MR2 1.8 VVTI
Author
Discussion

m3sye

Original Poster:

26,231 posts

232 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
GF is looking at one of these, does anyone have any round town (only) MPG figures for them?

soad

34,751 posts

207 months

MarJay

2,181 posts

206 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
soad said:
It doesn't help, it only has the Mk1 and Mk2 MR2 on there! hehe

thetapeworm

13,902 posts

270 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all

I think my numbers are based on the original brochure and the car has been subject to a few changes in it's short life but...

Fuel Consumption: 28 - 49.9 mpg

http://www.megaboost.co.uk/mr2/frames/techinfopage...




ally_f

245 posts

218 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
They're pretty good on fuel, ours gets high 30's / low 40's around town, probably because they're so light.

Great little car, literally the only complaint I can think of is that it's a little noisy because of the timing chain.

Oh, and the lack of a boot, but the weekly shop (just about) fits in the cubbies behind the seats!

soad

34,751 posts

207 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
MarJay said:
It doesn't help, it only has the Mk1 and Mk2 MR2 on there! hehe
I thought Celica VVTI 1.8 would come close (similar weight probably too).

m3sye

Original Poster:

26,231 posts

232 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
Anything we should look out for when looking at one?

nottyash

4,671 posts

226 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
Go for the facelifted 6 speed version. I think it has a chain instead of a belt,has front fogs, and the lights are different (slightly). I think the facelift was about 54 plate but not 100%
Earlier ones had problems with cat disintergrating, but was an easy fix to prevent it if you did get one.
I have a 51 plate Celica with the same engine and it gets 38MPG on the long motorway runs I used it on, if anything I imagine the MR2 to be better as its lighter.

Orb the Impaler

1,881 posts

221 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
I had a 2000X plate one and it was very good on fuel - mid 40s on a run. I was the most economical (petrol) car I've ever owned. If fuel costs are a concern in your car choice then you won't have a problem.

  • Fantastic* little car too - recommended big thumbs up from me biggrin

DrainTheSpuds

368 posts

212 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
Facelift was Jan 2003 onwards. As well as the minor cosmetic changes and the 6-speed gearbox, the front and rear wheels became different sizes (15" front, 16" rear, as oppose to 15" all-round) to improve stability under braking.

kambites

71,682 posts

252 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
The Elise with the same engine will give high twenties in heavy town type traffic, so I'd imagine the MR2 is similar. Around 40mpg on long runs.

m3sye

Original Poster:

26,231 posts

232 months

Wednesday 7th April 2010
quotequote all
Her budget is only allowing her to go to pre-face lift, I heard these have a problem with oil ?? Anyone else heard out for pre face lift? And is this rumour true?