The Turbo the MR2 vs Just buy a faster car argument

[muffdan]

hard to say, different kits use different turbos and different sized intercoolers (if they use an IC). There's also the loss of the stock manifold and possible loss of main cat and back box to consider. You take away weight as well as add it.

[stargazer30]

I did check out the V6 option BTW.  basic V6 conversion won't give much change out of £5K and for that you get 200lb/ft and 200bhp V6 plus a new clutch so its the same sort of power and cost as the basic kit Matt does give or take a little.  The experts (woodsport) are just down the road from me at Durham.  The down side is they have a 3 to 4 month waiting list and the conversion takes 4 weeks!  My cars my daily driver so not an option for me really.

[Two's Company]

once the novelty wore off I know the car was much more fun to drive NA. There's something so much purer in the drive without a turbo, and it was the main thinking behind me not going for all-out power after selling the VXR. As good as a turbo car is, you simply cannot beat the immediacy of an NA lump that doesn't leave you fighting between lag and boost round the corners.

This is exactly why I haven't turbo'd mine.  I have driven the SP240 and the C2 and whilst it is fun for a giggle I reckon most of the time a chipped N/A has just enough power to keep it interesting.  9 times out of 10 I never feel the need for more power.

[AC]

once the novelty wore off I know the car was much more fun to drive NA. There's something so much purer in the drive without a turbo, and it was the main thinking behind me not going for all-out power after selling the VXR. As good as a turbo car is, you simply cannot beat the immediacy of an NA lump that doesn't leave you fighting between lag and boost round the corners.

This is exactly why I haven't turbo'd mine.  I have driven the SP240 and the C2 and whilst it is fun for a giggle I reckon most of the time a chipped N/A has just enough power to keep it interesting.  9 times out of 10 I never feel the need for more power.

All interesting points, as already said we are now deep into personal opinion.  I differ from the above tbh.  Before I went turbo I had pursued a small degree of NA mods; Unichip, markiii pipe, Blitz panel, Magnex cat back, 5w40 fully syn oil and ran on V Power (probably £800's worth in total).  On a good day it may have been worth 150hp (just a guesstimate) and whilst it was without doubt an improvement over stock I still found myself wringing its neck to get a move on (in other words still lacking).  I then went for a passenger ride in Ste's (Spit) C2 and that was just mind altering, decision made, if I'm keeping the 2 then I had to tick the turbo box on the 'list of mods to do to your 2 before you die' (does a list exist?  New thread maybe?).

Clearly a solid, proven set-up is key to getting a level of driveability on a turbo and as you say its your daily driver then I'd think your best (only) option is the drive in drive out package from SP.  My personal experience with my Apexi (one of the smaller blowers, yet made about as much as a stock 1ZZ can take) is that driveability hasn't really suffered, its smooth off boost and just as quick as when it was NA but now I have boost assisting from 2500 and at 3000 the full mania is revealed and its just a case of how hard do you want to press the pedal.  If anything IMO it's the polarisation from off boost to on boost that alters the driveability (not necessarily worsening it) and for me that just adds another element to its character and another aspect to respect (feather the throttle if any degree of hand wheel angle is present).  Make no mistake its a radically different car to when it was NA'd, but then isn't that what you are looking for anyway?

[loadswine]

As a side note, Anyone know what a 1zz turbo with the intercooler weighs? Or the weight of a converted car?

My 1zz with PE turbo and full chargecooler setup was 1000Kg
My same car , but with the 3VZ-FE V6 weighed on the same machine came in at 1040Kg ( The weighbridge was supposed to be accurate to 20KG, so those figures can't be taken as Kg absolute, but you get the idea)
I think a 1MZ-FE V6 is around 20Kg lighter. ( Olie can probably confirm or deny this)

I fully accept the reversibilty argument and also the 1zz, even with a few mild mods is ace to drive too.
I drove my son's 2 back to back with my own, on a few nice roads in Sussex a few weeks back and though there was a difference, I just loved the way David's car responded. It just felt so sweet and in touch with the road, very responsive and the engine crisp and more flexible than I remembered as well. The Fidanza lightweight flywheel is a very underestimated mod for an NA, which I rate as probably the best for what it costs.

