Toyota Celica Supra Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
And, quite frankely, I wasn't to impressed. The only thing it has on my car is boost (though I'm really starting to get hooked on that; damn the cost of higher ed.) It just struck me as not being as well layed out from a driver standpoint as my 85 P-type. The boost gauge has half way across the dash, it felt more cramped (though I could have fixed that by taking the targa top off), and the shifter just didn't feel as good. Of course, the fact that it also had a problem so that it liked to die coming off of boost didn't help... :? Still, it was a fun drive (the used car salesman let me take it off the lot alone, with a little collateral sitting back at the dealership). I think they are hard up to sell it (87T, 5spd, cloth intr., dies to easy...). It left me thinking "if this can move like this on boost, then my 900 lb lighter car would fly :) )

Just thought I would share my experience
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
Thanks for the review!

I have never driven a MkIII turbo, but a friend of mine used to have a 87' non-turbo, and it was never faster than my 83'. I love the interior of the MkIII though. I like having all the round guages extending across the dash.
I agree that a 7M-GTE is the ticket! (well... a 2JZ is THE ticket, but given my $ and mechanical skill level, I would be happy with a 7M-GTE :D )
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
3,283 Posts
I test drove a 91T last year sometime and to be honest, I wasn't impressed at all. even at 6psi boost it didn't feel like it pulled like my 85 does.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not bashing the mkIII, it's just not the right car for me.

I'm in the plans (and watching Norbie's site intently) for the 2JZ conversion after I get the suspension and brakes beefed up.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
Not to offend any MkIII owners, but the damn thing is too heavy and it feels a LOT like a Camaro to me when driving it. I drove a MkIII turbo last year and pretty much walked away unimpressed.

I didn't care for the interior and there was just something cheesy and inferior about the whole car. Just didn't seem as well made as the MkII.

I got back in my MkII and felt so much more comfortable. Hands down the MkII is a superior car - it just needs 7MGTE power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,613 Posts
SupraRacer007 said:
Not to offend any MkIII owners, but the damn thing is too heavy and it feels a LOT like a Camaro to me when driving it.
Its funny ya say that... I recently got to drive a mk III and thought the same exact thing. Tho for me, that wasn't a bad thing nessacarily, as I've had 7 camaro's and 3 firebirds :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
They aren't that "big", they are just heavy. My buddy's '91 Z28 is monstrously huge. IIRC the two cars weigh nearly the same though. I still want an MKIII, I absolutely LOVE the lines of those cars, I seriously think they are one of the best looking cars out there. I'm thinking hard about selling my junk when I get some money and buying a nice '89+ turbo with a targa top. So much easier than a turbo swap :D
 

·
BIG BOSS HOSS
Joined
·
4,460 Posts
I have to differ from most of the opinions here. I find the MKIII's performance MUCH better than that of the MKII. Sure, It may be slow in stock form but with a 3" o2 elbow, 3" mandrel bent exhaust and 12psi it can scoot nicely at about 280rwhp. That type of power is more than enough to run a new Mustang GT.

The MKIII handling is also vastly improved over the MKII. The MKIII feels much more stable on the road and it's steering has a nice heavy-tight feel. Even though we are talking about a 3700 tank it's suprisingly nimble and corners very flat. Not to mention, the MKIII comes with much larger disk brakes. In terms of handling and braking the MKIII is a few steps beyond the MKII.

My next Supra will be a 89+ MKIIIT as a MKIV is totaly out of the question for obvious reasons. :wink:

Oh, and edit: I used to dislike MKIIIs *alot* till about two years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Not to sound stupid but why do you guys say you'd rather have a 89'+ MKIII's?
there something not quite right about the 86.5' - 88's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,445 Posts
My reasons for wanting a "later" MKIII is more for asthetic reasons.

My dream MKIII, is a 91 - 92 Turbo. 5-speed, Must have the White Package, I "prefer" the 91 - 92 5-spoke wheels, compared to the 86.5 - 90 sawblade wheels. It can be "either" the Blue, or the Deep Red Leather interior, AND it MUST have the pop-up Sunroof option. Don't want the hardtop, or the Targa. 92's have the upgraded 10 speaker stereo.

Choice #2 would be a 92T in Teal, w/ the Shadow Gray Leather. Must also have the Sunroof.

Either car, I would also upgrade to the MKIV TT wheels.

I currently own ALL of the MKIII U.S Spec Brochures (86.5 - 92), and from a asthetic standpoint, along w/ some of the features that the latter MKIII's have,......... This is why I would rather own a latter model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,445 Posts
Oh, and yes.......

I have test driven several MKIII's, in both the NA & Turbo varieties & both the 5-speed & Automagic's. Yes, they do feel like tank's, and are big & heavy. I still like them anyway. :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,613 Posts
Supraa_luva...

