![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
For my dollar the 2 is simply trickier but also more rewarding to get right.
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
Lets be honest if you simply want a great chassis with fabulous response buy a mk3 and do whatever engine transfer you fancy.
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
madfish wrote:Was looking at the BEAMS version of the NA..
.
I imagine that would be a decent compromise.
![]()
.
.
synXero wrote:madfish wrote:Was looking at the BEAMS version of the NA..
.
I imagine that would be a decent compromise.
![]()
.
.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love mine, kept up with two turbos more than adequately, and it's so clear that it's much, much easier to drive in the wet especially.
Boost is great and feels exhilarating but it grows old and then you need to make the car faster, so you get more and more boost..
.
And then one day you boost mid corner and your lovely car is wrecked!
Mid engine cars are so much easier driven as NAs than harsh turbos IMO.I would definitely have a turbo MR2, and I would definitely have another Beams NA MR2, but they each have their own strong points I think.
madfish wrote:synXero wrote:madfish wrote:Was looking at the BEAMS version of the NA..
.
I imagine that would be a decent compromise.
![]()
.
.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love mine, kept up with two turbos more than adequately, and it's so clear that it's much, much easier to drive in the wet especially.
Boost is great and feels exhilarating but it grows old and then you need to make the car faster, so you get more and more boost..
.
And then one day you boost mid corner and your lovely car is wrecked!
Mid engine cars are so much easier driven as NAs than harsh turbos IMO.I would definitely have a turbo MR2, and I would definitely have another Beams NA MR2, but they each have their own strong points I think.
Don't suppose you fancy swapping for a twin tubby legacy?![]()
synXero wrote:A lot of mr2s are showing their steely natures now and rusting at roof joints and sills.Check carefully! Feel free to come and view mine
![]()
![]()
Negligably heavier than a turbo Ashley and whilst it doesn't have the kick of boost it's the smoothest and steepest torque delivery I've experienced on any road car.ashley wrote:Can't comment on a v6 as I've not driven one, but I can't help but think the extra weight at the back will compromise the NA's ability round the twisty stuff.
synXero wrote:madfish wrote:Was looking at the BEAMS version of the NA..
.
I imagine that would be a decent compromise.
![]()
.
.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I love mine, kept up with two turbos more than adequately, and it's so clear that it's much, much easier to drive in the wet especially.
Boost is great and feels exhilarating but it grows old and then you need to make the car faster, so you get more and more boost..
.
And then one day you boost mid corner and your lovely car is wrecked!
HighwayStar wrote:Yeah but you're talking performance again and the original post says that isn't the requirement..
.
otherwise the OP could just keep what he has.
So far as enjoying them in the twists the tubby is no more fun and it can be argued
(and is) is less so.
.
.
It isn't a speed thing, it's a grin thing.