And if you're gonna go with the 3S-GTE that Banken suggested (with good reason), then I think you'll want to go with either the GT or GT-S models of the SW20 if you haven't already (because those cars had that very engine in them to begin with).
| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums > Technical Discussion > Quick Question about MR2 |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 11 2013, 02:59 PM |
| I'm probably going to get laughed at for this, but... I was wondering if it would be practical to supercharge the 3S-GE in an MR2 SW20? Thing is... I'm writing a fic, and would like to keep it semi-realistic. And I apologize if this the wrong section of the board. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: RedsunsF1 Apr 11 2013, 03:15 PM |
| I don't see nothing wrong with it. They already have amazing handling with their 50:50 balance and adding a supercharge wouldn't be a bad a idea. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 11 2013, 03:15 PM | ||
http://nacelicas.darkbb.com/t164-3sgze-how-to |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 11 2013, 03:23 PM | ||
Ah, thanks. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 11 2013, 07:40 PM |
| It would make more sense to just swap a 3S-GTE. But if you were absolutely positively in love with the car or stuck with a loan and couldn't afford to buy something faster, I could see using it, if used engines still cost more than a supercharger kit (back when the car was brand new). There are supercharger kits for the Altezza that could theoretically be reworked to use with the 3S-GE. Assuming there is any room for them... which there probably isn't. There is almost zero room between the front of the engine and the wall of the engine bay where you would be adding an extra pulley. Actually, a bolt-on turbo would make slightly more sense for packaging reasons. But again, I will repeat this, supercharging an NA car when there was a turbo version available is a dumb idea. |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 11 2013, 07:48 PM | ||
Well, I wasn't planning on doing it myself. I was going to write it into a fanfiction, and at the very least wanted to confirm the fact that it was possible. I at least want my facts correct if the writing tanks. Thanks for the response, either way. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 18 2013, 01:03 AM |
| If you need/want some help with the fanfic as far as technicals go please feel free to shoot me a PM with your questions. id be glad to help out where I can if youre interested. |
| Posted by: Meteor Apr 18 2013, 03:38 PM |
| sideways certainly knows his stuff. I'd take him up on his offer if I were you. And if you're gonna go with the 3S-GTE that Banken suggested (with good reason), then I think you'll want to go with either the GT or GT-S models of the SW20 if you haven't already (because those cars had that very engine in them to begin with). |
| Posted by: knightrous Apr 18 2013, 05:37 PM |
| While a supercharged SW20 is pretty rare, there have been a couple of good ones. If you check out the MR2 Australia forums, particularly this thread by Mandalay, which shows his build of his SW20 with a 3SGE BEAMS motor and a Rotrex Supercharger. mr2australia.com/mr2play/tm.aspx?m=24141&mpage=8 Mandalay's build is a brilliant work of art and makes the whole build look like a factory installation. Initially the car made 205.1RWKW, but with some changes and tweaks, it then went to 251RWKW. He is currently rebuilding the car with a bigger intercooler system, bigger supercharger and shooting for over 300RWKW. Now if your looking for information on MR2's, definately have a good look around about the AW11, SW20 and ZZW30's that have had the 1MZFE V6 3L motor or 2GRFE V6 3.5L motors dropped into them. A 2GR in an SW20 put it's on par with a NSX power wise, but is a lighter package and one example of a 1MZFE Twin Turbo (WTF Auto's SW20) produced 600+HP with an awesome power curve. |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 18 2013, 06:13 PM |
| None of which is relevant for a touge MR2 because that sort of power would be a total waste. 400 HP is pretty much the limit... and an SW20 is already way too heavy with the 3S in the back, never mind a twin turbo V6. |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 19 2013, 06:42 AM |
| Alrighty, I'll be sure to ask for help, thanks. |
| Posted by: Jhaqastar Apr 19 2013, 10:43 AM |
MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2 MR2  Supercharge is nice if you're portraying a guy that likes to be out of the norm (like Wataru). You can add the benefit of the added weight of the SC at the back as a weakness (or strength... or both...). But if he's the typical run of the mill street racer guy, the 3SGTE might be more "realistic." I'm somewhat familiar with the MR2 and how it handles (and somewhat it's weaknesses). First of all I don't believe the 50:50 weight dist that people claim it to have. It's more of 40:60 I think (rear biased) or something close to that. And don't believe the whole it oversteers a lot and stuff. If you know what you're doing, it should be at the verge of understeering at the limit on a long sweeping corner. Though when it oversteers, you need to catch in immediately! It can only handle a certain drift angle before the oversteer is unsavable (On the stock turbo car at least). Strengths: -Rear traction (Can shoot out of a corner almost like an AWD car without the extra weight. It's kind of alarming actually. Even if you power shift 1st to 2nd in the rain, the rear wheels will just chirp and the car will continue to launch you to the horizon) -Cornering speed (It can carry some speed... Buuut when it let's go... It let's go) -Braking (in theory, The car is more 50:50 in braking so all 4 tires get loaded equally, meaning that you can brake carder... But I don't know why my FR brakes harder than my MR though >.