MR2 Turbo VS Honda Integra Type R???

[loadswine]

You still have to watch the Mk3 in the wet. Maintaining the tyre stagger front to rear will help keep the snap oversteer at bay.
Very interested to see the helpful comments about the open diff.
In its last incarnation , my car was turbo'd with the stock UK 6 speed box and the LSD that goes with it. Even though ultimate traction from a slow corner may be a bit less with the open diff, that I now have on my rev3 NA gearbox , it does seem to give you half a chance to catch the rear end.

I suppose it'll get a bit of a test at the weekend up at Anglesey,, though i intend to try and be sensible with it. There is a DC5 going to the event, so I'll keep an eye out for it and see how that performs. I hope the person will give me a ride in it !

[Simarshy]

The handling and grip is a completely different ballpark to the MR2.

I've always wondered if the reputation of mk2 not being chuckable are down to the tubby engines power delivery, lsd's and suspension/wheel setups.

I notice most people who comment on the mk2's lack being chuckable are tubby owners past and present. And that most of the stories I've read involving diesel on the road (read 'handling issues') are modified tubby's.

My rev3 tubby on the standard bilstiens and 18's with 40 profile tyres (not my choice), was as you said a bit lairy in the wet. There was lots of grip but I don't remember ever trying to get near the limit due the snap oversteer characteristics and lack of easy throttle control to counter it.

But my current mk2 n/a has standard susp, stock 15's and the non-lsd diff. I can say hand on heart thats its quite chuckable. And being a v6, the torque does get it sideways every now and again. When pushed beyond the level of grip, the lack of lsd means the inside wheels spins and outside grips (but without drive). This does allow some travel of the rear end but never at much of an angle and it regains grip quickly. This makes it easy to control by the throttle input. If you keep on the throttle its just spins the inside wheel but the angle of drift doesn't increase, because the outside wheel is still giving grip. If you lift off the grip returns to both wheels and returns to driving in straight line.

Also the flex in the high profile tyre lets you know when the limit is near and the transition from grip to slide is more linear giving more reaction time. Pretty much all tubby's are not on standard size tyres or suspension as owners choose ultimate grip and looks over predictable handling.

IMO this contributes to the mr2's 'will bite you' reputation.

Would be interesting to compare numbers of mk2 n/a (standard, non-lsd models) prangs that were handling related to similar incidents involving modified tubby. Bearing in mind the numbers of tubby's models to n/a's in the UK.

Just going by time I've recorded in the Toyota Sprint Series even in the wet I've been the fastest in my class more often then not. So in my eyes a Mk2 Mr2 can set a fast time even in wet conditions.

Now that on it's own doesn't mean the car is easy or `chuckable` in the wet but for me it's been fantastic fun. It's defiantly harder to drive then some other performance cars in these conditions (could drive `GTI style` cars in my sleep in comparison) but the rewards are there for a smooth and measured driver.

Regards setup, it does make a big difference. The amount of mr2's I see with worn suspension, cheapo tyres and large heavy wheels is quite shocking. All of this combined with an ON/OFF turbo power delivery really upsets an already quite sensitive handling setup.

Coming back to the question.... which is faster.... well honestly which has been better setup, which one had the most money spent on it and most importantly who's driving it.

[BarronMR]

Just going by time I've recorded in the Toyota Sprint Series even in the wet I've been the fastest in my class more often then not. So in my eyes a Mk2 Mr2 can set a fast time even in wet conditions.

Congrats .

I believe a few people have expressed the same opinion, that the mr2 is a rather good wet track car (although in the context I think they were referring to a mk1). I assume because front wheels don't have drive, it allows them to be less suseptable to understeer while accelerating through corners. Although its suggested that at lower speeds understeer is a problem, due to lack of weight over front wheels.

Coming back to the question.... which is faster.... well honestly which has been better setup, which one had the most money spent on it and most importantly who's driving it.

Thats what it all comes down to at the end of the day, technology, money and the driver.

Im happy thinking that there isn't faster car that could be bought for the money Ive spent without losing something I'd miss. Best Bang vs. buck

[eRATic]

something else we all need to bear in mind when discussing "handling issues" is the way the car is driven. The main influencing factor i am on about is the driver.

