Reliability - be honest with me

[Scooter]

I think an NA could be the ideal stepping stone for you. It's the low risk option, there is nothing really pricey to go wrong and loads of cheap spares for the medium/small cost stuff. Sure you may then hanker after a TT but that's not too much of a problem if you've got a good NA for a good price in the first place.

 

I'm not saying its a bad thing but this place is full of power power power types, is a VX220 not worth it compared to a VX220 turbo? What about all the caterham's is the R500 the only one worth having?

 

I'm just giving my point of view having gone backwards and forwards to and from NA's to TT's, I'm a little different to most it seems in that if the supra was only ever an NA i'd probably still have one now and not have moved on to a RX7, 300ZX Manaro etc etc........

 

Years ago now I went from a 205 Gti to a NA supra and thinking back more than anything the quality impressed me the most.....it was the first car I'd had where the doors felt 'solid' the gear shift had no play whatsoever, all the controls felt smooth, the ride great (and that one wasn't the best for a supra by miles). Engine bay was oil and gunk free, the straight 6 smoothness and the test drive of my first RWD drive car............it just felt so silky!?

 

I just wanted to point this out as these are the things we forget on here or take for granted after all the these years, or if we came to the Supra from a comparable Make/model rather than a fwd hot hatch.

 

Go blag a ride in one............and a test drive if you can

[China Man]

I think I understand where imi post come from, enough people want to buy supra without thinking about the money needed to maintain it or insurance even.

 

I can't judge who can or cannot afford a supra but I will get offended to know anyone buy one but can't afford to pay for the proper oil and filter change

 

for me the Supra have been very relaiable, so much that if anything goes wrong is usually the modification you do to it to make it the little bit faster, stock is best if you are on a tight budget.

 

More chance of you lost control of the car and write off than it giving you trouble because of break down, I know as I had one RIP

 

get a NA with nice body kit or a standard TT

[tDR]

I think an NA could be the ideal stepping stone for you. It's the low risk option, there is nothing really pricey to go wrong and loads of cheap spares for the medium/small cost stuff. Sure you may then hanker after a TT but that's not too much of a problem if you've got a good NA for a good price in the first place.

 

I'm not saying its a bad thing but this place is full of power power power types, is a VX220 not worth it compared to a VX220 turbo? What about all the caterham's is the R500 the only one worth having?

 

I'm just giving my point of view having gone backwards and forwards to and from NA's to TT's, I'm a little different to most it seems in that if the supra was only ever an NA i'd probably still have one now and not have moved on to a RX7, 300ZX Manaro etc etc........

 

Years ago now I went from a 205 Gti to a NA supra and thinking back more than anything the quality impressed me the most.....it was the first car I'd had where the doors felt 'solid' the gear shift had no play whatsoever, all the controls felt smooth, the ride great (and that one wasn't the best for a supra by miles). Engine bay was oil and gunk free, the straight 6 smoothness and the test drive of my first RWD drive car............it just felt so silky!?

 

I just wanted to point this out as these are the things we forget on here or take for granted after all the these years, or if we came to the Supra from a comparable Make/model rather than a fwd hot hatch.

 

Go blag a ride in one............and a test drive if you can

 

Good post, this is very true. I had the same perception when I got an NA MR2 pre Supras. It felt great to drive.

 

Besides, NA Supras give scoobies and the like hope

 

Cheers,

 

Brian.

 

p.s. Yep he meant the 2JZ-GTE engine. JZA80 is the model code for the MKIV Supra.

[tbourner]

is a VX220 not worth it compared to a VX220 turbo?

No.

What about all the caterham's is the R500 the only one worth having?

Yes.

[ellis]

All 3 of my Supras have been daily drivers - always reliable, about as thirsty as my old 325i Beemer round town and on runs, you can drive off boost and you're fine, have the power to keep your TED well down when overtaking. Look after it and it will look after you.

[Chewie]

No.

 

Yes.

 

On the subject of the Caterham, I'd say an emphatic NO!! A decent Roadsport or R300 will do. Caterham performance is down to their poxy weight 550-580kg!! You don't need much effort to tune the engine to get more than 500bhp/ton. I'm looking at one now. Anybody want a Supra?

[Aweegin]

..sure, i get times when I think a cheaper to run car would give me cash to spend elsewhere.

Just owning one, driving one, the looks you get as they are pretty rare..I love it.