>...) Weakness: -Heat soak (Engine at the back... Not as much air flowing... The stock turbo MR2 would heat soak on the second lap of a race track on a hot day. The boost gauge says you're boosting, but you'd feel like an N/A... I don't know if applicable with a SC though... Engine oil temps goes up like crazy too! But water temps are fine.) -Rear tire wear (With great rear traction comes great rear tire wear. My rear tires only last like 6 months in the MR2 while the front seem like they last forever >.>...) Sorry if I answered more that what you asked >.>... I just have this thing with the internet and portraying the MR2 in the wrong light... The car deserves more praise that it's getting >.>... And maybe it'll help on how the MR2 wins or loses in your story |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 19 2013, 05:13 PM | ||
I dunno how familiar you are (do you actually own one?) but this statement is silly. How tail-happy it is depends on a few factors, but Toyota wouldn't have bothered making a suspension geometry change in '93 if it didn't have a reproducible snap-oversteer problem.  |
| Posted by: Jhaqastar Apr 19 2013, 10:58 PM |
| Yeah I race one :3. It's relatively stock though. 1998 Turbo so I have the updated cross member (Sometimes I wish I could try the older crossmember). And only mods are a Greddy side mount Intercooler, down pipe, and exhaust.... Well tires aren't stock, obviously, and I run 17s. Yeah that over steer is thing is over rated (when you know what you're doing). Mostly the oversteer comes from people who shift from FF to MR. Since the front is really really light, understeer will come first. Then they add more steering lock and decrease throttle. Then when the front regains grip (and since they have more steering angle), boom, snap oversteer. Or sometimes when understeering bad, then lift off the throttle violently, then there, it will oversteer. I came from an FR so adapting was a bit easier. The same habits you do for an FR is really close to the habits you need for an MR. I'm used to using lift off oversteer to correct understeer than increasing more steering lock. I'm also used to power out Acceleration. But my FR oversteers more frequently than my MR2 on the track. Sometimes I intentionally want to make the MR2 oversteer a bit but fail. You really need to pendulum the back to let the tail out. Or have the boost already kicking in when you clutch kick. Sometimes mid corner (not at the limit though) I tried to brake somewhat violently and the MR2 was still composed. I heard so much about it's oversteeriness that I expected it to misbehave... But it didn't >.>... But yeah... Once it does let go, and you reach a certain drift angle, it's unsavable  . So you really need to catch it quickly before you get to that angle of no return. And yeah, when it does tail out... It is quite alarming.I describe feeling as... FR= Keeping the tail from overtaking the front with throttle control. MR= Keeping the front in front with steering since the rear has the mass, it will go where it wants to go. But MR2s are more stable that what people say it is >.>... I think I'll be faster around the track with the older crossmember >.>... |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 20 2013, 05:56 AM |
| As a former MR owner, I totally agree with what Jhaqastar posted. The notion that MR2s oversteer at the drop of a hat is a huge misconception, and probably was made by somebody that never actually drove one. In theory, sure, it sort of looks like it would be tail happy. In reality, it's actually very easy to control the car and in most situations it will hug the ground like it's on rails. If the tail end does swing out, it's not difficult to tame, unless it's some sort of violent oversteer or you're on bad terrain (ice ice baby). The only time I ever lost control of my AW was during a blizzard when I was trying to get home, and got snaked by a traffic light change. I hit the brakes, upset the rear balance (due to poor traction), and ended up spinning through the intersection, stopping just a bit after reaching the other side facing the wrong way. I just put it in first gear, turned around and continued home, which was luckily only a few blocks away at that point. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 20 2013, 11:03 AM |
| Oh, was this topic limited to the AW11 chassis? In that case the comment I made has no bearing. The snap oversteer issue was limited to the SW20 chassis and was corrected in '93 with a suspension geometry and tire change. As far as I know there's no such 'issue' with the AW11. EDIT: Oh wait, the OP says specifically SW20. That changes that then! |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 20 2013, 11:53 AM |
| I was just speaking of the MR2 in general. I've never driven an SW20 so I have no idea how it handles, but the AW and the early SW had similar setups, so I figured they would drive relatively the same. |
| Posted by: Meteor Apr 20 2013, 01:40 PM | ||
