Scooby Vs MR2 Turbo
10 January 2003, 01:01 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are they not for the uk MR2?
The Turbos are generally less than the UK N/As due to insurance costs.
I paid £5500 for my '95 turbo 18 months ago!
At the time, similar Scoobs were going for £9k with high miles and they were the bog standard uk car! Don't think so!!!
The Turbos are generally less than the UK N/As due to insurance costs.
I paid £5500 for my '95 turbo 18 months ago!
At the time, similar Scoobs were going for £9k with high miles and they were the bog standard uk car! Don't think so!!!
10 January 2003, 01:08 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't think Parkers covered import only cars?
Anyway, the market was flooded with turbos in 97-98 so and as insurance costs rocketed, prices dropped through the floor!
The most expensive one I've seen is £11k for an end of line model (98) with low miles.
But the point remains that the times you have are wrong. My 1st Turbo had the original maual that stated a 0-100kmh time of 5.39secs. That was the 225bhp car.
Anyway, the market was flooded with turbos in 97-98 so and as insurance costs rocketed, prices dropped through the floor!
The most expensive one I've seen is £11k for an end of line model (98) with low miles.
But the point remains that the times you have are wrong. My 1st Turbo had the original maual that stated a 0-100kmh time of 5.39secs. That was the 225bhp car.
10 January 2003, 01:12 AM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the point remains has the people at max power got it wrong is what id like to know but im sat here thinkin to myself why would they i mean there supose to know what there on about i bet if i sent an e mail to them telling them there wrong ill look silly when they tell me to **** of lol
10 January 2003, 01:18 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well they're wrong!
Do the maths.
241bhp, rwd, engine over rear wheels, little transmission loss and the same weight as a scooby. In the dry it'll at least match a similarly powered and weighted car. But take into account the 4x4 losses and then it should do it in the dry.
I've seen lots of quoted figures for my car, from 4.5 secs to 60 to 6.9 secs. That's the problem as it's an import only motor and there's no literature on it. The obvious answer is that most mags take their info from the USA mags as it was imported there, but in a lower powered guise to match strict US guidlines.
Like I said: my car is a Jap model and does your figures to 60 by over a second.
Do the maths.
241bhp, rwd, engine over rear wheels, little transmission loss and the same weight as a scooby. In the dry it'll at least match a similarly powered and weighted car. But take into account the 4x4 losses and then it should do it in the dry.
I've seen lots of quoted figures for my car, from 4.5 secs to 60 to 6.9 secs. That's the problem as it's an import only motor and there's no literature on it. The obvious answer is that most mags take their info from the USA mags as it was imported there, but in a lower powered guise to match strict US guidlines.
Like I said: my car is a Jap model and does your figures to 60 by over a second.
10 January 2003, 01:22 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is there a uk mr2 turbo by any chance if not then it must be like you said stats for the yank model if so getin back to the start of this thred ask your pal wich he has and if its not jap then you wup him lol
10 January 2003, 01:25 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. Never sold here as Toyota deemed it too dangerous to sell to the uk market!
Only ever sold as new in Japan and the US of A.
Jap models were (of course) the bitches and the US ones dulled down for emission reasons.
Only ever sold as new in Japan and the US of A.
Jap models were (of course) the bitches and the US ones dulled down for emission reasons.
10 January 2003, 01:29 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well there we go at long last i have the stats for the yank you have them for the jap jobs a good en. MichaelG go ask your mate wich he has hopefuly its the yank one and you can rub it in if its the jap then take it like a man lol
10 January 2003, 08:17 AM
#41
Scooby Regular
Steve - never trust stats from magazines as they are usually woefully wrong. As fatherpierre has said, there were various models of MR2, the latest being the Rev 3 240bhp model, with 0-60 of 5.2s.
Also, all these "they spin into bushes" stories usually concern the Rev 1 MR2. Rev 3, 94 on models had much better suspension by Bilstein, and the handling was a lot better.
For every friend of a freind that has spun his MR2 according to everyone on here, I will find you a friend of a friend that has stuffed a Scoob.
The debate is not about which car is best, as they both do different things and I would/will own both cars. It is just about accelleration tests between the two.
Also, all these "they spin into bushes" stories usually concern the Rev 1 MR2. Rev 3, 94 on models had much better suspension by Bilstein, and the handling was a lot better.
For every friend of a freind that has spun his MR2 according to everyone on here, I will find you a friend of a friend that has stuffed a Scoob.
The debate is not about which car is best, as they both do different things and I would/will own both cars. It is just about accelleration tests between the two.
