Talked to a guy who reccons he should not have sold his MK 1 as it was a better drive than the 2...

Anyone??

I'll second that...

I agree.

I have both 1992 UK GTI-16 SW20 and a 1988 uk AW11, their different cars!!! sw20 is faster, more predictable handling, mile eater, grand tourer style but still agile enough to mix it with any other well respected B road machine.

The AW11 however is more lotus elise style, want to really throw around car everytime you get in, not that fast off the line, but moves when rolling, wouldn't want to do massive miles in it, you feel like your going fast enough at 90 mph on the motorway.

Just have both you can get AW11's for £500 quid, third party insurance £170 quid (group 13)(25 year old) not exactly bank busting for someone that can afford to run a sw20 (group 16).

Could never, ever agree that the mk2 is a better or more predictable handling car than the mk1.

Well I've driven every kind of Mk2 now - UK GT: Jap spec G-limited, Rev 1,2,3, Jap spec GTS from 225bhp up to 280bhp - and every time I've found myself longing to get back into my Mk1!

I've got two friends with Mk2s, one with a UK NA, the other with a 240bhp GTS and while the GTS is substantially quicker in a straight line, I can completely destroy it on a twisty road when we
're in convoy. But the thing that makes me go for the Mk1 is that it just *feels* like a sports car - the Mk2 is just a grand tourer. You put a millimetre on the steering wheel in a Mk1 and the front end steers *immediately*. You put a millimetre on the throttle and it responds - immediately. You just don't get that responsiveness in the Mk2. Yes, the Mk2 is better looking, rusts less and is more refined, but driving it is little different from driving a Mondeo.

Two years ago when I was much less experienced with MR2s I was considering upgrading to a Mk2 (see here: http://www.benerridge.freeserve.co.uk/decision.htm ), but now I've driven them a lot, my mind is very clear on the matter!

This is an apples and oranges question. Some people will prefer the Mk2 for its styling and refinement. Those who prefer a rewarding driving experience, however, will go for the Mk1 - it's basically a Lotus Elise with leather seats, electric windows and a nicer engine!

Mooseracer, do you own both? mk1 demands alot of respect in the wet, mk2 not even slightly bothered in the wet

[Edited by Midmotorsteve - 3/15/2003 1:33:13 PM]

Steve. I've had both at one time or another, currently still got a mk1 sat in the field slowly(well quite quickly actually) rusting away ;)

Undoubtably the mk2's are quicker in a straight line, and on some roads, but the mk1 is a better drive (IMHO of course)

yes, hence i said the mk1 is more elise like :)

Got me thinking this, looking on Autotrader, now want a mk1 MR2, anyone got the supercharged one, are they available in the uk on import ?

The supercharged one was available only as an import from japan. They are very rapid though, but some of the handling is lost over the NA version, probably due to the extra weight. It's fairly easy to fiddle with the supercharger pulley to get a bit more power if the there isn't enough as standard :). Oh and it has a light on the dash to show when the supercharger is doing it's stuff, which for some reason I find a cool feature.

Chris

was accelerating round a roundabout today in mk1 not looking at revs then glanced down was doing 8500rpm!!!! didn't sound unusual, didn't loose power, didn't hit limiter, didn't seem even slightly bothered! really is a bike like engine!