So, The MR2 Turbo Then...
Discussion
What do the people in the know think about this car?
I reckon they bloody good, despite what all the mags would have you believe. The T-Bars do tend to make the car feel a bit flabby though... But if this was remedied, I reckon you'd have a damn fine car.
I realised today that my G Limited has gotten under my skin a bit...
I reckon they bloody good, despite what all the mags would have you believe. The T-Bars do tend to make the car feel a bit flabby though... But if this was remedied, I reckon you'd have a damn fine car.
I realised today that my G Limited has gotten under my skin a bit...
Most of the complaints about the handling are directed at the earlier Rev1 cars. This means that while all the wiseacres will steer clear of the MR2 Turbo because they think it'll instantly fling them backwards into the undergrowth as soon as it rains, there are plenty of very good later cars for the like of us.
Boxster-beating performance, sharp responses, a sassy mid-engined body and Toyota reliability for £3,500 odd seems like a winning deal whichever way you slice and dice it.
Boxster-beating performance, sharp responses, a sassy mid-engined body and Toyota reliability for £3,500 odd seems like a winning deal whichever way you slice and dice it.
The 'problem' with the rev 1 was that there was more weight at the rear than the later models. A bunch of idiotic car testers took it for a whizz bang, and threw them into hedges, and hence forth the critisism started. All that power at the rear wheels in a car with a F/R weight distribution of 45/55 on the later cars meant it was a very well balanced car. (I think rev 1 was 40/60, but as usual I might be terribly wrong, and if so, then burn me at a stake, and call me a witch). The thing is, if everyone hates them/calls them puffs cars, thinks they are slow, means that there are more about for the more loving of owners 
Gazboy said:
They say it's heavy, well mine was 1203kg. (it didn't weigh the EVO quoted 1283kg when I was sat in it)Considering it's wider and longer than an Audi TT, or as big as a Boxter, that's actually quite light in todays money.
But not in 1990's money, or more importantly compared with the MK1 MR2 which is what most people at the time would compare the weight with.
Gazboy said:
They say it doesn't handle. Out of a Tamora, Tuscan, T350C, M3 Evolution, Supra TT, Chimaera 400 and the MR2, only the Tamora/T350 twins were better imo. That's a lot of scalps, and all of them (chim poss excepted) are seriously rated for their handling.
The Tuscan, M3 evo and supra TT were never rated for their handling, the tuscan was known as twitchy and unplanted, the M3 evo was slated compared to the E30, the supra isn't exactly known for going round corners, the only ones that were rated were the ones you said were better than the MR2 (are we comparing a standard one here BTW, not your old modded one).
Gazboy said:
When people say is dodgy on the limit, what are they comparing it to?
I'd imagine they were comparing it to other cars, the fact it is mid engined does not make a comparison with a front engined car less valid, if it was more dodgy on the limit than an integra, or a M3 then it was more dodgy fullstop. Being midengined should make it handle better, not worse. I chased a 300bhp+ MR2 tubby round donington in a 160bhp clio and he'd leave me for dead on the straights and I'd be all over him on the next corner exit, I don't think they inspire confidence (maybe why they went with silly understeer inducing tyres on uk cars?)
Gazboy said:
When we first got ours, it wasn't unusual for us to go out driving for 3-4 hours at a time, alternating every 20 minutes or so to do the driving, just to drive. If it was that bad would we have done that?
[quote]
People do the same with Novas and micras, it proves nothing other than you enjoy driving, and I suspect you'd enjoy driving whatever you had at the time (which is a very good thing BTW).
[quote=Gazboy]
Had it been sold by Toyota in this country from the start, maybe people would have thought differently. Certainly would have killed the hairdresser jokes stone dead (name me some cars in 1990 that could accelerate as quickly, and reach 158mph).
Serious question - could a standard 1990 MR2 reach 158? Blimey!