Wait, what? Back when I asked you a bunch of questions about the MR layout, learned partway through that your AW barely had any lift-off oversteer to it (without even having any roll bars or the like to give it that sort of stability) and then started wondering what made AWs inherently so much more stable than early SWs despite having shorter wheelbases, you ended up giving an explanation that actually included differences in setups. You mentioned that AWs had a relatively low ride-height and in turn, relatively limited weight transfer, so the reason they were so stable was because even when the weight shifted onto the front wheels, it wouldn't easily take enough weight off the back wheels to make them start sliding out on their own. Meanwhile, early SWs not only didn't have the wider tires that came on later models, but also had a comparatively higher ride height that gave them comparatively greater weight transfer, so they were more likely to start oversteering since as well as being able to transfer more weight onto the front wheels with more ease, they also didn't have rear tires grippy enough to downplay the effects of that characteristic. As N1 mentioned, it was significant enough that Toyota revised the suspension and fitted on wider wheels for later models (something they never did for the AW). Certainly not all that difficult to control if you know what you're doing though. So yeah, the difference in ride height sounds like different setups to me. Am I remembering something wrong here? I want to get this cleared up before I end up doing something stupid with my own fic. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 20 2013, 02:41 PM |
| The difference is in power. An NA AW11 is incredibly easy to drive because it has very low power. There's a lot of torque for such a light car, but that's it. The SW20 changed that with essentially the same setup but much more power to the rear wheels. I don't think ride height really had much to do with it. A lot of the issues people were reporting were coming from people that were not at all used to the uncommon MR setup in terms of control. In 93, they put longer toe links on the rear suspension and put wider tires in the back to reduce the chance of snap oversteer and calm down fears of drivers wrapping them around trees. In reality, what they did was stifle the "pure" feeling drivers got from the AW11 and pre-revision SW20. The revised toe settings and tires meant it was harder to make the car oversteer when you actually wanted to. What I am saying is that when driving the AW11 and pre-revision SW20, they feel the same, as it should be. |
| Posted by: Rudy Apr 20 2013, 03:28 PM |
| Tit for tat, the NA version of the SW20 behaved nearly identical when I was putting the car through its paces. To be honest, the power to weight ratio didn't seem to change much between the 4A-GE and 5S-FE. I'm not sure what the weight differences were between the two cars but the acceleration felt the same. That said, engine braking/lift-off seemed to have more of an effect on cornering behavior in the SW20, probably due to the fact the SW is a 2.2 liter. No experience on the S/C or turbo models though. And admittedly, the 5S has a way broader powerband than the 4A and doesn't need to be revved as high to produce power... but that kind of killed the fun, if you know what I mean. |
| Posted by: Jhaqastar Apr 20 2013, 10:56 PM |
| The longer arms on the 93+ were there so that the toe changes were reduced when the suspension travels. The shorter arms produced more toe changes. One main difference with the AW11 and the SW20 is surely the weight. The SW20 is the heaviest of the MR2 line up. Plus having the heavier 2.0L+ engines at the back. But in effect, I think the SW20 has the highest potential when handling power (putting it to the ground) and is a little bit more stable on the bumps. But nothing would take away the raw pleasure of the AW11! I bet the AW11 was a more tail happy car. But since it was so raw and it transmitted data to the driver so well, catching or predicting the ovesteer wasn't to bad. I think they tried to replicate the AW11 winning handling characteristics to the SW20. But since the SW20 came out in the era of FWDs and cars that baby their drivers, the early SW20 were thought to be death traps (for people who don't know how to use em). So they dumbed it down for the everyday consumer with the longer tie rods at the back and wider tires. Cuz seriously, I'm having a really hard time rotating the thing with the +20mm of tire at the back and the 93+ Crossmember. On long sweepings it just wants to wash out. I need to somewhat violently lift off the throttle to induce some oversteer. And the stock toe is +0.35 degrees i think (toe in)... 0.35 degrees!!! That's frikin' huge! Well for me at least. I go maximum of .1 degree on my other cars and that's already huge. That's also the reason why it eats the rear tires like crazy. I'm thinking of getting an alignment again and getting like .1 degree to like 0 degrees toe at the back. That might help the understeering problem with the 93+ crossmember >.