Lotus-born suspension on the MKIII Supra?

[RyDeFly]

I've heard people mention the MKIII having a Lotus designed suspension, but I've never been able to confirm it.
The MKII obviously does; I think it was sourced out to Lotus on a contract.

But Toyota was a major shareholder in Lotus in the first half of the eighties. The MR2 was designed with Roger Becker of Lotus helping with the suspension and performance, but never had an "official" Lotus-designed suspension per se.
How long was the MKIII in development for?
I don't know how long the relationship between Lotus and Toyota lasted, but I think there's a good chance Lotus at least had their fingers in the geometry design.
At the very least, Toyota made good use of the knowledge they gained with Lotus. But I think it would be a lot cooler to say you had a Lotus suspension.

Looking back to some of the old magazine articles, the prototype MKIII handled markedly better than the final version. Lotus was gone by that point, so maybe Toyota thought they knew better and screwed up the balance.

I don't know, quite a bit of speculation on my part. Do you guys have any info on this?

 

[Big Wang Bandit]

I think Lotus had part in it. I have so many souyrces I jsut cant put my finger on one at 3:06 AM.

 

[bigaaron]

I don't know who designed it, but with a good set of coilovers and sway bars the mk3 handles great.

 

[CPT Furious]

No doubt! I love how this car handles. Especially after driving my Suburban...

 

[Mr.PFloyd]

i remeber a article as well Kyle, its just at school with the compooter nazis around i cant do shit...
I love how these cars, even stock handle... expecially after driving a 2000 sienna all the time.... Worst turning radius ever.

 

[jtamulis]

Actually it is the MKII that Lotus did the suspension on. In 1980(81) Toyota
bought controlling stock in Lotus. The MKII was WAY ahead of its time, and
was rumored to be the next Lotus. There is a Lotus car that was built which
uses the same suspension for the MKII. Lotus guys every now and then come
on the MKII newsgroup, or forums, looking for parts for thier Lotus car. Oh, and
a MKII with all the goodies (swaybars/shocks/etc) WAY out handles a MKIII. I
love the MKIII, but it doesn't handle anywhere near the MKII (built suspension
vs. built suspension).

Jeff

 

[mkIIIman089]

^ Thats pretty much how I understand it as well.

Lotus has a hand in a lot of cars, they will also do any one off you want pretty much. Of course, it costs an insane amount, but if you want, take whatever you want to the Lotus factory and they will make it handle well. IIRC, Top Gear had them do a Lada... turned out pretty interesting.

 

[Tanya]

 

[Nick M]

Yes, it is true according to design engineers interviewed when the Supra debuted in Jan of '86.

I have all the old Supra articles. Including those stupid 0-60 numbers people always quote.

edit: contrary to popular opinion, the chief engineer on the Supra was a man named Wada, not Lange.

 

[GotToyota?]

My car handles great with Eibach springs, KYB shocks, and a MR front strut bar. :dunno:

-Matt

 

[GrimJack]

From what I understand, Toyota sent Lotus the Mk3 rolling chassis and they setup the suspension. Then, when Toyota got it back, they scratched their heads and said, but, we wanted a GT car... so let's lift the suspension by ~1.5 inches and call it a day.

So, drop the car back down by the same amount and you are back to the way Lotus intended.

 

[RyDeFly]

Nick M, do have a link/source to that article?
....and stupid 0-60 numbers? Why, were they way overated? (I've heard the stock turbo is hard pressed to do 7)


Concerning MKII vs MKIII, if they both have Lotus suspensions, I highly doubt the MKII handles better for any other reason than weight. The only fair comparison would be with a lightened MKIII. I'm sure a weight ratio better than 53/47 would help too.

So does a rolling chassis have suspension geometry in place (implying Lotus just tweaked) or does that mean just the axles and that Lotus made the double wishbones? Not that important a distiction, but I was curious.