[Anonymous]

[The Fidanza lightweight flywheel is a very underestimated mod for an NA, which I rate as probably the best for what it costs.

That's probably one of my next mods, plus a decent clutch as my thrust bearing is making strange noise at the moment.

Rob

[MattPerformance]

ChrisGB, good points well made.  My only complaint is the use of the vague term "more" when summarising the various options! Bangs for your buck is surely the all important metric?!
A final point on the various options, is the potential for future tuning.  If you choose turbo you have the option for further tuning (280+ bhp) with uprated internals.  With all other options you are pretty much limited to outputs well within the capabilities of the stock engine (whichever it is!).

I was thinking as well the other day, is the only reason that TTE made their turbo kit around 180-200bhp (depending on which dyno/car is being read) purely because of longevity and keeping a sensible warranty? Or was it because that's what they felt gave the best power increase to the car before you get to the hanging on syndrome I mentioned in an earlier post? Be interesting to know, that's for sure.

The outputs of the TTE kit is all based around Toyota Corporation Standards and vehicle homologation requirements (the choice of turbo was determined by the driveability argument).  The kit has to meet Toyota's own 100 hr test (100 hrs at full load at max power), Toyota engine bay temp requirements, as well as all noise and exhaust emissions, and all at a price which is marketable.  The stock cat (and to some extent, the pre-cat) will generate too high temperatures at high outputs so in order to keep the engine bay temps in check (and to meet the ultra-demanding 100hr test), the tune had to be wound back to where it is.  Also, for drive by noise, they had to keep the stock air box which is also quite restrictive.  

When you don't have to meet homologation (which tuners don't) and a good understanding of how to go about safely exploring the headroom from Toyota's fool-proof standards, it is possible to develop the kit to produce far more performance without any reliability trade-off whatsoever.  That is what the original SP240 did.  The new SP Turbo kit moves the process further along with a more efficient intercooler and a few other tweaks to improve efficiency and avoid bracket fractures and water pipe leaks  s;-) ;-) s;-)

[ChrisGB]

I was thinking as well the other day, is the only reason that TTE made their turbo kit around 180-200bhp (depending on which dyno/car is being read) purely because of longevity and keeping a sensible warranty? Or was it because that's what they felt gave the best power increase to the car before you get to the hanging on syndrome I mentioned in an earlier post? Be interesting to know, that's for sure.

My take on this is that Toyota had to offer a warranty with the kit, so it had to be gentle enough to no wreck anything. I think that quite a few people have shown that putting more torque than the TTE kit makes down the gearbox is going to significantly reduce its life. Quite a few have had gearbox problems in the standard non turbo car, so it is obviously not like a big VAG diesel box. As for the hanging on effect, I felt that 200hp was comfortable and I am sure that the car could handle a fair bit more with an experienced driver behind the wheel, but to do this, other compromises are being made in thermal and longevity terms.

ChrisGB, good points well made.  My only complaint is the use of the vague term "more" when summarising the various options! Bangs for your buck is surely the all important metric?!
A final point on the various options, is the potential for future tuning.  If you choose turbo you have the option for further tuning (280+ bhp) with uprated internals.  With all other options you are pretty much limited to outputs well within the capabilities of the stock engine (whichever it is!).

If bang for buck is the key metric, nitrous is the best option, with an easy £5 per bhp added. Next step is the cheaper turbo kits at anything from £25 per bhp added. Next up is something like the Web3.0 Rotrex Supercharger kit which is around £33 per bhp gained. Next up is N/A mods at £50 per bhp. This is equalled by a 2zz swap with mild bolt on power mods but you spend more to get more. Last is the more complete, but more expensive turbo setups from around £50 - £70 per bhp and V6 conversions at a similar level. Wonder if anyone has done a 2GR-FE swap?

When it comes to headroom, the turbo gives you an option to make more than the supercharger on any given engine, but if you are building for maximum power on revised internals, the turbo that makes huge power will be less drivable than the supercharger option that makes 40 - 50hp less in total when limited by the strength of the internals.