>... But yeah... Maybe the SW20 is sort of a death trap to people who just jumped into the realm of RWD coming from racing a FWD machine. But coming from an FR, The SW20 is really blowing my mind away as it is! And that's considering my FR is pretty heavily modified already to a stock MR2. That amount of rear traction is really really really amazing! On a FWD car, the 3SGTE (a friend of mine has a Corona with the 3SGTE), rolling in third at 1Krpm, with 235 tires (better brand than mine), then you floor it, once the boost starts kicking in, the torque steer is crazy! On the MR2, 1st gear, when it boosts, it launches you forward. Power shift to second, a little chirp, then rockets you forward, 3rd, it still rockets you forward. On a SR20DET Silvia (stock), in the rain, when you're in 1st, 1Krpm, then you floor it, when the boost kicks in, the tires will be spinning to the red line (and you'd be sideways a bit), Power shift into second and second gear will also bounce on the limiter without you going anywhere (other than sideways if you jerk the wheel). On the MR2 (it was still new to me back then), it was raining, and I felt a little playful. I ken that stock to stock, the 3SGTE is more powerful than the SR20DET. I was in first, and I was planning to bounce the revs on the limiter (letting the wheels spin). So I was rolling. I floored it. Here comes the boost! Boom! The tires spun a little, then it launched me forward. I was approaching the limiter fast (but the tires was gripping). I though if I power shift maybe I'll have the wheel spin that I wanted... Powershift. There we go! Some wheel spi- oh wait it's gripping again and the car in from of me is getting really close... Fuuuuuuuuuuuu! The rear grip is really amazing >.>... Call me blasphemous but I think this car can go toe to toe with AWDs at corner exits! Without the added AWD system weight! The only downside I think is that it does tend punish mistakes more than your regular car. Give the car to Itsuki or Iketani or even the lesser evo and FF drivers of Initial D and they might crash the thing when they carry their habits to it. But give to like Takumi, Bunta, Keysuke, Ryoske, Soichi, Sudo, etc etc and the SW20 will handle really well! Oh and the other downside to the MR2 is the engine bay space. It's so frikin hard to work on that thing. Some shops drop the whole engine just to change the clutch >.>... Maybe that's why it's not so famous with the racers . Our local shops charge me more when they work on my engine because it takes longer to do stuff. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 20 2013, 11:35 PM | ||
With an MR2, you don't pull the motor, you pull the car. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 21 2013, 02:11 AM | ||
And what a pain it is.
(Note this is not aimed at you, just the general reader who is less informed). Despite popular belief, mid/rear engine cars (engine behind the driver) tend to generally be very prone to bad understeer. And when you think about it- its pretty easy to understand why. One of the most generally-understood "strengths" of cars like this is their ability to lay down power coming out of a corner because theyve got the weight of the engine on top of the rear wheels adding traction. In comparison to the light front end, the front tires have relatively little force on them. This creates a rather drastic difference in the amount of traction between the front and rear tires. This makes it exceptionally easy in most cases for the rear wheels to lay down more power without slipping than what the front tires can handle causing them to wash out (slip), and the result is understeer. Their "dreaded characteristics" come from when you do something to make those rear tires lose traction (even if its uusuuaalllyy easier to make the fronts go first- this isnt always the case)- And the weight of that rear end wants to swing out like a hammer. Because of the amount of traction the rears tend to have when it does happen it happens abruptly, and it happens quickly. |
| Posted by: Vortrex Apr 21 2013, 02:52 AM |
| Nice nice, i should follow this thread closely! Because my first car is going to be a AW11 probably. Since we are talking about MR2, it that a good idea: a AW11 as first car??? |
| Posted by: Tygur Apr 21 2013, 03:02 AM |
Its not as bad as people make it out to be. Either way it could be worse: |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 21 2013, 03:32 AM | ||
If you can be bothered feel free to shoot me a PM |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 21 2013, 04:08 AM |
| Is it a good idea to daily a car over 25 years ago as your first car? No, it is not. Absolutely positively not. Buy a 10 year-old Civic or Miata. Unless you like rebuilding cars from the ground up. Even then, you will feel very guilty putting tens of thousands of miles a year on a classic car. |
| Posted by: TTH Apr 21 2013, 04:53 AM |
| Why not, late 80's to mid 90's was the age when the most reliable cars were made, especially the japanese ones. Old Toyota, make sure it's not rotten, drives fine and the engine sounds okay. Other than that, it should be great first car. If you're a bit DIY'er, then an old Toyota is even greater car, cheap parts and easy to work with. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 21 2013, 05:25 AM | ||
wat 25 years is just 1988... my first car was a '90 Subaru and it was an absolute breeze to drive and own. Well, of course until you got into trouble and ended up doing a 180 into a ditch but that's a different story altogether. Not really the car's fault.  Nowadays econoboxes from that era are cheap and easy to get (with the exception being the tofu tax of course) and I absolutely would recommend them as first cars. Not to mention, why would someone who hasn't even driven a car before feel guilty about putting tens of thousands of miles on an 80s econobox or even, in this case, a first-gen MR2? I've never felt guilty about putting miles on any of my 70s cars...and they were far from being my first. I doubt someone who's only just learning to drive would know enough to care. |
