Toyota MR2 Mk2 - Rev 1-4...best all rounder?
Discussion
..been looking at the price of MR2, Mk2s this week and find the various designations very confusing! I understand the 1990 version had 158 HP and was known for lift off oversteer and that in 1992 a newer less edgy version arrived. However, Rev 2, 3 & 4 confuses me.
..discounting for a minute the Turbo which was never an official UK model, which UK MK2 will offer the best experience? I.e. is the 1990 model a purer drive, or the 173 HP 1994 onwards cars the best overall model?
..discounting for a minute the Turbo which was never an official UK model, which UK MK2 will offer the best experience? I.e. is the 1990 model a purer drive, or the 173 HP 1994 onwards cars the best overall model?
The one that's been best looked after will be the best to drive. These are all old cars even the Rev 5s so look for signs the car has been well cared for.
In an ideal world where you find immaculate examples of each, there are a few things to consider when comparing models. The Rev 1 had 158hp, 14" wheels and a tendency for snap oversteer when driven by the ham-fisted. There was also version of the Rev 1 with just 119hp known as the "FE" after its 3SFE engine.
The Rev 2 had the same power but revised suspension, bigger alloys and bigger brakes. This all served to make the handling a little more docile. The Rev 3 came along with a slightly wider track, and developments to the engine that brought power up to 173hp although the acceleration figures were only marginally more impressive. The Rev 4 actually had a drop in power to 168hp, and the range included the Sonic Shadow model, but was otherwise largely unchanged. The Rev 5 carried on where the 4 left off adding a new design of alloy wheel, the "combat" adjustable rear spoiler and red stitching in the interior.
The swan song was the BEAMS engined Rev 5, essentially a VVTI type of engine making in the region of 190hp. This is the pick of the naturally aspirated SW20s.
You should also consider the differences between UK and Jap import models. The U.K. model is known as the GT-i16 and came with full leather interior and could be had with either a sunroof or T-bar roof. The Japanese model was the G-limited. They came as either a hard top or T bar with no sunroof option. It often had cloth interior but can come with various JDM features such as steering fog lights and climate control. A fresh Japanese import is likely to be rust free, one that's been here for some time will not be if it hasn't been rust proofed.
The BEAMS Rev 5 is the ultimate NA MR2 but are rare and thus expensive. Anything Rev 2 onwards is going to be pretty much equal in performance terms and more forgiving than the Rev 1. If the best example you can find is a Rev 3 that would be ideal, but if you find a better Rev 1 then that's the one to go for. Just whatever you do don't buy a 3SFE.
In an ideal world where you find immaculate examples of each, there are a few things to consider when comparing models. The Rev 1 had 158hp, 14" wheels and a tendency for snap oversteer when driven by the ham-fisted. There was also version of the Rev 1 with just 119hp known as the "FE" after its 3SFE engine.
The Rev 2 had the same power but revised suspension, bigger alloys and bigger brakes. This all served to make the handling a little more docile. The Rev 3 came along with a slightly wider track, and developments to the engine that brought power up to 173hp although the acceleration figures were only marginally more impressive. The Rev 4 actually had a drop in power to 168hp, and the range included the Sonic Shadow model, but was otherwise largely unchanged. The Rev 5 carried on where the 4 left off adding a new design of alloy wheel, the "combat" adjustable rear spoiler and red stitching in the interior.
The swan song was the BEAMS engined Rev 5, essentially a VVTI type of engine making in the region of 190hp. This is the pick of the naturally aspirated SW20s.
You should also consider the differences between UK and Jap import models. The U.K. model is known as the GT-i16 and came with full leather interior and could be had with either a sunroof or T-bar roof. The Japanese model was the G-limited. They came as either a hard top or T bar with no sunroof option. It often had cloth interior but can come with various JDM features such as steering fog lights and climate control. A fresh Japanese import is likely to be rust free, one that's been here for some time will not be if it hasn't been rust proofed.