The other thing is how you define bang. If numbers are your objective, turbo makes lots of sense. If driving purity is your thing, N/A makes lots of sense. It is all about personal preference and what you enjoy about the car.

Chris

[loadswine]

Re the 2GR-FE swap, a chap called USPSpro over on SC has just installed one, Blitzo had done an autocross version before that as well. Nobody that I'm aware of in the UK with a Roadster yet, though there are a couple of Mk2s and a Mk1 is being done by Woodsport at the moment. With just exhaust manifold mods, these can make 300 horses on stock ecu.
Cost around £8500 or thereabouts from information I've seen. Engines are not easy to come by over here.  Say £55 per bhp increase over stock levels.

[ChrisGB]

At £8 1/2Ks you are a long way into buy a better car budget. You need to love the mr2 a lot to spend that much on one. Bet it is a cracking drive though!

Chris

[OlberJ]

A final point on the various options, is the potential for future tuning.  If you choose turbo you have the option for further tuning (280+ bhp) with uprated internals.  With all other options you are pretty much limited to outputs well within the capabilities of the stock engine (whichever it is!).

I'm assuming here you mean not adding FI?

That's the reason i like the V6. It's a starting block of 200bhp and 200lb/ft of torque (and remember, 95% of that torque is available for most of the time, not just peak). And you can add your FI up to around the 300/350 mark without needing internals.

If you uprate the internals, that'll cost you, on any engine.

Nige i need to get the car weighed really, it's booked in for when i get my tyres fitted for tracking and corner weighting so should hopefully be soon!

Also we're doing apples and oranges here. It is possible to do your own V6 conversion so the figures being banded about aren't a true reflection really.

Parts alone are about £2k for a V6 conversion. It is labour/skills intensive though.

[ad_car_08]

Okay heres the probs with the different car route..

Boxter S
Finding one with a good history and in good condition in the price range difficult, most expensive of the bunch
silly repair and maintenance costs due to no access to engine
plastic rear screen WTF!
sky high insurance
highly likely it will get keyed in Sunderland

S2000
Best of the bunch but a group 20 insurance again
iffy handling apparently?
low torque, high reving engine
hard to find locally, hens teeth these

BMW Z4
Most of these are 2.0, 2.2s so under powered
3.0 apparently front heavy given weight of engine
2.5L is the one to go for but not many up here, expensive to buy
expensive maintenance again
group 19 insurance like the boxter

VX220
nope sorry its just ugly, don't care how good they are I couldn't buy one

MX5
Would need turboing anyway so may as well turbo the 2.

Just to add my 2p's worth - my mate/housemate has a 56 plate 2.5 Z4. It looks lovely, brilliant build quality as you'd expect from a BMW, but disappointing performance. My standard W reg '2 is far more agile, and beats his car from the off. It seems to take ages for the Z4 to get going, but I admit that once it's up to 3.5k revs, its quite quick

[Mad Matt]

You can get a Mazda fitted MX5 1.6 turbo fairly cheaply. You can get a Fiat Barchetta and turbo it fairly cheaply. The MG-TF 160 is fairly easy to get to 190bhp and keep NA.

I don't think any of these drive as well as the MR2, but just to throw some ideas into the mix....

[OlberJ]

The Mx5 is a great drive. Especially with the turbo added.

[Thudd]

VX220s are pretty cheap (and quick)...
Early Elise?
Smart Roadster   s:crazyeyes: :crazyeyes: s:crazyeyes:    s:D s:D  

I'm in a similar place right now - i'm far too comfortable with the '2, even in the wet.
I wouldn't consider turboing it, mostly due to reliability concerns, which leaves me wondering: what's next?

Elise is a bit basic, Boxster has image problems and concerns about big bills, S2000 is a torqueless wonder and gets criticised for the handling.
You sure you couldn't learn to live with the VX220 Turbo looks? Maybe in black? There's an Opel version with no Griffin badge....   s:wink: :wink: s:wink:

[Thudd]

I have just realised you need to get a 335D   s:D s:D

[davidarden]

I have just realised you need to get a 335D   s:D s:D

Mapped...   s:wink: :wink: s:wink:

[jamfe355]

As per my earlier post, i thnk you should buy this......

 l viewtopic.php?f=37&t=28863 l

Its froma club member, and i reckon its a fair price.

