89 Supra
March-22nd-2003, 06:46 PM
#1
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Roseville/St Paul, MN
Posts: 300
89 Supra
Anyone have any experience with teh MKIII Supra? A friend of mine is looking at one. Don't know if its the turbo or not but it's at 100K and at $2-3k for price. Original owner, wintered etc etc. It does have T tops also.
March-22nd-2003, 07:48 PM
#2
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
My friend and I were looking at them briefly. He was looking to get a fun second car to get him to med school. We test drove an '87. Really fun.
Here is a useful site I came across:
http://www.supracentral.com/
Try a search on Google...lots of good sites.
Here is a useful site I came across:
http://www.supracentral.com/
Try a search on Google...lots of good sites.
March-22nd-2003, 11:01 PM
#3
Certified Sick Individual
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Houston, TX.
Posts: 1,141
One of my friends had one, wasn't turbocharged though. Thing cratered about 5 months after he bought it and either he got a crap mechanic or those engines are expensive as hell to rebuild because they wanted more than he paid for the car to fix it. It met mr. scrapheap shortly thereafter. I would definitely look into how expensive that thing is going to be to fix considering:
1. It's a Supra and has probably been driven hard.
2. It's old.
1. It's a Supra and has probably been driven hard.
2. It's old.
March-23rd-2003, 12:02 AM
#4
formerly chastan
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,350
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
what do you want to know about them?
As far as I'm concerned, it's too damn big and heavy, and you'd be better off with an old Camaro. :shrug:
what do you want to know about them?
As far as I'm concerned, it's too damn big and heavy, and you'd be better off with an old Camaro. :shrug:
hey I like the looks of the supra
here's something that I've heard is a problem:
http://www.supras.org.nz/techinfo/bhg.htm
March-23rd-2003, 04:54 AM
#5
Ive got that funny feelin
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Columbus, Oh
Posts: 291
Ive looked into those and it is my opinion that the engines are VERY tempremantal. Again my opinion, if you want a fun second car get either 1st or 2nd gen MR2 those can be had in that price range EASY. 3sgte, 2nd gen turbo, engines are almost "dime-a-dozen" and are proven to be bulletproof. Ask Jessie how much he likes his MR2.
March-24th-2003, 02:48 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,122
I mostly concur with Pseudo's comments, but I generally don't like big cars. If your friend likes large vehicles, maybe he'll like a Supra, which brings me to my first point...
The mkIII Toyota Supra is really a lot different than almost any other Jap performance car due to its size. This is a BIG car. It not only looks big on paper (3500+ lb curb weight), it feels big when you drive one too. These cars feel as if the Toyota engineers were trying to build a duplicate of a 70-82 Chevy Camaro, but with Toyota build quality and interior design, and they succeeded. The elements are all there: big exterior dimensions, big doors, big weight, loooooooooong hood, torquey engine, and softish stock suspension. Driving these cars feels like piloting a large powerboat; you sit way back looking over the long hood, and the car heaves back and forth when you accelerate or brake.
Which brings me to my next point: these cars can be VERY fast, but they emphasize straightline speed over handling. The engines will put out GOBS of power (despite a few well-documented problems) but the high curb weight hurts performance and handling, and the suspension is pretty unsophisticated (mkIV Supras are LEAGUES ahead of the mkIII in this department). In stock form, these cars are seriously hurt by really soft springs and shocks (they feel like 80's T-Birds, seriously), but even when modified, they really don't like to turn. A college friend of mine attempted to build a turbo mkIII into a track car and gave up due to the fact that it would NOT handle. He basically summarized it this way- it would roll less and grip more, but just couldn't hang with lighter, more sophisticated cars in the twisties.
