www.imoc.co.uk Forum Index
 AlbumAlbum CalendarCalendar FAQFAQ SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist Legal NoticeLegal Notice IMOC 1/4 Mile1/4 Mile Table Knowledge BaseKnowledge Base   RegisterRegister 
 GarageCommittee GarageGarage  SubscriptionPremium Membership  ProfileProfile   Log in to check private messagesLog in to check private messages   Log inLog in 
Calendar 
Fast-road/Track car advice - mk3 2ZZ or mk2 turbo?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic       www.imoc.co.uk Forum Index -> Motorsport and Trackdays
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Fast-road/Track car - mk3 2ZZ or mk2 turbo?
mk3 2ZZ
57%
 57%  [ 4 ]
mk2 turbo
42%
 42%  [ 3 ]
Voted : 7
Total Votes : 7
This poll does not expire

Author Message
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:39 am    Post subject: Fast-road/Track car advice - mk3 2ZZ or mk2 turbo? Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I thought I'd register here to garner a bit of experienced opinion about an upcoming car choice. I'd really love to hear from anyone who has taken either (or both) on track, to help me decide.

I've been bitten by the trackday bug in a hot hatch, and intend to up the ante a bit in 2017 (while hillclimbing/sprinting the hatch with a mate). I want to buy something that will be brilliant fun on track, and usable for occasional journeys on the road (e.g. trips to the shops) and driving to track. I don't drive to work (live in London), and the OH has a practical/sensible car for real journeys. I've had plenty of quick/powerful/RWD cars before, so neither option is particularly daunting.

Both MR2s popped up as potential candidates, along with a supercharged MX5 and an S2000. My budget is about ?5k (give or take), and I'd be aiming at both cars being part-stripped/bucketed etc..

While the turbo would probably have the edge in a straight line (assuming I was aiming at ~300bhp), would the extra couple of hundred kilos blunt it in the corners compared with the mk3?
Would the extra performance of the turbo be of significant benefit on the average UK track?
Is the turbo, particularly when mildly tuned, more fragile than a largely standard 2zz?
Would either deal better with super-occasional use (like once a fortnight) and being parked outside?

Which would you choose, and why?
Back to top
User is offline 
Ben




Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 3070
Location: Oxford(ish)
Feedback Score: 5

2001 BMW M5

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Welcome to IMOC. This thread will probably give you some good ideas [Smile]

http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=190500
Back to top
User is offline 
Ben




Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 3070
Location: Oxford(ish)
Feedback Score: 5

2001 BMW M5

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

As an additional thought, I compete in a sprint series alongside a 2ZZ-powered Mk3 and a *fairly* stock powered Mk2 turbo (around 260bhp I think). the Mk2 has beaten the Mk3 in 3 out of the four rounds so far. It's fair to say they are both extremely competent drivers.

Personally I'd go for the 2ZZ Mk3 anyway, as the engine really comes alive on track [Cool]
Back to top
User is offline 
pistol pete
Premium Member



Joined: 11 Feb 2008
Posts: 7019

Feedback Score: 27



PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I'd go for the 2ZZ caged mk3.. great little cars..

the turbo is very capable.. but i loved my mk3 on track and that was only a 1zz..

I started track work in a mk3 and have evolved into different cars..
feel free to have a read through
http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=176621
_________________
MR2 Sprint zombie outbreak response vehicle
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Zombie-Sprint-Page/1548040272127049
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNBrEdG4xcH5ds-qbox0FwQ
Back to top
User is offline 
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Thanks folks.

Ben - I'd read that thread already, actually. Although I'm still struggling a bit to pick between the two.
Back to top
User is offline 
Ben




Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 3070
Location: Oxford(ish)
Feedback Score: 5

2001 BMW M5

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

It's very much down to personal preference - there's no right answer unfortunately [Sad]

Best bet would be to see if you can find a local owner who wouldn't mind offering a passenger ride. I'd offer myself, but I sold my last MR2 a couple of years ago and both of mine have been Mk1s [Laughing]
Back to top
User is offline 
Race Idiot




Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 2462
Location: London
Feedback Score: 25

1994 Toyota MR2 Mk2 Turbo Rev3

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Are you the same guy who made the thread on pistonheads?

As someone whos fairly cackhanded and slow I've had lots of fun with it but, it hasn't been cheap.

Although I've tried to keep mine fairly road friendly (fixed bucket seat and removable steering wheel aside) i'd say the MK3 with a 2zz would be the better bet on track.