Reliability..For me, just anything you would expect from a 16yr old motor..wear and tear. Just the wear and tear items on a Soop cost more than a 16yr old Ford, for example..imo

 

I run my own business too, in the building trade.. just having a van for work and economy (ahhh business diesel lol)... my advice, as it applied to me when I thought to buy mine.. go for it.. if you keep her a year and sell her.. at least you will have owned one.

 

 

 

the N/A is still a quick car ... so can still give you a 'buzz' when you want a bit of speed.

 

I second that... It just depends what you are used to previously... an N/A is fast though she ain't the quickest thing on the road.. but it is a Supra!!

Edited December 10, 2009 by Aweegin (see edit history)

[j_jza80]

Running costs will be higher than the clio no doubt and as for reliable engine wise im very sure they are. In the last year i had to replace full brakes,suspension shocks/springs, exhaust system 1 set of front tyres and 2 sets of rear tyres so far its been fine lol, as for the n\a not being much quicker than the clio think toyota said the n\a was 6.2 0-60 top end of around 150 which is no slouch

 

Ph.1 172 0-60mph is 6.8secs 0-100mph 18.3secs (can't find weight but think about 1050kgs)

Ph.2 172 0-60mph is 7.1secs 0-100mph 18.9secs 1110kgs

172 Cup 0-60mph is 6.7secs 0-100mph 17.7secs 1021kgs

Clio 182 0-60mph is 6.6secs 0-100mph 17.5secs 1110kgs

182 Cup 0-60mph is 6.5secs 0-100mph 17.3secs 1090kgs

Trophy 0-60mph is 6.6secs 0-100mph 17.3secs 1090kgs

Clio 197 0-60mph is 6.9secs 0-100mph ???? 1240kgs

197 Cup 0-60mph 6.9secs 0-100mph ???? 1220kgs

Clio 200 Cup 0-60 6.6secs 0-100mph 16.7secs 1204kgs

 

that shows the supra n\a on data is faster than the quickest clio and the supra weighs about 400kg more all im saying is dont discount the n\a many people are happy with it and its a big jump from a clio

 

I've never seen any Toyota figures quoting the 0-60 time for an NA

 

I'd say it would be nearer to 8 seconds in an NA. Any of the Clios should be able to see an NA off to maybe 80mph, the only speed advantage the NA would have is top speed. On a backroad the Clio would be far quicker.

If it's acceleration you want a TT is the only option, although putting your right foot down is always seriously tempting which will seriously affect MPG.

[Fitz]

It's that magic 30% though that matters. That's the time when the uncontrollable grinning starts

 

You said yourself on the Brighton run that you didn't realise TT's were that quick when we were having some fun, and I'm being honest here, I wasn't even pushing her.

 

------------------------------

 

If you love that "pressed into the seat" feeling when accelerating, the TT does this in spades, especially when BPU'd.

 

Do it mate, you won't regret it.

 

 

Indeed, on that Brighton run whilst on the motorway it showed how much quicker a TT is in comparison to an N/A both acceleration and Top Speed wise. Some of the way I'd let myself drift to the back to watch everyone go past then floor it to catch up.

 

But, the TT's seemed to effortless overtake and kept accelerating to the point I thought...'I'm wasting petrol on this '

 

I agree with you that it probably would be that 30% of you urging for that bit more power (I do it myself, I'd love a BPU'd TT6) but it's not for right now. My current lifestye suits the N/A just fine. I think that's one of the main aspects around the car you choose. As said, many have bout a TT and used it as a weekend car for the cheaper option, some use a TT as a daily driver. Either way a Supra is a great car to own.

[pistonbroke]

Either way a Supra is a great car to own.

 

Amen

[Scooter]

I've never seen any Toyota figures quoting the 0-60 time for an NA

 

I'd say it would be nearer to 8 seconds in an NA. Any of the Clios should be able to see an NA off to maybe 80mph, the only speed advantage the NA would have is top speed. On a backroad the Clio would be far quicker.

If it's acceleration you want a TT is the only option, although putting your right foot down is always seriously tempting which will seriously affect MPG.

 

 

The NA gets to 90mph in approx 15 secs so I'd have thought that it must be at least in the middle of that pack of Clio's for the 0-100mph times?

[j_jza80]

The NA gets to 90mph in approx 15 secs so I'd have thought that it must be at least in the middle of that pack of Clio's for the 0-100mph times?

