N/a Mk3 vs N/a Mk2

[queenskid926]

the reason why i would consider buying a blown motor mk3 is to fix it, im concern with which car is faster, if the the mk3 is faster then im going 2 buy the blown motor mk3 n/a and fix it and if the mk2 supra was faster then im going to buy the shell that i found and drop in my engine and trans. so far i see that the mk3 is faster stock so i guess im going that route

 

[turbogoo1]

Having driven both....I would still take the mkII with the 7mge. It would spark the mkII up a lot. Not saying that the 5m isnt the greatest but is dependable, but put the 7mge in a mkII and race after...and I think the mkII would take the mkIII. Of course, I am thinking of putting a 7mge in my mkI.....

 

[GrimJack]

The ultimate combination is a Mk2 shell with a newer engine in it.

The weight difference between the two shells means that you can run with much less power and still be competitive.

 

[ubara86]

If we look at 7mge vs 5m/6m dynos we can see that the numbers are very close, although I doubt that the 7mge slight hp advantage will overcome the weight difference. It really would come down to gearing/driver.

 

[supramad77]

Why not drop in the 7mgte or the 2jzgte in the mk2. It's what i always wanted to do but could never afford.

 

[queenskid926]

Why not drop in the 7mgte or the 2jzgte in the mk2. It's what i always wanted to do but could never afford.

because i am a college student and cant afford it either. If i had the money i would just drop the 7mgte in the mk2 shell and have on hell of a car. but i decided on gettin my cousin's n/a mk3, thanks everyone for their input,

 

[cartel1_950]

watched a mkii race a NA mkiii with intake and exhaust and it looked like the mkii was in the lead

 

[GeneStarWindGSW]

What about my
2jz n/a mk3 vs mk II n/a vs 7m n/a mk3 vs 1jz n/a mk3 vs 1G n/a mk3 :evil2:

stock of course

(all is in HP and torque [ft/lb])
(also not sure if this HP is to the wheels or to the crank)

5ME
81
116 hp @ 4,800 rpm
145 rwtq @ 3,600 rpm

5MGE
82
145 hp @ 5,200 rpm
155 rwtq @ 4,400 rpm

83
150 hp @ 5,200 rpm
159 rwtq @ 4,400
8.8:1 Compression

84
160 hp @ 5,600 rpm
163 rwtq @ 4,400 rpm
8.8:1 Compression

85
161 hp @ 5,200 rpm
169 rwtq @ 4,400 rpm
8.8:1 Compression

7M-GE ( In-line 6-Cylinder, DOHC, 24-valve, EFI)
86.5-92
200 hp @ 6,000 rpm
?? x ?? mm ,?? compression

86.6-87
185 rwtq @ 4,800 rpm
88-92
188 rwtq @ 3,600 rpm

1JZ-GE
180 hp @ 6000 rpm
173 rwtq @ 4800 rpm
86 x 71.5 mm, 10 bar compression

1G-GE
150 hp @ 6200 rpm
134 rwtq @ 5600 rpm
75 x 75 mm, 9.5 bar compression

2JZ-GE( In-line 6-Cylinder, DOHC, 24-valve, EFI)
220 hp @ 5800 rpm
219 rwtq @ 3800 rpm
86 x 86 mm, ?? compression

i provided all the numbers, now weight and all the other factors will depend on you

 

[got_boosted]

but the 7mgte was already made but just not ready before the 86.5s were even released. they didnt create the turbo system because the nas were too slow, it jsut wasnt ready.

Correct.

Even if when the 86.5's were released they had gotten complaints that it was too slow, it would have taken a lot longer than half a model year to engineer the 7M-GTE. There's a lot more going on between the two engines than bolting on a turbo. :icon_roll

My 88 N/A 5spd with a tired engine runs 16 flat all day long, roasting one tire out of the whole. If I had a sport package with limited slip and a fresh engine, I'd be running mid 15's or better without a problem.

I believe that the 5M-E Celica Supra may have been a fun car due to its lighter weight, though I have never driven one, but I have heard from many sources who have owned both that the "new" 86.5 Supra was quicker and faster. Most won't believe me on this, but the 86.5 MKIII also handles better due to updated IRS. Later model MKIII's are too overweight. Anybody who has driven a base model pre-89 non-turbo MKIII can tell you that the weight difference is very noticable.

Collin

 

[queenskid926]

thanks got boosted, im gettin a 87 n/a with the sport package and a few more goodies, i hope i can get it to runn low to mid 15