In short, these cars are an acquired taste- kind of a Jap muscle car, if one ever existed. They are capable of really good straightline performance- an acquaintance in the early 90's got had a turbo mkIII that would run high 11's, and would shock many domestic racers who hadn't gotten used to uttering "import" and "11 second 1/4 mile" in the same sentence. However, their unwillingness to turn, their old age, and the appearance of newer, more sophisticated cars without the same list of drawbacks makes me hesitant to recommend them. Actually, if I were your friend, I would take one of Pseudo's suggestions and look at an M5 LT1 F-body- they're big and powerful like a mkIII but they have better aftermarket support, they're newer, they handle better, and the parts are cheaper.
The mkIII Toyota Supra is really a lot different than almost any other Jap performance car due to its size. This is a BIG car. It not only looks big on paper (3500+ lb curb weight), it feels big when you drive one too. These cars feel as if the Toyota engineers were trying to build a duplicate of a 70-82 Chevy Camaro, but with Toyota build quality and interior design, and they succeeded. The elements are all there: big exterior dimensions, big doors, big weight, loooooooooong hood, torquey engine, and softish stock suspension. Driving these cars feels like piloting a large powerboat; you sit way back looking over the long hood, and the car heaves back and forth when you accelerate or brake.
Which brings me to my next point: these cars can be VERY fast, but they emphasize straightline speed over handling. The engines will put out GOBS of power (despite a few well-documented problems) but the high curb weight hurts performance and handling, and the suspension is pretty unsophisticated (mkIV Supras are LEAGUES ahead of the mkIII in this department). In stock form, these cars are seriously hurt by really soft springs and shocks (they feel like 80's T-Birds, seriously), but even when modified, they really don't like to turn. A college friend of mine attempted to build a turbo mkIII into a track car and gave up due to the fact that it would NOT handle. He basically summarized it this way- it would roll less and grip more, but just couldn't hang with lighter, more sophisticated cars in the twisties.
In short, these cars are an acquired taste- kind of a Jap muscle car, if one ever existed.
They are capable of really good straightline performance- an acquaintance in the early 90's got had a turbo mkIII that would run high 11's, and would shock many domestic racers who hadn't gotten used to uttering "import" and "11 second 1/4 mile" in the same sentence. However, their unwillingness to turn, their old age, and the appearance of newer, more sophisticated cars without the same list of drawbacks makes me hesitant to recommend them. Actually, if I were your friend, I would take one of Pseudo's suggestions and look at an M5 LT1 F-body- they're big and powerful like a mkIII but they have better aftermarket support, they're newer, they handle better, and the parts are cheaper.
March-24th-2003, 08:34 PM
#7
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Roseville/St Paul, MN
Posts: 300
Well he's just loolking for a car to get him by till he can get a better deal on a Mazda 6s or an RX8. I think that the straight line performance thing will be good, handling will be more of an issue. The fact that the car is bigger may be a good thing as he's pretty tall and has issues with many cars. I think reliability and availability will be the biggest issues. If the head gasket issue's been addressed (I'll check on that) the car should last a few more years at least. More then enough time for Mazda to work the first year bugs out of the 6 and the 8 and for some slightly used lease returns or something to pop up.
Otherwise I would also have recomended an MR2 or even a 240/300z as a better choice. Thanks for the advice on the Supra. I let you all know how it goes this weekend when I go see it with him.
Otherwise I would also have recomended an MR2 or even a 240/300z as a better choice. Thanks for the advice on the Supra. I let you all know how it goes this weekend when I go see it with him.
Last edited by jlanger; March-24th-2003 at 08:36 PM.
March-24th-2003, 09:47 PM
#8
formerly chastan
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,350
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
Our SCCA steward the last few years drove an AUTOMATIC MKIV Supra and had a mullet. Nice guy though.
Our SCCA steward the last few years drove an AUTOMATIC MKIV Supra and had a mullet. Nice guy though.
j/k, of course
March-25th-2003, 08:33 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by jlanger
Otherwise I would also have recomended an MR2 or even a 240/300z as a better choice. Thanks for the advice on the Supra. I let you all know how it goes this weekend when I go see it with him.
Otherwise I would also have recomended an MR2 or even a 240/300z as a better choice. Thanks for the advice on the Supra. I let you all know how it goes this weekend when I go see it with him.