 

Maybe on paper, but I doubt it in the real world. The advantages I can see of having an NA Supra are;

 

- Looks

- Comfort

- interior

- Build quality / reliability

- RWD

- Soundtrack

 

based on performance or running costs alone i'd pick any Renaultsport Clio over an NA Supra.

[csa]

Alright guys,

 

Theres been a couple of similar threads, but they're over 2 years old so I wanted to get some views from now, as these cars are now that much older.

 

Basically, the Clio is starting to get on my nerves, theres something else that needs sorting every other week.

 

As a daily drive, no silly amounts of power, are they reliable? I'm more interested in TT's, as from what I've read N/A's aren't much quicker than the Clio.

 

Seeing this car has made me want one NOW!

 

http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/vbpgimage.php?do=full&p=8984&d=1191575148

 

Cheers fellas

 

Hey that's my car (JamieP's old one) and I took that picture at Harwich harbour when picking up the car.

 

For reliability? well I've spend about 8K on it since I bought it, pretty much only changing stuff that broke, including a complete engine job, and a wasted turbo. That being said, it IS singled and modified in every way possible, so a lot CAN go wrong.

[Scooter]

Maybe on paper, but I doubt it in the real world.

 

I took my figures from the real world ones off this very website (admittedly the top 5 quarter mile times)............

[foggy147]

Being an NA owner myself and coming from a 140bhp 7th gen celica the car is more than quick enough. And like people have said it's all well and good having a car that might be faster, but let's be honest the supra is one of the best looking cars on the road imo even after all these years, and that alone is what puts a smile on my face every single morning I get in it to drive to work

[The Raven]

Maybe on paper, but I doubt it in the real world. The advantages I can see of having an NA Supra are;

 

- Looks

- Comfort

- interior

- Build quality / reliability

- RWD

- Soundtrack

 

based on performance or running costs alone i'd pick any Renaultsport Clio over an NA Supra.

 

Id never pick a clio over a supra end of

[chris burford]

I would agree with most of these posts ive owned my uk tt now for 5 years, and done 80k in her she has now done 165k miles and the only things that have failed are the 2 front brake calipers (they seized when i had to leave it parked up for 5 months when i broke my leg) and the radiator split !! I wonder if a clio could manage to be that trouble free at the same age and mileage I doubt it !!!

 

Like others have said try and get a lower mileage one thats been looked after by an enthusiast and you should be safe (keep a supra fund to one side in the unlikely event of a rainy day) and if you do proceed down the soop route and decide to modify it make sure the work is carried out by competent people who know the soop inside out.

 

Other than that happy potential soop ownership and enjoy the club and meets.

 

Chris

Merry xmas

[j_jza80]

Id never pick a clio over a supra end of

 

I dont think I would either, especially if it were a 6 speed SZ-R NA, but from a performance point of view only, the Clio is a better car. However, NAs are still reasonably quick and certainly look alot nicer than the Renault.

[Scooter]

but from a performance point of view only, the Clio is a better car.

 

It's a match i'd say (manual NA's), nothing in it, 182's seem to do low 15sec 1/4's and round a track....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih8n2udhcLI apparently this is a S2000 behind a Clio 182 (with throttle bodies) is it well driven, could a NA lap the same..........yes it can.

 

I'm don't want to keep going on and on but I think i'm providing some good evidence of the fact that the NA is a match for a Clio 182, when you are just 'saying' it isn't?

[thebluefox]

I would agree with most of these posts ive owned my uk tt now for 5 years, and done 80k in her she has now done 165k miles and the only things that have failed are the 2 front brake calipers (they seized when i had to leave it parked up for 5 months when i broke my leg) and the radiator split !! I wonder if a clio could manage to be that trouble free at the same age and mileage I doubt it !!!

 

Definately not, I've been running the clio properly since july, and since then its had a new driveshaft (which until i changed it was causing it to shear wheel bolts) and a radiator, and the rad fan plug shorts and can stay on after the cars been turned off and drain the battery, so I have to unplug that everytime i leave the car for longer than 15 minutes.

 

French reliability is truly a wonderful thing.

 

I think an N/A would be a good stepping stone to getting a TT in a year or so maybe?