10 January 2003, 11:26 AM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not another Scooby vs xxxxx thread... A good one though, the 'Magazine Pros' and 'Max Power' had me crying 
Funniest thing I've read in ages.
The MR2 owners on here need to be careful, don't want them bursting the scoobynet bubble... Scoobs are invincable, honest.
Funniest thing I've read in ages.The MR2 owners on here need to be careful, don't want them bursting the scoobynet bubble... Scoobs are invincable, honest.
10 January 2003, 01:07 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The REV2 Mr2 Turbo's had the suspension revised as well as other minor mods to the engine, you can tell these cars by their 15 inch wheels and the srtipe down the door is a darker shade of the colour of the car insead of black (REV1) or the same colour of the car (REV3 onwads).
I can settle this argument now
I had a 92 REV2 MR2 Turbo (decat, exhaust and induction kit no boost mods) I took it on a local 1/8th mile strip the other year at a car show.
I beat all other scoobs apart from a 22B that won with a time of 8.86 sec. My best time was 9.01 sec, there was UK WRX and STI scoobs there none got near me. This time was done with ****ty tyres.
So there you have it, scoobs are fast but not that fast!
Scott
I can settle this argument now
I had a 92 REV2 MR2 Turbo (decat, exhaust and induction kit no boost mods) I took it on a local 1/8th mile strip the other year at a car show.
I beat all other scoobs apart from a 22B that won with a time of 8.86 sec. My best time was 9.01 sec, there was UK WRX and STI scoobs there none got near me. This time was done with ****ty tyres.
So there you have it, scoobs are fast but not that fast!
Scott
10 January 2003, 01:24 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Aldershot
Posts: 1,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think a rev 3 would kill a uk scooby, round the nurburgring a mate had a tussle with an evo 7 with me in it. Very even round the track, also on a 0-60 day a while ago i remember the winner of the rwd class was a mr2 turbo with a time not far off that of the fastest 4wd.
10 January 2003, 05:31 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember that-Redline Records I think.It did 0-60 in 4secs which is quite fast
.It wasn't masssively powered either-260bhp@wheels IIRC.
Steve-fair enough you're just quoting what you read and it should be correct-not always the case though.
.It wasn't masssively powered either-260bhp@wheels IIRC.Steve-fair enough you're just quoting what you read and it should be correct-not always the case though.
10 January 2003, 06:40 PM
#46
Scooby Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didnt expect such a heated debate! His car is a Jap import 220 bhp model. I was with him when he got it and we were sceptical about all that spinning off the road stuff until he practically wrote it off a couple of months back! Then again it was probably his driving! Spoke 2 him last night and he wants 2 swap it for a Celica GT4 soon so this cud all b 4 nothing!
10 January 2003, 07:31 PM
#47
Mate at work has an MR2 Turbo, suspect its a bit poorly as he could put any distance between his car and my old Golf 8v (few mods), suspect a wekll maintained one may be a complete animal !
10 January 2003, 08:16 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all those people who keep saying stuff like "the MR2s dodgy handling will put you in the scenery sooner or later", I'd just like to say that if you try to drive an MR2 like a normal car of course you will! The reason it's got that reputation is because a long time ago some spotty inexperienced motoring journalists jumped in and tried to drive it like a hot hatch! (Would you drive a Ferrari like a Fiesta? No....)
But if you drive it like a mid-engine rear wheel drive car is meant to be driven (ie, feathering throttle on the exit of corners, having an intuition for when you're starting to powerslide, not lifting off sharply or braking mid corner etc etc) it will always be a MUCH more rewarding drive than a front engine front/four wheel drive car. NO, it's not easy to drive, but YES it is hugely rewarding and very, very quick to drive when you can handle it.
There's a very good reason why so many sports cars get a mid engine rear wheel drive layout - it cuts polar inertia to a third of what it is in a normal car meaning we can change direction three times faster. That's partly why you get such great responsiveness from other MR-type cars, such as every Lamborghini, practically every Ferrari and Lotus, the McLaren F1, every Formula Ford, Formula 3, Formula 1 car etc. If you want something you can drive quickly without having to be a good driver, go for the Scoob.
But if you drive it like a mid-engine rear wheel drive car is meant to be driven (ie, feathering throttle on the exit of corners, having an intuition for when you're starting to powerslide, not lifting off sharply or braking mid corner etc etc) it will always be a MUCH more rewarding drive than a front engine front/four wheel drive car. NO, it's not easy to drive, but YES it is hugely rewarding and very, very quick to drive when you can handle it.