Shame im too far away form you in wellingborough, otherwise id have helped out by letting you feel a turboed mr2.  s:) s:)  

still think you should do it  s:D s:D

[loadswine]

I think if I was going turbo in the Roadster and I wanted a new install, it would have to be the SP kit. I've seen the SP Racer on track and it is very rapid indeed.  Not just on the straights, but everywhere.

[aaronjb]

At £8 1/2Ks you are a long way into buy a better car budget. You need to love the mr2 a lot to spend that much on one. Bet it is a cracking drive though!

Heck, you can literally buy an older S2000 or Boxster for that money..

[stargazer30]

As per my earlier post, i thnk you should buy this......

 l viewtopic.php?f=37&t=28863 l

Its froma club member, and i reckon its a fair price.

still think you should do it  s:D s:D

Nope I need a reliable turbo upgrade, so it will be the SP package + new clutch + there 40,000 mile warrenty.  I'm sure this HASS kit is a bargain but if I had probs I'm up north so no specialists here and I'm not mechanical enough to fix it myself.

[evileye_wrx]

I'm up north so no specialists here and I'm not mechanical enough to fix it myself.

The aforementioned Woodsport in Durham

Future Racing Developments in Middleboro

XO on the Team Valley in Gateshead

Jude Performance Services in Blaydon

S-Cars in Spennymoor did some work on my '2

There are lots of Specialists up North. I'm sure there are more but that's just off the top of my head. I've used 3 of those and found all quite capable when working on a turbo '2

[MattPerformance]

I think if I was going turbo in the Roadster and I wanted a new install, it would have to be the SP kit. I've seen the SP Racer on track and it is very rapid indeed.  Not just on the straights, but everywhere.

Thanks Nigel   s:D s:D  
I'll be at Bedford on Mon (29/3) in it again, but I'm going with my Dad - it's his 70th Birthday that day - so if anyone sees it bimbling around gently please don't come rushing back onto this thread...   s:wink: :wink: s:wink:  
I suspect it's also fair to say, regarding a second hand kit (or fourth hand Hass) that the reason David has a mint '05 car is that he wants the best he can get, both in terms of reliability and cosmetics.  I don't think a used kit fits the bill.  But that Hass kit will surely find a good home elsewhere.

[jjr197]

At £8 1/2Ks you are a long way into buy a better car budget. You need to love the mr2 a lot to spend that much on one. Bet it is a cracking drive though!

Heck, you can literally buy an older S2000 or Boxster for that money..

You can get low milage Yr 2000 S2000s for £7k, so for £8.5k you can get a 2002 ish one in good nick! Personally that's what I'd do, but I'm bias as I had one for a few years and I love them!

And I never had any problems with the handling (as it was mentioned in an earlier post). The only people that have problems with them are people that don't understand how to drive a rear wheel drive car properly! (just my opinion of course!)

Jimi

[filcee]

The main reason is I'm used to a turbo and the torque it provides.  It makes for easy/lazy driving.  The 2 is great on the bends but for getting into gaps on the A19 or having to speed up after road works its tiresome, having to change down/rev the nuts off it.  I recon with a turbo you'd have the best of both worlds.

Having the choice of driving a turbo'd family hatch - which is everything you describe here, and a '2, I far prefer the '2.  If you want to make the driving enjoyable (or, more of a headache), try thinking and looking a bit further down the road so that you're ready for whatever is going to be presented.  In standard trim, in the right gear at the right engine speed, it will deliver.  You just need to be ready for what comes up.  When you get it right, it is immensely rewarding.  When you get it not quite right, then the car will provide more than plenty of feedback about what you could have done ...

Having said that, the '2 can be really tiresome on a long drive home, in the rain and the dark after a long day at work ... but not so much I want to get rid of it.

I'd stick with it stock, and improve the way I use the road, then maybe think about more power.

edit: spelling and quoting