[GMan]

This will be a long post but I wanted to give you some real world insight into my first year of supra ownership

 

I bought my NA from this forum to be my daily driver as I own a Skyline as a weekend & track toy, and other than having to replace the front brake calipers on my first service after driving her back to Germany (due to the bleed nipples being tightened to the point of splitting the caliper body!) It has been faultless, I get about 500kms per tank of petrol even when I am not friendly to it on my weekend trips to Frankfurt.

 

My costs for service and reparis for my fist year of ownership?

3 oil changes+ filters $150 US dollars (working for the US Military I get stuff from the US CHEAP!)

 

I never take the word of a previous owner when I buy a car, but it turned out the previous owner a club member had done all of the fluids so all of the below was not necessary but was for my peace of mind

 

Brake fluid flush $10usd for the fluid $18 for three hours of lift time (I did everything at once)

Automatic transmission filter,fluid and gasket change $50usd all in

Differential fluid change $14usd

Coolant flush $10usd

Finally $550usd for a fresh set of tires as the ones the car came with were done

so $800 USD (about 600 GBP) for a full years worth of running costs is not bad at all if you can do some of the work yourself

 

The ONLY off the road maintainance issue was the broken brake calipers which happened at the shop as I was upgrading my discs and pads and was not the Supra's fault so not really a brake down)

Two front Brake calipers 75gbp each from Keron on here

A pair of used gas struts for the rear hatch 30 GBP from Keron(I use the boot alot so it was annoying to have to hold it all the time but hardly a reliability issue)

Lastly I have a rear shock absorber that's leaking, I could have replaced it for 60USD or both backs for 120 But decided to go with some KYB adjustable shocks at each corner so I can fine tune the handling a bit

 

Everything else I did (Headers, double decat, exhaust, platinum plugs, d/s brake rotors, ceramic pads,Injen Intake, Nology spark plug wires, new dizzy cap and rotor) Were purely for my almost obsessive compulsive inability as an engineer to leave good enough alone. In Germany I view the $80 I spent on a Greddy speed cut defender as a sheer necessity

 

Performance

A delimited lightly modded 160,000 km NA auto, the bottom of the Supra food chain like mine definitely can do 250kmh on the autobahn(GPS reading, my poor old J-Spec speedo can only read 180)

 

I easily dispatch 80% of the cars out there on the streets

BMWs- It takes a BMW 335 or greater to beat me anything with an NA 6(except of course an old shape M3) or less becomes a fading sight in my rear view mirror on a long autobahn pull the great thing about BMWs is that they tell you exactly what they have under the hood in nice bright big numbers on their boots (ex. 3xx 5xx and so on) and if it's =35 just ignore them as they try to goad you and give them the" I can't be bothered to waste the petrol on the likes of you look" and they will skulk away.

 

AUDIs-almost nothing short of an S series can pull away from me, I just spanked a guy in a brand new 2.0T A5 from stoplight to stoplight and he was so gutted that he pulled in behind me at the next light to avoid looking at me. Again Audi is kind enough to announce the displacement of motor that resides under the bonnet in chrome numbers on the boot leave anything bigger than a 3.2 or any thing with an S to the TT guys, and anything with an RS to the big singles

[j_jza80]

It's a match i'd say (manual NA's), nothing in it, 182's seem to do low 15sec 1/4's and round a track....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih8n2udhcLI apparently this is a S2000 behind a Clio 182 (with throttle bodies) is it well driven, could a NA lap the same..........yes it can.

 

I'm don't want to keep going on and on but I think i'm providing some good evidence of the fact that the NA is a match for a Clio 182, when you are just 'saying' it isn't?

 

No, i don't have any physical proof of it. I have however seen these Clios being flung around the circuit at Elvington very often, and the well driven ones seem to be a match for some of the kit cars that take part. I have driven a manual NA before and actually find it quite amusing when people try to make out that they get to 60 in around 6 seconds. My almost standard Corrado VR6 is significantly faster than an NA in a straight line, and it struggles against some of the newer hot hatches.

It shouldn't be embarrasing for NA owners to find that these Clios are faster cars, they are one of the best hot hatches of all time.

[Guest junior]

So your clio costs £40 to fill up and you get 250 miles? if so thats pretty sh!t to start with !!

 

for £40 in a TT Supra you can probably expect between 160-220 miles depending how heavy your right foot is

 

hey, back in september i went the JAE show, i filled up in stoke on trent(£55ish) and it was 110 miles to the show & it was nearly empty when i got there & thats just stead driving