| Posted by: MetalMan777 Apr 21 2013, 08:04 AM | ||
I actually support the idea of getting a 25 year old car for a first car. Yeah, it'll require some work, but if you're cool enough to do it yourself, it'll teach you a hell of a lot in a hurry. I currently daily an '85, and have done so for a while. Works fine, and it's nicer to drive than a 10 year old Civic. |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 21 2013, 01:44 PM | ||
I daily my mother's old 1990 Accord EX sedan, not the best thing in the world, but... It does the job. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 21 2013, 03:35 PM | ||
I said it was a bad idea, I didn't say it wasn't fun. The problem isn't the fact that the cars were from the 80s, but that they're now very, very old and require a lot of work to get back to a level of performance you can call sportscarish. Owning and driving an 80's econobox was fine... in the early 2000s. Now those cars are 10 years older. A new driver would be better served by something in the 10-15 year old range, with airbags and crumple zones, and no silly-ass automatic seatbelts. A sports car from the 80s (in 2013) will not be reliable. It is a great way to learn maintenance but it is not a good daily driver. And this is coming from someone who's first daily driver is an FC that now has 170,000 miles. Which is the sports car equivalent of being about 90. The money I spent on maintenance could have bought me a newer car that would have been safer, faster and handled better on account of not being so worn out. If you want an old car to behave like it did when it was new (which it never will because of metal fatigue), you've gotta spend thousands of dollars and more importantly, hundreds of hours restoring it from the ground up. But the fact of the matter is that a new driver is better served by a car that won't kill them, and has room for things like friends, bicycles, and suitcases. An MR2 is not either one of those things. But it does make a great second car... |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 22 2013, 12:19 AM | ||
Sounds like it's time to get a Maverick with 3000 pounds of American steel that seats six and can actually hold stuff in the trunk!  |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 22 2013, 12:21 AM |
| Actually I was thinking more like a turbo Legacy wagon... |
| Posted by: Vortrex Apr 22 2013, 05:21 AM |
| Okay, there are some mixed feelings here about a old car. But, i said: a AW11. Not old Subaru's or old Honda's. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 22 2013, 07:04 AM | ||
If you can find one that's in great shape that you have to do minimal work to (especially minimal ENGINE work) then sure why not. Just keep in mind that what I said earlier applies: when you have to pull an engine on an MR2 you don't pull the engine--you pull the car. They're not friendly to work on. There are plenty of old cars that are much easier and much cheaper to work on. An AW11 would be an investment and you'd have to love it for it to be worth it. I think Tessou could explain that a lot better than I could since he replaced his with a Tiburon. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 22 2013, 10:36 AM |
| The engine isn't actually too much of a bear to work on even considering the restricting dimensions of the engine bay. The transmission, however, is a fucking massive pain in the ass no matter what. You have to pull a lot of shit out to get to it. I would never, EVER, recommend it (an AW11) as a first car or an "only" car for anybody, because it's at least 23 years old and they all will have some sign of it, even if kept in amazing condition. You will find rust somewhere, guaranteed (rear wheelwells almost always, inside the trunk usually). The side skirt along the front fenders is notorious for collecting leaves and other garbage that gets sucked under the car and you will hate digging them out every week. The electrical system was made by a first grader and it shows. You are going to have lights go out constantly, or idiot lights flipping on and off for no reason (enjoy figuring them out with a code reader). Tires, particularly the rears, burn out quickly even with conservative driving. The voltmeter and oil pressure gauges are basically there to be ignored. Don't worry if it reads low, because the oil sender is a lying bastard, and your distributor is coded to break every 3,000 miles (read: get it checked out any time you take it to a shop). The alternator is one of the few things that never ever breaks in these cars, so forget about the voltmeter. It will go nuts every time you play with any switch in the car, but it's just useless information. If the meter is even working, you're more than good to go. Parts are deceptively expensive for a car with a Corolla engine, so beware. I still have nightmares about prices for transmission linkage cables. Even spare keys can run you up quite a bit. I say most of this in seriousness. Have a good, solid reliable daily driver first. Then you can think about having a sports car on the side. You may think having a little rocket car is cool for a while (I sure did), but you will soon realize that it's a very difficult car to live with for normal