Anyone think of a good reason the 1j wasn't put in USDM Supras?
- Thread starter te72
- Start date
Poodles;1659034 said:
The only thing I can say about this is that both of the Miatas I had were quite nice cars. However, they weren't nearly as comfortable and quiet... different beast I guess, but strictly speaking from a reliability comparison standpoint, the Supras might as well be Yugos.
Completely different price point though. While the miata is nice, it's very much a stripper car with very few things to go wrong.
Poodles;1659399 said:
Very true Poodles, it's kinda refreshing though, driving such a simple car. A better comparison (and just as reliable) would be the old Corolla GT-S. Still a lot of fun, but with a completely different purpose in mind.
te72;1659366 said:
With all due respect but I owned my Supra since 94. 38K on the clock. Never in the 10+ years of driving did the car leave me stranded. And that include its last leg with rod knock at 225k in 2004. So perhaps with you all it might be a Yugo but I never had one issue with the car. AND that included winter driving the supra in the snow!!
The reason for the 1JZ not being imported into the US is that there was no need for it.
The reason it was put in them in Japan was due to Japanese tax structure.
It was also offered in a 2L version for the same reason.
Anything over 2.5L is nailed a higher tax/license fee.
We have no such tax problem here in the US, so the car was not offered with small engine.
Thank god, or we would have more useless threads on how to make a 3400 pound car perform with too little engine......
Can you imagin a Ford Torino, with a pinto engine in it ?
uke:
But I am sure, if it was available, there would be a whole section of a forum somewhere on how good it is, and how to make it go fast(er).
The reason it was put in them in Japan was due to Japanese tax structure.
It was also offered in a 2L version for the same reason.
Anything over 2.5L is nailed a higher tax/license fee.
We have no such tax problem here in the US, so the car was not offered with small engine.
Thank god, or we would have more useless threads on how to make a 3400 pound car perform with too little engine......
Can you imagin a Ford Torino, with a pinto engine in it ?
uke:But I am sure, if it was available, there would be a whole section of a forum somewhere on how good it is, and how to make it go fast(er).
figgie;1659657 said:
No offense taken Fig, I was still in grade school back then, didn't get my chance at a Supra until late 2005. I think my youngest Supra was at least 17 years old by the time I bought it, and all it needed was a new cooling system (straight water and Wyoming winter temps don't do previous owners any good) and a new head gasket. Other than that, it was an awesome car for me. My current car was nothing but a headache for the longest time, so... really all boils down to how well it has been taken care of in it's lifetime.
CT26smoker;1659804 said:The reason for the 1JZ not being imported into the US is that there was no need for it.
The reason it was put in them in Japan was due to Japanese tax structure.
It was also offered in a 2L version for the same reason.
Anything over 2.5L is nailed a higher tax/license fee.
We have no such tax problem here in the US, so the car was not offered with small engine.
Thank god, or we would have more useless threads on how to make a 3400 pound car perform with too little engine......
Can you imagin a Ford Torino, with a pinto engine in it ?
But I am sure, if it was available, there would be a whole section of a forum somewhere on how good it is, and how to make it go fast(er).
If the motor change was due to tax structure alone, then why did they release the 3L/2JZ as the sole engine available in the MK4 three years later?
The JZA70 with 276hp and 268tq sure was underpowered compared to the unbelievably potent 232hp and 240tq of the 7M. You definitely made a good point there.
Last edited:
well, the JZA70 was ~31k USD in Japan in 1990, after entering that into an inflation calculator I have here, that brings us to around ~51k equivalency today. The MKIV was ~35k in 1993, and after the same calculations, the price would have been around 59k. I'd venture to say one could easily afford the tax on either..
however, the 2J being used in the mk4 from a power/marketing perspective makes complete sense, that I'm not debating.
however, the 2J being used in the mk4 from a power/marketing perspective makes complete sense, that I'm not debating.
Last edited:
True as well, but I think the MKIII to MKIV leap was much grander than the MKII to MKIII leap, same as the Z31 300ZX leap to the Z32 300ZX, as compared from the 280ZX to 300ZX leap...
they slotted it up in performance quite a bit, and crept the price up...
they slotted it up in performance quite a bit, and crept the price up...
Same story with the FC/FD leap Razoe... still kinda irritated that there were no less than 6 billion Rustangs and Camaros sold in the 90's, but they stopped selling all the cool Japanese cars before the decade was out. Makes sense though, considering the price difference. My 01 SS was something like MSRP of ~17-18k new (but sold for probably 30k), while my 89 Mk3 was over 24k, at least according to our DMV's paperwork, if that's to be believed.
So, to open another can of worms, why not put the GTE in the Aristo/GS300 over here?
So, to open another can of worms, why not put the GTE in the Aristo/GS300 over here?
I completely agree with the jump in Japanese sports cars in the early nineties (FC to FD, Z31 to Z32, MK3 to MK4, etc).
The odd thing is that there didn't seem to be much of a jump from something like the R32 to R33 Skyline IMO. That seemed to occur more with the jump to the R34.
If the GTE was offered here it would only serve to compete against the GS400/430. The gap between the N/A 2J and UZ motors made more sense, likely easier to work on, and the American market had long been accustomed to V8 powered luxury cars. Toyota had to follow suit and take these factors into account. Japan had all three options, but then again, they also had different versions of the MK3, MK4, JZX (Cresta, MKII, Chaser) and so forth, an almost limitless amount of options and trim levels were available. From my experience, taking into account that I know/have Japanese friends and have studied their culture (—I'm planning to teach there), that makes total sense for them, they love combinations and being able to customize things down to the smallest accessory; individuality is very important to them because Japan is so homogeneous.
The odd thing is that there didn't seem to be much of a jump from something like the R32 to R33 Skyline IMO. That seemed to occur more with the jump to the R34.
If the GTE was offered here it would only serve to compete against the GS400/430. The gap between the N/A 2J and UZ motors made more sense, likely easier to work on, and the American market had long been accustomed to V8 powered luxury cars. Toyota had to follow suit and take these factors into account. Japan had all three options, but then again, they also had different versions of the MK3, MK4, JZX (Cresta, MKII, Chaser) and so forth, an almost limitless amount of options and trim levels were available. From my experience, taking into account that I know/have Japanese friends and have studied their culture (—I'm planning to teach there), that makes total sense for them, they love combinations and being able to customize things down to the smallest accessory; individuality is very important to them because Japan is so homogeneous.
Last edited:
Also id like to point out that at one point the MA70 and JZA70's were sold along side each other at the same time. One of the things that really killed the MA70 in Japan was that the 3.0's were still the most the expensive Supra you could buy despite the difference in power. It was cheaper to buy a JZA70 at that time. The 1JZ cap problem is well known in Japan in fact Toyota issued a recall for them and had the fixed ECU's put in their place. This is of course if the owners actually brought them in.
Despite the jump from the MKIII to MKIV the president of Tom's himself stated in short that he prefered the A70 over the A80 for motorsports use.
Despite the jump from the MKIII to MKIV the president of Tom's himself stated in short that he prefered the A70 over the A80 for motorsports use.
Dylan JZ;1660680 said:
he didnt really go into much detail as to why he prefered them. However i do remember his statement that "the only thing worth using on the JZA80 platform was the shell"
Why not the engine? JGTC the GT500 class they used the 3S i believe it had to do with regulations.
Pretty sure the 3sgte was used in the GT500 class A80 because there was no need for the power level the 2j could put out. They could not only easily get that power out of the 3s, but it was shorter, lighter, and just as tough in every other aspect. Better for handling too, due to size and weight.