 

[johnathan1]

From what I understand, Toyota sent Lotus the Mk3 rolling chassis and they setup the suspension. Then, when Toyota got it back, they scratched their heads and said, but, we wanted a GT car... so let's lift the suspension by ~1.5 inches and call it a day.

So, drop the car back down by the same amount and you are back to the way Lotus intended.

Hehe, that's why the JDM JZA70 Springs are the best! :biglaugh:

Tanya: What kind of car is in that picture you posted?

 

[Tanya]

Hehe, that's why the JDM JZA70 Springs are the best! :biglaugh:

Tanya: What kind of car is in that picture you posted?

That car in the top pic is the Lotus Excel. You can see how much alike the mk2 and Excel are, hell, even the Excels engine has ribbed valve covers like the 5MGE :aigo:

 

[johnathan1]

That's pretty cool...I didn't even know that car existed! There are only a handful of differences that I can see...It even has the same rims!! :aigo:

 

[Nick M]

Nick M, do have a link/source to that article?
....and stupid 0-60 numbers? Why, were they way overated? (I've heard the stock turbo is hard pressed to do 7)



So does a rolling chassis have suspension geometry in place (implying Lotus just tweaked) or does that mean just the axles and that Lotus made the double wishbones? Not that important a distiction, but I was curious.

Lotus helped design the pieces so the geometry was correct. Interesting about shipping the car, and then sending it back. In the automotive world, that is likely.

Around March of '86, Car and Driver tested the "200 horsepower missile, Toyota Supra". The original 7MGE testing.

I say that about 0-60 because at the track, it does not matter, the 60 foot time does. And we do not know any conditions usually for their testing.

Here is a summary of some that I have stored on the notebook.

Sports Car International, February 1990
0-60 mph………..6.73 sec
0-100 mph………17.13 sec
¼ mile…………..15.25 @ 93.9
Top Speed………146 mph
Skidpad………… .85g
Braking 60-0.……126 ft
Braking 100-0.…..227 ft
5 speed manual

United States Auto Club certified performance
0-60 mph………..6.7 sec

Car and Driver, April 1989
0-60 mph……….6.2 sec
0-100 mph……..16.3 sec
0-130 mph……..35.5 sec
¼ mile………….14.7 @ 95
Top Speed …….146 mph
Braking 70-0.…..176 ft
Skidpad……… .85g
4 speed automatic

Road and Track, February 1990
0-30 mph………..2.5 sec
0-60 mph………..6.6 sec
0-100 mph………17.9 sec
¼ mile…………..15.5 @ 93.5 mph
Braking 60-0.…..146 ft
Braking 80-0.…..279 ft
Skidpad……….. .83g
Noise idle……….42db
Noise 70mph……67db


I have seen trap speeds listed in magazines on the net as low as 91 and as fast as 98 for the 7MGTE. 98 is quicker than stock in my opinion. And it was not stock original when tested.

 

[Figit090]

lotus excel even has a toyota gearbox....

does the chassis compare? i dont know jack about mkII's

 

[3p141592654]

Based on my own experience, the semi-trailing arm rear suspension on the MKII is inferior to the double wishbone on the MKIII. The MKII rear end breaks loose with very little effort, whereas the MKIII sticks like glue. I don't want to start a flame war, its just my experience after owning both and driving them for many years.

 

[mkiiSupraMan18]

That car in the top pic is the Lotus Excel. You can see how much alike the mk2 and Excel are, hell, even the Excels engine has ribbed valve covers like the 5MGE :aigo:

"Ribbed... for her pleasure"

Anyone wants to know what a mkII with a "built" suspesnsion drives like, come find me. You will be impressed. I promise.

 

[Figit090]

i'd like to have a spirited drive in both. i dont drive mine to fast becuse one...i dont want to die...and two...i dont want to hurt my engine...have to finish my tune up

i haven't accidentally broken my supra loose yet though...it feels pretty well planted. although i havent broken any fullsize car loose... only time i have was in my car in a wet parking lot with the e-brake.