We all drive differently and someone having major handling problems in the wet may just have poor throttle control. Power is nothing without control. Try riding a motorbike quickly in the wet and you will learn after the first time the back slides out not to be so aggressive but in a car you normally keep planting the foot down hard until you go backwards into a tree (and then blame it on diesel)

Good point on the set up and a lot of supposed lack of grip in the wet is a lack of sidewall movement caused by too low a profile tyre. A lower profile tyre will grip better up to the limit but go suddenly whereas a taller profile tyre will flex the sidewall more and breakaway a lot more progressively which in my book is more fun and why i run my 1.5 on 15"s

[steve b]

s a lot of supposed lack of grip in the wet

The MR2 has really high limits in the wet, best wet weather A to B car I've ever driven. Difficult to catch over the limits yes, but to get to those limits you've got to really push it or do something stupid.

[GeoffC320]

s a lot of supposed lack of grip in the wet

The MR2 has really high limits in the wet, best wet weather A to B car I've ever driven. Difficult to catch over the limits yes, but to get to those limits you've got to really push it or do something stupid.

Something I've been saying for many years now. Once you've got your head round it they're pretty good fun in the wet.

Then again I did gain most of my driving experience in a Capri on remoulds....

[Lauren]

The MR2 has really high limits in the wet, best wet weather A to B car I've ever driven. Difficult to catch over the limits yes, but to get to those limits you've got to really push it or do something stupid.

Try some other cars!

The mk1 was very good in the wet, principally because its setup suits the wet (think toyota erred on the side of caution with the setup). I don't agree that that mk2 shares this however, the lack of steering feel and having to allow for turbo lag in a car which does not have a great balance make it tricky on the limit.

Sure it can be rewarding driving around its foibles but there are other cars which don't have these foibles.

[steve b]

The mk1 was very good in the wet, principally because its setup suits the wet (think toyota erred on the side of caution with the setup). I don't agree that that mk2 shares this however, the lack of steering feel and having to allow for turbo lag in a car which does not have a great balance make it tricky on the limit.

The n/a mk2 like mine doesn't have the turbo lag problem Setup can alter cars a lot, I got my n/a mk2 as a practical reliable, all weather daily B road commuter, it does the job very well whatever the weather I don't really slow down at all with it in the wet on the road except slow tight turns <40mph as then it can understeer a bit. NSL & 50 B roads it tends to be happy at normal cruising speed (70 ish) in the wet.

[mattcambs]

The MR2 has really high limits in the wet, best wet weather A to B car I've ever driven. Difficult to catch over the limits yes, but to get to those limits you've got to really push it or do something stupid.

In really poor conditions, the problem is knowing when the limit is nearing as feedback from the rear is a bit lacking.

I was confident in my first turbo in the wet until I span it whilst accelerating out of a corner. Admittedly the car had an aftermarket LSD, but I didn't think my throttle input was aggressive - and the way the back end snapped around with no warning was scary (hitting the lamp post was more scary!)

In the wet you also certainly want to do any hard braking in a straight line as the back end feels a bit wayward if you need to brake mid-corner.

Smooth driving with careful steering and pedal inputs is definitely the way to go with mk2s, but maybe this technique stops you feeling like you're getting the most out of the car? We all know we can push really hard into the limits of a FWD car which makes us feel like we're a bit more of a hero.

IMO, in no way is a mk2 "chuckable" on wet roads.

[steve b]

I've never had a moment ever on road in any of my MR2's , on track I think I've spun my old n/a rev2 twice, my turbo never & my rev3 n/a about 6 times. Possibly as i push it to the limit and beyond on track I know exactly where the limits are and I find on road you'd have to be really going fast or doing in-appropriate things with the brakes and throttle.

Only time I've ever felt the in-ability to go quick and really have to tip toe about was at Castle Combe once and it started Hailing, having lots of ice balls all over the track changed things but even my friend in his scooby I was chasing ended up with a trip to the grass

[stiggy]

Lauren - how can you talk about the foibles of the MR2 when ITR's are FWD?

I love ITR's btw, they're IMO Honda's 2nd best ever car - and with tightening regulations probably the best we'll ever see! When you cut through the crap, I dont think they're as quick in real life as they are on track though... Incidentally, I was having a good play with one last night in my GT4 - it couldn't even come CLOSE. Let alone if it had been wet.

Why? Because in comparison to pretty much any of its competition ITR's are very much down on power. It's not too bad on track as you can carry a lot of speed through the bends but in real life you have to slow down to much slower speeds and much more often. It's not even like you can really tune them!

Also, reliable as they are, they're hardly infallible. Gearbox's are a weak point, and most cars that have done more than 100k have had the entire suspension setup replaced twice over by now. In comparison to the competition though, they are cheaper - and a LOT more economical. Still a performance car though, with performance prices. They also go for wayyy too much money for what they are. They still go for about 30% of the price they were new, 10 years on!!! Personally, give me an Mi16'ed 205 and 3 grand anyday!

[mattcambs]

Stiggy, do you realise the can of worms you sre opening here?

EDIT: see below

[Lauren]

Lauren - how can you talk about the foibles of the MR2 when ITR's are FWD?

I love ITR's btw, they're IMO Honda's 2nd best ever car - and with tightening regulations probably the best we'll ever see! When you cut through the crap, I dont think they're as quick in real life as they are on track though... Incidentally, I was having a good play with one last night in my GT4 - it couldn't even come CLOSE. Let alone if it had been wet.

Why? Because in comparison to pretty much any of its competition ITR's are very much down on power. It's not too bad on track as you can carry a lot of speed through the bends but in real life you have to slow down to much slower speeds and much more often. It's not even like you can really tune them!

Also, reliable as they are, they're hardly infallible. Gearbox's are a weak point, and most cars that have done more than 100k have had the entire suspension setup replaced twice over by now. In comparison to the competition though, they are cheaper - and a LOT more economical. Still a performance car though, with performance prices. They also go for wayyy too much money for what they are. They still go for about 30% of the price they were new, 10 years on!!! Personally, give me an Mi16'ed 205 and 3 grand anyday!

Each to their own I guess. The ITR may be FWD (you are talking to a previously RWD stalwart here!) but it has an amazing chassis with such poise and balance that cars like the MR2 can only dream of. If you can't see beyond the whole 'but its FWD' debate, then you need an education, go drive one.

The thing is its pointless comparing how some ITR did or didn't keep up with you on the road because you have no idea what the driver was like. Probably one of the most impressive things about ITR's is their corner entry speed. I can duplicate what I do on track on the road within reason.

The point is though why would you want to tune an ITR? Its pretty much perfect as it is, this is the beauty of it.

I think they are pretty reliable tbh. Like any car they need maintenance. Nothing outside the normal realms of reliability anyway.

ITR's go for high prices because they are extremely desirable to those in the know and have a good reputation and not without good reason either.

Tbh I find the ITR a devastatingly quick point to point car. I'd be quite amazed if anything left it on a road that has a few bends. I've yet to find something that has.

I'd honestly choose the ITR over an MR2 (and i'm talking Mk1) anyday.

[Quigonjay]

I'd honestly choose the ITR over an MR2 (and i'm talking Mk1) anyday.

just remind me lauren, why is it you are vice chair of an mr2 club?
you obviously have very little interest in mr2's of any mk these days and seem to want to berate them at every opportunity

[mattcambs]

I'd honestly choose the ITR over an MR2 (and i'm talking Mk1) anyday.

just remind me lauren, why is it you are vice chair of an mr2 club?
you obviously have very little interest in mr2's of any mk these days and seem to want to berate them at every opportunity

As Lauren would say:

DING

[BarronMR]

I thought the best point to point cars, for the most part are the 4wd brigade.

How would the ITR compare to a 240whp evo 2-3? I was lucky enough to get ride in my friends 1994 evo (320fwhp & 240atw). No major mods, simple manual boost controller, exhaust and filter. And the way that it could travel down country lanes boggles the mind.

My only experience of FWD on a track was following a 205mi16 in my mk1. I found it was carrying as much speed into the corners but couldn't accelerate out as fast, as to do so resulted in understeer, therefore the mk1 had more lateral grip under acceleration. I suspect the 205 chassis had as much if not more mechanical grip but asking the front tyres to do the two jobs at once lowers the available grip at the front.

On a different note, Ive been back driving a mk1 (4age) daily again. I really love the car, its so much fun to zing about in but...

I have noticed that once out of the power band its pretty dead and there's no way im banging the g'box back into 1st for the low speed corners. I can only suspect that the vtec unit is similar, would you throw it into 1st for a 10-15mph corner . But the mk2 v6 is back and so is the 5000rpm powerband, right engine wrong mr2.

[Lauren]

just remind me lauren, why is it you are vice chair of an mr2 club?
you obviously have very little interest in mr2's of any mk these days and seem to want to berate them at every opportunity

It's called balance honey and also because over the years the mr2 tends to become over-rated on single make forums. I like the mk1 well enough and god knows i've had a lot of fun in them, but have never been truly impressed with a mk2 as a 'drivers car'.

Toni's rev 3 on Tein suspenders with 24K on the clock was easily the best turbo i've driven. But i've driven a fair few others which have been nowhere near as good.

[Lauren]

I thought the best point to point cars, for the most part are the 4wd brigade.

How would the ITR compare to a 240whp evo 2-3? I was lucky enough to get ride in my friends 1994 evo (320fwhp & 240atw). No major mods, simple manual boost controller, exhaust and filter. And the way that it could travel down country lanes boggles the mind.

My only experience of FWD on a track was following a 205mi16 in my mk1. I found it was carrying as much speed into the corners but couldn't accelerate out as fast, as to do so resulted in understeer, therefore the mk1 had more lateral grip under acceleration. I suspect the 205 chassis had as much if not more mechanical grip but asking the front tyres to do the two jobs at once lowers the available grip at the front.

On a different note, Ive been back driving a mk1 (4age) daily again. I really love the car, its so much fun to zing about in but...

I have noticed that once out of the power band its pretty dead and there's no way im banging the g'box back into 1st for the low speed corners. I can only suspect that the vtec unit is similar, would you throw it into 1st for a 10-15mph corner . But the mk2 v6 is back and so is the 5000rpm powerband, right engine wrong mr2.

Am sure a 4WD car such as the EVO would have an advantage, but again its always down to the driver and as a rule its incredibly rare to meet anyone on the road who can drive.

LSD helps loads coming out of corners, pretty essential really. Without an LSD a FWD car spins the power away. I remember earlier in the year having a bit of fun with an E46 M3 round Croft. He was behind for a couple of laps, let him past as he was monstering me on the straights. Into the corners I was straight up behind and holding him well onto the next straights, his back end was squirming, so he was trying, but perhaps the driver wasn't smooth enough with his inputs to gain the advantage he should have.

A 205 chassis is crude in comparison to an ITR though.

You are quite right, the ITR suffers if its out of VTEC, so you generally just change a gear lower to go into/exit the corners. If its a really tight hairpin like for example the last corner at croft you just have to wait a bit for the power to come in to punt you down the straight, but its only a straight and its not like you don't have to take a lot of speed for Clervaux anyway, so no great loss. You do though get the odd occasion when you may have to drop out of VTEC for some corners, but its not a mega issue as a rule. It caught us out more at first when we took it out on track than it does nowadays.

[Slarty]

I'd honestly choose the ITR over an MR2 (and i'm talking Mk1) anyday.

just remind me lauren, why is it you are vice chair of an mr2 club?
you obviously have very little interest in mr2's of any mk these days and seem to want to berate them at every opportunity

Exactly. Isn't it time we had a vote on the Committee positions or are they self positioned?

Tbqfh Lauren, go join a Honda club and stay there

[Lauren]

Exactly. Isn't it time we had a vote on the Committee positions or are they self positioned?

Tbqfh Lauren, go join a Honda club and stay there

LOL. No. votes on committee position are by the committee themselves.

Besides you'll be pleased to hear that I will be moving out of my vice-chair position some time soon (when they let me) and will just be a director then.

I actually spend very little time on the honda forum in all honesty. Most of my time is spend running this club.