Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
Razor04 wrote:
Oh i see
Also when they first came into the series performance wise they are closer to mk1 na's.- Circuit Pack 
sheppy wrote:
i prefer not have to kick the s**t outta the turbo thought, car doesn't have to work as hard for power, just seems to relentlessly come from nowhwere, whereas the n/a i found i really had to wind it up!! was a rev2 import with tiny mods though!!
I find that I'm changing gear at 5000rpm max in the turbo as there's plenty of low to mid-range pull. With the N/A I had to constantly rev it up close to the redline. That could be partly why it started burning oil. I've found the 3S-GTE very reliable so far but it all depends I guess.(IMO) more challenging and therefore more rewarding, if I want somehting easy to drive fast i'll get an imprezza or some hot hatch.- then slag them off when they put a hole in a piston, I know other track based turbos that are equally as tough as mine too, so mines not a freak of nature!"I thought MK2's handled badly?"!!!!(while not as good as a Mk1 or Mk3) is an underrated car, especially the turbo because people are plain scared of it.skinthespin wrote:I think I disagree with most of the things on here! I have a rev3 turbo track car and have been on track with other race NA's and have been much quicker than them, even though my car is 200kg heavier.
The turbo isnt all about straight line speed at all, but its harder to drive fast, which makes it
Turbos are not tempremental either, I have done 30+ trackdays in mine and even though its running over 300bhp its NEVER broken, these cars are as tough as NA's easily, the bad thing about them is there easy to modify badly, if that makes sense, so people wind up the boost without thinking about the cooling or fuelling
I have taken several Mk1 owners out in mine and the general comments that come back are not those concerning straightline speed but the cornering ability, the usual comment being
I think the Mk2
The NA doesn't have the power to upset the rear a lot of the time so isn't that exciting to drive imo, where as the tubby you can pretty much do what you want with if you know how to time boost etc.think you can drive you'll probably have more fun in an NA, if you can actually drive get yourself a tubby and enjoy the extra power.jonb- wrote:skinthespin wrote:I think I disagree with most of the things on here! I have a rev3 turbo track car and have been on track with other race NA's and have been much quicker than them, even though my car is 200kg heavier.
The turbo isnt all about straight line speed at all, but its harder to drive fast, which makes it
Turbos are not tempremental either, I have done 30+ trackdays in mine and even though its running over 300bhp its NEVER broken, these cars are as tough as NA's easily, the bad thing about them is there easy to modify badly, if that makes sense, so people wind up the boost without thinking about the cooling or fuelling
I have taken several Mk1 owners out in mine and the general comments that come back are not those concerning straightline speed but the cornering ability, the usual comment being
I think the Mk2
Unsurprisingly I agree with all of this.
Having owned and tracked both an NA and a tubby i can tell you I enjoy the tubby way more than the NA on a country blast.
In short, if you
I very much doubt your on stock wheels, suspensions, alignment settings. Your cars have taken work to get them to behave how you want, to make that power useable and you are very regular experienced track drivers. n/a's don't stretch the chassis and so are easier to drive as you say, this can easily be argued makes them a "better" car. Your quite right a good driver can find a pushed chassis more fun as its more difficult, but the majority of people are not good drivers.(my mx5) about except a bit of power oversteer to adjust lines on track, lift off oversteer I always have trouble with, my big let down. Yet on the last trackday I went on the only car that was lapping at a compariable speed was an R400 Caterham, in fact i was still able to stick to his bumper lap after lap so even he wasn't much quicker. Only other things that were even close were a pair of Aerial Atoms but I still pulled slowly away from them, I obliterated the EVO's, Scoobys, regular Caterhams, M3's, 205's, 200sx, VX220, Exige, Elises etc. Answer because the cars a piece of p1$$ to drive on the limit, its a fantastic car and the powerlevel is perfect for the chassis. If I tuned it up to say 290bhp then i'd spend the whole time partial throttle balancing getting the power, down it'd become a handful. This would make the car not as good, it'd make it harder to drive. This is how I think about the n/a and tubby MR2, ones got it about right, the other shows up its problems and unless your a good driver that finds that fun then the n/a is better.(always on ice or diesel of course).'02 VX220 2.2 n/a Daily driver - Exige Size TD 1.2 - TAT shorty Diffuser - HardTop - Chris Tullet 4-1 Manifold.'97 mk1 Mazda Eunos Turbo track car with 260bhp/ton - soon more as Chris Wilsons going to build me an engine over the winter 
) . Fine if you want it like that, but going round a roundabout at 15mph in the drizzle shouldn't require such concentration! All great cars, but out of all these, the one I miss the most in the teggy. 