Less weight, less consumable use less temp management. On a hot day at bedford my turbo was seeing oil temps of 130c after about 5 laps, this is on a low boost setting and lifting off the throttle down the big straight a bit. Needs an aftermarket oil-cooler to keep temps in check.

However I'm not sure if I'd want to do any long distance in a stripped out mk3. If I could be bothered to fix the aircon and added a bung to the exhaust I recon I could do some big distances in it.
Back to top
User is offline 
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Race Idiot wrote:
Are you the same guy who made the thread on pistonheads?

As someone whos fairly cackhanded and slow I've had lots of fun with it but, it hasn't been cheap.

Although I've tried to keep mine fairly road friendly (fixed bucket seat and removable steering wheel aside) i'd say the MK3 with a 2zz would be the better bet on track.

Less weight, less consumable use less temp management. On a hot day at bedford my turbo was seeing oil temps of 130c after about 5 laps, this is on a low boost setting and lifting off the throttle down the big straight a bit. Needs an aftermarket oil-cooler to keep temps in check.

However I'm not sure if I'd want to do any long distance in a stripped out mk3. If I could be bothered to fix the aircon and added a bung to the exhaust I recon I could do some big distances in it.

I am indeed. I thought the same username would have been the big giveaway tbh. [Very Happy]

A lot of what you say about your experiences on track with the turbo are things that have been bothering me. It just feels like a lighter car with a more 'stock' engine configuration would be a much better drive and ownership proposition, even if it didn't shove me in the back on every straight.
Back to top
User is offline 
Race Idiot




Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 2462
Location: London
Feedback Score: 25

1994 Toyota MR2 Mk2 Turbo Rev3

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I say consumables but my car hasnt been that bad, i've only used one set of tyres (started with Toyo T1R's and then upgraded to Advan AD08Rs) and i've been using the same set of pads for a while.

I've just bits and bobs go wrong like turbos failing and gaskets blowing. But again my car was a bit ropey when I bought it.

I feel like a MK3 would be a 'fresher' car mainly due to being newer. Unless the MK2 has had a major suspension refresh.
Back to top
User is offline 
gavsdavs




Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Posts: 697
Location: saahfeeeeastlaandun
Feedback Score: 2

1991 Toyota MR2 Mk2 NA Rev2

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

The rev2 almost certainly has the edge in straight line speed, comfort if you're taller and a bit more practicality if it's also a shopping car.

The rev3s are a good deal lighter and have an amazing turn-in on a track - they're little roller skates by comparison. They are probably a bit lighter on consumables, a bit easier to source parts for as they're newer, etc.

Obviously whichever way you go it has to be a red one as they're known to be the fastest [Smile]
Back to top
User is offline 
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

gavsdavs wrote:
The rev2 almost certainly has the edge in straight line speed, comfort if you're taller and a bit more practicality if it's also a shopping car.

The rev3s are a good deal lighter and have an amazing turn-in on a track - they're little roller skates by comparison. They are probably a bit lighter on consumables, a bit easier to source parts for as they're newer, etc.

Obviously whichever way you go it has to be a red one as they're known to be the fastest [Smile]

I'm confused - do you mean "mk2" and "mk3", rather than "rev"? I thought that was only applicable to the mk2?
Back to top
User is offline 
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Race Idiot wrote:
I say consumables but my car hasnt been that bad, i've only used one set of tyres (started with Toyo T1R's and then upgraded to Advan AD08Rs) and i've been using the same set of pads for a while.

I've just bits and bobs go wrong like turbos failing and gaskets blowing. But again my car was a bit ropey when I bought it.

I feel like a MK3 would be a 'fresher' car mainly due to being newer. Unless the MK2 has had a major suspension refresh.

You see, those "bits and bobs" are what would worry me - and what I would assume wouldn't be present to fail on a largely standard, and more modern 2ZZ lump.
Back to top
User is offline 
SonicSW20
Premium Member



Joined: 29 Nov 2010
Posts: 3564

Feedback Score: 12

1997 Toyota MR2 Mk2 NA Rev4

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I'd go 2ZZ Mk3, or if you really want to go out there with the conversion, look into Honda K20 conversions. The K20 swap with some choice mods will see you to 230bhp+. It's not a heavy engine either.

IMO, a Mk2 Turbo will only show it's performance benefit (assuming you're running the standard 280~300bhp botl on mods with stock turbo, ECU etc) on tracks with long enough straights to exploit the power advantage - Bentley Straight at Snetterton for example. With a good setup and the right tyres the Mk3's lighter frame and nimbler handling should see it ahead of the Mk2 on twistier tracks.