March-25th-2003, 09:16 PM
#11
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Roseville/St Paul, MN
Posts: 300
Originally posted by carguycw
Old Z-cars have their own set of issues. You say "240/300z"; what years and models are you talking about? I used to own a 1971 240Z and can add some Z-related comments to this debate too.
Old Z-cars have their own set of issues. You say "240/300z"; what years and models are you talking about? I used to own a 1971 240Z and can add some Z-related comments to this debate too.
I'll also recomend an GenII Rx7. I know he likes the GIII Rx7 but shies away from the little issue of them blowing up. :bomb: I know that the G2 and non turbo G3 ones aren't too bad. He really likes mazdas and is eagerly waiting the release of the Rx8 so that he can drive one but his MX6 (at 240k mind you) is slowly giving up the ghost.
Last edited by jlanger; March-25th-2003 at 09:20 PM.
March-26th-2003, 05:36 PM
#14
2002 RX-7 Spirit 'R'
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 872
Originally posted by ZoomZoomH
F-C-3-S! F-C-3-S! F-C-3-S!
lightweight, roomy (relatively), fun to drive, and NO PISTONS!!!
gotta toot my own horn you know
toot toot
F-C-3-S! F-C-3-S! F-C-3-S!
lightweight, roomy (relatively), fun to drive, and NO PISTONS!!!
gotta toot my own horn you know
toot toot
F-C-3-S F-C-3-S F-C-3-S
Yes yes i love RX-7s .... can't wait to get my FC, then later on in life my FD
ye and all 3rd gens are twin turboed!!!
March-27th-2003, 08:42 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,122
FWIW I vote for the FC3S too. These cars have gotten crazy cheap. The only problem is that the engines can't be compression-checked with conventional equipment and they're expen$ive to rebuild. Always get it checked by a qualified rotary mechanic. Other than that, the only big problem with these cars is lousy gas mileage.
Thoughts on the other vehicles....
1) 240SX... nice handling, but hurt seriously by lame truck engine. Someone always says "just SR20DET swap it!" but that's not smog legal in major cities, you have to take the car apart, and the popularity of this swap has driven the prices of JDM front clips up, at least in my area. It's also drained the supply of worthwhile donor vehicles.
2) Z31 (84-89) 300ZX... cheap and reliable, but heavy, slow in N/A form, and don't handle very well. "Grand touring" boulevard cruiser. If that's what he wants, fine, but it's not a very good sports car.
3) Z32 (90-96) 300ZX... reliable, heavy, not so slow, better but not fantastic handling, but quite high priced. Almost all cars you will find in the $2k-$3k price range will be RATS. Any TT's in this price range will be so bad you don't even want to see them... can you say "salvage title", "flood damage" or "parts car"?
4) MR2... great handling, fun, cheap in N/A form, but small, somewhat cramped for tall drivers (let's face it), very little cargo room, expensive to insure and difficult to work on.
Just my $0.02. Feel free to add you own opinions.
Thoughts on the other vehicles....
1) 240SX... nice handling, but hurt seriously by lame truck engine. Someone always says "just SR20DET swap it!" but that's not smog legal in major cities, you have to take the car apart, and the popularity of this swap has driven the prices of JDM front clips up, at least in my area. It's also drained the supply of worthwhile donor vehicles.
2) Z31 (84-89) 300ZX... cheap and reliable, but heavy, slow in N/A form, and don't handle very well. "Grand touring" boulevard cruiser. If that's what he wants, fine, but it's not a very good sports car.
3) Z32 (90-96) 300ZX... reliable, heavy, not so slow, better but not fantastic handling, but quite high priced. Almost all cars you will find in the $2k-$3k price range will be RATS. Any TT's in this price range will be so bad you don't even want to see them... can you say "salvage title", "flood damage" or "parts car"?
4) MR2... great handling, fun, cheap in N/A form, but small, somewhat cramped for tall drivers (let's face it), very little cargo room, expensive to insure and difficult to work on.
Just my $0.02. Feel free to add you own opinions.