NA or Turbo for first MR2 - around £3k to spend

[arr0n]

Hi guys,
I've just graduated for Uni and have landed a proper job so I'd like to finally be able to purchase a Mk2 MR2 - the car I've wanted since I've been 15 . Now I need to decide whether to get an NA or Turbo '2 :S. As I mentioned in the title, I've around £3000 to spend so I'm looking at either a decent Turbo or an excellent condition late rev. NA I'd imagine? The thing which may swing the decision is that I'm 23 with 1 years NCB (although been driving for over 6, just on my dad's insurance) so I'm not sure if the insurance for a Turbo would be too much to realistically pay.

I'm aware that I could get a half-decent NA from somewhere like Autotrader for around 1K, but my last/current car (Toyota Paseo) was purchased in the same manner and I regretted it later (I've had to strip down the head twice, and strip everything down again to replace the rings, plus bodywork was a bit ragged), so I'd rather spend more and get an excellent car from somewhere like the classified forums on this site .

So I guess, what I'm really asking, is which would you recommend based on my circumstances? I currently live in Huddersfield so not sure what sort of club activity is up here.

Cheers!
Arron.

[nitric4k]

go for na dude till ya get some more driving experiance turbos can be alot handle and your insurance on a na will be steep let alone a turbo

[tranx]

I've been riding 180mph bikes for the last 7 years and driving normal family 2.0l hatchbacks for the last 2 years. I recently bought my first MR2, a 1993 160bhp N/A Rev2.

I've already had the back end spit out in the wet and it is PLENTY fast enough even for someone used to a 3.5s 0-60.

I'd love a turbo in the future or a V6 transplant but the 2.0L N/A is not slow and still needs to be treated with respect.

To echo robbrookes5 get some more driving experience before going the turbo route. I'm sure you could handle it and it would be fine but don't feel you need a turbo to have fun.

[craig]

My first MR2 was a revision 1 120bhp 3SFE N/A. Best place to start is with an N/A. Can always stick a turbo engine in it at a later stage

Plus insurance on a turbo at 23 with 1 years NCB and no previous performance car experience will be quite steep.

[TheBaker]

I'd get a turbo.

NA is nice and very fast but if you like speed you'll want more.

[arr0n]

go for na dude till ya get some more driving experiance turbos can be alot handle and your insurance on a na will be steep let alone a turbo

I never really considered the experience part but yeah, point taken . By the looks of things an NA will be around £700 fully comp, which isn't too bad, but yeah, after searching it looks like a Turbo will be little dear.

I've been riding 180mph bikes for the last 7 years and driving normal family 2.0l hatchbacks for the last 2 years. I recently bought my first MR2, a 1993 160bhp N/A Rev2.

I've already had the back end spit out in the wet and it is PLENTY fast enough even for someone used to a 3.5s 0-60.

I'd love a turbo in the future or a V6 transplant but the 2.0L N/A is not slow and still needs to be treated with respect.

To echo robbrookes5 get some more driving experience before going the turbo route. I'm sure you could handle it and it would be fine but don't feel you need a turbo to have fun.

Good to know mate, cheers. I mean, the 173bhp Rev3+ will have almost twice the bhp of my current car, so as you say.. it'll be more than enough for me atm . I had a go in my mates Celica ST162 which I guess is similar specced and has the older 150bhp 3S-GE, and that was definitely nice enough, so I imagine the lighter MR2 should be excellent.

Now I just need to keep my eye out on the classified section . For around £3k, is it reasonable to assume I'll be able to get an excellent condition Gen3/4 NA with lowish milage and a bit of change left over?

Cheers!
Arron.

[ashley]

I'd go for a rev3+ g-limited (NA)- if it's an import chances are it wont be too rusty. You could then use some of your cash to sort the handling and service the engine, brakes, etc- the NAs are seriously under rated fun

[ashley]

For around £3k, is it reasonable to assume I'll be able to get an excellent condition Gen3/4 NA with lowish milage and a bit of change left over?

Easy- if you can find one. I'd look to pay a fair bit less I reckon, saving some cash to sort it.

[craig]

I would aim for a rev 4 G-ltd, shouldn't be out of reach for 3K, but if not then as ashman says, a rev 3 G-ltd

Also as stated, import is the one to go for. No salt is used on roads in Japan and imports are as a rule, in better condition than UK equivalents regarding rust.

