MR2 Turbo VS Honda Integra Type R???

[tonigmr2]

Are there any other cars that have been shown to be beaten in some youtube vid which clearly show the MK2 is a better car?

Can we just list them and get it all over with in one thread?
/death by a thousand cuts
T

[luthor1]

Lauren - if you've got something to show us, then post it up? If we haven't seen this video of yours how can anyone comment??

Toni - this post is regarding ITR/MR2 Turbo, and to list 'other' cars outside that would surely be to drift off topic?

[tonigmr2]

Toni - this post is regarding ITR/MR2 Turbo, and to list 'other' cars outside that would surely be to drift off topic?

/sorry irony went astray.
T

[luthor1]

I've just noticed, I spend most of my time on this forum clicking the reply button to Lauren, then tonigmr2. I feel stalked!

...but that's off topic!

[LimeyMk1]

I've just noticed, I spend most of my time on this forum clicking the reply button to Lauren, then tonigmr2. I feel stalked!

...but that's off topic!

PMSL, come out of the cold darkness that is Driving Experiences and walk towards the light! Towards the light Andy, it's calling youuuuuu!

[Lauren]

Lauren - if you've got something to show us, then post it up? If we haven't seen this video of yours how can anyone comment??

Toni - this post is regarding ITR/MR2 Turbo, and to list 'other' cars outside that would surely be to drift off topic?

http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseacti ... id=6085302

Its about a third in, though it may do you no harm to watch it all. ITR beats and posts faster lap times than an MR2 turbo GT. Didn't the ITR post faster laptimes in the odus clip too?

[luthor1]

Doesn't say it's a "MR2 Turbo GT", it merely says "MR2 GT" I'm afraid, looks like that's an N/A to me... sorry.

[Antstarr]

Here is the sequel to the first ITRvsGlimitedvs200sx after a few mods

MUCH closer this time. i think we shud stop underestimating the NA

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7238043896

Its a BEAMS not just standard NA.

[Lauren]

Doesn't say it's a "MR2 Turbo GT", it merely says "MR2 GT" I'm afraid, looks like that's an N/A to me... sorry.

If you watch the video, you'll hear them clearly state that the other cars are turbo cars. The MR2 GT = mr2 turbo as there are GT and GTS models. Unless everything they state in the commentary is wrong?

[Lauren]

Here is the sequel to the first ITRvsGlimitedvs200sx after a few mods

MUCH closer this time. i think we shud stop underestimating the NA

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7238043896

Its a BEAMS not just standard NA.

DING... as it states: 200PS.

[Kongaroo]

I enjoyed watching the video - nice post.
The dubbing voice for the Drift King et al when they are all standing around talking at the end of the race made me laugh

Was good to learn more about why the car is so highly rated and how it actually shed the weight to weigh in at its impressive 2337lbs/1043Kg.

Might be worth pointing out though that with the Integra Type-R at 200PS (or 197BHP), the power to weight ratio is actually about 189BHP per ton.

The 1995 Bathurst RX7 should have been either 265BHP or 275BHP - assuming the lower amount and it's weight of 1260kg then its BHP per ton is approx. 210BHP per ton.

A GT MR2 turbo is the more equipped model with all the add-ons - i.e abs, ps, full climate control etc so it probably weighs similar to what my GT-S car did as my car came more or less fully equipped. My car weighed in slightly more than 1310kg on a public weigh bridge after I subtracted my weight/junk etc from the total figure.

So with 245PS (241BHP) and 1310kg the power to weight ratio of the MR2 GT should be approx. 184BHP per ton which is actually lower than both the RX7 and the Integra.

So the results (lap times) more or less followed the power to weight ratios of the fastest 4 cars from that perspective. The exception being the 4 door integra which had a ratio of 182BHP/ton (+88.2lbs or 39KG according to the video) but posted a 1:10.04 to the MR2's 1:10.39.

Although the Drift King then goes on to say the 3 door version is 1.2 seconds faster than the 4 door and then the times that come up on the screen show 1:09.20 for the 3 door and 1:10.46 for the 4 door so not sure which of the 2 stated lap times for the 4 door is the correct one.

Either way the power to weight difference between the 4 door and the MR2 is pretty negligible and the small differences in the best lap times more or less reflected that.

Anyways hadn't realised so much R&D went into making the Integra Type R - certainly I have some new found respect for the car after watching the video of how it was designed etc. - thanks for posting it up

Only one thing though... you can't up the boost in the integra

[Quigonjay]

Doesn't say it's a "MR2 Turbo GT", it merely says "MR2 GT" I'm afraid, looks like that's an N/A to me... sorry.

If you watch the video, you'll hear them clearly state that the other cars are turbo cars. The MR2 GT = mr2 turbo as there are GT and GTS models. Unless everything they state in the commentary is wrong?

yes, the commentary IS wrong
they are not all turbo's
mitsi fto for instance, never made a turbo
either way (turbo or not), yes the teg is quicker, but 0.4 per lap is hardly anything to shout about when he admits that that particular circuit is better suited to the tegs gearing
also, the clip later on with the gold beams engined mr2 (same as earlier in thread) they are quite evenly matched, therefore i believe the white mr2 is an na too

[rossdymond3352]

These threads are pointless, a car is only as good as its driver.

I could drive an enzo and Andy drive his mr2 and he would still kick my ar$e.

on that video, look at the times, the mr2 is only 0.3 of a second quicker, i cant even say "integras are ugly" in that ammount of time

[luthor1]

Doesn't say it's a "MR2 Turbo GT", it merely says "MR2 GT" I'm afraid, looks like that's an N/A to me... sorry.

If you watch the video, you'll hear them clearly state that the other cars are turbo cars. The MR2 GT = mr2 turbo as there are GT and GTS models. Unless everything they state in the commentary is wrong?

You'll actually hear them say the other cars are "...2 litre turbo's..." yes I have ears too.

Where does that leave the FTP? That's never a turbo... and the RX-7 is never 2 litre? and the 2 x integra's are 1.809cc non-turbo's, so the only turbo's were the subaru (1994cc boxer) and the Nissan, the others weren't turbo's or the correct cc!! So the voice over was WAY out.

If it was the Beams engine, that makes perfect sense as it follows the previous demonstrations, whereby with the same power/weight ratio available the integra would lap SLOWER. Thanks for the VID Lauren - demonstrates perfectly what we already knew, that the MR2 bhp/tonne bats so far above it's weight it can almost take on an RX-7!!!

EDIT: Actually, I have to admint, the rest of the vid was cool, watching them tighten down the rods with a micrometer!! That's probably why they don't generally have failures on those engines, although when they do let go it's pretty spectacular and EVERYTHING gets destroyed since the RPM involved is usually really high and the small-packaging means everything is really close to everything else!

[Lauren]

Thought an MR2 GT= Mr2 turbo?

[luthor1]

On a serious note for a mo (if that's possible!)

"GT" "GT-S" etc refer to the interior trim level, for example, the GT-S tended to be the cheaper less well specc'd (and lighter interestingly) models.

You could have a GT NA, a GT-S NA, a G-Limited NA, but you could only have a GT-Turbo or a GT-S Turbo, G-LTD was only NA. GT does not *mean* Turbo and I can't see a good enough shot on the film to categorically say it's a Turbo, infact if anything one angle I'm sure it has flat engine cover... but not 100%

The Beams seems the most likely, and fair enough is has equivelant power to a 1990 Rev1 Turbo so the performance there can be assumed to be identical.

It's the 241bhp Rev3+ which I believe would stretch a little further forwards.

For example, if the difference they are claiming between the 3 door and 5 door ITR is measured in seconds rather than 10ths how would another 41BHP (20%!) power increase alter a cars lap times?

[luthor1]

/back to the fun...

Assuming both teg and MR2 are 200ps (BEAMS being most likely here...)

Power to weight...

Teg - 200ps/1045 x 1000 = 191ps/tonne
MR2 - 200ps/1310 x 1000 = 153ps/tonne.

[Lauren]

On a serious note for a mo (if that's possible!)

"GT" "GT-S" etc refer to the interior trim level, for example, the GT-S tended to be the cheaper less well specc'd (and lighter interestingly) models.

You could have a GT NA, a GT-S NA, a G-Limited NA, but you could only have a GT-Turbo or a GT-S Turbo, G-LTD was only NA. GT does not *mean* Turbo and I can't see a good enough shot on the film to categorically say it's a Turbo, infact if anything one angle I'm sure it has flat engine cover... but not 100%

The Beams seems the most likely, and fair enough is has equivelant power to a 1990 Rev1 Turbo so the performance there can be assumed to be identical.

It's the 241bhp Rev3+ which I believe would stretch a little further forwards.

For example, if the difference they are claiming between the 3 door and 5 door ITR is measured in seconds rather than 10ths how would another 41BHP (20%!) power increase alter a cars lap times?

Ahh okay, i stand corrected. An extra 41bhp ought to make some difference to the laptime, though it really depends on the circuit and the conditions. For example if it was wet or damp, then the difference between a turbo and an NA would be much smaller.

[Antstarr]

Ok guys ive been contemplating the thought of selling my modified rev3 turbo for a JDM DC2.

Reasons being I live in London and roads are bumpy, lots of turns etc nowhere to plant my uber-turbo power. Also need more seats as u see more people in London.

I know 3 rev3 turbo owners all who were pushing 300+bhp have converted to DC2 and said how the handling is very responsive and V-tec feels awesome (even without the turbo tug). Its addictive to drive and all say the DC2 would keep up with a turbo easily.

Do I need to actually test drive or sit in 1 to understand if its worth sacrificing my beloved MR2 for? I still prefer the looks + turbo performance of the MR2 btw. I am in 2 minds...

[luthor1]

Teg is awesome, and will do all the things you require - except keep up with a 300bhp Rev3 turbo!! The TEG does a great job of feeling like an awesomely fast car until you do a 30mph roll on against the tweaked turbo, I know, we've done it.

Coming from a turbo, you'll notice that it feels like you've got a 'box full of 1st gears, when you change it doesn't feel like the next gear is much different ratio to the one you just came out of unlike in the tubby, when you feel like you've got a long-ish gear to get that wall of torque to push against.

You'll find that to keep up with modern diesel turbo cars you are thrashing it everywhere spending your time at 4-6000rpm.

On the cruise it'll do great mpg, but those 9krpm blats drink the fuel.

It's noisier than a stock tubby inside, but the seats are awesome for grip, and the seating position is good although it feels less sporty, and the steering wheel isn't quite as adjustable.

Brakes are better than a stock tubby. Can't think of much else really. Go drive one!