The BEAMS Rev 5 is the ultimate NA MR2 but are rare and thus expensive. Anything Rev 2 onwards is going to be pretty much equal in performance terms and more forgiving than the Rev 1. If the best example you can find is a Rev 3 that would be ideal, but if you find a better Rev 1 then that's the one to go for. Just whatever you do don't buy a 3SFE.
Yep. Other than rev 1 perhaps, just ignore the age and get one that's in good nick. The differences are minor.
I will say that my 99 Rev 5 was the best built and most reliable car I've owned, and in some ways a better car then my beloved MX5s. I think if I'd had a targa and not a coupe I might still own it.
I still wonder about buying a really nice targa turbo.
I will say that my 99 Rev 5 was the best built and most reliable car I've owned, and in some ways a better car then my beloved MX5s. I think if I'd had a targa and not a coupe I might still own it.
I still wonder about buying a really nice targa turbo.
MikeyMike said:
The swan song was the BEAMS engined Rev 5, essentially a VVTI type of engine making in the region of 190hp. This is the pick of the naturally aspirated SW20s.
The BEAMS Rev 5 is the ultimate NA MR2 but are rare and thus expensive. Anything Rev 2 onwards is going to be pretty much equal in performance terms and more forgiving than the Rev 1. If the best example you can find is a Rev 3 that would be ideal, but if you find a better Rev 1 then that's the one to go for. Just whatever you do don't buy a 3SFE.
Is the 190 engine one, the same engine that goes in the VVTI Celica?The BEAMS Rev 5 is the ultimate NA MR2 but are rare and thus expensive. Anything Rev 2 onwards is going to be pretty much equal in performance terms and more forgiving than the Rev 1. If the best example you can find is a Rev 3 that would be ideal, but if you find a better Rev 1 then that's the one to go for. Just whatever you do don't buy a 3SFE.
Its all fairly confusing because according to my old Autocars, the fastest MR2 Mk2, n/a was the original 158 Rev 1 (0-60, 6.7) followed by a 1992 (|rev 2?), then the 173 hp 1994 (rev 3?( which somehow managed to be the slowest of all! I guess conditions on the day helped, but the 1994 173 model weighed 80 kilos less than the Mk4, which is the equivalent of your average adult male....
No its not the same, the Mk2 MR2 engines are a generation before.
The 3SGE is a really solid motor, I think is under-rated. Again comparing it to the contemporary MX-5, its really torquey and makes a much better noise.
I'd still stand by ignoring the minor differences in spec/power over the years, and just concentrate on finding a nice one thats been looked after.
However, if you can afford one - yes, get a turbo, properly exciting car with real (even nowadays in the time of 300hp hatchbacks) performance.
The 3SGE is a really solid motor, I think is under-rated. Again comparing it to the contemporary MX-5, its really torquey and makes a much better noise.
I'd still stand by ignoring the minor differences in spec/power over the years, and just concentrate on finding a nice one thats been looked after.
However, if you can afford one - yes, get a turbo, properly exciting car with real (even nowadays in the time of 300hp hatchbacks) performance.
GreenArrow said:
Is the 190 engine one, the same engine that goes in the VVTI Celica?
Its all fairly confusing because according to my old Autocars, the fastest MR2 Mk2, n/a was the original 158 Rev 1 (0-60, 6.7) followed by a 1992 (|rev 2?), then the 173 hp 1994 (rev 3?( which somehow managed to be the slowest of all! I guess conditions on the day helped, but the 1994 173 model weighed 80 kilos less than the Mk4, which is the equivalent of your average adult male....
