MK2 vs. MK3

[mkiiSupraMan18]

lol

He doesnt feel up to a clutch swap but let's recommend a BHG repair. :icon_bigg

Go witht he mkII. You'll never, ever make enough power to worry about the drivetrain failing. Plus, there are awesome mkII owners like me and Tanya on this forum. :icon_surp

 

[faithless88]

Only reason why I shy away from doing a clutch is the only thing I have done to a drive line is replace axles on a FF car. Older cars don't scare me off currentlet drive a 88 corolla also had an 88 jeep cheroke. But I also worked on a 65 mg mkII 1600 but had a motor swap and was raced back in the day. it had a roll cage over the driver and biggest motor that the mg could fit in it.

This is the car

Oh and being called out by a girl dos't bug me, I know that there are several women that know more than I do. I just have't had the chance to try and work on a driveline.

 

[Wade T]

Well, own 2 turboed Mk2s and have owned up to 4 Mk3s. I drag race the 85 7m car and use my last Mk3 for a DD. Both have good points and bad. Mk2 are 10x more reliable stock vs stock. And the Mk3 has all the nice performance upgrades but it's too heavy. a 7m swapped Mk2 w/ other upgrades is the perfect compromise between the two.

 

[tekdeus]

Mk2's are WAY more reliable than Mk3's. Blown head gaskets and rod knock are very rare on Mk2's, even with very high mileage. I've owned 2 Mk2's since 1993 and never had any major drivetrain problems. Almost every week on these forums you read about BHG's or rodnock on a Mk3.

 

[Dachande]

you see so many bhg and rod knock cases because people dont take care of their car or improperly install the hg.

 

[Wills7MGTE]

I like the mk3 looks and interior wise much more, the only advantage an mk2 has is it is lighter, but then again when you have a turbo platform to toy with it's much more fun, you can spend the money you'd spend on a 7M or 1JZ swap for that mk2 and build a badass engine for the MK3.

Those are my two cents

 

[Chrisfrom1986]

you can spend the money you'd spend on a 7M or 1JZ swap for that mk2 and build a badass engine for the MK3.

...and still be faster in the mkii with the same motor.

 

[Tanya]

...and still be faster in the mkii with the same motor.

:boink:

 

[GrimJack]

They both have their problems.

Mk3 deficiencies:
- The Mk3 loses head gaskets due to lack of torque on the headbolts from the factory.
- The Mk3 is too damn heavy, and moving to a Targa instead of a sunroof was a stupid idea.
- We lost the interior flashlight and the under hood integrated trouble light, too.
- The digital dash in the Mk2 was available in LHD, unlike the Mk3.
- The design of the shifter boot on the Mk3 is weak sauce by comparison to the ones on the Mk2.
- The W58 tranny from the Mk2 is smoother than the R154 found on the Mk3.
- I've blown up the 7M engine twice.
- Interior door handles suck. Badly.

Mk2 deficiencies:
- Mk3 has better suspension.
- The Mk2 suffers from rust HEAVILY - far more than the Mk3. And yes, I'm still comparing apples to apples here, I've owned several Mk2s in the same age range as my Mk3 is now, and all from the same area, so same driving conditions, salt, rain, etc. I've had a Mk2 rust out on me completely, to the point that the rear shock towers collapsed!
- There are way nicer 5 bolt rims available than 4 bolt rims, and trying to upgrade the Mk2 to 5 bolt is a pain.
- The instrument cluster on the Mk3 is nicer.
- The R154 transmission on the Mk3 is tougher than anything found in the Mk2. Same for the rear diff.
- I've blown up the 5M engine three times. I've also been driving them for twice as long, so this may not really be a deficiency, I guess.
- Exterior door handles suck unless you get the 84+ variant, the earlier ones are made with something that looks like plastic and it about as tough as almond roca.

However, they are both dead sexy.

 

[Tanya]

Meh.. I'm not a fan of the mk3 intrument cluster at all. It is way too spread out. I like looking at everything RIGHT in front of me and not glancing halfway across the car.

I am also not a fan of the mk3 seats, I feel like I'm sitting in a truck, way up high. The mk2 seats sit lower, but are not ridiclously low like F-Bodies.

The mk2 suspension may not be as good as the mk3s, but it doesn't take much at all to get to and surpass that point.

You cannot overheat either the 5M or 7M and expect it to like you for it. They will both BHG in your face. I've helped kill two 5Ms, both were caused by driver/owner ignorance/negligance.

I've seen both rusted to fuck mk2s and mk3s. If you start off with a decent mk2 and take care of it (i.e. wash it often if it is near the ocean or any sort of salt) then you'll be just fine. I watched my 1st black Supra rust away to shit bc my ex worked right on the beach.

 

[Mr.PFloyd]

The mk2 suspension may not be as good as the mk3s, but it doesn't take much at all to get to and surpass that point.

Mk2s will never have as good a suspension design as the mark 3's. So to surpass it would be illogical.
And mk2's seat's aren't really low in comparison to the mark 3. Sitting in a truck? LOL

 

[Tanya]

*shrug* just my opinion about the seat thing.

And about the suspension, it won't be technically "better", but the car will handle better than the mk3, was what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[JustAnotherVictim]

Your butt prolly makes you feel higher.

 

[Tanya]

:-[

 

[mkiiSupraMan18]

*shrug* just my opinion about the seat thing.

And about the suspension, it won't be technically "better", but the car will handle better than the mk3, was what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

They'll never understand Tanya. A car that is easy to drive w/o Power steering... no easy task w/ a mkIII.

I will offer anyone a ride in my 82 to prove to them that a mkII handles like a dream. No ghey TEMS either.


Oh yeah,
Just some sensatrack shocks, suspension tech springs, adco front and rear sway bars, cusco strut bars, poly bushings, camber mod, and 16's. :icon_bigg


*edit*
and I have no idea about the mkII seats, since I upgraded. I always liked how the mkIII seats kinda sucked you in, made you feel like a part of the car... all 3800lbs of it.

 

[Tanya]

Ahahaha

Yeah, my car is lowered 2.5 inches, has no power steering and it handles fine. All I know is that when I get the car sideways for fun, I countersteer and the car snaps back straight immediately. This is probably the best handling mk2 I've ever had. (out of 9)

I've only driven one mk3, an 89 I think, and I was not overly impressed.

*shrug*

 

[GrimJack]

I forgot about the seats! Mk2 seats ROCK. Light, comfortable, modular.... what more could you want?

 

[Imprezademics]

I cant believe this is even a debate... MK3 all the freakin way.

Stop arguing with Tanya on this. Shes a diehard MK2 girl. lol. Gotta love her!

 

[GrimJack]

They'll never understand Tanya. A car that is easy to drive w/o Power steering... no easy task w/ a mkIII.

I will offer anyone a ride in my 82 to prove to them that a mkII handles like a dream. No ghey TEMS either.


Oh yeah,
Just some sensatrack shocks, suspension tech springs, adco front and rear sway bars, cusco strut bars, poly bushings, camber mod, and 16's. :icon_bigg


*edit*
and I have no idea about the mkII seats, since I upgraded. I always liked how the mkIII seats kinda sucked you in, made you feel like a part of the car... all 3800lbs of it.

The problem with that is you are now comparing SERIOUSLY upgraded gear to stock. Do the same work on a Mk3 and compare it again.

 

[JustAnotherVictim]

:-[

<3