Why does everyone underestimate the MKIII?

csnow

Matthew 6:33
Apr 5, 2005
1,176
0
36
Palm Bay, FL
selfinfliction;923492 said:
that's why my build is the greatest. it's got dents, scratches, faded paint and a badly cracked dash. between the hood and the drivetrain will be about$4000 worth of go faster materials though :biglaugh:

set the expectations low from first sight, then make them feel bad about themselves

Why do you think it makes someone with a nice car more upset to be beaten by someone in a beat up car? Even if you smoke them, their first comment is going to be "who cares", you car looks like poop. Guys with really fast, nice cars rarely race; they have nothing to prove. Different strokes for different folks, good luck on your build. You doing a 7M or JZ setup?
 

suprarcr89

The Juggernaut has my old
myself I like a very nice car that is fast... nothing wrong with having both in one car.... I agree with what was said earlier alot of reasons people underestimate the mkiii is because about 75% of them on the road look like crap... and run like crap...
 
Last edited:

OfnaRcR4

Shea!
Oct 2, 2006
1,340
0
0
kettering ohio
Jeff Lange;923684 said:
Most people underestimate the MK3 because most MK3's are beat down ugly looking 20 year old Toyotas. 'Nuff said.

Differentiate yourself, have a nice looking car, one that's fast and looks good and drives nice. Sleepers don't have to look like crap to be a sleeper.

Jeff

Perfect reason why i'm painting my car.
 

shaeff

Kurt is FTMFW x2!!!!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2005
10,588
10
38
Around
casing said:
Why does everyone underestimate the MKIII?

honestly?

1) 90% of them are beat to death

2) 99.860784% of their owners are immature, negligent, young, and careless kids who just want to go fast.

3) it's a 20 year old car. MAINTAIN it first, MODIFY it last. once you have a perfect base to start with, THEN mod it.

4) 99.860784% of their owners are immature, negligent, young, and careless kids who just want to go fast.

5) 90% are beat to death.

6) people are stupid.

i think that covers most of it.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
Sep 9, 2005
8,894
38
48
U.S.
www.ebay.com
casing;923241 said:
Was shootin gthe shit about horsepower today and my 87t came up.. we were talking about dyno numbers.. Ive seen a few STOCK mkiiit's will put down anywhere from 175-190 RWHP.

One guy thought supra's were 4 cylinder, another said it couldn't make anymore then 200 HP at the crank let alone the dyno... another said, "i dont know why you would buy that car when I know you love racing/speed" something along those lines.. Like i know a stock supra is not the fastest thing in the world, but its no slug. I Just want spring to be here so I can dyno my beast running at 12 psi on manual boost. what does 12 psi usually run on the dyno anyway? 3 inch exhuast, intercooler 2 inch hardpipes, k&N, one peice drive steal drive shaft is also what i have,

Anyone here ever race or shut a guy down after they dispresct your car?

Misinformation isn't necessarily disrespect. Some people have asked if it was front wheel drive, because it is a Toyota.

On another note, it is a luxury GT that happens to have a strong engine. You want a real sports car? Pony up for the JZA80.
 

foreverpsycotic

Back in the game!
Jul 16, 2006
3,171
12
38
37
ATL
Nick M;923985 said:
On another note, it is a luxury GT that happens to have a strong engine. You want a real sports car? Pony up for the JZA80.

Not to toss gas on the fire but, if the MKIII and the MKIV are both only luxo GT cars. One just happens to have a better overbuilt motor. IMO a sports car would be a Porsche car or a Lotus.
 
Last edited:

OneJoeZee

Retired Post Whore
Mar 30, 2005
5,721
0
0
38
aboard the Argama
ultimatefacepalmip9.jpg
 

IJ.

Grumpy Old Man
Mar 30, 2005
38,728
0
0
62
I come from a land down under
foreverpsycotic;924031 said:
Not to toss gas on the fire but, if the MKIII and the MKIV are both only luxo GT cars. One just happens to have a better overbuilt motor and better suspention. IMO a sports car would be a Porsche car or a Lotus.

Don't get how the Mk4 suspension is "better"?
 

Supracentral

Active Member
Mar 30, 2005
10,542
10
36
Factory tests put he stock MKIII at .89G on the skidpad and the stock MKIV at .98G, a considerable difference.

However the MKIV is lighter and comes from the factory with considerably wider tires. Also with the MKIV there was more of a focus in the reduction of unsprung weight.

With all that said, comparably equipped MKIII's and MKIV's with the same sized tires on aftermarket rims tend to handle about the same. The primary difference being the weight of the cars.

In other words, you can make both cars handle about the same. If you can trim some of the fat off the MKIII and get it down to MKIV weight, the cars handle almost identically.

Anyone who tells you a MKIII can't handle is ignorant.
 

Tun_x

Built to do the NASTY!!
Apr 1, 2005
878
0
0
Utah
I don't really have any problems with people being disrespectful after they see my car ... In fact everybody and there dog wants to race until they see it .. I think its all how you carry yourself and how you represent the car... most of my friends are domestic guys but they all respect the car ... Of course there will always be the generalizations from the uneducated and thats when you have the opportunity to shine and either you prove them right and do nothing or simply educate them...

In my opinion on the best mods you can do is the most over looked by the MK3 crowd ..

Clean is FREE!!!! inside and out all you have to do is CARE


Jason
 

KeithH

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,716
0
0
Portland, OR
Clueless;924135 said:
I've always thought the mk4 were heavier then the mk3's...

From the sales brochures:

3530 1989 Supra Turbo 5 Speed
3613 1989 Supra Turbo 5 Speed w/ Sport Roof
No weight listed 1997 Supra Turbo 6 Speed
3505 1997 Supra Turbo 6 Speed w/ Sport Roof
 

toyo4life

Supramania Contributor
Oct 8, 2006
238
0
0
Manchester NJ
buzzbomber;923332 said:
heres my take. our mk3's are HEAVY. about like any of the cars in its class. its a highway cruìser. kinda underpowered consdering an alltrac of the same year makes more power with 2 less cylinders and the same turbo. i love the mk3 because its balanced with its weight and even with the amount of power it has it has potential for high numbers without worry of the rear end and transmission crapping out. my brother owns a 12sec 86 fox body. my dad owns a 70 dart and i own a 3s powered 85 celica drag car. and still i love my mk3

I really don't see why people make it sound like MKIII's are so heavy. I think they may have been underpowered for their weight when stock, but my car tips the scales at 3650. A Camaro of the same year was 3500ish depending on model. My 98 Z28 weighed 3450. new mustangs go about 3700-3900. The only car which I know a lot of people like to talk shit about are the 5.0 mustangs which could weigh as little as 3100 (LX notchback with power nothing).If any one tries to compare the Supra to an RX7 of similar age, they should realize the RX7 was always basically designed in 3/4 scale to save weight. Put a 3000GT or 300Z TT on a scale and see what they're crushing the pavement at. When Toyota was designing the Supra back in the early 80's their design target was a Porsche 928 at half the price.

Build the car right, let people talk shit, smoke em on the street, then tell um...... STFU.