 and rev 3...

http://videos.streetfire.net/Player.aspx?fileid=857624CD-A98C-4466-AE5C-4574F64CC521&term=mr2&p=2

Updated link...

>> Edited by andy mac on Thursday 6th October 22:51

[GTS Turbo]

link don't work. i had a bit of one on one with a rev3 in my rev2 and he was pulling away but it was so minimal it would take miles before he got even a car length away and we'd probably be at top speed by then anyway.

rev2 forever

[andy mac]

this test was done by best motoring I believe. It does prove to be a bit of a pasting by the rev 3! :P

[_Al_]

andy mac said:

this test was done by best motoring I believe. It does prove to be a bit of a pasting by the rev 3! :P

Pah! Show me a corner!

Edited to add : I can't see the link as my company don't want me to. Can someone email it?

>> Edited by _Al_ on Friday 7th October 08:44

[Turbo T]

I think the main difference is potential TBH.

Bigger injectors
MAP not MAF
Lower Compression ( hence high boost in stock form)
Better Rods ( apparently)
Better Head Design ( apparently)

As you can tell I am not really into MR2's but that is my brief understanding

[Dakkon]

Well they weigh virtually the same yet the Rev 3 will have more power & torque, seems fairly obvious to me which is faster...

[Mr E]

Turbo T said:

I think the main difference is potential TBH. Bigger injectors MAP not MAF Lower Compression ( hence high boost in stock form) Better Rods ( apparently) Better Head Design ( apparently) As you can tell I am not really into MR2's but that is my brief understanding

Very accurate. The rev3 turbo is also smaller and more efficient, and they run significantly more boost.

[_Al_]

Mr E said:

Very accurate. The rev3 turbo is also smaller and more efficient, and they run significantly more boost.

[jealous]

[andy mac]

_Al_ said:

Mr E said: Very accurate. The rev3 turbo is also smaller and more efficient, and they run significantly more boost. [jealous]

Depending on who you speak to though, the earlier lump is more tunable... although this gets disputed more often than a JFK grassy knoll party...

[Turbo T]

The Fact it is a MAP car would make it a big plus to me.

BTW Power Enterprise do a straight Bolt on turbo that is supposed to make great power ( very expensive from memory though

I am sure I have read somewhere that early Rev3 block could be weak?

[Turbo T]

Found the old mail from PE

Dear Terry,

Power Enterprise PE1919T, newly developed twin-entry system turbocharger specifically for the MR2.
Designed as an upgrade for street or mildly tuned race cars.

Output 330PS/6800rpm
Torque 41kgm/5300rpm
Boost 1.2 kg/cm2 (17 PSI)

The retail price is 248,000JYN

[andy mac]

I used to run 1.25 bar on my stock turbo...

[Turbo T]

How much boost you can run has more to do with compression ratio and fuel quality than it does turbo type.

[andy mac]

Gazboy said:

andy mac said: Just for anyone who may be interested, I found this while I was on a site, and thought it showed the difference straightline the difference between rev 2 and rev 3... <a href="http://videos.streetfire.net/Player.aspx?fileid=857624CD-A98C-4466-AE5C-4574F64CC521&term=mr2&p=2">http://videos.streetfire.net/Player.aspx?fileid=857624CD-A98C-4466-AE5C-4574F64CC521&term=mr2&p=2</a> Updated link... >> Edited by andy mac on Thursday 6th October 22:51 Just watched it, either the rev2 is sick (most likely) or the rev3 is tweekd, that's a hell of a difference over 1/4 mile. Did Flibbers supply the rev2?

Both cars were out of the box stock, no mods... test by best motoring, (won't get anyone fairer than those chaps, and they are all top notch drivers too!)

The 1/4 times for each seemed to be pretty spot on, give or take a tenth...

[GTS Turbo]

Gazboy said:

It has 20bhp more, and a better gearbox, torque is the same, although the rev3 can spool up quicker (what's quicker than instant anyway?). Terry was bang on the money when he said the rev3 had more potential, but it's only slightly more, once you get to (just an example) say, 375bhp, the advantage of the rev3 engine is quashed as you have to change a fair bit of stuff (will a CT20 give that much BHP in the fist place without major reworking?)

actually the gear boxes are the same in a rev 2 and 3 well rev 3's had LSD's as standard and LSD was an option on rev2's (which mine got! hehe) that's the only difference in the gear boxes.

[GTS Turbo]

also just noticed in the clip that the rev2 is the lardy GT and the rev3 is the lighter GT-S if it's one with no options fitted.

[andy mac]

Any excuse

[Dakkon]

Couple of points, I thought the GTS was only marginally lighter?

I was running 21psi on a Owens developement stage III hybrid turbo, no changes to fueling and ran fine.

And the LSD comment, they are only viscous, my rev 3 would still spin up one wheel if you accelerated hard on grass or gravel.

[_Al_]

Dakkon said:

And the LSD comment, they are only viscous, my rev 3 would still spin up one wheel if you accelerated hard on grass or gravel.

My rev2 won't...

It gets amazing traction even on gravel/wet roads. I've never seen a 'single' line of tracks.



Edited to add: There's probably some fun to be had trying to test this claim on a wet field...

>> Edited by _Al_ on Monday 10th October 12:29

[MR2Mike]

andy mac said:

Both cars were out of the box stock, no mods... test by best motoring, (won't get anyone fairer than those chaps, and they are all top notch drivers too!) The 1/4 times for each seemed to be pretty spot on, give or take a tenth...

Rev2 would have to be an older car though. No doubting the Rev3 has more power in stock form, but general consensus in the past from the owners club was that there really wasn't a great deal of difference in performance.

The ECU in my Rev2 seems to use any excuse to limit boost to ~6PSI, weather too cold, weather too hot, engine too cold, fuel not good enough, "wrong time of month" etc