[All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

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

KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

[All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

Just in my own little world driving into work this morning and I thought about posting this thread (I know...it really is sad). I saw a couple of Mk3s and wondered how they went from the Mk2 to to that and the design process involved. I imagined them digging round on forums looking for threads like this for ideas and that.

When designing the Mk2, what do you think the designers should have included?

  • Interior
    Exterior
    Mechanical
    Electrical
    ...everything


Just thought it'd be interesting to find out how the owners would have done it or what they would've changed, added etc
Last edited by KrisMoyse on Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
MartG
Posts: 6029
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:19 pm
Location: Poulton le Fylde, Blackpool
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by MartG »

A V6 option :wink:
Spidey
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Spidey »

A v6 :mrgreen:
KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

Seems probably overshadowed by the above comments but....cupholders lol
KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

Got thinking about why they only did a 1.8 in the Mk3 and the only reason I could come up with is that so many people had trashed their Mk2s because they had more power than they could handle and maybe Toyota had received complaints. Therefore they played it safe and went with a 1.8?

Just an idea I had whilst pottering on to work lol
Club Tropicana

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Club Tropicana »

That roads have bends :lol: (I have a rev3 turbo by the way)
Driftlimits Performance
IMOC Affiliated Company
Posts: 4928
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:33 am
Location: 01442 601301
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Driftlimits Performance »

you sound like a bunch of yanks!

We do turbo's! Not displacement! :mrgreen:
mrfil13
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:18 pm
Location: Cambridge (ish)

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by mrfil13 »

^^ :clap:

Maybe a lighter back end and t-bars that never ever leak :pray:
Spidey
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Spidey »

Now, don't shoot me down -but IMO, an option of either low-rise or flushmount headlights

Rob
TheRoadWarrior
Posts: 1052
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:43 pm

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by TheRoadWarrior »

Dont forget the MK2 was designed in the mid/late 80's; Pop-ups were COOL!
Image
Spidey
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Spidey »

TheRoadWarrior wrote:Dont forget the MK2 was designed in the mid/late 80's; Pop-ups were COOL!


Yes, I agree - now, I think they've become Pop-(too far)-Ups !

Rob
KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

rwilson_ie wrote:Now, don't shoot me down -but IMO, an option of either low-rise or flushmount headlights

Rob


Not sure about the flush-mounts but I do agree with you on the low-rise ones
Greddy-Matt
Posts: 4412
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Location: Southampton

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Greddy-Matt »

Proper hose clips unlike the pronged ones that double up as razorblades when you catch your hands on them :thumleft:

An oil dip stick that is actually easy to reach and put back in without having to bend the damned thing in half (tubby)

plastic undertray bolts that dont sieze and snap off :D
KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

Greddy-Matt wrote:An oil dip stick that is actually easy to reach and put back in without having to bend the damned thing in half


Amen to that for a N/A as well!
BenF
Premium Member
Posts: 10764
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04 pm
Location: Ipswich
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by BenF »

Kris,

Good question.

IMO the main aims with the Roadster were to build a lightweight drivers car that handled well. MrT could have fitted the 2ZZ 190bhp lump (its a popular swap) but the 140bhp 1ZZ lump was enough with 975kgs to make an entertaining car. In keeping the weight down, compromises had to be made however.

The Mk2 in comparison is heavier and a better 'GT' car, espeically as a turbo, but on the limit isn't a progressive as the Roadster when both have standard suspension.

The Mk3 it is very comparable to the Mk1 NA in terms of straight line speed and feedback to the driver, but does have the edge over it in terms of handling.

For me, adding a turbo kit gives me the fix I need as a torque junkie- V6 would be nice for aural entertainment, but some wastegate chatter is also good :)
KrisMoyse
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Bognor Regis
Contact:

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by KrisMoyse »

Never driven a Mk3 so I didn't know it handled well.