I can't speak for the rest, but I like the 89+ mk III's because of the more "modern" styling look to it. The front fascia, wheels and rear hatch are different and just look better to my eye. There are also some differences in the intakes, heads and ECU that (argueably) make the motor run better...

My dream mk III would be a 90 to a 92, Dark blue with a set of Volk TE-37's in bronze, with grey cloth interior... at least thats where the fun would begin :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,111 Posts
Iv test driven a mk3 T 5spd once a while back. It use to be a neighbors car, till he wreaked, then burned it :x . In my point of view as far as the mk3 vs the mk2 issue, I like the mk3 for its upgraded suspension + the turbo, but it feels like a tank (a fast tank at that). IMO the mk2 seems more fun to drive. :p
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,577 Posts
I prefer the 89 & 90s. The 91 to 93s (yes there were 93s) have a rebalanced crank with a lower red line, and the 90+s have air bags. The wheels need to be changed no matter what year you get anyways, though the 90+ ones aren't bad. 900 pounds lighter? Not quite, more like 600, and thats comparing the sport roof turbo to a mk2, an NA hardtop mk3 vs a mk2 would be more fair. In that case the numbers are more like (these are dry numbers) approx 3280 vs 2960. Drive a nice mk3 with a decent suspension and well maintained motor and you'll be more impressed, but personally I prefer mk2s and mk4s. Speaking of mk4s, for those of you who aren't that impressed with mk3s and would prefer something like your mk2 but much newer, try an NA mk4 someday if you ever get the chance. I have recently and I was very impressed. Their basicly the perfect mk2, the same fine balance between luxery and all out performance, similar over all dimensions, very reasonable curb weight (3215 (ht), 3275(sr)), and a beautiful NA engine. They improve upon the mk2 by offering excellent high speed stability, wicked stock brakes, perfect ergnomics (though crappy seats, especially compared to mk2 ones), an incredible suspension, and an awesome motor that makes beautiful sounds and has sweet ass top end (almost a 7000rpm red line).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
ahh, I see. I'm not to the point yet I can pick out years but I do know I like the MKIII's styling. Was originally going to buy a turbo MKIII but they were more expensive and this MKII I found hooked me and I was 16 with the urge to drive that day so I got it. Dang, just realized that was 6 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
I have to differ from most of the opinions here. I find the MKIII's performance MUCH better than that of the MKII. Sure, It may be slow in stock form but with a 3" o2 elbow, 3" mandrel bent exhaust and 12psi it can scoot nicely at about 280rwhp. That type of power is more than enough to run a new Mustang GT.

The MKIII handling is also vastly improved over the MKII. The MKIII feels much more stable on the road and it's steering has a nice heavy-tight feel. Even though we are talking about a 3700 tank it's suprisingly nimble and corners very flat.
OK, I had four camaros before getting my mkII. My 92 Z-28 was very stable on the road, especially at high speeds. IMO, my MKII is every bit as stable, and capable at any speed as my f-bodies were. There was a mention earlier that the mkIII handled like a camaro, I have never driven one, but I do have a lot of experience with the f-body, and would say the mkII handles every bit as well in any situation as they do, with the obvious exception being braking.(although it looks like supra bob has me beat with the f-bodies though!! :wink: 10?? Damn, that is a real enthusiast there!)


just my .02

Christopher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
I was thinking about getting a MkIII this year... they're cheap and would be fun to modify.

...but the platform is grossly overweight. I'd rather have a tossable slow car (AE86 or MR-Spyder) than a modified heavy MkIII T.

As someone who owns a decently-powerful MkIV and has driven it pretty hard I can say that weight is definitely an issue.

The current plan is to get a MkII or an AE86 'runner' and strip it down for exclusive track car use.

If you want a cushy commuter that you can modify for decent power, get a MkIII T auto.

Bottom line is that having a fun-to-drive slow car is more important than a fast, heavy car. I don't feel like plowing through turns.

JMO. MkIIIs are the bastard stepchildren of the Supra world for a reason -- and it's not the 7M-GTE's headgasket -- it's the weight of the platform.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Since I started this...

It really didn't feel all that heavy in the corners (in town, though :? wonder what it would be like out on a country road). It felt heavier braking, it also had more power behind the brakes (reminded me of my parents MDX braking; heavy but strong). Since I never test drove a Camaro, I couldn't really compare (though I wanted one back in my pre-Mk II days)

Also, funny you mention it. I was going to buy a 89T targa auto, but it fell through and I ended up with my Mk II. Since then, I've discovered that I ended up with the right car (though it needs more power... damn I need a turbo :!: )
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top