If you had to give up your FD
Actually LSX swaps has been done already.
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
Actually LSX swaps has been done already.
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
Omg now I seen it all lol.
The ls7 is a MONSTER.
Amazing what that engine can do.
If you look at it he didn't really needed to get as detailed as much has he did. There is plenty of room to do it. It just seem really pointless since IMO the NSX motor is pretty good to start with. I while ago I seen some else do it but with a FWD set up from a Cadillac Noth Star engine. That was a while back.
Actually LSX swaps has been done already.
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
This guy went a bit over board but it can be made easier than this.
http://www.ls7nsx.com/
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
Those stats are for a 91-92 MR2 with dinky 14" rims, one of the main reasons it got **** poor handling and braking for its mid-engined lay-out
I specifically stated the 93+ MR2 Turbo
Body style: 2-door, 2-passenger
Drivetrain: Mid engine, rear drive
Curb weight, lb: 2888
Engine: 2.0-liter DOHC turbocharged I-4, 4 valves/cylinder
Horsepower, hp @ rpm, SAE net: 200 @ 6000
Torque, lb-ft @ rpm, SAE net: 200 @ 3200
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Acceleration, 0-60 mph, sec: 6.2
Standing quarter mile, sec/mph: 14.8/93.5
Braking, 60-0, feet: 107
Handling, lateral acceleration, g: 0.94
Slalom, 600-ft, mph: 69.2
Functional price: $30,475
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz1JAKE1KKa
Whats impressive is the zo6 comes with what, stock 19's and some wideass tires, while the MR2 does it on some almost literally pizza-cutter 15's for tires, so there is still room for improvement.
Its lateral g's ties a Ferrari F40 which isn't bad for an almost 20 year old car that was originally $22k or so new.
I remember once I ricer flew by a local with a blue c6 zo6 in one of my MR2's and he said on the street racing forum that he wanted to brake check me, and I told him Id be just fine with that because my car I paid $2850 for on could brake check his $70k zo6 and his front end would be up my *** if I did, not to mention I had upgraded rims and tires over what it came with from the factory. But those days are over, I don't drive like a retard, kinda hard to in a stock '95 miata.
I specifically stated the 93+ MR2 Turbo
Body style: 2-door, 2-passenger
Drivetrain: Mid engine, rear drive
Curb weight, lb: 2888
Engine: 2.0-liter DOHC turbocharged I-4, 4 valves/cylinder
Horsepower, hp @ rpm, SAE net: 200 @ 6000
Torque, lb-ft @ rpm, SAE net: 200 @ 3200
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Acceleration, 0-60 mph, sec: 6.2
Standing quarter mile, sec/mph: 14.8/93.5
Braking, 60-0, feet: 107
Handling, lateral acceleration, g: 0.94
Slalom, 600-ft, mph: 69.2
Functional price: $30,475
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz1JAKE1KKa
Whats impressive is the zo6 comes with what, stock 19's and some wideass tires, while the MR2 does it on some almost literally pizza-cutter 15's for tires, so there is still room for improvement.
Its lateral g's ties a Ferrari F40 which isn't bad for an almost 20 year old car that was originally $22k or so new.
I remember once I ricer flew by a local with a blue c6 zo6 in one of my MR2's and he said on the street racing forum that he wanted to brake check me, and I told him Id be just fine with that because my car I paid $2850 for on could brake check his $70k zo6 and his front end would be up my *** if I did, not to mention I had upgraded rims and tires over what it came with from the factory. But those days are over, I don't drive like a retard, kinda hard to in a stock '95 miata.
PS I think most mags had the C6 Z at about 100 feet even on the 60 to zero but with good pads and tires an Mr2 should easily beat those #s. However what really matters is braking from 150 to 50 over and over again or in the mr2s case more like 110 to 50
Fritz, what is your opinion of the Cayman S cars on track if you have seen any?
It is what I was originally looking for but I didnt want to eat the $5-7k more of depreciation they will have over the next 12-18 months.