No it's a different engine, I believe the only car it's shared with is the Lexus RS200 or Altezza as it's known in Japan. That 0-60 figure is wildly optimistic, it's generally held to be 7.6/7.8sec pretty much across the revisions. The trouble is there have been so many different mk2 MR2s in different markets that's people struggle to get the stats right. That 6.7sec is often what's quoted for the 200hp USDM Rev 1/2 Turbo.Its all fairly confusing because according to my old Autocars, the fastest MR2 Mk2, n/a was the original 158 Rev 1 (0-60, 6.7) followed by a 1992 (|rev 2?), then the 173 hp 1994 (rev 3?( which somehow managed to be the slowest of all! I guess conditions on the day helped, but the 1994 173 model weighed 80 kilos less than the Mk4, which is the equivalent of your average adult male....
MikeyMike said:
GreenArrow said:
Is the 190 engine one, the same engine that goes in the VVTI Celica?
Its all fairly confusing because according to my old Autocars, the fastest MR2 Mk2, n/a was the original 158 Rev 1 (0-60, 6.7) followed by a 1992 (|rev 2?), then the 173 hp 1994 (rev 3?( which somehow managed to be the slowest of all! I guess conditions on the day helped, but the 1994 173 model weighed 80 kilos less than the Mk4, which is the equivalent of your average adult male....
No it's a different engine, I believe the only car it's shared with is the Lexus RS200 or Altezza as it's known in Japan. That 0-60 figure is wildly optimistic, it's generally held to be 7.6/7.8sec pretty much across the revisions. The trouble is there have been so many different mk2 MR2s in different markets that's people struggle to get the stats right. That 6.7sec is often what's quoted for the 200hp USDM Rev 1/2 Turbo.Its all fairly confusing because according to my old Autocars, the fastest MR2 Mk2, n/a was the original 158 Rev 1 (0-60, 6.7) followed by a 1992 (|rev 2?), then the 173 hp 1994 (rev 3?( which somehow managed to be the slowest of all! I guess conditions on the day helped, but the 1994 173 model weighed 80 kilos less than the Mk4, which is the equivalent of your average adult male....
Re your turbo..might be a bit too "hard core" for me, but certainly a tempting proposition! Looks fab in the photos, but I want something low maintenance to thrash on road and track....hence a n/a might be better for me...
GreenArrow said:
I went back and checked out my sources, Autocar road test 16.5.90, definitely says 0-60..6.7 secs. I agree it seems ludicrously optimistic. What car managed 7.4 in their T-Bar Rev 1 which seems about right to me.
Re your turbo..might be a bit too "hard core" for me, but certainly a tempting proposition! Looks fab in the photos, but I want something low maintenance to thrash on road and track....hence a n/a might be better for me...
Well, i love n/a motors and toyota ones are good. So, if you don't want to have a turbo don't buy it. I bought n/a Supra for same reasons what you just said and i love it. One thing tho, try to find some aftermarket tuned ecu (mines,trd,amuse or so). It will make that engine alive! Throttle response is immediate. And btw, mk2 MR2 is a nice car! Re your turbo..might be a bit too "hard core" for me, but certainly a tempting proposition! Looks fab in the photos, but I want something low maintenance to thrash on road and track....hence a n/a might be better for me...
GreenArrow said:
Re your turbo..might be a bit too "hard core" for me, but certainly a tempting proposition! Looks fab in the photos, but I want something low maintenance to thrash on road and track....hence a n/a might be better for me...
I think this is a sensible approach. At some point however it is entirely possible that you will want to convert to the dark side and get the turbo version. Alternatively, if you want to stay n/a, a V6 conversion is the way to go. 3VZ-FE, 1MZ-FE, or 2GR-FE depending on the size of your piggy bank. As has already been said, condition is key with a car which can span a 10 year time span (Revision 1 to Revision 5) and where even the most recent Revision 5 will now be 16 years old. As with many cars, the weak spot is the sills, especially the rear section. Toyota used foam sound deadening blocks in the body panels behind the rear speakers. These have a nasty habit of absorbing condensation/water and the result can be seen here. Another issue with the n/a is the design of the engine lid. Unlike the turbo is doesn't have a drip tray and water can find its way onto the alternator. Not great, especially on a car which doesn't get used daily.
