Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
'bulletproof' true?(rev3 240bhp forexample) and the uk NA models??I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way.
! just scanning thru recent posts, theres a few n/a's that have died and turbos with problems...... (lots of straights and a few twistys) and didnt have one problem, just lots of bbbbbbbbbbbbrrrrrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, bbbbbbbbbbrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm.....brmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmHOWL 
!!! (which he is selling I might add!). So if you want maybe we could arrange for a spin? The turbo feels miles faster. You also don't have the hassle of having to let it cool down after a drive. The turbo is great as a weekend car and is considerably quicker, rev 3 onwards especially but I personally don't like the way it suddenly kicks in. My mate had a rev 3 with hybrid turbo and I didn't like the way it just suddenly bolted you back in the seat, was quite scary. Lol. I prefer a smoother drive so it has to be an N/A for me. V6 or Beams are the best option.'bombproof'. Just expect that word to drift in and out depending on the choice of engine mods some add....look after your car like the misses and it will look after you 
I don't think a standard rev 1/2 turbo feels all that much quicker than an N/A but rev 3+ does seem a fair bit quicker. 0-60 is about 2 secs quicker in a turbo compared to an N/A so yes you can feel the difference but in this country with all the speed bumps and camera's is it worth the extra running costs for that bit extra? I think maybe not but it's up to you.(chr15py on here). I didn't think that the acceleration was that savage. I thought it was quite nice and linear really - certainly not scary or in any way uncontrollable - but bl00dy fast if you need it to be. Off boost I found it very nice with plenty of torque under 3000rpm to nip around town with ease.(what an engine though - more character than the turbo's). Seemed about as quick as a tubby when ragging it, but needed a lot more concentration to drive fast. I'm not slating NAs. ..added many mods and sometimes driven it quite hard but had no problems whatsoever with it.never let me down..if your not interested in having loads of power when you want it then an n/a otherwise be carefull when choosing a turbo,get a good one and ull have a permanent grin....lifes short so enjoy I would love to have a tubby but I'm doing over 25k miles a year in my N/A and I can't afford the running costs. Yes, my N/A a little disappointing off the blocks but the car looks so good and handles so well on bends and roundabouts that I forgive it. Engine-wise, since I've had it I have changed the plugs twice, the clutch once and re-cored the radiator - but these are things that you have to replace on any car. The cam belt is due in the Summer and I have no worries that I will get my moneys-worth out of it. The engine seems as sound as a pound. Don't understand why though. After recharging the battery and jump starting it it has been fine ever since. I guess we all have bad days 
Don Cool wrote:
"off the blocks" isn't where I'd say any MR2 was lacking. As I start on my 3rd set of tyres at 27000 miles I'm trying to do a bit less of that... and TBH often the acceleration limit is her in the passenger seat - "My neck hurts"Andy Champ wrote:Don Cool wrote:
I used to get through rears in 6,000 miles.
Not saying it's anything to do with my driving style but.
....(like Rev 1/2) the ECU blends it in with throttle as RPM rises.- should you choose to tweak it up a bit.@ 40K miles, and have personally put over 100K miles on it with numerous trackdays as you all know....$$$ to spend, do it properly!...(with old ct26 turbo on it), one week later he had the na up for sale, and bought a tubby 2 weeks after that..... 
..."possibly" less realiable, but the gains you get are massive............and looks the same...'oh my god,theres the wages gone again' difference in fueling and other running costs.(super) unleaded.