I want something that is nice to drive everyday and is still track ready with the change of brake pads. The T-REX was something I have wanted for 6 years and found a solid deal so I jumped on it. I am still not convinced I will keep it longer than just this summer and will likely be looking for something different this fall.
It is what I was originally looking for but I didnt want to eat the $5-7k more of depreciation they will have over the next 12-18 months.
I want something that is nice to drive everyday and is still track ready with the change of brake pads. The T-REX was something I have wanted for 6 years and found a solid deal so I jumped on it. I am still not convinced I will keep it longer than just this summer and will likely be looking for something different this fall.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
Fritz, what is your opinion of the Cayman S cars on track if you have seen any?
It is what I was originally looking for but I didnt want to eat the $5-7k more of depreciation they will have over the next 12-18 months.
I want something that is nice to drive everyday and is still track ready with the change of brake pads. The T-REX was something I have wanted for 6 years and found a solid deal so I jumped on it. I am still not convinced I will keep it longer than just this summer and will likely be looking for something different this fall.
It is what I was originally looking for but I didnt want to eat the $5-7k more of depreciation they will have over the next 12-18 months.
I want something that is nice to drive everyday and is still track ready with the change of brake pads. The T-REX was something I have wanted for 6 years and found a solid deal so I jumped on it. I am still not convinced I will keep it longer than just this summer and will likely be looking for something different this fall.
I'd also look at Boxsters (if you can handle the convertible thing) because you'll probably find a better deal and it's the same car.
Cayman R has been tweaked a bit
http://www.autospies.com/news/VIDEO-...ayman-S-63036/
Not necessarily - far more common in the earlier models, based on reviews on S2KI - the newer engines are pretty tough
http://www.autospies.com/news/VIDEO-...ayman-S-63036/
However the engine can and will eventually die an early death.
Yup. Just like any motorcycle those engines take a HUGE beating. I was looking at a 600 a couple of weeks ago and the engine died at 10k. Must have been a young owner that loves to bounce the rev limiter lol.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 45
Likes: 1
From: STL
Nice magazine numbers for the mr2 but I've yet to see one have any sort of performance on a road course to run with the big boys. I remember a 1st gen back in 2004 or so w/ a turbo running some decent laps at Summit Point and the lap times were about the same as a stock FD, approx 1.26 laps (fairly fast lap would be under 1.20) and he did win the race that weekend which was pretty cool. I can't remember which class he was driving in but obviously not a fast one. That's the only mr2 I've ever seen that was remotely fast.
PS I think most mags had the C6 Z at about 100 feet even on the 60 to zero but with good pads and tires an Mr2 should easily beat those #s. However what really matters is braking from 150 to 50 over and over again or in the mr2s case more like 110 to 50
PS I think most mags had the C6 Z at about 100 feet even on the 60 to zero but with good pads and tires an Mr2 should easily beat those #s. However what really matters is braking from 150 to 50 over and over again or in the mr2s case more like 110 to 50
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H12wfwdn_rM
The beauty of the MR2 is its got good nuetral balance, a wide stance (a stock wide-body version of it too, unlike most Japanese cars), and rearward braking bias, plus the obvious benefits of a midship car.
It didn't do well, but they've used an MR2 chassis in Le Manns before, and it won a couple JGTC 300 championships, toyota celebrated with building the TRD2000gt, a widebody version of the MR2.
The 3sgte it utilizes has been used in several JGTC Toyota chassis and been the champion of several.
This guy is pretty hardcore into MR2's, has a great racing budget and it performs quite well in all facets of racing. Its a good overall chassis if you want to do Autox, Hill-climbs, drag, track, etc.
http://www.jekylhyderacing.com/
http://www.planet-9.com/cayman-boxst...tml#post429147
If by "updated" you mean the '09 and on engines, or what people have called the "gen 2" family, then I have to disagree. The Gen 2 is a very different engine from the first generation and should not have the same failure modes. If you mean just the engines that were offered in the 987 cars, then I agree, since they are virtually the same as the 986 engines, but with some fixes, mainly the RMS problem though I have never heard just what was done, just that RMS failure stories have become rare.