A JDM car (the turbo versions were never sold in the UK, they are all grey imports) is generally more likely to be in better condition particularly if, when arriving on our shores, it has been proofed against the dreaded UK salt-encrusted winter roads. On that basis I would go for a G-ltd given the choice. Also, all other things being equal, I would choose a Revision 3 (or later) version.
Something else you will find is that many Mk2s have bigger aftermarket wheels fitted. This is partly to do with the difficulty of now finding decent rubber to fit the stock rear wheel size (7J x 15"). Do not under any circumstances use cheap ditchfinders on a MR2!
There is a thriving club community which I would recommend joining (MR2OC and/or IMOC). I did nearly 10 years ago just before buying my first one and that move has saved me a shedload of money over that time.
LasseV said:
One thing tho, try to find some aftermarket tuned ecu (mines,trd,amuse or so). It will make that engine alive! Throttle response is immediate. And btw, mk2 MR2 is a nice car!
These ECUs are going to be a total waste of money for the OP if he is planning on getting a n/a car. Even if he was going the turbo route I would not recommend using a Mines (or any other similarly modified stock unit) as it isn't mappable. My Rev4 turbo had one fitted when I bought it which I subsequently removed and replaced with a standalone unit. The reason being that most people don't realise that the fixed map will have been written with specific mods/fuel/boost parameters. You have no way to know if is correct for your car* without finding out what they are. The maker may be able to tell you from the serial number.* If it was fitted in Japan prior to importation it might be, but if done after it reached the UK all bets are off.
Bear in mind the 3S-GTE engine was also fitted to the Celica GT4 (ST185/ST205).
Good advice....Thanks.
On my short list right now, is an MR2/ Celica Mk6 or 7, RX-8 and Civic Type R!
I have been watching an Ebay auction for a car that supposedly was stored away for years. However, I am suspicious that it may be a 119BHP model, simply because it has no rear spoiler of GT-16 marker on the rear panel...that may however simply be my ignorance, but you don't see many de-spoilered models and it rang alarm bells.
Can anyone confirm or deny this? Link is here.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231871104366?_trksid=p20...
On my short list right now, is an MR2/ Celica Mk6 or 7, RX-8 and Civic Type R!
I have been watching an Ebay auction for a car that supposedly was stored away for years. However, I am suspicious that it may be a 119BHP model, simply because it has no rear spoiler of GT-16 marker on the rear panel...that may however simply be my ignorance, but you don't see many de-spoilered models and it rang alarm bells.
Can anyone confirm or deny this? Link is here.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231871104366?_trksid=p20...
The lack of a spoiler, although suggestive of it having the 3S-FE engine, is not conclusive: the current (or previous) owner may just have preferred that look. However there is another clue which also suggests it could have the less powerful engine and that is the lack of front foglights, although again some people prefer it that way.
There is definitely an issue with the ad re the power output though. Unless it has had an engine change it can't be 168bhp. That is the figure for a Revision 4 with EGR. The Revision 3 is 173bhp, and the Revision 2 (confirmed by the K registration prefix) is 158bhp. A sure-fire way to tell if it has the 3S-FE engine is a photo* of it or a physical check by going to see the car.
* The one that isn't in the ad!
Btw, the autosnout.com info is wrong for a UK Rev 1 n/a. 168bhp stock: no chance.
There is definitely an issue with the ad re the power output though. Unless it has had an engine change it can't be 168bhp. That is the figure for a Revision 4 with EGR. The Revision 3 is 173bhp, and the Revision 2 (confirmed by the K registration prefix) is 158bhp. A sure-fire way to tell if it has the 3S-FE engine is a photo* of it or a physical check by going to see the car.
* The one that isn't in the ad!
Btw, the autosnout.com info is wrong for a UK Rev 1 n/a. 168bhp stock: no chance.
