[Mk2] [Generic] What were toyota thinking when they made the mk2

[vishpish]

chatting to my mates yesterday an we were jus thinkin what was on toyotas mind:

i mean they have the supra the kinda muscly front big engine rear drive competing with the gtrs rex's etc. They have the celica nice ff car to compete with the tegs and ftos etc! And they have the mk1 i mean as a sporty little roadster seemed clever and as far as i know well balanced to match mazdas mx5s etc- similar to what theyve now gone back to with the mk3....

imho toyota were sniffing the right stuff(my mates(impreza/civic/celica/corsa owners thought differently) when they made the mk2- a breakthrough in styling/design but i dont understand why they havent continued it after the 90's and why the mr2 name is on a girly roadster. and why is it that the only other similarly unique jap sports car, the nsx, has also now gone out of production too

[raptor95GTS]

out of production because nobody was buying them. Why they weren't being bought is another question altogether

[marcnoonan]

Hi,

Manufacturers normally go down the masculine route after a femine Mk. i.e Z3 to Z4, Audi TT, can't think of anymore at the mo

Hopefully the MK4 will be a little more blokey!

Cheers

Marc

[Alex B]

It's possibly that they've gone back to what the MR2 was supposed to be and as you've stated already, competition at the MX-5 level.

The old MR2 was prob. taken out of production because no-one was buying them, as already stated. The reason for this is possibly just the natural lifecycle of a model. People get bored with the design and look to the next new sharp cool car. An old shape wouldn't cut it in a modern world.

I've found myself a person who normally avoided the MR2, mainly because I felt it was a bit ... "look at me." This is probably the wrong thing to think as many I'm sure would pipe up and say.

I've decided to buy one now only because, it's performance and handling is something I want for a track toy. I'm still not particularly taken with the looks of the car. Whatever way I look at it I can't really think of an easy fix either short of replacing all the panels. I know I would like to see an NSX style look past the headlights, but I'd also like 'functional' scoops to increase front end down force but when I come to think of the back end.. I'm stumped.

So to sum up, in my humble opinion, I believe it's both; Length of the models run and the fact that it was probably a detraction from where Toyota wanted to be placed in that market space.

[Gizmo.mp3]

I suspect that the Mk1 competed with the MX5 (and if anyone remembers them, the Fiat X1/9) because there wasn't anything else.

But the time the Mk2 came along there were loads of coupés - everything from Celicas to the Probe, the Rover one, the Corrado... all of which had back seats because they are front-engined. Your average coupé driver didn't care where the engine is, they care that there's nowhere for their sprog to sit - and if you didn't have sprogs you bought an MX-5/MGF/Barchetta.

All of which doesn't explain why there aren't more SW20 Spiders around

[ryan]

The mk2 MR2 was very expensive in run out rev 5 t bar form, it was over £24k! Thats back in 1999, but just look what you can get new for 24k today, some nice motors.
I think if Toyota UK decided to put the turbo engine in uk cars, things might have been different, but then again, it would be a few grand more again

[mattcambs]

I think if Toyota UK decided to put the turbo engine in uk cars, things might have been different.....

Oh, yes! We wouldn't be able to enjoy the reasonable insurance premiums on import Turbos that we currently do. Can you imagine what a shocking reputation the mk2 Turbo would have got if it had been on sale in the UK for nearly 10 years?

AFAIK, the reason there was no Turbo MR2 in the UK was so that it didn't detract from GT4 sales . Fat lot of good that did!

I don't know what Toyota were thinking exactly, but certainly the mk2 Turbo (more so than the NA) was a last of a breed. Can you imagine an manufacturer now bringing out a tricky handling, mid-engine, laggy and powerful turbo car with no traction control?

£24k gets you a 350Z now. In 14 years time these too will seem a bit crude and will have a great cult following

[Alex B]

£24k gets you a 350Z now. In 14 years time these too will seem a bit crude and will have a great cult following

They already do don't they?

[mattcambs]

You're right. I think a future classic in the making

[dawolf]

I believe the mk2 shape is based on a ferrari design. When I was younger I didn't really pay that much attention to MR2's (probably because I used to be into modified ford's for some reason). I just suddenly decided one day I fancied one as they looked nice and sporty but were fairly cheap. I haven't looked back since then.

[HighwayStar]

Yup. Loads o grunt and fairly good looks but having driven my best mates over varying roads and surfaces I've got to say they are nowhere near as involving to drive as my 2. His old 260z is more to my taste (or would be if he could get it back on the road again!).

R.

[Kosshi]

what were they thinking when they made this video?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WTpdWBNC48c

[GeoffC320]

The old MR2 was prob. taken out of production because no-one was buying them, as already stated.

Could be wrong but I think this comment was aimed at the NSX? Nobody was buying those because they were very expensive for a car without a 'prestige' name. And the useability/reliability didn't really matter much to the sort of people that want to be seen in a Ferrari...I also think they dated quite badly, much worse than the SW20 (esp. the interior!).

Personally although it's looks are very derivative, I think the Mk2's by far the best looking of the MR2 range. Don't care how good to drive the Mk1 is, it looks like a Tonka toy. Props to Toyota for bucking the trend for increasingly bigger & heavier replacements with the Mk3 but the styling, overall quality and practicality definitely took a backwards step at the same time.