....assuming you are driving it properly, which lets face it is what it comes down to.(both times messing about for the camera) and its not like i'm not trying, I just don't think its a bad as people make out, I think the biggest problem is people progress to one from a 150bhp hot hatch and think they can drive them the same (which obviously you cant!) and end up in a ditch! In the mk1 I could easily get round the corners quicker but in a straight line drag / overtake it was sometimes a fair old task with the result I was stuck behind them for miles in some cases before the road opened up enough and was clear enough to get past them. With the turbo, cog it down and rip straight past them in much much smaller spaces. Then I can carry on at my own sedate pace. Yes if you stamp on the loud pedal mid corner it will try and kill you but that's not the cars fault. At least in the tubby I have a better chance of getting past them easier and safer than I would do in an n/askinthespin wrote:
The turbo isn't the uncontrollable beast people make out, ive done 10's of 1000's of road miles in mine and have never spun it, only spun it twice on track
Yes if you stamp on the loud pedal mid corner it will try and kill you but that's not the cars fault. 
skinthespin wrote:Hi Steve, I understand where your coming from completely but its sort of a flat arguement, wheres the fun in driving something on the limit thats a doddle?
I find my car the same 
I also feel very proud that what i've done to my car (that 2.5 years ago had only 133bhp, took 8 seconds to get to 60 and gets dismissed by many as a hairdresser, girly car) means it is now a capable tool for chasing down EVO's and EXIGE's '02 VX220 2.2 n/a Daily driver - Exige Size TD 1.2 - TAT shorty Diffuser - HardTop - Chris Tullet 4-1 Manifold.'97 mk1 Mazda Eunos Turbo track car with 260bhp/ton - soon more as Chris Wilsons going to build me an engine over the winter ) .skinthespin wrote:
The turbo isn't the uncontrollable beast people make out, ive done 10's of 1000's of road miles in mine and have never spun it, only spun it twice on track
So the driving style is kind of similar:'quicker' mr2's, I don't think id get that thrill from something thats easy to drive and fast, hence I have always said Evos and the like are for people who want to go fast but don't know how.........*ducks!*(inevitably) oversteer. I think with the MR2 if you're going to drive it close to the edge you have to be very quick with the steering correction otherwise it's too late. With FWD cars it doesn't seem so sudden. skinthespin wrote:Hi Steve, I understand where your coming from completely but its sort of a flat arguement, wheres the fun in driving something on the limit thats a doddle? I could drive a hot hatch or something like that flat out all day like and regardless of how many people you beat on a trackday you know full well its the car thats easy to drive and no challenge at all, I have got out of my turbo dripping in sweat after driving it flat out while racing slick shod 911's and the sense of satisfaction when the driver comes over and says WTF! is brilliant, I doubt whether it would be the same if I had done that in a Radical or R500.
Also for pure handling I think my car was better when it was standard, it just didnt have the grip it has now, hence the mods.
Sure a standard turbo wouldn't keep up with a track NA BUT it would leave a standard NA.
The turbo isn't the uncontrollable beast people make out, ive done 10's of 1000's of road miles in mine and have never spun it, only spun it twice on track
If you are really pushing a car its never a doddle to drive over the limit, but its a more involving experience if the car has a good chassis because instead of driving around the cars foibles/idiosyncracies you can concentrate on pushing it harder still and as such I think its more rewarding. I would wager that any car is a challenge to drive really quickly and the key is always progressiveness with how the car responds. If you were really racing ie as in a proper race then i take it back. You name it i've passed it in all my mk1s on track, but that doesn't mean the mk1 is a quicker car, I just drove it quicker than the other driver drove their car. But because it is a difficult car to drive very quickly and takes some skill to do so, it can be beyond what a lot of drivers feel comfortable with and so they miss out as a result.- Circuit Pack skinthespin wrote:Hi Lauren, I knew you wouldn't be able to resist! lol
This is my point, I don't think the turbo is a bad handling widowmaker that people think it is, but perhaps harder to drive than an NA purely because of the power delivery/extra power, but has extra rewards if you do exploit its limits because of that extra pwer?
So we are all agreed if you can drive a bit you should get a turbo? If you are less comfortable and perhaps its your first RWD car you should get an NA?
But if you are not comfortable with RWD cars in genral, I dont think a MR2 is the best place to start. I love MR2s, but cars like MX-5s and 200sx are much more controllable on the limit for someone new to RWD, but ultimatly cant corner as quickly on the limit (as standard anyway). But I love my tubby so much more than my S13 
skinthespin wrote:Hi Lauren, I knew you wouldn't be able to resist! lol
This is my point, I don't think the turbo is a bad handling widowmaker that people think it is, but perhaps harder to drive than an NA purely because of the power delivery/extra power, but has extra rewards if you do exploit its limits because of that extra pwer?
So we are all agreed if you can drive a bit you should get a turbo? If you are less comfortable and perhaps its your first RWD car you should get an NA?
I think though a lot of people do buy the turbo because of its straightline pace and then enjoy that, but get in trouble on the corners when they have to balance the car.- Circuit Pack skinthespin wrote:
So we are all agreed if you can drive a bit you should get a turbo? If you are less comfortable and perhaps its your first RWD car you should get an NA?
"a bit" to well. well means you wouldn't brick it if the car does slide a bit at speed.'02 VX220 2.2 n/a Daily driver - Exige Size TD 1.2 - TAT shorty Diffuser - HardTop - Chris Tullet 4-1 Manifold.'97 mk1 Mazda Eunos Turbo track car with 260bhp/ton - soon more as Chris Wilsons going to build me an engine over the winter ) .