Red Devil said:
These ECUs are going to be a total waste of money for the OP if he is planning on getting a n/a car. Even if he was going the turbo route I would not recommend using a Mines (or any other similarly modified stock unit) as it isn't mappable. My Rev4 turbo had one fitted when I bought it which I subsequently removed and replaced with a standalone unit. The reason being that most people don't realise that the fixed map will have been written with specific mods/fuel/boost parameters. You have no way to know if is correct for your car* without finding out what they are. The maker may be able to tell you from the serial number.
* If it was fitted in Japan prior to importation it might be, but if done after it reached the UK all bets are off.
Bear in mind the 3S-GTE engine was also fitted to the Celica GT4 (ST185/ST205).
Well, they do support bolt on upgrades so they are perfect for value for money upgrades. Buying standalone ecu and mapping it does cost a lot.... * If it was fitted in Japan prior to importation it might be, but if done after it reached the UK all bets are off.
Bear in mind the 3S-GTE engine was also fitted to the Celica GT4 (ST185/ST205).
LasseV said:
Well, they do support bolt on upgrades so they are perfect for value for money upgrades.
May I ask how many MR2s you have owned? Your profile doesn't show any. Sorry, but I don't buy the value for money argument.
The issue is that one person's 'bolt on upgrades' may well differ from the next.
A Mines ECU (for example) will have been supplied on a trade-in basis for the stock SW20 unit.
The serial number corresponds to a specific fixed set of parameters programmed to the ROM chip.
Amongst other things the fuel map and ignition timing will be altered.*
So for starters with a s/h unit you need to know what Revision car it originally came from.
Revision 3/4/5 ones have a different turbo and larger injectors than the earlier versions.
The only certain way to find out what you have is to contact Mines quoting the serial number.
I would not be keen to accept without some proof from Japan what a seller might say or put in an ad.
* These are critical. Unsuitable values won't help with the longevity of your engine.
LasseV said:
Buying standalone ecu and mapping it does cost a lot....
For sure more than an ECU with just an add-on board. Horses for courses, but I'm not a fan of mods which can easily do more harm than good if you get it wrong.
Compromises can turn out to be more costly and/or less effective in the long run.
Red Devil said:
For sure more than an ECU with just an add-on board.
Horses for courses, but I'm not a fan of mods which can easily do more harm than good if you get it wrong.
Compromises can turn out to be more costly and/or less effective in the long run.
I'm talking about n/a motors and you are talking turbo. Two different things. N/a bolt on upgrades means, well err bolt on parts. We are not talking about opening motor things, just basic power upgrades. N/a Toyota motors are great, thats for sure but stock ecu is a very conservatively mapped. Tuned ecu is a game changer and if you are staying bolt on parts you don't need standalone ecu IMO. As you said horses for courses, stand alone ecus are for more advanced power upgrades. Horses for courses, but I'm not a fan of mods which can easily do more harm than good if you get it wrong.
Compromises can turn out to be more costly and/or less effective in the long run.
I have a mines ecu in my n/a Supra and it is a lovely piece of kit. Makes my car much easier to drive fast. It has better throttle response, mid range torque and it is more rev happy. Needs premium fuel tho.
LasseV said:
I'm talking about n/a motors and you are talking turbo.
Yes I am, and have said why. See below for more.LasseV said:
Two different things. N/a bolt on upgrades means, well err bolt on parts. We are not talking about opening motor things, just basic power upgrades. N/a Toyota motors are great, thats for sure but stock ecu is a very conservatively mapped. Tuned ecu is a game changer and if you are staying bolt on parts you don't need standalone ecu IMO. As you said horses for courses, stand alone ecus are for more advanced power upgrades.
I have a mines ecu in my n/a Supra and it is a lovely piece of kit. Makes my car much easier to drive fast. It has better throttle response, mid range torque and it is more rev happy. Needs premium fuel tho.