This is not to say the Mk2 would be bad in any way, it will still be great fun and very quick with the right setup. I just think the Mk3 would be a bit quicker in the corners where the fun is.

As Pete says as well, being lighter means your tyres and brakes will last longer, and you have less temperature management to worry about.
Back to top
User is offline 
HughesR1




Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 349
Location: Warwickshire
Feedback Score: 8

1998 Toyota MR2 Mk2 NA Rev5

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I agree with what Gazza has said there ^

I was in a similar position to you last month (Thats my thread link posted earlier by Ben). I ended up with a Rev5 NA with a few upgrades for no real reason other than I just quite like Mk2's (And I've had 4 of them now so know my way around them).

I had the opportunity to buy a 2ZZ Mk3 and I passed it up, still kicking myself now to be fair [Brick wall]. Having driven both, I would hands down pick a 2zz mk3 over an MR2 Turbo for track work for the reasons already mentioned above like heat management and reliability etc. I've also never found turbo cars that entertaining on track, the low down torque feels epic on road but on track when the revs are always high up they never feel that much faster. I did a trackday at Bedford a few years ago where I was able to drive our Elise (180bhp then) back to back with my friends VX220 Turbo (260bhp then) and whilst on the road the VX was noticeably quicker, it was noticeably slower on track because there wasn't much chance for it to utilise its low down torque/power, I'd think the MR2 Turbo vs Mk3 2ZZ would be a similar story? (Someone might be able to prove/disprove this?)

The main reason I chose my mk2 NA is that the initial purchase price is so cheap it left more cash left over to do trackdays, upgrade brakes, suspension, tyres, decent service. I'd still buy a 2zz Mk3 now though if one came up for sale for a fair price, then just use my Mk2 for daily duties [thumleft]
Back to top
User is offline 
MilesH




Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 94

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

MK3 2ZZ's are great on track, but speaking from personal and long term experience of an n/a mk2 and a 2zz (and 1zz) mk3, the mk2 n/a is hands down more reliable on track and will not give you half the issues a 2zz will.

All in my opinion of course [Smile]
Back to top
User is offline 
gavsdavs




Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Posts: 697
Location: saahfeeeeastlaandun
Feedback Score: 2

1991 Toyota MR2 Mk2 NA Rev2

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

C70r wrote:

I'm confused - do you mean "mk2" and "mk3", rather than "rev"? I thought that was only applicable to the mk2?

Sorry, yes, that's what I mean. mk2 vs mk3.
Back to top
User is offline 
CalMac




Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Posts: 1745
Location: Northampton
Feedback Score: 17

1995 Toyota MR2 Mk2 Turbo Rev3

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

I almost swapped my Rev 3 turbo for a 2zz mk3 a while back

http://imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1623545&sid=8edd802ec67020e0dfb80de4834d74d7

A little more food for thought!
Back to top
User is offline 
C70r




Joined: 25 Aug 2016
Posts: 7

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

Thank you, all. This is some really helpful input - and veering towards my preconception.

MilesH wrote:
MK3 2ZZ's are great on track, but speaking from personal and long term experience of an n/a mk2 and a 2zz (and 1zz) mk3, the mk2 n/a is hands down more reliable on track and will not give you half the issues a 2zz will.

All in my opinion of course [Smile]

What sort of issues could I expect with a mildly tuned 2ZZ?
Back to top
User is offline 
MilesH




Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 94

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

My experience shows they are more prone to niggles than a 3SGE n/a in a mk2. The 3SGE I use for racing and test days and I just top up the oil and run it. Never an issue unless you over rev or once every couple of seasons I have had a headgasket go. Whereas the 2zz I have only used on the odd trackday and I've had driveshaft issues, plug failing, lift issues and a couple of other small things over the years.

It may just be my experience but the 2zz just seems slightly higher maintenance.

But no one can deny in terms of lap times the 2zz is slightly quicker.
Back to top
User is offline 
Jerry




Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Posts: 11

Feedback Score: 0



PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Reply with quote including images

For your use (track&street), reliability, performance and possible future development of car taken to account:

1. MK3 with Honda K20 engine [Applause]
2. MK2 with 3SGTE
3. Original MK3
Back to top
User is offline 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic       www.imoc.co.uk Forum Index -> Motorsport and Trackdays All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group