Fabioso

For some reason I am drawn to owning a Mk3.

Has any male done this and if so, have you found the experience (very gay this is no wind up......)

I'm being serious here.......

I'm trying to understand if they are worth the driving experience vs ownership connotations................

Matteeboy

Mother in law had one (!) but FIL used to use it a lot too.

Never mind the image - the handling it utterly brilliant, they are very well made but could easily handle another 50bhp. If they'd stuck the 190bhp vvti engine in them, it would have been a proper Elise basher.

Very nice interiors too but do NOT go for semi auto - it's cack (Inlaws got one and changed it for a manual pronto).

RobEvo5

iTrader: (9)

What do you define as a MK3 ?. The early shape 1990-1996 MR2 hardtop/targas, were classified from MK1' to MK5 I think. All of which are cracking cars and I have had most of them. The Turbo's and Mk1 1.6 being the my fav of the bunch. Non of which I classify as a gay mans/girls car and all have a real following just as much as scoobies.

The later Toyota Engined MR2 roadsters are nice looking cars I think, but interior is a bit of a let down. Handle well, but not a quick car. Image wise got to be better than an MGF, and you can't knock them for what they cost. Great value for money, reliable and fun convertible motoring.

As for image, the girls/women would probably like the car, and you might have get some extra attention from the fella's as well but if you like the car for what it is, and a fella gives you a second look I'd just take it as a compliment. As for what others think.,.. **** e'm I say drive a car because you enjoy it and not what others think.

Had an Audi TT 225 coupe and loved it, despite the odd ribbin from my mates.

Matteeboy

I'd called mk3 the very last shape.

Slower than the mk2 turbos by a long way but the handling is about 125155 times better.

Dream Weaver

The 90 to 98 were actually classifed as a MK2 MR2, but they then had the sub class of Revision 1 to 5, (Rev1 to Rev5).

I always thought it was:

MK1 - boxy rusty ones.
MK2 - Coupe ones
MK3 - small ones/soft top/current model

I ran a MK2 for quite a long time and the handling was spot on, although mine was a Rev3 with the newer suspension. All the stories of them not handling are rubbish, although the steering could be vague sometimes.

Matteeboy

Dream - they stopped making the mk3 (most current) a few years ago. A real shame.

Dream Weaver

I know, I just meant current as in the last one they made, as you say "most current".

mrmarc

iTrader: (6)

i had a mr2 turbo rev3 before i bought the wrx.
i considered the mk3 mr2 for a while but was put off by the underpowered engine and the cost to get any more BHP out of it.
its ment to be the best handling out the bunch though and as a true convertible (unlike the previous tbar models) it was quite attractive.
non the less im glad i went for the the scooby in the end.

M444GY

iTrader: (72)

thay are good cars , handle well but when they go wrong , you need to rob a bank

Fabioso

When I say the mk3 I mean the "latest version" that didn't have pop up lights.

I really like the previous pop up light incarnations, especially the turbo version but as they are now getting old in terms of years now I caught myself looking at the later model in a car park and wondering how it handled etc....

Thanks for all the replies so far.....as it handles well, is there much potential in tweaking the existing engine to give more straight line oomph?

Matteeboy

Fabioso - the inlaws looked into it and they are definitely not easy to tune. But I'm sure the Celica 190 lump must fit in (the 140 lump is the same as the MR2) one? That would be a brilliant car.

Anyone know what the 190 lump has done to it that the 140 doesn't? Both are the same capacity, both are NA, both are vvti.

mrmarc

iTrader: (6)

a few helpful links.
these guys are probably the leading mr2 specialist in the country.
Rogue Systems - Home

a mk3 owners club with loads of tuning info and quite a few nice cars for sale
MR2 Roadster Owners Club • Index page

then theres the big 2 mr2 clubs
IMOC - Home
Welcome to the MR2 Owners Club

plenty of reading on all sites.

a problem that kept coming up when i was considering a mk3 was the dreaded pre cat failure which may or may not have something to do with oval piston bore problems.
a few engines were going pop!..
theres plenty of reading to do on it.
HTH

The Chief

Quite a few firms do turbo conversions on the MK3 now. I nearly bought one once but the lack of boot put me off.

chris270181

the mk2 mr2 turbo was nick named the widow maker. Due to its tendancies to throw you into a ditch/fence etc. Always wanted one. supposed to be quick too

scoobymad555

iTrader: (1)

my bro had a mk2 gt .... thing handled like a mouldy turd - vague, unpredictable on bumpy roads and a tendency to understeer like a pig. Set of koni's all round sorted it right out though Saying that, once the shocks were done if the back let go at over 50mph you had to be real quick to catch it on a road - anything under 50 was usually predictable and actually quite well mannered for a shortish wheel base though.

Oh and they're built for japanese people - or SHORT people to put it another way. Number of times I smacked my head on the poxy a-pillar getting in and out the thing!

Must admit though, I still like the styling on the mk2's and I'd still like to have a good drive of a mk1 to see if they're everything the guys into them say they are

Matteeboy

The mk2 really was a bit cack - the mk3 was miles better. A mk3 with a decent turbo conversion would be a belter of a car. Even with 140bhp, fun can still be had due to it's amazing handling.

Dream Weaver

I disagree, my later version Mk2 was one of my fave cars to date, lovely interior and very reliable/cheap to run.

From a performance/handling viewpoint they weren't fantastic, but as a day to day car they were superb - fun, good looking (IMO), reliable, and quick ish.

As for being built for the Japanese, what garbage - I am over 6 ft and many stones in weight and it was one of the bigger cars I've owned and one of very few where I could drive with the seat forward a notch.

Matteeboy

My FIL is 6'1" and has a very long back (!) and was fine in a mk3.

To me, handling is the priority for a sports car! I drove my mates mk2 turbo (260bhp) and it was utterly dreadful. I was glad to get out alive.

The mk3 is totally different - it's up there with the Elise for handling.

Steve vRS

I'm amazed we've got to 18 posts and I can't see any mention of MX-5s yet

Steve

Fabioso

or me being a "wannabee" hairdresser for asking about them

Thanks for all the links/info chaps, certainly looks like a good drive from what's been said.

Need to check out a test drive though and compare it with the other candidates.......roll on the Spring

dazdavies

iTrader: (22)

Dont get a MK2 Turbo, tailhappy ditch finders in the wet!!!!

scoobymad555

iTrader: (1)

fair play to ya but at 6ft with longish legs I battered my head nearly every time I got in and out the thing. Perhaps it was just the seating position my bro had or because it was lower than standard but either way, I struggled. Never had any problems with any other sports / sporty cars though.

Matteeboy

There's something very satisfying about caning something more powerful with a "hairdressers" car