Quite, but this thread is about the MR2 not a Supra. Apples and pears. Bolt-on mods for the 3S-GE engine (of which there aren't many anyway) will give only marginal improvements in power or torque. There is a good reason why people don't fit a Mines ECU to a MR2 n/a though. The company doesn't list one (whereas it does for the JZA80 Supra with the 2JZ-GE engine).I have a mines ecu in my n/a Supra and it is a lovely piece of kit. Makes my car much easier to drive fast. It has better throttle response, mid range torque and it is more rev happy. Needs premium fuel tho.
One simple route to more power is to get one with (or retrofit) the red top BEAMS engine. On a Revision 3, 4, or 5 car that's an uplift of ~14% out of the box (double that for a Revision 1 or 2). It was only fitted as OEM to Revision 5 cars, so is as rare as rocking horse poo, and comes with a commensurate price tag. There are other methods of getting to ~200bhp (and above) but they involve a lot more work, are by no means bolt-on, and will empty your wallet faster than a pickpocket at a horse race.
Red Devil said:
The lack of a spoiler, although suggestive of it having the 3S-FE engine, is not conclusive: the current (or previous) owner may just have preferred that look. However there is another clue which also suggests it could have the less powerful engine and that is the lack of front foglights, although again some people prefer it that way.
There is definitely an issue with the ad re the power output though. Unless it has had an engine change it can't be 168bhp. That is the figure for a Revision 4 with EGR. The Revision 3 is 173bhp, and the Revision 2 (confirmed by the K registration prefix) is 158bhp. A sure-fire way to tell if it has the 3S-FE engine is a photo* of it or a physical check by going to see the car.
* The one that isn't in the ad!
Btw, the autosnout.com info is wrong for a UK Rev 1 n/a. 168bhp stock: no chance.
Yes, I noticed the "wrong BHP" figure and I wonder if the car is indeed a 119 BHP model, its a conincidence that the bidding stopped at £720 some days ago....also dubious when people sell supposed immaculate cars without reserve, although the seller's feedback score is very strong...There is definitely an issue with the ad re the power output though. Unless it has had an engine change it can't be 168bhp. That is the figure for a Revision 4 with EGR. The Revision 3 is 173bhp, and the Revision 2 (confirmed by the K registration prefix) is 158bhp. A sure-fire way to tell if it has the 3S-FE engine is a photo* of it or a physical check by going to see the car.
* The one that isn't in the ad!
Btw, the autosnout.com info is wrong for a UK Rev 1 n/a. 168bhp stock: no chance.
In my opinion if something looks too good to be true, it normally is.
THere's another car on ebay I like the look of, the black Rev 3, which I will post the link of.....also a rev 2 with no reserve not making strong money yet...
Another question. would an MR2 be viable as a winter "hack car"? some reviews I read indicate that the engine being in the rear doesn't help with defrosting windows and washer jets....
GreenArrow said:
Yes, I noticed the "wrong BHP" figure and I wonder if the car is indeed a 119 BHP model, its a conincidence that the bidding stopped at £720 some days ago....also dubious when people sell supposed immaculate cars without reserve, although the seller's feedback score is very strong...
In my opinion if something looks too good to be true, it normally is.
THere's another car on ebay I like the look of, the black Rev 3, which I will post the link of.....also a rev 2 with no reserve not making strong money yet...
Another question. would an MR2 be viable as a winter "hack car"? some reviews I read indicate that the engine being in the rear doesn't help with defrosting windows and washer jets....
I haven't had an issue with the windows not defrosting, but yes washer jets! What a pain in the arse! At some points over the winter I had to get out and wash the windscreen with a bottle of water!In my opinion if something looks too good to be true, it normally is.
THere's another car on ebay I like the look of, the black Rev 3, which I will post the link of.....also a rev 2 with no reserve not making strong money yet...
Another question. would an MR2 be viable as a winter "hack car"? some reviews I read indicate that the engine being in the rear doesn't help with defrosting windows and washer jets....
Link to ad for another MR2. Rather a lot of owners, but low mileage, if genuine...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/291708717697?_trksid=p20...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/291708717697?_trksid=p20...
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff