The Chief

I went in a MR2 Mk1 today and i was pretty impressed - fairly nippy and handles really well. I've noticed the Mk2's are coming down nowand are a performance bargain. What are the GT's like especially the 174bhp version (i think thats what they've got) are they on par performance wise with a 306 Gti.

Thanks chaps!

The Chief

Has anyone driven one then???

Roojai

They are good - very under-rated, but do suffer from hairdresser syndrome. The earlier MK 2 models (rev 1 and rev 2 - 158BHP) were actually quicker than the later ones (173BHP) as they were a lot more torquey (7.2 secs vs 7.8 secs to 60) but weight may have played a part in this.

The turbo models (especially rev 3 0n (1993-)) are very fast - 5.3 ish to 60 and not too difficult to get them sub 5 secs.

They are heavy cars for 2 seaters - 1250kg to 1350 depending on model.

The t-bar is great but may leak, although there is a fix for this that normally works. It is very windy with top off.

They are great looking cars I think, and very good quality build, and the interior is much better than a scoob.

I'm sure fatherpierre will be along soon.

VAL113R

Hi

I have an mr2 GT. The GT is the turbo version and only available as an import.

There are quite a few different revisions. Mine is a revision 1 as it is a H. I think they changed to Revision 2 on a K plate and then Revision 3 on an L. I think it goes right up to revision 6 but don't quote me on that.

They are coming down in price a lot and your getting a lot of car for your money.

I bought mine as a Cat C write off back in January. It cost me £1300 and all it needed was a door and rear quarter panel. I have to get the rear quarter from Mr T (Toyota) so the repairs were a little dearer than I thought.

Taxed, Moted, Serviced and on the road the car set me back about £2600. It is mint condition though with only 68k kilometres (still reads in kph was never converted) which is about 44k miles.

The car is standard and puts out about 220bhp. It's a very fast car to drive due to the smaller turbo, but still pulls over 100mph. I have not really driven the car at that speed as I don't feel the need to.

The car handles quite well considering it is a rear wheel drive, although the back end slips in the wet sometimes. Rev1's are the worst for this and they fixed this from Rev2 on. I also believe some revisions have traction control.

Petrol wise it is quite good. I have not really worked out the mpg but it is a LOT better than the Subaru. I do quite a lot of miles and only usually fill it once a week which is about £36. I don't really boot it everywhere I go and don't need to take the car over 5000 rpm as it pulls so well.

The downside to the car is most of the t-bars leak under heavy rain. Not very nice sitting in a wet seat. Also it is a bit slippy in the wet and you really need to keep your feet off the gas, which I suppose is a good thing.

The engine is about 26cm from your ear and you can really hear it revving which also gives a nice growl off the exhaust. (the turbos sound different to the na for some reason) You can rev the car all the way to about 8000rpm although I don't recommend it if you want the engine to last.

I have 2 subaru impreza turbos and the mr2. I would say I probably enjoy driving the mr2 most.

Don't get me wrong I love the flat 4 burble and all but the subaru seems so slow compared to the mr2. Before I get flamed for saying that, what I mean is both my subarus have a big TD05 on them so the lag is quite long. With the Mr2 it's always on the boil.

Also as I said I fill the Mr2 up once a week, the Subaru probably about 3 times if I drive it all week.

I can't really think of anything else to say about the car other than go and get one.

Lastly you can't do this to a Subaru can you ?

The Chief

I'd probably blow up the Turbo knowing me!

to be honest i am more interested in the N/A versions!

VAL113R

Just trying to stir things up here

No scoop failure at speeds of over 100 mph like the subaru

VAL113R

check out this guide for info on buying an mr2

http://www.btinternet.com/~netsurf/mr2t/mr2tfaq.html

If your going to buy one I would recommend the turbo.

You can pick them up from about £2200 and they are built to take a bit of stick. Insurance isnt too bad either.

I am 26 and paying £450 full comp.

The Chief

Crikey that insurance is cheap who's that with???

VAL113R

thats with A-Plan, check out the insurance section

I also got insured on the 1993 wrx import with all mods declaired for £825

mods are

exhaust
fmic
induction kit
apexi ecu
4 pots
17" alloys
facelift front end
sti 5 spolier

cheers

Jap2Scrap

I had a NA JDM G-Limited Rev 1 for a while. Without a doubt the best car I've ever had. Reliable for over two years, nippy if not ballistic, comfortable and a hoot with the targas off.

Forget the scare stories about lift off oversteer and snap oversteer being worse on the Rev 1. They make it sound like a deathtrap and it certainly isn't. The Rev1 is a far better driver's car and not as soft as its Rev2 & 3 cousins. That said, get the best one you can afford and go for one that's had the 60,000 mile cam belt change as it's likely to be the most expensive job you ever have to do to it. Avoid the early red ones if you can help it as the paint pigmentation is terrible and it fades to pink if not t-cut every fortnight. Think 'Vauxhall Nova pink'.

Wish I still had mine, I traded it for a GT4 Celica which got too expensive to run when I started doing 700 miles a week. The MR2 cost peanuts by comparison.

Dream Weaver

The UK model was also referred to as the GT, even though the badge on the back was GTi IIRC.

I owned a Goodwood Green Rev 3 mk2 for a couple of years recently. Itwas a bloody superb car. 94 M reg with 103k miles but it drove like new, never let me down once in 30k miles of being hammered and was quick, comfortable and surprisingly roomy.

The driving position is one of the best ever, the handling is great and running costs are minor. I had a major service done at a local garage for £90

he only downsides to them are wet handling and vague steering feel - you never quite know what the car is doing, but as a summer tool they are bloody superb.

In fact, the Mrs is currently toying with the idea of buying a Rev5 MK2 as opposed to the MX5 she wants.

The Chief

How do they compare to say a 306 gti in terms of performance though?? as i notice they are quite powerful! Dreamweaver did you have the 158bhp or teh 174bhp model?

Dream Weaver

I had the 174bhp model and thought it was fairly quick tbh, and I always got comments about it being quick on the Scooby runs it went on - Northern Meet 5, the Big One etc

To give you an idea we have a local dual carriageway that travels from a roundabout and shoots off up a long long hill (about 2 miles upwards). At the top is a Parking sign used as a measuring point - we use this hill a lot to test out cars' performance, added mods etc - not exactly scientific but gives you an idea.

Times so far:

UK Scoob (Scoobysport backbox): 118mph
My 174 MK2 MR2: 110mph
Std 405 Mi16: 99mph
Focus 1.8 Zetec: 90mph

So the MR2 times were never that far from a std Scoob. The aerodynamics help a lot, and this also means you get good MPG - used to get 45mpg on my daily motorway run to work.

The Chief

I'm impressed!!!

a private dual carriageway of course

Smokedog

I used to have a MR2 Rev4 N/A. Traded it in for a CTR but now trying to hunt down a Rev5 turbo. Rev5 was the last ones they made and are 98 - 00 plates. But they are almost impossible to get hold of.

The build quality is light years ahead of the CTR. I was quite shocked that the CTR used cheap hard pastic. Where as the MR2 used soft pastic and seem to feel more expensive in general. I had my MR2 for 2 years and not a single thing went wrong. Can't say that about my current car.

Dream Weaver

Chief, not sure where you are but my dad also had a Rev 3 Mr2, P-reg and it had only done 44k miles or so. He traded it in 6 months ago and the local garage still have it for sale AFAIK for about £4500. Would have to check it though.

The Chief

Royton - mate between Oldham and Rochdale!

Dream Weaver

Not far then, car is at Steve Durkin Car Sales in Burnley, will search now see if its still there.

Dream Weaver

Yes, they still have it - Click here

My dad bought it in 1999 for £13k with low miles, and he ran it until last year when he traded it in. I can totally vouch for that car and it was used mainly for my mum to get to work and for them to tootle off at the weekend.

They never even drove it above 5k rpm!!. Only problem with it was slight patch of rust bottom of drivers door - they tend to collect water there and if not sorted they rust. My dad being an old bugger he never bent down low enough to spot it

He's also not brilliant on servicing so it probably missed a service, but with the miles he did and how he drove it (slowly) it wouldnt be a problem.

A very good car at £4975 and worth a look.

Jonty

Some good responses already here so I'll try not to be repetitive. If you're looking at a superb package consisting of standard power, looks, handling, and modification potential then you really can't beat a MkII MR2 Turbo for that 'bang for buck' award.

There were 5 revisions of the MkII up until 1999, where late 1993/early 1994 saw the Rev3 arrive with the 174 bhp NA 3S-GE engine (previously 154ish) or the 240 bhp 3S-GTE in the Turbo (previously 220 bhp.) If you'd prefer the NA flavour then look at the final Rev5's where some JDM models were kitted with a 200 bhp BEAMS VVTi lump.