[HighwayStar]

I'd agree with that Geoff. The g/f has a mk3 and you seriously cant get anything in it. Went to Hotel Du Vin in Henley at the w/e and managed one squashy bag between us. In the cabin there wasn't enough storage for my mobile, fags and wallet!! I appreciate storage isn't the main issue in a sports car but if you want a pure sports car you'd be buying an ariel atom or radical anyway. And why do they sit so high? Sometimes I think it looks like a little clown car (although they can be made to look better and colour plays a big part with a roadster... the g/fs sable car with red roof isn't too bad actually and the red leather interior looks nice if you avoid the rest of the plastic bits). It just doesn't look as sporting as the mk2 and like you I think the mk1 just looks odd. Never driven one mind you (mk1) but I certainly prefer the drive of my mk2 rev1 to the mk3.

R

[Alex B]

The old MR2 was prob. taken out of production because no-one was buying them, as already stated.

Could be wrong but I think this comment was aimed at the NSX? Nobody was buying those because they were very expensive for a car without a 'prestige' name. And the useability/reliability didn't really matter much to the sort of people that want to be seen in a Ferrari...I also think they dated quite badly, much worse than the SW20 (esp. the interior!).

Well, subject context was MR2 and as others have said, it got expensive in the later years. Equally applies to NSX though.

[vishpish]

Can you imagine an manufacturer now bringing out a tricky handling, mid-engine, laggy and powerful turbo car with no traction control?

lol!! that is sooo true!

[James Junior]

I think at the time of it's release the MR2 MK2 was a stunning and very modern design. Just look at what most designers were coming up with in 1989 and you realise just what a stunning piece of design it was.

The Ferarri styling queues are clear and Toyota's plan to make a 'poor man's Ferarri' worked.

It is testament to the cars popularity and unique appeal that it lasted a ten year production span without any huge changes.

For most of its lifespan it was the only mid engined sports car at it's price point. As someone rightly pointed out, the only other Jap example was the NSX which was selling for about £60k more out of the box!

The MK2 just got a bit long in the tooth and the sports car market was becoming more mainstream, hence the softer looking and low powered MK3. A clear move to go back to the basic principles of the MK1 whilst taking styling and design queues from one of the most sought after sports cars of the time - the Boxster.

Though I think most fans of the MK2 were disapointed with the styling and performance figures of the MK3 when it was released, it was aimed at a different market and so was never going to appeal to the more 'hardcore' MR2 turbo crowd. It cannot be argued that this was a mistake on a commercial level as the MK3 also had a long and very successful production run of 8 years.

Its just a shame that the MK3 being one of the best handling cars on the road today is mainly used by (queue sweeping generalisation) ladies for commuting and shopping trips. Few MK3 drivers know anything about the heritage of their car for example and as we have discussed before, they never wave at you as MK1 and MK2 drivers do!

This is not meant to be a sexist comment or derogatory to MK3 drivers by the way (I had one for a bit!), it is simply an observation.

I convinced a female friend I used to work with to buy one and she loved it, but the only time she got the tail out was when she span on a wet roundabout!

[cosmos]

Toyotas designers i have heard had the brief to design the MR2 and aim it at the Japanese young executives and it must be able to have luggage space for a set of golf clubs.

[Tiamat]

IThe MK2 just got a bit long in the tooth and the sports car market was becoming more mainstream, hence the softer looking and low powered MK3.

The only reason the MK3 was lower powered was because it enabled Toyota to sell more units. Lower power means lower insurance group and therefore people will buy more.

[dawolf]

I think at the time of it's release the MR2 MK2 was a stunning and very modern design. Just look at what most designers were coming up with in 1989 and you realise just what a stunning piece of design it was.

The Ferarri styling queues are clear and Toyota's plan to make a 'poor man's Ferarri' worked.

It is testament to the cars popularity and unique appeal that it lasted a ten year production span without any huge changes.

For most of its lifespan it was the only mid engined sports car at it's price point. As someone rightly pointed out, the only other Jap example was the NSX which was selling for about £60k more out of the box!

The MK2 just got a bit long in the tooth and the sports car market was becoming more mainstream, hence the softer looking and low powered MK3. A clear move to go back to the basic principles of the MK1 whilst taking styling and design queues from one of the most sought after sports cars of the time - the Boxster.

Though I think most fans of the MK2 were disapointed with the styling and performance figures of the MK3 when it was released, it was aimed at a different market and so was never going to appeal to the more 'hardcore' MR2 turbo crowd. It cannot be argued that this was a mistake on a commercial level as the MK3 also had a long and very successful production run of 8 years.

Its just a shame that the MK3 being one of the best handling cars on the road today is mainly used by (queue sweeping generalisation) ladies for commuting and shopping trips. Few MK3 drivers know anything about the heritage of their car for example and as we have discussed before, they never wave at you as MK1 and MK2 drivers do!

This is not meant to be a sexist comment or derogatory to MK3 drivers by the way (I had one for a bit!), it is simply an observation.

I convinced a female friend I used to work with to buy one and she loved it, but the only time she got the tail out was when she span on a wet roundabout!

Agree with you on everything