mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Discussion and technical advice the SW20 MR2. 3S-GTE, 3S-GE, 3S-FE etc
Anything and everything to do with maintenance, modifications and electrical is in here for the Mk2.

Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members

Post Reply
ioa1980
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Anglesey

mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by ioa1980 »

Hello all.

I'm thinking of selling my current car and getting another MR2.

I used to own a Rev2 Turbo and was probably one of the nicest cars to drive that I've ever experienced - as many of you will agree with, I'm sure!

However, if I am to get another MR2, its going to be through Woodsport and the V6 route.

I've been trawling the forum for previous topics on this.

The general consensus seems to be that the V6 works well in both the mk1 and mk2.
I love the look of both cars (even though they are very different), and would be looking to get a T-bar in either one if I was to get one.

As I have not driven a mk1 and mk2 in a close enough time span to compare, I need help off you guys and girls...

What are the differences (driving-wise) with a mk 1 vs a mk2?

How does the v6 compare with in both the mk1 and mk2?

What advice would you give?


Thank you,

Chris.
BenF
Premium Member
Posts: 10764
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04 pm
Location: Ipswich
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by BenF »

Chris - Depends on what driving you like doing ( I've owned mk1 / mk2 and Mk3 ) and ignoring styling and speed ( if you're doing an engine swap anyway ..)

I'd go with a Mk1 if you're looking for great handling and feedback, but the body shell will probably need TLC especially bodywork for cars the age of a Mk1. If you were looking at a V6 conversion, I'd look also at brake upgrades. I've not driven a Mk1.5 but there's a question IMO as to if fitting a heavier engine in the middle spoils any of the standard car's handling balance - I'm not sure how many have been tracked and used to their full potential.

I'd go with a Mk2 if you're looking for a "Grand Tourer" with reasonable storage and good for travelling distances. IMO The Mk2 isn't as communicative as the Mk1 when driving on the limit in standard form, but with practice you can push them hard and have fun. Older Mk2s seem to resist tinworm better than near - similarly aged Mk1s.

Of course, turbo'ing a Mk3 is the way to go :clown:
raptor95GTS
Posts: 6213
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:14 pm
Location: glasgow
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by raptor95GTS »

for handling I'd say the mk1 but as Ben says there's the usual body issues to deal with. MK1 is lighter which helps as well.

Mk3 v6, handles well no tin worm issues either and I'm sure someone is selling a mk3 with a busted engine on here - perfect excuse to change the engine :twisted:
Mikey P MR2
Posts: 640
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:17 am
Location: Milton Keynes

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by Mikey P MR2 »

I would go mk1 will have a more useful power to weight ratio with that engine, although make sure you find as rust free as shell as possible before parting with a lot of money converting the engine.
BarronMR
Posts: 367
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:00 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire.

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by BarronMR »

I've just parted with my mk2v6 to make way for a mk1v6sc. :thumleft:

Just echoing what other people have said really, mk1's are more communicative and IMO more fun to drive. But it's not as if the mk2 isn't fun because it is, just not as much as the mk1. But if we put handling aside for a moment I could live with the mk2 more easily day to day.

Cost wise the mk2 v6 will probably cost at least £1000 less. This is partly down to and I think I'm correct in saying woodsport charge £500 more for a mk1 conversion due to the extra work required for the swap and you also need another gearbox if going mk1, I don't know if this is part of that £500 or not.

The brakes and suspension are more likely to need upgrading on a mk1 and they are more likely to have some body rot. That said I'd guess solid examples of both are probably around the same to buy (1k'ish?).

