Mr2 Turbo vs 240/SILVIA

[bretts15mr2]

Which do you think is a better racecar buildup?

[BuudWeizErr]

Wow... we are on a roll tonight.

http://www.nissaninfiniticlub....x+mr2

[Dori Dori]

Well since he asked specifically about race car characteristics, it's a different subject entirely IMO.

240 is the winner IMO. Why? Here:

1. Almost perfect weight distribution2. Very advanced rear multilink/double wishbone suspension; front is strut based w/ tension rods3. Light weight4. Longer wheelbase (most important)...longer in S14 than S13 FYI. 97.4in for S13 and 99.4in for S145. Very stiff chassis (more room for a cage too even though you can build braces in the MR2 engine bay)

If you want a 3sgte v sr20det arguement, I won't even get involved. There will be too much sensitivity from both sides. It'll probably sound like this...Iron block is stronger...Aluminum is lighter...Jun did this...HKS did that...and so on and so on.

[the_invisible]

I don't get it. How is a longer wheel base benefial?

It is good for high speed stability, but other than that, what else?

Well, another good thing about 240sx is that it has 7 degrees of adustable caster. Whereas other high performance cars only have 5-6.

[toy turbo 2]

40/60 makes a better race car, MR2 has the characteristics of the top race cars.

[toy turbo 2]

the cars weight the same and the mr2 has room for all the safety stuff also.

i've owned both, and now own a 240sx because it was cheaper, the mr2 was better unless its raining and you want to carry more than a couple bags

[Dori Dori]

Ideal is 50/50, sorry. Always has been, always will be. More weight on either end gives understeer/oversteer...neutral balance is the best. Take the 360 Modena for example. Ferrari is definately someone that knows what they are doing. Ferrari placed the radiator on the front of the car to try to reduce the weight in the rear. This brought the weight distribution to 43/57 (street car). In the race car, it's supposed to be even closer to 50/50...but race teams don't usually give out that kind of information, so one can only assume...

[I H8 UR DSM]

what kind of racing do you mean when you say 'race car'???? LOL

[Dori Dori]

I was just assuming he meant road racing...but I guess he did leave it open to interpretation.

[I H8 UR DSM]

Im interpreting it as "ice racing"...so im going to go with the Galant VR4.

JESSERPI

[brent]

I've had both and its hard to beat the mr2, its weight distribution is great, slightly rear biased so when you brake and weight shifts forward its perfect, and when you excelerate it transfers even more weight over the rear tires (and they already have mega traction - rear engine). My vote goes to the MR2. The 240sx is more practical as a daily driver

[iceburgslim]

MR2's are complete whores to work on. I've worked on many many cars and the MR2 takes any pleasure you may get out of it and shoves it up your A$$. IMHO as far as which motor is the best to mod, the SR20DET hands down. It has more aftermarket support, is just as strong and is easier to work on.MR2's do look better though.

[I H8 UR DSM]

HOW ARE YOU ALL SAYING THIS WITHOUT SAYING WHAT TYPE OF RACING THE CAR WILL BE FOR????

HIGH SPEED?DRAG RACING?DRIFT RACING?AUTO X RACING?ROAD COURSE RACING?

CUMON NOW, DEPENDING ON THOSE QUESTIONS THE ANSWER WILL DIFFER.

JESSERPI

[FinalDrive]

MR2's are complete whores to work on. I've worked on many many cars and the MR2 takes any pleasure you may get out of it and shoves it up your A$$.

The only hard part about working on an MR2 is the cramped engine bay. It is no different than working on a front engine/fwd car because the engine is on the same end of the car as the drive wheels. I have done all the work on my MR2 myself and it was no harder than any honda I have worked on.

[FinalDrive]

As far as 3sgte vs sr20det, in my experience the sr20 responds to mods better. For example, if you use a SAFC on a 3sgte to lean out the notorious rich condition, the ecu responds by screwing with ignition timing which makes a bad situation worse.

