madnut

hello all,

this is my first post here on this forum, since I used to drive mr2 turbo; but now it's time to move on to rotary for some experience.

I read a thread a few days ago where people voted the mr2 to be better than the FC; I still think the FC has a platform that has potential. I would like to hear opinions from FC owners.

FD was under consideration also, but it would be much less $$ and more fun to tinker with the FC?

Turblown

iTrader: (12)

What??? I doubt anyone here would say that...... post the thread plz

madnut

dunno if the link is linked, but it's in general automotive section called: "Poll: Mr2 mkII turbo, Rx Turbo II, or Supra mkIII turbo?"

https://www.rx7club.com/forum/showth...&highlight=mr2

Scott 89t2

stock for stock the mr2 turbo and FC turbo are very close in everything, 0-60, 1/4 mile, handling Gs, and weight. I did a bunch of online research before I bought mine and I would gladly drive either car. but the FC's are alot cheaper and alot more usefull (ie trunk ). the mr2's will have better gas millage though.

also I couldn't see how working in the mr2 engine bay would be much fun back there... also there is probably alot more after market surport for the rx7 since it is a very common race car.

madnut

well, I thoroughly enjoyed driving the mr2 turbo, but now it is gone, and I am wanting to experiement with the rotary engine.

My only option with the FC would be to go with the turbo; my goal is not to build a drag car, but one that can handle and go fast. I also would like to know what modification steps would be in order? Is it possible to run an FC to the 13s in 1/4 without upgrading the turbo?

By the way, Scott, it was quite a PITA to work on the two; there really isn't much space...

seveninphilly

iTrader: (7)

Welcome to the wonderful world of wankel!

RETed

The SW20 turbo has a slight edge in terms of raw performance numbers.&nbsp It has a definitely edge in torque over the FC turbo.

In a good driver's hands, the SW20 should hand the FC it's *** - it's hard to beat a mid-engine layout, IF you know how to control such a beast.

The 3S-GTE SW20 engine has a lot of aftermarket support, but that stuff is very expensive to play around with!




-Ted

Turblown

iTrader: (12)

u know what the best part about the FC is? its still comparable to cars that are half its age!

Bambam7

13's are definately attainable without upgrading the turbo.

Stock for stock, The MR2 is faster than the TII though....
I beat one a few days ago though- I just talked to the guy yesterday, and he has a catback and intake too. Big stereo, rims, and ground effects though- could add a bit of weight.

787B

i think the FC vs. the MR2 is good competition.

since my heart is in the rotary i would have to vote for the RX-7, but I still admit that the MR2 is a VERY nice car.

i love mid engined RWD two seaters and would own a turbo MR2 if i had money for one. However, i think the new MR2's suck. seems like they focus on looks to much.

MtnRacer

As I understood it, the sw20 went throught SEVERAL subtle chassis modifications in an attempt to cure it of it's lack of rigidy. I also heard that they never did quite nail it. Pound for pound, they're both great cars and it would really come down to driver skill to see a major difference on the track. Anybody know how much an MR2 weighs?

2DoritosOnAStick

The 3S is an incredible engine, like many Toyota engines. I would love to have an MR2, and will someday when I care enough.

An FC can be made faster cheaper, IMO. Then again it's all about being able to turn a wrench yourself

madnut

I typically perform modifications on my own car; it's usually painful, but the end result always gives a good feeling.

toyota made some suspension changes in 93 to fix the toe-out problems in 91-92, where the mr2 would easily oversteer (but most mr2 drivers, including myself, likes the 91 handling better). The mr2s weight around 3k lbs, since most of them have t-tops, which add some weight. But I think the hardtop is around 2800lbs.

The two cars are very comparable, but now I'm in the fc camp, so I need to get my hands on a t2 and start working. Is the 89+ that much different than the pre-89? I know they had some power increases and some fixes, but I see most owners here are '88 and '87s. I personally like the 89+ round taillights...

Erik

yes, you're right...the 89+ T2's had some subtle body changes, as well as a little more hp due to lighter rotors, higher compression, and a slightly different turbo. 200hp as compared to 182 of the earlier models. buuut, they do have a little extra weight, so in performance they are about equal.
the 89+ ar around 2900-3000 lbs.

honestly i guess it doesn't matter which year you get as long as you're happy with the car. the turbo/wastegate on the 89+ is better which might help in the long run...but all in all when you put the same mods on an 87-88 T2 its gonna be pretty close in performance.

on a side note though...it seems like the 87-88's have more electrical gremlins than the 89+...which may be irritating. but thats just from my observation on the forum...

good luck man...hope you find the T2 you're looking for. and if you find a nice 89-91...BUY IT! they are RARE!

T04FC

I own a MR2 turbo along with my Turbo'd FC..
I've had the MR2 for almost 4 years now and after the 5SFE - 3SGTE conversion, the car has run strong and is very comparable performance wise to the TurboII's...
After i got the FC, i had a few little quirks with the car, but now it runs really nicely.. and to me.. the car feels nicer to drive..

i think after you drive a rotary u'll understand how i feel...
at the same time.. i would feel more safe going on a long *** road trip with my MR2 than i would with my FC..
but my MR2 is bone stock except for shocks/springs and my FC is fairly modified..
I like both cars equally.. but pricing wise.. the FC wins.. I can get either 1 MR2T or 2 TurboII's