[arr0n]

How does this one look (if it's still available?): http://mr2oc.co.uk/ads.html?page=show_a ... 12&catid=5 . Quite expensive but if I can bring him down a little on the price.. might be worth it? Not much detail posted but it looks promising.

Also looked at the specs for the G-Limited and they seem to be mostly automatics? :S. I'm definitely after a manual .

[marc GT Turbo]

[quote="arr0n"]How does this one look (if it's still available?): http://mr2oc.co.uk/ads.html?page=show_a ... 12&catid=5


looking at the pics it looks mint you need more info though !

[malcster]

I reckon you could find a pretty clean rev2 Turbo for under 3k.

I really wouldn't be put off with the Rev2 Vs Rev3+ nonsense. So long as the body is clean and it's been fairly well looked after, you're good to go.

[ashley]

If you are going for an NA you WANT at least a rev3- they are 172bhp (the rev 2's are 158bhp). Most of the rev3 g-limited's are manual boxes as well.

HTH

[dazzz]

If you can afford the insurance and fuel get a Turbo.

[Mike]

I'd echo the majority of the previous posts and say go for an N/A. They're still quick cars. As for which revision, the only one I'd advise you to avoid is the Revision 1, purely because it is the most unforgiving of all revisions.

Bear in mind that despite the increase from 158bhp to 173bhp that took place between the Rev2 N/A and the Rev3 N/A the performance figures are almost identical so that extra 15bhp is only really any good down the pub

Its also a little known fact that the Rev 4 and 5 N/A (other than the BEAMS) were slightly less powerfull than the Rev 3 at around 168bhp, again this makes no real difference.

Ultimately go for the best condition MR2 you can find regardless of revision (barring Rev 1) with the spec that you're looking for and keep asking questions on here. Best of luck

[HighwayStar]

Hey there Arron, a happy new year to you.
I reckon I'll partly agree with the others who have already posted and suggest the N/A for your first mid engine RWD. Lower costs all round (ins, fuel, service costs etc) and easier to learn the car and layout. It's a great everyday car (mine has been my daily drive for over 10yrs) and plenty fast enough for most circumstances. For me the appeal of a sports car is in the corners (and while a mk2 might not be so nicely balanced as a mk1 or a mk3 it's still a lot better than most cars) not grunting in a straight line. Others will disagree of course..
Ignore the rev... what initial bhp it may have had may well be rendered irrelevant by quality (or lack thereof) of maintenance over the years... I'd argue the rev1s are in fact the better drive based on other later rev cars that I've driven myself but again who knows what geometry/tyres the examples you look at will be running... The rev1s are perhaps more sensitive to drivers inputs so that may be a reason to avoid them even though for me thats the attraction of them.
The key is finding a clean car a little under budget (whatever you buy will require some work in the first year even if that's only service costs, geo check up, etc).
Get something with loads of history and an owner that knows their car and can answer all your questions. Budget itself suggests a rev3/4 but a fantastically cared for rev1/2 could still be worth going for.
Get someone who knows 2s well to go look with you (where are you?) and take your time with the search.
Lastly... enjoy it. Fabulous and involving cars.

R.

[Andy F]

Totally agree about the rev1 handling, my first mr2 was a G reg rev1
G limited, it always felt very planted even on 17s...but they are 20years
old now and do tend to be rusty at the rear of the sills

But not all of them obviously

[vishpish]

cannot believe no one has said v6! Best balance of power torque and reliability. I've had mine for 3 years. Fe ge 3 boxes and finally thanks to the legend paul woods my two is awesome!

[eddo]

gotta be the turbo mate, cant beat the feeling of boost!

[arr0n]

Cheers guys, input is appreciated . I'm pretty much set on an NA due to reasons mentioned above.

HighwayStar: Unfortunately I don't know anyone else who owns a '2 let alone knows anything about them... I'm in Huddersfield at the mo.

I think it just boils down to waiting for the right car . Does anyone have any recommendations for places to purchase MR2s aside from this site's classified and the other owners club website? I'd obviously like to avoid buying off traders/idiots lol.

Thanks again!