[brent]

I agree, they are not bad to work on at all, but they do have alot of safety features built in to prevent huge power increases from ruining reliabilty. Basic upgrades like downpipe , exhaust, intake and boost controller can make pretty decent power

[BLiTz]

FinalDrive, im not really shure what kind of work you have done on an MR2, because changing the headlight isn't what were talkin about, but they are complete *****es to work on, a good friend of mine has a 91 mr2-turbo, and we just put on a Butterfly 304 exhaust and it took about 8 hours. Its terrible, having to drop the entire rear crossmember that supports the engine just to get the exhaust off is a little insane:D

[brent]

I didn't have to drop my crossmember to do my exhaust, maybe you did it the hard way? did you have a lift so you could work under the car decent?

[FinalDrive]

I recently put an hks hiper exhaust on my mr2. It took 45 minutes, including dropping the rear crossmember and stopping to take pictures to put on my site of the whole process.

[Nils]

I recently put an hks hiper exhaust on my mr2. It took 45 minutes, including dropping the rear crossmember and stopping to take pictures to put on my site of the whole process.

It took me 20 minutes to put on the exhaust on my 240, including stopping and taking pictures

Not that ease of work would stop me from buying a "quicker" car or that the mr2 isnt a capable sports car... but from what I have heard from other mr2 owners is that the car is very tail happy on the road course. I dont know that for a fact though since I have never driven one.

Going back to the original and n o o b question - "Fast" is a very relative term, what you might think is fast might be slow to someone else..... Fast in a straight line does not mean fast in a big turn and vice versa. When asking such a question, you have to be more specific in detailing your opinion of what fast means.

In either case, if you have enough money you can make anything fast. What ever car makes you happy... makes you happy.

I dont really care what brand my car is aslong as it meets my criteria of what "fast" is in some sort of fashion.

n

[looksLikeA240]

keep in mind that these opinions are usually bias, cause it was asked on a nissan forum. My guess is that people will say different on a mrkII forum.

[FinalDrive]

but from what I have heard from other mr2 owners is that the car is very tail happy on the road course. I dont know that for a fact though since I have never driven one.

You heard correctly. An MR2 suffers from "snap oversteer" as we on the MR2 board call it. The car is an amazing handler, but if you push it past its limit, good luck.

What ever car makes you happy... makes you happy.

Exactly. I'm looking for an s13 to park next to my MR2 as we speak.

[Dori Dori]

You heard correctly. An MR2 suffers from "snap oversteer" as we on the MR2 board call it. The car is an amazing handler, but if you push it past its limit, good luck.

Which is why I placed emphasis on the car's wheelbase. If it had a longer wheelbase, say as long as the s13, the MR2 could be the better track car. The s13/s14 still has a much more advanced suspension.

[toy turbo 2]

Ideal is 50/50, sorry. Always has been, always will be. More weight on either end gives understeer/oversteer...neutral balance is the best. Take the 360 Modena for example. Ferrari is definately someone that knows what they are doing. Ferrari placed the radiator on the front of the car to try to reduce the weight in the rear. This brought the weight distribution to 43/57 (street car). In the race car, it's supposed to be even closer to 50/50...but race teams don't usually give out that kind of information, so one can only assume...

if you don't brake or accelerate. most race cars do have a rear balance. also look at most porsches. a rear balance lets you brake later and accelerate earlier.

the mr2 and 240sx are almost a perfect comparison if the 240sx has more power and better brakes.

my brother also owns a miata w/50/50 weight. when you brake late into a corner the rear end wants to come around, with the mr2 i could brake until the really hard cornering came on.

look at thew lotus elise, it puts up better handling numbers than even the ferrari and it is right at 40/60. also radiators go in front for cooling in about any car, its much easier to get the air in the front and the heated air doesn't heat up the engine bay.

[toy turbo 2]

It took me 20 minutes to put on the exhaust on my 240, including stopping and taking pictures

Not that ease of work would stop me from buying a "quicker" car or that the mr2 isnt a capable sports car... but from what I have heard from other mr2 owners is that the car is very tail happy on the road course. I dont know that for a fact though since I have never driven one.