Not only that but to hear it handles better than a Mk1...I'm lookin at it in a completely different way now! lol
Harry
Posts: 13941
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:03 pm

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Harry »

KrisMoyse wrote:When designing the Mk2, what do you think the designers should have included?
  • Interior
    Exterior
    Mechanical
    Electrical
    everything




For myself two specific MR 2's a road version and a track version, is the one I would like to discuss:




Target weight 1000-1100 KG
Full Carbon Fibre Body [&] Kit-If painted Pearl:[Red White Black Silver Gun Metal Yellow Blue Full Carbon Interior-Seats-Door Cards-Dials. Steering-Roof Trim-Carbon Fibre Roll Cage Built through the chassis to permit more cabin space.
Massive Carbon Aero Wing height, and angles of attack and blade adjustable. Flush lights. [Lightweight glass windows.]Hard Top Carbon. Massive flared and smoothed arches.



V8:Light Alloy Block @ 650 torque! :lol: :twisted:
ENGINE:2.2 L Stroked Lightweight Inertia. Fully balanced Aero space heat treated coatings on pistons and Turbo parts. 4" Intake and Down pipe-Exhaust divided BY THREE 4-5-6" FLARED twin exit Titanium, with in cabin adjustable electronic baffle [90-150 DB*] A [GT Turbo*] as suggested by you[IMOCUK*]Buffs. Throttle bodies-exhaust manifold-intake manifold. Charge cooler-front Rad-water injection all with warning in cabin views of stats .water flow.400-600 BHP*[1.4 BAR-2 BAR BOOST-SHELL V POWER AND C 16 Race Fuel Options. Direct Ignition. 12 MM TREBLE wrapped Super weaved woven protected space material Ignition Leeds/Carbon fibre.



ECU:Built in in dash hand control commander with computer port and direct plug in board computer and also port to lap top fully easy user use.ALL Carbon white dials and gauges.



Chassis: Rose jointed every thing: TRD-Tein-Toms-full light weight materials-upper lower-struts braces anti roll bars. In fact one of those is it called mono frame chassis as used by a certain LE MANS Racer? You know the one/type.In cabin fully adjustable suspension coil over settings electronically. Traction control auto or off switch!= Good luck! :twisted:




Other Aerodynamics: Flat bottom-rear carbon fibre diffuser/s-front adjustable bonnet and bumper carbon fibre aero wings in cabin electronically adjustable via ECU and G force/speed sensors and or manual over ride.



Brakes: Massive lightweight AP type if not AP brakes disks 6 pot front and rear with in cabin brake adjust bias and obviously master brake cylinder to match-brake lines-dot fluid[*Rogue Motorsport Carbo Tech Brake Pads*Free Bump] [LMAO!] No ABS-NO air-con-no heavy copper wiring-no waste no nonsense un needed any thing that spells weight!




Gearbox:Dog box with [long] final drive 200 mph and another setting making it 150 mph maximum but [short]t settings on final ratios. Carbon or what ever drive shafts heavy duty type.






Wheels naturally carbon fibre either silver carbon,bronze tinge carbon,dark normal carbon and or colour coded to your paint powder coat tone. Thick 5 spoke-Super deep dish say 8" front and 10" front. 17" Rims 8 & 10" wide Rims 245-40-17" & 285-40-17" Track tyres.

Any more to add?

Price £19 000 to [IMOCUK] members and £35 000 to others to keep prices good demand up and exclusive! ha ha ha
Harry
Posts: 13941
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:03 pm

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Harry »

rwilson_ie wrote:
TheRoadWarrior wrote:Dont forget the MK2 was designed in the mid/late 80's; Pop-ups were COOL!

Yes, I agree - now, I think they've become Pop-(too far)-Ups !
Rob


ha ha ha LMAO!
Si_Crewe
Posts: 1444
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:00 pm
Location: Near Dumfries

Re: [All] [Generic] What should've the Mk2 designers included?

Post by Si_Crewe »

I know this is kinda picky and a bit too fundamental but anyway...

I wish they'd made it so the side windows sloped inward by another couple of inches.
When you look at the Mk2 from the side (or almost all angles) it looks very swoopy and curvy. However, when you look at it from the front the doors look curvy but then the windows just seem to be very upright.
Even if they'd made the roof an inch or so narrower on each side it would have allowed the windows to curve inwards a bit more for that proper "supercar" look.

When I compare my 1992 MR2 to my 2001 BMW about the only things I'd change on the MR2 would be to have a radio aerial built into the windscreen surround and a dashboard (and interior in general) lit in a more modern way.

Oh and indicators on the correct side of the bloody steering wheel! :D
Post Reply

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