Compared to the MkI, the MkII is heavy... but it's a different car -- more practical, more comfortable, and with bigger power plants to match. If you want a great trackday throw-about then get a MkI (or even a MkIII with a Turbo conversion!) If you want a pocket rocket which can leave most things standing (including STi's) with simple mods then a MkII Turbo is for you.

At this point I should mention that as well as the Imprezas on my driveway, there's also a 260 bhp MR2.

To own and drive one is a pleasure as long as you're an enthusiast. Most are reaching stages where parts need to be replaced and they're not always cheap. Drive it well and it'll reward you. Abuse it (especially on a wet road) and it'll bite you hard if you get things wrong.

As for looks, there can't be many cars on the road who have a bodyshell which goes back 16 years yet doesn't look dated (as long as it's maintained properly.)

And for some MR2 trivia -- In France the MR2 doesn't actually exist -- it's called the Coupe MR since saying "MR2" in French sounds familiarly like "merdeux"... which means sh*t.

Jonts.

VAL113R

And another bit of Trivia...

What does MR2 stand for ?

My mate recons Mid-engine Racing 2 seater

but it really means Mid-engine Rear wheel drive 2 Seater

If your interested in the mr2 then you should check out

www.imoc.co.uk
www.mr2oc.co.uk

cheers

VAL113R

there is a cracker for you !

VAL113R

This is the ultimate 2

504bhp at 1.6 bar

and the bodykit is standard Mr T equipment

Jap2Scrap

The Japanese meant it to mean "Midship Runabout 2 seater," but that sounds too poofy for the UK market. You might find an old Mk1 or a Mk3 import with that on it though.

fatherpierre

You've just got to go down the turbo route!!!

More per £ than any car I can think of!!

Turbos are now actually more or less the same price as the eq N/A model so you've got to consider a Tubby.

I had a few with my last Rev 3 on 320bhp and they are in the (old) mercedes league for reliability, and not that far off in build quality.

If you are definitely going for N/A then there was a 'beams' N'A with a Lexus engine made which puts out 200ish horses and well worth searching out. I think it was Jap only but there are still some in the UK.

As stated earlier the rev 1 and 2 were quicker despite less BHP, but go for a Rev 2 as it handles less 'dangerously' in the wet! The rev1 came with the smaller wheels (looks a bit silly) and was silly in the wet. Rev 2 was still a bit touch and go with 3 onwards less tail happy. They all are still easily spinable in the wet. Not an easy car to drive - certainly not when compared with a scooby or any other easy to drive 4wd car that makes the driver seem capable. The MR2 will show you for what you are!! I crashed a couple of mine!!

BTW - the MK1 handles way better than the MK2!! And the Mk2 will munch tyres like a hungry fat lad in burger king.

My advice is to drive a turbo first and then try an N/A. You'll have a turbo on your drive and won't want an N/A. N/A is just the same car but it feels (and is) so much slower. Plus, the turbo sounds so good as it's right next to your head so the noise of it winding up makes you bring it in just to hear it!!!

The Chief

Hmmmm Turbo eh i'm tempted

fatherpierre

You know you want to. As I said, try both and you'll feel the difference!

I had a rev2 turbo with mega miles (I forget how many) and it was still dynoing around 5bhp under new figures.

Ultra reliable cars and very, very fast. One of the best things about them is that most people think it's an N/A as there are only a couple of subtle differences (raised vents on engine cover, small 16v twin entry turbo bit on side that doesn't stand out) so you can mince people in Audi TTs and most other motors off the lights (if dry).

The Chief

Aren't they meant to run hot though???/

ulttra reliable and bomb proof - it wouldneed to be with me!

fatherpierre

Run hot??

Water cooled and bomb proof.

I thrashed all mine, and I mean thrashed! Red line and beyond without problem. The 3GTSE is an engine that likes to be run to high revs and runs better when worked.

Why do you think the Supras that do proper racing use them instead of the standard bigger and 6cyl Supra lump?? Because they're so tuneable for big power and take **** - plus, the engine is light.

If you want more power they're pretty simple to mess with and cheap for more horses. If standard is fine then they go on for big miles with abuse before they need attention.

Jonty

There are a number of interpretations as to what MR2 stands for including; Mid-ship Racer 2-seater, Mid-engine Rear-drive 2-seater, Mid-ship Runabout 2-seater, and other variations. Mid-ship Runabout 2-seater is my favourite.

Jonts.