There's a very good reason why so many sports cars get a mid engine rear wheel drive layout - it cuts polar inertia to a third of what it is in a normal car meaning we can change direction three times faster. That's partly why you get such great responsiveness from other MR-type cars, such as every Lamborghini, practically every Ferrari and Lotus, the McLaren F1, every Formula Ford, Formula 3, Formula 1 car etc. If you want something you can drive quickly without having to be a good driver, go for the Scoob.
11 January 2003, 12:16 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got my Rev 3 MR2 Turbo about 4 weeks ago now and it is an amazing piece of machinery!!! In the dry it launches like nothing I've ever been in!! Including Escort cossies!! Its mental!
Needs a lot of respect on the wet thought, you have to be restrained. Although saying that you can still drive fast as long as you're smooth with the power.
By the way, Autocar tested a Rev3 MR2 Turbo ages ago. It pulled 5.2 0-60 and 14s 0-100, which was also pretty much the 1/4 mile time aswell.
Needs a lot of respect on the wet thought, you have to be restrained. Although saying that you can still drive fast as long as you're smooth with the power.
By the way, Autocar tested a Rev3 MR2 Turbo ages ago. It pulled 5.2 0-60 and 14s 0-100, which was also pretty much the 1/4 mile time aswell.
11 January 2003, 12:18 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree with cletter.
i had a 95 m reg mr2 uk car with 174bhp, i think tyres made a big differance on mine, apparently the revised suspension mods were designed for the use of yokohama AO 22r or summat, cant remember the number now.
But the sidewalls were supposed to be stiffer than other brands which werent specifically for the car, now these were about 135 quid apiece for the rears and about 90 to a 100 for the fronts, hence why i havent seen many running the correct tyres.
i had them on mine and dry grip was phenomenol! but you had to bear in mind in the wet you had to be in the right gear and all your braking done before the corner and feather then apply power once past the apex, like most rear wheel drive cars really.
No it wont put up with you entering a 3rd gear corner in 5th with the engine pushing it on, then letting off and braking, it will unsettle it but thats just bad practice!
my mate had the 240bhp import and that was quite abit quicker than mine.
up shap road near kendsl which i travel alot, the mr2 turbo was just as quick as my impreza in the dry.
ive had 5 rear wheel drive cars:
celica x 2
sylvia turbo
325i
mr2
and had no probs with catching slides or the odd kick out. provoked of coures!
i think aerodynamics would play a big part over the scoob once over the ton as well!
Lee
i had a 95 m reg mr2 uk car with 174bhp, i think tyres made a big differance on mine, apparently the revised suspension mods were designed for the use of yokohama AO 22r or summat, cant remember the number now.
But the sidewalls were supposed to be stiffer than other brands which werent specifically for the car, now these were about 135 quid apiece for the rears and about 90 to a 100 for the fronts, hence why i havent seen many running the correct tyres.
i had them on mine and dry grip was phenomenol! but you had to bear in mind in the wet you had to be in the right gear and all your braking done before the corner and feather then apply power once past the apex, like most rear wheel drive cars really.
No it wont put up with you entering a 3rd gear corner in 5th with the engine pushing it on, then letting off and braking, it will unsettle it but thats just bad practice!
my mate had the 240bhp import and that was quite abit quicker than mine.
up shap road near kendsl which i travel alot, the mr2 turbo was just as quick as my impreza in the dry.
ive had 5 rear wheel drive cars:
celica x 2
sylvia turbo
325i
mr2
and had no probs with catching slides or the odd kick out. provoked of coures!
i think aerodynamics would play a big part over the scoob once over the ton as well!
Lee
11 January 2003, 12:25 AM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a dry car, simple.
In dry conditions it sticks to the road; in the wet you'll die in your car if you don't know how to drive it and push it too hard.
The throttle response was described by my Ninja riding friend as 'just like my bike' when I let him have a go in mine.
It took me 6 months to learn how to drive mine properly and safely, and that was coming from a BMW 325i.
Bullits in the dry on straights, corners, whatever. In the wet they need respect. All that power through those 2 wheels and the way it's weighted make it a death-trap to the poor driver.
In dry conditions it sticks to the road; in the wet you'll die in your car if you don't know how to drive it and push it too hard.
The throttle response was described by my Ninja riding friend as 'just like my bike' when I let him have a go in mine.
It took me 6 months to learn how to drive mine properly and safely, and that was coming from a BMW 325i.