everyday things. Carrying anything is a chore because there's no space. The trunks are very small and can't hold anything bigger than a suitcase each. There's no cupholder anywhere and aftermarket varieties have a fun time fitting in the unique architecture of the interior (a lot of hard angles), so think before getting food at the drive thru. If the weather is getting bad, you will have to change your driving habits in order to cope. If the rear tires get wet, you'll need to baby the throttle. Also remember, old engines do not have the originally posted horsepower or EPA figures anymore. A 1989 NA in good condition might have 100hp, and at that age it will be gobbling fuel up pretty quick (my 87 was getting an average of 16mpg). With a tiny 11 gallon fuel tank, you will be at the pumps a lot if your daily driving is anything more than short trips. The MR2 was not designed to be the primary car for anybody from the start. It's a sports car that comes with sports car problems. You get the fun of the pure driving feel, but you have to take some negatives to get there. Lack of comfort, always-demanding transmission and throttle, and a thirsty engine are not things you should want in your daily driver. |
| Posted by: HashiriyaR32 Apr 22 2013, 11:20 AM | ||
And I thought that something that looked like this  Would weigh a lot more than that. |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 22 2013, 11:58 AM |
| So wait. How did we get from supercharging to daily? [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 22 2013, 12:48 PM | ||
Because Vortrex asked. Simple.  |
| Posted by: Vortrex Apr 22 2013, 01:39 PM |
Sorry for getting off-topic.  Thank for the nice guide about the AW11 Tessou. I knew there will be a lot of bad things about that car. But here in Holland, things are a bit different than in USA. Every two year we have a MOT Test (APK) that is strictly monitored and so quality of old car and new cars is way higher then america. All cars need to attend it but not if the car is more than 30 years old. And once in two months i see a perfect AW11 for just 1200/1300 dollars (1000 euros) on our Dutch Ebay (markplaats). And that's really really cheap here in Holland for such a car. AE86 are super rare and cost more than 5000 dollars. Older Impreza WRX has a minimum of 8.000/9.000 dollars. Evo's are... Toooo much.  (from 7 and higher)And so on. (I hate Honda's , NO but i never would buy a FF car.... I love FR and 4WD)AW11, is just right and i don't want a perfect car as first car because that would be boring.   We should go back to the point were Kyouko started. I will make a other thread next week about this.So, i read your fan-fiction, it was pretty sweet. And a supercharger on a SW20. Anything is possible in a fan-fiction! So if it is bad or not.You can make it look awesome. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 22 2013, 01:48 PM | ||
There's nothing wrong with FFs. I own one now and it's quite fun. Then again, I live in the midwest, where FRs are sort of a seasonal breed considering the usual blizzards and icy roads for four months every year. I traded up simply because the MR2 was increasingly becoming useless as the winter months drudged on. I bought the Tiburon and suddenly I could drive through anything. There was a massive blizzard the day after I bought it, and I was able to carve through the horrid road conditions without a problem. The MR would never have been able to do that. I would have ended up spun around in the ditch before I even got to the highway, the conditions were so bad. |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 22 2013, 01:51 PM |
| Well, I hope to get something slightly newer than my '90 Accord... [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Tygur Apr 22 2013, 02:28 PM |
| I say go for it. My first car was a mid-80s Toyota with a 2SE on its last legs. Sure it was newer back then but it still had 230k miles and most of it was ruined. It taught me a lot. If you just keep up on maintenance and have enough to refresh the important bits, find one in good condition and don't drive it like an idiot, you should be good. If you get a bad example, don't replace the safety bits, like brake hoses and suck, and flog it like a madman, you'll be in trouble. FYI I took mine to the junkyard after a couple years, but not because it was broken, it was because I got another car and nobody wanted it. Toyota engines of that era are sturdy as hell. |
| Posted by: Spaz Apr 22 2013, 03:34 PM | ||
And it may also spontaneously spray fuel all over the engine bay.  |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 22 2013, 03:38 PM | ||||
You bastard, I choked on my frappe.  At least it's not an American oil sender, which will fail while you're doing 70 on the freeway and erroneously alert you to a complete lack of oil. You then discover that the brand new oil sender you just installed that week has failed, and that you will likely go through several new oil senders before finding one that won't spontaneously fail for no reason.  In the mean time you disconnect the oil sender wire and pray you don't actually run out of oil. EDIT:
Right? In fact it's half a ton lighter than my SVX was.  |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 23 2013, 01:53 AM | ||