And the mk1 will be quicker.
Driftlimits Performance
IMOC Affiliated Company
Posts: 4928
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:33 am
Location: 01442 601301
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by Driftlimits Performance »

mk2= look nice
mk1= go fast

:D
blue2
Posts: 3013
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:12 am
Location: The Wirral

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by blue2 »

Ive not driven a mk1 v6, but I prefer the looks of the mk2 plus as has already been said, they have more space. Also if you are going down the mk1 route you will need to take into account the age of the car and will cost more on upgrades and wear and tear. Either one will perform really well, they are great fun.
Rowland
Posts: 2016
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:36 am
Location: Leicestershire
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by Rowland »

allan welsh wrote: I'm sure someone is selling a mk3 with a busted engine on here - perfect excuse to change the engine :twisted:




That's me.
I'm going to be lowering the price to £2000 to get rid.
£2k for a mk3 MR-S in black!
I've driven a mk3 with the 3.0 litre V6 conversion and hand on heart it was truly awesome in every way!

8)
raptor95GTS
Posts: 6213
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:14 pm
Location: glasgow
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by raptor95GTS »

Rowland wrote:
allan welsh wrote: I'm sure someone is selling a mk3 with a busted engine on here - perfect excuse to change the engine :twisted:




That's me.
I'm going to be lowering the price to £2000 to get rid.
£2k for a mk3 MR-S in black!
I've driven a mk3 with the 3.0 litre V6 conversion and hand on heart it was truly awesome in every way!

8)

argh, must resist :oldtongue:
BenF
Premium Member
Posts: 10764
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04 pm
Location: Ipswich
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by BenF »

Rowland wrote:
That's me.
I'm going to be lowering the price to £2000 to get rid.
£2k for a mk3 MR-S in black!
I've driven a mk3 with the 3.0 litre V6 conversion and hand on heart it was truly awesome in every way!

8)


Hmmm .. 2zz Turbo project ... I must resist ...
MartG
Posts: 6029
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:19 pm
Location: Poulton le Fylde, Blackpool
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by MartG »

If you can find a solid one, then go for a Mk1 if excellent handling is your prime concern - handling isn't really compromised in the Mk1.6 as the alloy V6 is comparable in weight to a factory 4A-GZE SC engine installation. I also know that some sceptics who have driven a Mk1.5 on track were pleasantly surprised how good the handling was :-$

BTW - good choice going for a Woodsport conversion - I haven't had one myself, but I've had a nosey around his garage at cars he was working on, and the workmanship was top notch :thumleft:
brgbrm
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:55 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by brgbrm »

Luke, why should a MK1 go faster than a mk2? I thought the weight ended up similar for example?

Skywalker wrote:mk2= look nice
mk1= go fast

:D
ToyotaTosh
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:01 pm
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by ToyotaTosh »

Does anyone have video evidence to finalise the question ??? :pray:
User avatar
Lauren
IMOC Committee
Posts: 38632
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:37 pm
Location: Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by Lauren »

ToyotaTosh wrote:Does anyone have video evidence to finalise the question ??? :pray:


The MK1 is lighter, what more evidence do you need?
2020 GR Yaris - Circuit Pack :lover:
PW@Woodsport
Posts: 7642
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:40 pm
Location: durham
Contact:

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by PW@Woodsport »

mk1 v6 for me,based on years of experience building and driving both mk1 and mk2 v6's.... and if its going to be a mk1 then the 1mz-fe is the absolute weapon of choice....its quite simply sublime in the back of a mk1.

In case anyone thinks im biased well im building a 1mz powered mk1 for my own use and i had the choice of rev 3 turbo motors or any of the other engine options.Sure the 3sgte will be quicker in a straight line,but for sheer driveability and smoothness of power delivery its got to be the 1mz in a mk1.

That is until i build a 2gr mk1 in which case i will probably change my mind.
Image
ioa1980
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Anglesey

Re: mk1 v6 vs mk2 v6

Post by ioa1980 »

Thank you very much for the help.

I really didn't need to know about a mk3 conversion!!!!...even more indecision now!

Right, gonna have to sell my car first and count my pennies! Should have a enough for something decent. Either way...you guys have cemented the V6 decision. Thats now a cert!
Post Reply

Return to “MR2 MK2 1990 - 1999 NA & Turbo”