Kawasaki builds some of the best motors, and they are favored in drag racing - that's why I own a ZX-10R
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 45
Likes: 1
From: STL
Want a deep 9 second 90's import? heres one on ebay, starting bid $15k, not a bad deal if you ask me.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Toyot...fCarsQ5fTrucks
It also happens to be an MR2 Turbo.
I like the MR2 because if your car hobby is on a budget, you can still get good bang for the buck out of one of these cars. There is always a faster car, but for the cost of the chassis alone, MR2's chassis are dirt cheap, usually half the price or less of an FD chassis in the same condition.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Toyot...fCarsQ5fTrucks
It also happens to be an MR2 Turbo.
I like the MR2 because if your car hobby is on a budget, you can still get good bang for the buck out of one of these cars. There is always a faster car, but for the cost of the chassis alone, MR2's chassis are dirt cheap, usually half the price or less of an FD chassis in the same condition.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 45
Likes: 1
From: STL
Besides, you can't get a Midship car for much cheaper than the MR2, so if your on a budget, its your only option. I guess your only other option is a Fiero, and a 98 JDM MR2 looks a helluva lot better than your 85 Fiero. Also it was the MR2 that set the trend for Wide-bodied cars, since its the only one to come with a wide-body version from the factory.
Wasn't this thread about having a suitable replacement to the FD? Why is this kid still trying to push a dead horse(mr2) into the mix. We get it you like them but you need to understand their limitations and standing in the automotive world. They really are the forgotten import, especially when thinking about Toyotas sports cars. There's a big reason you no longer see them involved in motorsports outside of being riced out at an HIN event. The FD on the other hand is simply in a much higher category of performance. Just look at all it still accomplished and is still a threat to most of todays sports cars around a track, its such a beloved car that manufacturers/ tuners still continue to make new parts/aero to keep it in the lime light 20 years after its inception. I think the mr2 might find it hard coming up in conversation let alone sharing equal footing with the FD.
Thats an opinion, not a fact. Some people don't like FD RX7s, but as they say, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
Besides, you can't get a Midship car for much cheaper than the MR2, so if your on a budget, its your only option. I guess your only other option is a Fiero, and a 98 JDM MR2 looks a helluva lot better than your 85 Fiero. Also it was the MR2 that set the trend for Wide-bodied cars, since its the only one to come with a wide-body version from the factory.
Besides, you can't get a Midship car for much cheaper than the MR2, so if your on a budget, its your only option. I guess your only other option is a Fiero, and a 98 JDM MR2 looks a helluva lot better than your 85 Fiero. Also it was the MR2 that set the trend for Wide-bodied cars, since its the only one to come with a wide-body version from the factory.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 45
Likes: 1
From: STL
point of my argument was, that Mazda does not have monopoly on low-dollar high performing sports cars, thats what I was getting at.
Someone suggested it earlier, and there are great contenders from other companies that give good performance without costing an arm or a leg, and the magazine numbers I posted up from that "Best bang for the buck" 1994 motor trend article, seemed to back me up as well. The MR2 was merely being used as an example of a low dollar, (edit: "good handling"), that is NOT a Mazda. Sorry for not being a Mazda fanboy even though I own one.
For low dollar "good handling" cars you need to look up 24 hours of LeMons, MK1 MR2's as well as several other cars race for 24 hours straight with a racing budget of $500 or so.
This video is one of the reasons why I don't ONLY look up Mazda alone if Im looking for low-dollar good handling, "bang for the buck" cars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojROyPUZvc4
Someone suggested it earlier, and there are great contenders from other companies that give good performance without costing an arm or a leg, and the magazine numbers I posted up from that "Best bang for the buck" 1994 motor trend article, seemed to back me up as well. The MR2 was merely being used as an example of a low dollar, (edit: "good handling"), that is NOT a Mazda. Sorry for not being a Mazda fanboy even though I own one.
