Are these numbers real?

[demolisher]

Just looking at the chart someone posted in the stickies section. It says non-turbo supras go from 0-60mph in 8.11 and complete the 1/4 mile in 16.17
Is this really true?

Non Turbo:
Motor Trend, May 1986
0-60 mph = 8.11 sec
1/4 mile = 16.17 sec
60-0 = 132 ft
Skidpad = 0.86 g

Turbo model:
Motor Trend, November 1986
(Pre-production model)
0-60 mph = 7.84 sec
1/4 mile = 16.17 sec @ 89 mph
60-0 = 126 ft
Skidpad = 0.86 g

Car and Driver, April 1987
0-60 mph = 6.4 sec
1/4 mile = 15.0 @ 91 mph
70-0 = 188 ft
Skidpad = 0.83 g
Top speed = 145 mph

Motor Trend, April 1987
0-60 mph = 6.88 sec
1/4 mile = 15.40 sec @ 92 mph
60-0 = 126 ft
Skidpad = 0.85 g

Road and Track, February 1989
0-60 mph = 6.6 sec
1/4 mile = 15.2 sec
60-0 = 146 ft
Skidpad = 0.83 g

Car and Driver, April 1989
0-60 mph = 6.2 sec
1/4 mile = 14.7 sec @ 95 mph
Top speed = 146 mph
70-0 = 176 ft
Skidpad = 0.85 g

 

[Eriol]

Just looking at the chart someone posted in the stickies section. It says non-turbo supras go from 0-60mph in 8.11 and complete the 1/4 mile in 16.17
Is this really true?

Non Turbo:
Motor Trend, May 1986
0-60 mph = 8.11 sec
1/4 mile = 16.17 sec
60-0 = 132 ft
Skidpad = 0.86 g

Turbo model:
Motor Trend, November 1986
(Pre-production model)
0-60 mph = 7.84 sec
1/4 mile = 16.17 sec @ 89 mph
60-0 = 126 ft
Skidpad = 0.86 g

Car and Driver, April 1987
0-60 mph = 6.4 sec
1/4 mile = 15.0 @ 91 mph
70-0 = 188 ft
Skidpad = 0.83 g
Top speed = 145 mph

Motor Trend, April 1987
0-60 mph = 6.88 sec
1/4 mile = 15.40 sec @ 92 mph
60-0 = 126 ft
Skidpad = 0.85 g

Road and Track, February 1989
0-60 mph = 6.6 sec
1/4 mile = 15.2 sec
60-0 = 146 ft
Skidpad = 0.83 g

Car and Driver, April 1989
0-60 mph = 6.2 sec
1/4 mile = 14.7 sec @ 95 mph
Top speed = 146 mph
70-0 = 176 ft
Skidpad = 0.85 g

Looks about right.

 

[jbsupra89t]

I wouldn't doubt it... stock is :aigo:

 

[Pokey]

yup :nono:

 

[demolisher]

Alright thanks guys for the clarification. People say the non turbo is a lot slower than it is maybe. That 0-60mph is faster than a lot of cars these days like celicas and honda ricers. But I guess it is slow for what type of car the supra is.

 

[Ckanderson]

yea stock turbo is SLOW... i remember when i first drove my supra i thought it was SOOOOOOOO fast! now i know better.

 

[jbsupra89t]

i remember when i first drove my supra i thought it was SOOOOOOOO fast!

Yep I remember that day, a day my wallet will never forgive me for now

 

[demolisher]

Can you guys answer another question while ur here?
What are the chances of getting a BHG on a NA?
My friend has a turbo model with a redone metal headgasket but I cant remember if
the NA was prone to these BHG.
thanks

 

[MKIIINA]

yup bhg on any one of the supra 7m's just less likely to happen as early on it seems.

 

[GrimJack]

Agreed. The biggest cause of the BHG is insufficient torque from the factory on the head bolts, so it can easily happen on either engine.

 

[SupraMario]

BHG=more annoying problem than anything, its not like you put a rod through the block, more of a headache than nething. but i am going to have to say that the NA seems to not get BHG more than the Turbo, im guessing from the pressure from the turbo.
how much u guys think would be shaved off that time of 15.2 if we took out o say 600lbs of junk?
and were those the NA numbers or Turbo?

 

[demolisher]

Yeah i cant remember from where but some magazine like car and driver said that the factory specs for the bolts were sufficient enough for NA. But ill be on the watchout.
Btw the na numbers were like 16.1 for 1/4mile and 8.1 for 0-60mph, while the turbo numberes are more like 14.9-15.2 for 1/4mile and 6.8 for 0-60mph.