Bullits in the dry on straights, corners, whatever. In the wet they need respect. All that power through those 2 wheels and the way it's weighted make it a death-trap to the poor driver.
11 January 2003, 12:32 AM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Father pierre, did you say you still had yours or you were selling it? how much can you get a later model turbo for theses days? ive seen some real nice examples round my way and they still look the mutts!
Lee
Lee
11 January 2003, 12:34 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've still got mine, keeping it a bit longer!
Prices vary wildly, but there's loads about.
You could pick a rev3 up for 5k now (L reg).
Try www.mr2dc.com and go to market. Loads on there usually.
Prices vary wildly, but there's loads about.
You could pick a rev3 up for 5k now (L reg).
Try www.mr2dc.com and go to market. Loads on there usually.
12 January 2003, 07:29 AM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i've had both....a 92 mr2 t-bar turbo - full stainless exhaust system & dv, and a 97 sti type-r - full stainless exhaust system & dv (running with a vf28 turbo rather than a 24 - more top end boost)...the scooby would have **** all over the mr2, and was a far better handling car wet/dry than the mr2...from memory the mr2 turbo's 'turbo' looked bigger, but that doesn't mean everything.... regulator's, inlets/outlets of the turbo are different etc and the intercooler on the mr2 is for bugger all...which are all as important!
12 January 2003, 08:23 PM
#60
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys, heard about your discussion so thought I'd pop in and have a read.
The Rev 3 MR2 Turbo built from April 1994 on is 245bhp from stock and has a 0-60 of between 5.4 and 5.7 seconds dependant upon weight of driver, conditions etc.
The Rev 3 unlike the Earlier revisions are NOT tail happy, the suspension was completetly redesinged by Lotus and Bilstein producing a car that sticks to the road like glue and you have to be really silly and on the edge to lose it even in the wet and mine is a modified one with over 300bhp.
The stock CT26 Turbo is not only larger than those on the scooby, it is a real Twin Entry (see my web site for a description of this) and therefore it allows a smoother power increase across the range and from 2K-5K revs, it really does kick ***, however many like myself with get the earlier CT-20 with larger ports, fit a large Stainless Steel Compressor Wheel and get even more power.
Please do not get me wrong, I am not knocking the Scooby, in general terms the 4 wheel drive gives it many benefits over a 2 wheel drive, (and of course it has more seats and a bigger boot!)however the MR2 like a true performance car has the engine mounted in the middle for a reason - balance - if you look at the official figures, the MR2 Turbo is still listed in the TOP 20 of the fastest production cars ever made, which when you consider the price of them new was a real blast.
My MR2 which you can see at http://www.a16toc.com has this week gone in for a complete strip down and re-build (Engine, Interior & Body) and should come back to me in about 6-8 weeks at 360bhp plus - I have just ordered new wheels for it that are £2K plus tyres from Elite - meanwhile I am in a little N/A MR2 so if you see me out there, go easy on me and it has NO POWER at 153bhp and I hate getting caned.....
The Rev 3 MR2 Turbo built from April 1994 on is 245bhp from stock and has a 0-60 of between 5.4 and 5.7 seconds dependant upon weight of driver, conditions etc.
The Rev 3 unlike the Earlier revisions are NOT tail happy, the suspension was completetly redesinged by Lotus and Bilstein producing a car that sticks to the road like glue and you have to be really silly and on the edge to lose it even in the wet and mine is a modified one with over 300bhp.
The stock CT26 Turbo is not only larger than those on the scooby, it is a real Twin Entry (see my web site for a description of this) and therefore it allows a smoother power increase across the range and from 2K-5K revs, it really does kick ***, however many like myself with get the earlier CT-20 with larger ports, fit a large Stainless Steel Compressor Wheel and get even more power.
Please do not get me wrong, I am not knocking the Scooby, in general terms the 4 wheel drive gives it many benefits over a 2 wheel drive, (and of course it has more seats and a bigger boot!)however the MR2 like a true performance car has the engine mounted in the middle for a reason - balance - if you look at the official figures, the MR2 Turbo is still listed in the TOP 20 of the fastest production cars ever made, which when you consider the price of them new was a real blast.
My MR2 which you can see at http://www.a16toc.com has this week gone in for a complete strip down and re-build (Engine, Interior & Body) and should come back to me in about 6-8 weeks at 360bhp plus - I have just ordered new wheels for it that are £2K plus tyres from Elite - meanwhile I am in a little N/A MR2 so if you see me out there, go easy on me and it has NO POWER at 153bhp and I hate getting caned.....