For low dollar "good handling" cars you need to look up 24 hours of LeMons, MK1 MR2's as well as several other cars race for 24 hours straight with a racing budget of $500 or so.
This video is one of the reasons why I don't ONLY look up Mazda alone if Im looking for low-dollar good handling, "bang for the buck" cars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojROyPUZvc4
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
point of my argument was, that Mazda does not have monopoly on low-dollar high performing sports cars, thats what I was getting at.
Someone suggested it earlier, and there are great contenders from other companies that give good performance without costing an arm or a leg, and the magazine numbers I posted up from that "Best bang for the buck" 1994 motor trend article, seemed to back me up as well. The MR2 was merely being used as an example of a low dollar, (edit: "good handling"), that is NOT a Mazda. Sorry for not being a Mazda fanboy even though I own one.
For low dollar "good handling" cars you need to look up 24 hours of LeMons, MK1 MR2's as well as several other cars race for 24 hours straight with a racing budget of $500 or so.
This video is one of the reasons why I don't ONLY look up Mazda alone if Im looking for low-dollar good handling, "bang for the buck" cars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojROyPUZvc4
Someone suggested it earlier, and there are great contenders from other companies that give good performance without costing an arm or a leg, and the magazine numbers I posted up from that "Best bang for the buck" 1994 motor trend article, seemed to back me up as well. The MR2 was merely being used as an example of a low dollar, (edit: "good handling"), that is NOT a Mazda. Sorry for not being a Mazda fanboy even though I own one.
For low dollar "good handling" cars you need to look up 24 hours of LeMons, MK1 MR2's as well as several other cars race for 24 hours straight with a racing budget of $500 or so.
This video is one of the reasons why I don't ONLY look up Mazda alone if Im looking for low-dollar good handling, "bang for the buck" cars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojROyPUZvc4
The FD is at an elite level even today (in SCCA autox I think the FD is still ASP) when most of the high performance cars from the 90s are long forgotten. Sorry but the MR2 was never remembered for elite performance at any time
However thanks for bringing the MR2 to the table as the brake #s are impressive
PS if you really want to go fast on a budget buy an old stock car.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 45
Likes: 1
From: STL
Yea I have to agree with you there that the MR2 is a forgotten sportscar, I think it stems from the US getting a watered down version missing about 45hp and 45lb/ft of torque from what they got in Japan.
As for an elite performing level, the MR2 and MRS (which is basically a MKIII MR2) have won 4 JGTC's, so given a good enough budget and a good wheelman, it can perform with the best in the JGTC 300.
Sure wish they'd allow rotaries in Le Manns again, that would be fun to see.
As for an elite performing level, the MR2 and MRS (which is basically a MKIII MR2) have won 4 JGTC's, so given a good enough budget and a good wheelman, it can perform with the best in the JGTC 300.
Sure wish they'd allow rotaries in Le Manns again, that would be fun to see.
Highwayman
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: Houston
I'd have to say a Cayman S or early Viper, but both cost significantly more than a clean FD.
Stephen
I have owned 2 MR2s in the past (na and turbo) and now I own a FD RX7.
FD > MR2 period.
MR2 feels just as special and easier to drive and live with and goes like a bullet, launches like an awd, and is much more reliable.
But just the handling and chuckability of the RX7 is enough to hit a MR2 on the head with a hammer.
MR2s snappy oversteer always makes you think twice when pushing hard and the front end feels too light at high speed.
To me MR2, S2000, 200sx, WRX etc are all bang for your buck but still they are all one league below the RX7, NSX, GTR and Supra so I also think MR2 has no place in this thread.
FD > MR2 period.
MR2 feels just as special and easier to drive and live with and goes like a bullet, launches like an awd, and is much more reliable.
But just the handling and chuckability of the RX7 is enough to hit a MR2 on the head with a hammer.
MR2s snappy oversteer always makes you think twice when pushing hard and the front end feels too light at high speed.
To me MR2, S2000, 200sx, WRX etc are all bang for your buck but still they are all one league below the RX7, NSX, GTR and Supra so I also think MR2 has no place in this thread.