Gazboy said:
They say it doesn't handle. Out of a Tamora, Tuscan, T350C, M3 Evolution, Supra TT, Chimaera 400 and the MR2, only the Tamora/T350 twins were better imo.
m12_nathan said:
I'd imagine they were comparing it to other cars, the fact it is mid engined does not make a comparison with a front engined car less valid, if it was more dodgy on the limit than an integra, or a M3 then it was more dodgy fullstop.
Gazboy said:
True, you can't just jump in, switch your brain off and go fast, does take a *bit* of getting used to.
So they are crap handling then and you have to get used to it!
lmao, defensive to the end. Just admit it, you're a hairdresser!
I have had my car for nearly 4 years now and I have never once "got bored" with it as some people say.
Pound for pound I'll put my neck on the block and say you would be very hard pushed to buy something nearly as fast or as reliable!
In all the time I have had my car I have only had to replace the clutch at 70k which is fair enough really! (services every 6k aside)
The handling of the rev3+ cars is greatly improved on the earlier models and it let's you know when your on your limits before ever letting go!
I keep looking at MKIV Supra TT.s and have the money to buy one, but there’s just something about the MR2 T. handling and speed I would begrudge 'trading up' from.
Dont get my wrong Supras are very good cars and obviously faster (though not till after 70 mph
) than the MR2 but they just don’t have the same "mad-hatter" feeling of acceleration you get out the ol 2 - IMO. I have also driven a Noble M12 round Brunters and that is a league above the MR2 (and most MR cars!) but then so’s the price!
My car is now 12 years old and was (with the exception of a classic 911) the oldest car at the recent Northants PH drive out. I managed to keep up with an Impreza P1 and Griffth 500, Audi RS2 round the back roads without to much trouble and even got the complements of the 2003 M3 driver behind me for having ' A f....in great car'
So in short - I think MR2 Turbo's value for the money! cant be beaten
-but then thats just my opinion and each to their own.
-Gareth
Pound for pound I'll put my neck on the block and say you would be very hard pushed to buy something nearly as fast or as reliable!
In all the time I have had my car I have only had to replace the clutch at 70k which is fair enough really! (services every 6k aside)
The handling of the rev3+ cars is greatly improved on the earlier models and it let's you know when your on your limits before ever letting go!
I keep looking at MKIV Supra TT.s and have the money to buy one, but there’s just something about the MR2 T. handling and speed I would begrudge 'trading up' from.
Dont get my wrong Supras are very good cars and obviously faster (though not till after 70 mph
) than the MR2 but they just don’t have the same "mad-hatter" feeling of acceleration you get out the ol 2 - IMO. I have also driven a Noble M12 round Brunters and that is a league above the MR2 (and most MR cars!) but then so’s the price! My car is now 12 years old and was (with the exception of a classic 911) the oldest car at the recent Northants PH drive out. I managed to keep up with an Impreza P1 and Griffth 500, Audi RS2 round the back roads without to much trouble and even got the complements of the 2003 M3 driver behind me for having ' A f....in great car'
So in short - I think MR2 Turbo's value for the money! cant be beaten
-but then thats just my opinion and each to their own. -Gareth
I got scared of using it properly because of the bills so got myself a car that is 90% as quick round a track but costs between £160 and £500 per year to service and comes with a factory warrenty you can renew. Having said that I've had it 3 months and have killed 4 sets of front brake pads (2x pagid, 2xbmw) and a set of rear pads.
Overall the BMW is the best car I have ever owned, it'll match a GT3 in lap times and can seat 4 with a decent boot (in a drag race down the 1km straight at bedford there is nothing between it and a GT3, I was hitting 148 indicated, but a GT3RS does pull away a little bit)
www.justgofaster.com/gallery/gallery/justgofaster/public_videos/Bedford050325.wmv
vid of me playing with the GT3RS's
Overall the BMW is the best car I have ever owned, it'll match a GT3 in lap times and can seat 4 with a decent boot (in a drag race down the 1km straight at bedford there is nothing between it and a GT3, I was hitting 148 indicated, but a GT3RS does pull away a little bit)
www.justgofaster.com/gallery/gallery/justgofaster/public_videos/Bedford050325.wmv
vid of me playing with the GT3RS's
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff