240sx vs. Mr2

[AkademikONE]

i have an 89 240sx, bone stock, except for a CAI. my friend has a 93 mr2, also bone stock. we each have around 7 grand each to play around with and fix our cars up. we were wondering which car had the biggest potential for speed if we used that money to fix our cars up. i'm getting an sr20det, and he has the 3sgte engine w/ stock turbo, thanks for your inputwhich one?

[nomore_mr2]

well since i am a previous mr2 owner(still am actually) i left the mr2 for a 240sx. i want a car that can make high horse power reliably. unless your friend is going to go to a standlaone he ont make reliable high horse power+325. the stock ecu in the mr2 are terrible and timing advance underload is sometimes in excess of 40 degrees. when you throw on a s-afc and start to lean it out the timing gets more advanced. 3sgte's are built strong as hell but there ecu's ruin it. i put the mr2 on hold and now i have a built ca18det. also yeah the whole mid engine thing is cool but it becomes a pain in the *** at times. for intercooling your limited to side mount(i feel there isnt enough air flow) a2w(mad expensive) and trunk mount. the trunk mount is the best place to put a intercooler but then you loose the little space you have. if you are looking to spend momney and getting a mr2 and can behappy with 300 hp or below dont worry about any of these problems i listed. anything over 300 and you WILL have problems. i speak from experience. also if you are looking at 91 or 92 they have a bad rear suspension and snap over steer. you really have to drive teh car to learn its limits or it will bite you in the *** un-expecedly. good luck to both of you but i would put my momey on you with a sr20 then him with a mr2 and 3s.

[Cosmo_MR2]

With respect to nomore_mr2, I'm going to argue in favour of the MR2 in this situation.

You're going to spend $7k on an SR20DET swap, which will give you about the same hp as the MR2 Turbo, stock. And the MR2 owner still has $7k to spend on mods. Plus, you'll have all the problems with operatind a JDM engine in the US (I assume you're in the US). Japan's high-octane pump gas is not available here, so your SR20DET won't make as much power here as it did in Japan. I don't know, but I expect that an ECU retune will be necessary to make the SR run nicely on our gas. Plus, you'll always have problems diagnosing engine problems and getting parts, because of your exotic engine.

The MR2 owner, on the other hand, starts with 200hp stock, he can get a nice GT25 or GT30 ball-bearing turbo kit, big intercooler, intake, exhaust, injectors, pump, CD ignition and ECU re-tune for his 7 grand. If it is tuned well, he can have a very driveable 300+hp, at least before heat-soak sets in. If he has some cash left over for a water injection kit, or at least sprayers for the IC, so much the better.

Of course, I'm just assuming you're only interested in power and/or drag racing. If you want a real driver's car, I'd spend half the money on engine and half on suspension, LSD & brakes, that goes for either car.

I'm a long-time MR2 Turbo owner (big surprise!), and have never owned a 240SX (although I'm looking at an S14 for my next car).

-John

[Cyberkreig]

Plus, you'll have all the problems with operatind a JDM engine in the US (I assume you're in the US). Japan's high-octane pump gas is not available here, so your SR20DET won't make as much power here as it did in Japan. I don't know, but I expect that an ECU retune will be necessary to make the SR run nicely on our gas.

This is not a flame, just a correction. What you said isnt accurate, here is why: #1 japans ocatane rating is calculated differently than here, their 100+ ocatane is comparable to our 92-94 octane (readily available). #2 Octane (not patronizing, just telling you if you dont know) is not a rating of power, but how hard the fuel is to burn, the higher, the harder to ignite. 110 octain will make no more or less than 87 octain (assuming no detonation.) Round about way for me to say that the SR will run happily on anything 90 or higher.

Quote »Plus, you'll always have problems diagnosing engine problems and getting parts, because of your exotic engine.[/quote]

You are absoultly correct. There are only a handful of shops in this country (unless you are lucky enough to live in california) that can diagnose and repair this motor. If you are gonna swap you/yourdad/your best friend better know about cars and you need to be willing to have some downtime.

[Cyberkreig]

sorry, forgot to comment on the orginal topic.

I dont know anything about MR2 or that motor, I do know that any toyota motor deserves respect.

As for the SR I would look at it this way:SR20 motorset + install approx $4000 = 205 RWHPFMIC + BOV & pipes $1000 = 220 RWHPCat-back exhaust $500 = 230 RWHPElectronic Boost Controler = 250 RWHP (about the stock turbos max)

I love my SR, but after all that money, I dont know which would be quicker..

[SeVa-S13]

Don't conform an get an SR20 like every half of the freakin' 240 owners out there. (not that they're at all a bad motor) Get an RB25 and have considerably higher potential.RB25 front clip and professionally installed, you can get for ~$4000Bigger turbo - $400-600 Voila! MR-2 = not even competition.

Disregard this post cuz I'm just throwing random ideas and opnions around.

Edit: add $$$ for shipping of the clip.

[big jon's 240]

I know you said you were only interested in the power potential of the two cars, but have you taken into consideration htat the 240 is a much nicer looking car?If you dont install the sr20 yourself, yes you will use up your 7g's real quick. However, if you buy the motor and throw it in your self, you will still have a few grand to play with. In the long run, not sticking to the 7g budget, the sr20 will have a much higher power potential. Of course you could have a real nice KA24DET for 7g's......

[S13Ka24e]

#1 japans ocatane rating is calculated differently than here, their 100+ ocatane is comparable to our 92-94 octane (readily available). #2 Octane (not patronizing, just telling you if you dont know) is not a rating of power, but how hard the fuel is to burn, the higher, the harder to ignite. 110 octain will make no more or less than 87 octain (assuming no detonation.) Round about way for me to say that the SR will run happily on anything 90 or higher.

I'm not saying your wrong but i did not know that octane was calcuated differently. Over hear it is

(hypothetical octane)x(realistic octane)_____________________________________ 2

Right? This is where hypothetical is done in a lab and realistic is done on the road. How do they do it in Japan, just strait hypothetical?

[Cyberkreig]

There was a big discussion about that on this board some time ago. I'll dig around and try to source myself before i say anything else.

[Cyberkreig]

http://www.btinternet.com/~mad....html

If you read throught that page, you will see that you are correct, the US uses an average (RON + MON /2) Aka (R+M/2). Where as Europe (and the rest of the world at large) Simply use RON.

There are several threads discussing it, search for "octane rating"

[nomore_mr2]

well if he already has the mr2 with a turbo engine and he is starting off with with 7k obviously he will have more then you. now if cars were equal and you already have the turbo engine then it would be a whole new story.it all comes down to what you put into it. i still think the 240 is a better chasis for modding then a mr2. it has alot more advantages plus a 240sx is so much more sexual then a mr2.

[APEXi240]

MR2, hands down. Even if you already had an SR, it would still make more power...that engine is a monster.

There is no way an S13 looks better than an MR2.

[yashin]

just before i start, let me say i love the 240

but there is now way that you will win, those cars are fast and freakin light, they run 14.8 stock, that's pretty damn good, now with 7 g's he could get a hell of a lot, a bigger turbo, boost controller, BOV etc., and i think that the mr2 looks pretty damn good

[big jon's 240]

Well, looks are a matter of opinion, but personally, i think older MR2's are just plain ugly.

[SilviaLuvr]

Cyberkreig, umm our car doesn't have 205hp to the rear wheels. we They have about 175-185RWHP' sunless your are mistaken RWHP with FWPH to the fly they produce 205hp. unless i've been lied to for most of my nissan living life, it only produe about 175-185 to the wheels.

[lessthanjakejohn]

Quote »Well, looks are a matter of opinion, but personally, i think older MR2's are just plain ugly.[/quote]

bah! I love MK1 MR2's they are beasts! how can this be ugly: http://www.racingstrong.com/aw...e.asp

Well wahtever

[elbles]

This is a question I kinda, sorta agonized over when I got my 240. The MR2 is nothing short of a great sports car, and there is some serious potential with the 3SGTE engine, and SCC even did a V6 swap into one in their latest issue. This isn't to say the 240 is a "wimp"; the chassis is just as good, and you have way more engine options (SR20DET, CA18DET, RB25DET, etc), not to mention greater availability (i.e lots more 240's than MR2's, believe me ;-)). But given $7000, you could probably get a much faster car out of a 240 than a MR2; the MR2s very design, specifically the mid-engine layout, limits what you can fit in there.

Admittedly, I have some bias, but if any of you out there are considering getting either of these cars, keep this in mind: there are many more 240's out there than there are MR2's. If you can even find a MR2, many of them are beaten to hell (as are many 240's, but there are more of them around to choose from), and it could be more difficult to work on, given the mid-engine layout. And it certainly isn't as practical a car as a 240, given 2 seats, and not much cargo space (like 6 cubic feet, whereas a S13 hatch has more than twice that). And the shifter in the MR2 doesn't have the best feel, at least to me. Oh, and insurance companies will consider the MR2 a sports car (expensive); with a 240, you have a shot with the excuse of a backseat. Don't get me wrong, I love the MR2, but it's a hard car to find, and can be a hard and expensive car to live with, depending on what your desires/needs are for a car. I wanted a MR2 at first, but because of the above, I choose a 240 for my 1st RWD sports car (also my very first car). Sorry for the rant, I'm 17, home sick on a Friday night, with work the next morning. What else am I going to do? ;-)

[Cyberkreig]

SilviaLuvr - It is possible, if not probable that you are right. I *thought* it was RWHP.. but crankHP makes more sense.

[theNUDdistBUDDhist]

Well my VERRY VERRY biased opinion is and will asways be a nissan. +D But, starting off againsa a lighter turbocharged car if you dont aproch this the right way youll likely get burnt. But like i sayed "IF you dont.." 1 im assunging you have an SE. witch should be 1k lbs lighter, (correct me if im wroung but i dont think i am) than the odds are much better, your best beat is to note his and your obvious advantages and look at how your gunna compair the two cars. -- MoNK

[Rockenreno]

Curb weight:

1993 MR2 - 2657 lbs. (http://auto.consumerguide.com/...6.htm)1989 240sx - 2730 lbs. (http://auto.consumerguide.com/...8.htm)

1000 lbs. lighter??? where are you getting these crazy numbers? MR2's are tiny, they weight less than the 240 (which is a 4 seater, not a 2 seater)!!

I would say the MR2 has more potential, but if you are going to spend $6k, I wouldn't do it upgrading a 1989 240sx. You could get a very nice '95 for that much (but it wouldn't be as fast as an '89 240 with $6k in it:( ). I guess if you are racing with it you could probably get an RB series engine in there for $6k if you budget it right, or an SR20 with a bigger turbo, or just turbo the KA... I don't know...:pface

[Bubba1]

Depends what you want to do with the car. MR2's do handle like go carts, but if you're hauling anything more than a briefcase, or if you plan to bring more than one fiend, MR2 won't work. 93 MR2 is smaller and quicker than an 89 240, but a 240sx roomier, slower, but less expensive to maintain/repair. Your choice... If you put this poll on a Toyota BB, you would have a different result.

[lessthanjakejohn]

I think the 240 has a ton of potential but the MR2 will be a quicker car with less money. its also smaller and handles better>>>if you can drive it

[sims]

well... look at it like this, in Japan, the Silvia, and the 2G MR2's are basically competition. They both respond well to mods, have pretty close to the same HP limits before major works is going to be needed, both about the same weight, both have amazing chassis and handling potential, all in all they are both amazing cars.

But that’s in Japan, here in North America it cost 4K just to catch up to the MR2.But then again, you could probably get a 89 and a SR for the same price as a good 93 MR2 is worth. But the question at hand is what would be fast, a 240 or a mr2 turbo with 7 grand, so I’m definitely going with the mr2 turbo

[Silviagirl79]

Thats what I going going to say...I would love for it to start out with 205 to the wheels without any MODS!!!

[Lsnaple]

why dont you just turbo the ka?

i will also say the mr2. those are damn quick cars, and he has a stock turbo. i also agree that those are beautiful cars.

just do the mods and then find out.

[Phax]

I prefer the looks of the MR-2, especially with some of the body kits that they have for them. As for performance potential, the MR-2 will be the 240SX hands down given that he's starting with a turbo charged engine and then dumping 7k into it.

[Gregariousgreg]

I think the MR-2 is probably gunna get more horsepower for less money. Like everyone has been saying, it comes with a good engine in the first place, the 240 you need to put one in. However, the 240sx has great potential. Plus it's a lot easier to work on since it's a conventional front engine car. I personally would go with a 240, just because I want to do the wrench work for a project. So, if your goal is horsepower go with the MR-2. If you want a car that you can work on and learn more about, go with the 240sx. Not to mention, in the long run the 240sx will have a lot more potential. This is if you get an rb25det. That baby can handle more horsepower than you'll ever need. It's a bit of a bottomless pit for money though.

[SmithSR]

just before i start, let me say i love the 240

but there is now way that you will win, those cars are fast and freakin light, they run 14.8 stock, that's pretty damn good, now with 7 g's he could get a hell of a lot, a bigger turbo, boost controller, BOV etc., and i think that the mr2 looks pretty damn good

yeah and stock drivetrain will grenade before you can say "toyota's fugly duckling fake porsche".

[t4 mr2]

I say mr2!!!! 542rwhp on a stock block running 26 psi with a boost leak (3sgte) No seriously the 3 best 4cyl motors out there are the 4g63, sr20 and 3sgte. Not in that order of course. This is my opinion is which order they go in. Please don't take this offensively, but i believe the sr20 come sin last do to its design. 3sgte first, 4g63 2nd, and sr20 3rd but that does not by any means say its a bad motor. So since and mr2 has a 3sgte in it

[JustinStrife]

Spend 5900 at Daunttless to have the RB25DET installed running about 250hp at the wheels and spend the other grand on a bigger turbo and you should be hitting 350 at the wheels(depending on Turbo and boost)



End of story