Thats just down right shocking. Ive known a handfull of aw11 owners over my years, none have had anything reported like that. Most were getting mid-upper 20s, some as high as the low 30s. None where anything id call special, most belong to broke mofos who could barely afford gas- let alone upkeeping their cars "properly". High miles, original engines, etc. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 23 2013, 04:21 AM |
| Were they driving it in your area where it's typically much nicer? The winter months here tend to bring out the worst in cars. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 23 2013, 04:26 AM | ||
You would think that would be better. Isn't colder air more efficient? |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 23 2013, 05:47 AM | ||
Cold air = more air = more gasoline = more power Please note item number three. Hot air (to an extent) actually helps gasoline atomize better, which makes it burn more completely. Also, colder weather tends to make oil thicker and engines run colder, both of which lower efficiency. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 23 2013, 09:01 AM |
| And so the usual winter conditions here meant the car had to work harder and burn more fuel to operate "normally". Mileage wasn't horrifying when I was in Augusta (low 20s if I recall), but it wasn't reaching the levels Sideways mentioned. I'd kill for 30mpg. The Tiburon, for comparison, gets roughly the same mileage. |
| Posted by: HashiriyaR32 Apr 23 2013, 09:44 AM |
| I'd kill for 30mpg. Same. In fact I'm driving a car that SHOULD be getting that much....but I think I'm a bit too aggressive with it. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 23 2013, 11:23 AM |
| Oh noez I actually got told by banken time to commit sudoku |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 23 2013, 12:48 PM | ||
But help me with my seppuku game first! |
| Posted by: Spaz Apr 23 2013, 02:26 PM | ||||
Now it's my turn to choke on a beverage. This thread wins hard today. |
| Posted by: Meteor Apr 23 2013, 02:30 PM |
| It really does. Help me too please! I've never really understood Seppuku's rules! |
| Posted by: knightrous Apr 23 2013, 03:14 PM | ||
The twin turbo V6 was just an example of the potential of the 1MZFE conversion with forced induction added. However, a 2GRFE V6 is a good 20kg lighter then a 3SGTE and has proven to punch out a good 300+BHP in NA form with nothing more then a less restrictive exhaust. With some improvements like camshafts, intake design and some quality engine management, 350-400HP should be achieveable and could indeed make a good fan fiction based car. |
| Posted by: Tygur Apr 23 2013, 06:03 PM |
| Cold air into the engine actually makes it more efficient because it doesn't have to work as hard. The air is denser, taking in the same amount of air yields more oxygen, so you don't need to be on the gas as much. But the combining factors of cold on other parts of the car, like thicker fluids, a less efficient gas that stations carry in winter, less pressure in the tires from colder air, the affect of thicker air on drag, or the engine itself taking longer to heat up, combine to drag your MPG down, and lead to an urban myth that colder intake air makes worse mileage. http://www.metrompg.com/posts/winter-mpg.htm |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 23 2013, 06:28 PM |
| It's not an urban myth if it's confirmed truth by many sources... just saiyan. |
| Posted by: Banken Apr 23 2013, 07:20 PM | ||
Das is true, ja, but since thicker air means the ECU or carbs add more fuel (which is less efficiently burned because of lower temperatures), and people usually don't drive differently to compensate for an increase in power, you're probably going to end up burning more fuel for the same distance. That said, you will have much more power when it's cold, especially with a turbo engine. FWIW, dyno numbers compensate for ambient temperature by calculating the power at a given temperature, a given barometric pressure, and a given humidity (77 degrees F and 0% humidity at approximately seal level pressure for SAE horsepower). Just an interesting fact... |
| Posted by: Tygur Apr 23 2013, 08:41 PM |
| Ok I see your point, and interesting note about dynos, never knew that. I just thought it was cool how many things conspire against you in cold weather. |
| Posted by: Tessou Apr 24 2013, 04:46 AM |
Well, it's cold weather. Is it hard for you get around in that shit? It's the same for your car.  |
| Posted by: Seri Apr 24 2013, 05:30 AM |
| I'd love to trade places. Florida. I want to try and survive a winter. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 24 2013, 05:54 AM |
| My car starts without the need for a choke when it's above 70F outside. Which I only know because my dad broke the electric choke so I removed it completely. Hard as hell to start the car when it's cold but when it's hot out no problem! |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 24 2013, 06:11 AM |