Going back to the original and n o o b question - "Fast" is a very relative term, what you might think is fast might be slow to someone else..... Fast in a straight line does not mean fast in a big turn and vice versa. When asking such a question, you have to be more specific in detailing your opinion of what fast means.

In either case, if you have enough money you can make anything fast. What ever car makes you happy... makes you happy.

I dont really care what brand my car is aslong as it meets my criteria of what "fast" is in some sort of fashion.

n

they are tail happy because they are ment to run larger rear tires then they are given stock and because the 91 and 92's had very short suspension set-ups. Like most race cars, larger tires help get the power to the ground in back and considering that rear tires don't actually get to turn they get a lot of weird forces on them when cornering hard.

mr cars are not drift queens though.

[toy turbo 2]

Which is why I placed emphasis on the car's wheelbase. If it had a longer wheelbase, say as long as the s13, the MR2 could be the better track car. The s13/s14 still has a much more advanced suspension.

this has to do with the actual suspension pieces not the wheel base.

[S13240]

All I gotta say is the mr2 turbo's are a kick a$s car. My brother has one and I have an s13 with sr20 and they're about the same. I have more suspension mods done so it seems my car currently handles better, but his car seems to have no traction problems at dead stop launches. Does kinda have body roll, but still a good car in all. i wouldn't mind having one, it's just a bish working on it...I've worked on his car so many times I don't even want to work on one anymore. Same goes for the Deuce's brother, the Celica Turbo All Trac...I owned 2 of them and don't wanna work on it again.But I love all the cars still! I'm a Toyota and Nissan enthusiast here! If I really have the chance to pick the Deuce or the 240sx I'd pick the Deuce just because it is DA BOMB! : )

[Dori Dori]

this has to do with the actual suspension pieces not the wheel base.

Wrong. Wheelbase is the reason for the snap oversteer. Sure, it can be better controlled w/ a better suspension, but short wheelbase cars like the miata and mr2 always suffer from snap oversteer during 'at the limit' driving.

[Dori Dori]

if you don't brake or accelerate. most race cars do have a rear balance. also look at most porsches. a rear balance lets you brake later and accelerate earlier.

my brother also owns a miata w/50/50 weight. when you brake late into a corner the rear end wants to come around, with the mr2 i could brake until the really hard cornering came on.

look at thew lotus elise, it puts up better handling numbers than even the ferrari and it is right at 40/60. also radiators go in front for cooling in about any car, its much easier to get the air in the front and the heated air doesn't heat up the engine bay.

1. I'm not going to fight w/ you about a vehicles weight distribution and which is better. The fact is that every race team and every driver has a different view on this. Some people like more rear bias, some people like 50/50, and sadly some people like front bias. But I will say this...the car world calls a 50/50 balanced car 'ideal weight distribution' for a reason.

2. Miata's suck. They are good for females, auto-x, and nothing more. They have a short wheelbase too, hence their lack of high speed stability.

3. An elise weighs 1775lbs. Magazine tests are very bias to smaller/lighter cars, so please don't try to convince me a lotus handles better than a Ferrari b/c of it's weight distribution (which is not 40/60 btw...an elise is even more rear bias than that).

4. I mentioned the radiator in the Ferrari b/c the F355 (the predecessor to the 360) had the radiator in the rear and Ferrari purposely placed it in the front of the car (of the 360) to get closer to a 50/50 weight distribution. Hmm, wonder why.

[fogleroller]

I like both cars very much, but for a "race car" I would have to go with the MKII MR2-T. People talk about snap steer and weight distribution, but if you are building a "race car" then that doesn't matter because it will not be stock. Once you change the wheels, suspension, add some negative camber,......bla bla bla. then you are set.

The funny thing is that, in the MR2 community, I see people getting CF hoods, gutting out the front trunk, taking out the spare tire, when really you want some weight in the front.

I am setting up my S13 for drift and the MR2 is already set up for Road Racing (but it is still a track virgin)