| Typically speaking an engine is going to be more "efficient" (to an extent) in colder weather than in hotter weather, and make more power. We can observe this easily on a dyno where engines typically produce higher numbers in cooler weather (again, to an extent). And like banken already pointed out- Colder air is denser. Denser air means youre motor will ingest more oxygen per revolution. And most cars compensate for this extra oxygen by adding more fuel to maintain a desired afr. (Side note: This is assuming an efi set up. In all honesty im pretty ignant on what would happen in the same instance if you had a carb. As carbs work off of air velocity causing a vacuum to pull fuel into the intake as they pass a channel in the itnake plenum that connects to a fuel bowl. While i wouldnt be surprised if it makes some difference, im not sure if air density will make as much of a difference to a carb as it would to an efi car. Anyone know if their carbed cars see a difference in AFRs during winter/summer seasons?) Other factors come into play as well. Again back to colder/denser air- Your car has to push through more air to cruise. The difference is slight, but there is an increased drag on the car as the weather cools down. Its also worth pointing out that this colder weather will reduce pressure in your tires as the air inside them cools/contracts causing a larger footprint and more rolling resistance. Of course this is readily correctable, but in realist almost no one does. Not adding much to whats been stated- just confirming a few things. Colder weather, your car does make more power. You also get a decrease in gas mileage. Before I made the move to aussie land i frequently made 300 mile trips back and forth between vegas and la (visiting friends and family at both sides). Quite often this was literally -every- weekened for months on end. Even in the "slower" times I never went more than a couple of weeks without a trip. I did this for years. My wallet readily looked forward to warmer times. My corolla after the 20v swap would go from mid 30s to low 30s average like clockwork as the weather changed. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Apr 24 2013, 06:34 AM | ||
Are you kidding me? You have to re-tune a carb for altitude. You tell me if air density matters to a carb. |
| Posted by: Spaz Apr 24 2013, 07:27 AM |
| You have to retune a carb if the temperature changes 20 degrees, too. |
| Posted by: sideways Apr 24 2013, 08:22 AM | ||
Haha imma blame 4 hours of sleep and it being 2 am for the vagueness on that one. I know theyd have to be retuned for different air densities, im just unsure of how much itll effect how much fuel is actually going into the engine when the density changes. |
| Posted by: badtzlover Jul 10 2013, 10:22 AM |
| I say mr2 = best example of a snap oversteer I drove my frds sw20 sometime ago and he told me to take that left turn at the light fast, and I did the best thing I could have done... LET GO OF GAS and I spinned 360 while making the turn the rear is just so uncontrollable if it breaks free from grip I felt the MRS and NSX wont do as bad but I heard frds say mr2 the worst And I had the opportunity to experience it  |
| Posted by: RickkyyP Jul 10 2013, 04:38 PM |
| When I had suspect tires, worn suspension bushes and a right foot that wasn't used to 240hp ish I managed to end up facing the wrong way down a dual carriage after giving it to much gas on the exit from a roundabout. Fortunately there were no cars around me and I was able to avoid the barriers by mainly luck. Two months later with decent rubber, and renewed suspension the grip seemed unbreakable providing you transitioned to acceleration smoothly, however in the wet the 'fear' was always there! Incidentally, I found it to be excellent in the snow, with the engine over the tires, traction was pretty good, and unlike a FWD the front end didn't wash out so much because you give it some gas to pivot the car to the inside. |
| Posted by: Banken Jul 12 2013, 04:17 AM |
| In heavy snow the front end will wash out and the back end won't stop once it comes out. But as long as you're careful it's fun. But the real issue is that being so low, once it gets stuck, it's stuck. Unless you have an aftermarket LSD. The stock viscous is worthless in snow because one wheel will just spin while the other won't move. It also helps to put weight in the front. I'm still not sure whether it handles better on the track with the spare tire in or out. Also, tires make more of a difference than anything else, even if your suspension is bad. With dry-rotted sporty tires (first time I drove the car, which happened to be on the track) I couldn't even dream of using the gas in turns, but it was no problem with new sports tires. |
| Posted by: HashiriyaR32 Jul 19 2013, 07:05 PM |
| If you're up for it, and have the resources, you could try swapping in a 2GR-FE. |
| Posted by: fastrax203 Aug 29 2013, 10:26 AM |
| Or just do what I did and go with the Gen4 3SGTE. They can be had for just over $1k. You can re-use the S54 transmission with a custom friction disc and it's bolt in. Wiring harness conversion to plug and play is like $400. I probably spent about $2500 for everything (complete re-seal, water pump t-stat and waterpump, cv axle rebuilds and other maintenance). In stock form it's at least at 250hp with added upgraded IC, intake, downpipe and 3" exhaust I can't imagine I'm far from 300hp at stock boost. Oh, it retains stock AC and Cruise to boot. I've also logged 28mpg combined fuel economy. Can't beat that considering the power output. |
| Posted by: RickkyyP Feb 18 2014, 11:00 AM |
| Well I'm back in an MR2 again now, so its definitely a car I liked! Rev 3 + is 240hp standard compared to the Rev 2 which is 220. Upgraded IC and manifold + exhaust are all sensible mods and should have netted you a few HP. I personally use the standard airbox, from my research its better than aftermarket induction kits and plenty of people make big power with it. I very much doubt you'll make close to 300 without an increase in boost, maybe 255-260 ish. You'd maybe get 300ish at 16-28psi. |