2.slow vs Supra
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 1563
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:05 am
- Cars: 95 VW Golf
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
2.slow vs Supra
Me: VW golf mk3, 2.0 with a chip and 91 octane gas. ~2500 lbs.
Friend: Toyota Supra mk4, N/A, Automatic with a fat passenger (aka one of our friends) ~3400lbs
On the freeway.
The cards were obviously stacked against him but I honestly can't believe how much of a difference weight and an Automatic makes.
I pulled EVEN with a Supra. He would only pass me by catching me on the 3-4 shift, and then his rev-happy engine would finally kick in.
Still, it's a testament to weight reduction and the hp loss of an auto tranny, if he has 105 hp on me and I'm still keeping up. That inline-6 through an APEX'i N1 sounds pretty sexy I've gotta admit.
Friend: Toyota Supra mk4, N/A, Automatic with a fat passenger (aka one of our friends) ~3400lbs
On the freeway.
The cards were obviously stacked against him but I honestly can't believe how much of a difference weight and an Automatic makes.
I pulled EVEN with a Supra. He would only pass me by catching me on the 3-4 shift, and then his rev-happy engine would finally kick in.
Still, it's a testament to weight reduction and the hp loss of an auto tranny, if he has 105 hp on me and I'm still keeping up. That inline-6 through an APEX'i N1 sounds pretty sexy I've gotta admit.
95 VR6 Golf Sport
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
Can you post up the hp and torque ratings for both cars.
- AHTOXA
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 14693
- Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 6:31 pm
- Cars: '19 4RUNNER TRD ORP
- Location: Irving, TX
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
Nice. My car's heavy compared to yours, Phil.
'19 Toyota 4Runner TRD ORP
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 1563
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:05 am
- Cars: 95 VW Golf
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
me: 125hp
him: 230hp.
no idea on torque for either car. mine's 122 ft-lbs stock but I chipped it so I'd guess like 130ish?
him: 230hp.
no idea on torque for either car. mine's 122 ft-lbs stock but I chipped it so I'd guess like 130ish?
95 VR6 Golf Sport
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
Sexy whales? Lol...wait...WTF?!subzero wrote:nice.
i like to think of mk4 supras as sexy whales.
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
forgive me, my mind is a little............altered.........right now.
FREE ROMAN!
- Bawked
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 2417
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:24 am
- Cars: 08 JDM Subaru Impreza STI
- Location: New Zealand
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
supras are awesome but are much like the 300zx..... turbo or its weight is too much, coupled with an auto even worse
<3 fwd
- kamesama980
- Senior Standardshifter
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:38 pm
- Location: Columbus, IN
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
agreed. the previous generation was even worse.... MKIVs are like 3500lb with all the options. MKIIIs are like 3800 lbs with all the options.Bawked wrote:supras are awesome but are much like the 300zx..... turbo or its weight is too much, coupled with an auto even worse
it's also the weight involved but you're right, automatics are TERRIBLE for power. I converted my cressida (which is basically a MKIII supra with 4 doors) from auto to manual and it's a whole different car to drive. even with a horribly slipping clutch it was better than the auto. 1st, the torque converter. good in some places, not so good in others. 2nd, fewer gears means less able to keep the engine in the peak of the power band. the gearbox the supra has is a slightly updated (electric speedo instead of mech cable) version of the box that was in my cressida. I know how bad it is.
he might also not have had the shift patten button set to power. if he had it in the power mode you wouldn't have walked him that badly.
oh yea, the 2JZ is not a high-revving engine. it does rev high but it's got as much torque down low
-Russ
2012 Nissan Frontier 4.0l M6 4x4
1990 Toyota Cressida 3.0l M5
1994 Pontiac Firebird LT1 M6
1970 Volkwagen Beetle M4
1990 Suzuki VX800 SM5
2012 Nissan Frontier 4.0l M6 4x4
1990 Toyota Cressida 3.0l M5
1994 Pontiac Firebird LT1 M6
1970 Volkwagen Beetle M4
1990 Suzuki VX800 SM5
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
Sweet motor + crap car = Toyota Supra
I love the 2JZ--it has such a nice tone to it--but the MKIV Supra is just about the ugliest ricemobile ever. (Except the interior, which is sexy)
I find it interesting though, how easy to mod the Supras are. You see people making 500, 600 horsepower and even more, with only easy top-end stuff like boost controllers, fuel systems, intake/exhaust, whatever. Nobody does the more "traditional" engine stuff like heads, cams, boring/stroking, porting, etc. Makes you wonder how reliable any of the modded Supras are, what with all that power on a stock bottom end.
I love the 2JZ--it has such a nice tone to it--but the MKIV Supra is just about the ugliest ricemobile ever. (Except the interior, which is sexy)
I find it interesting though, how easy to mod the Supras are. You see people making 500, 600 horsepower and even more, with only easy top-end stuff like boost controllers, fuel systems, intake/exhaust, whatever. Nobody does the more "traditional" engine stuff like heads, cams, boring/stroking, porting, etc. Makes you wonder how reliable any of the modded Supras are, what with all that power on a stock bottom end.
I drive a Phantom Black 2005 GTO M6. I commute in a 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited.
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
Lol is this what you saw.subzero wrote:forgive me, my mind is a little............altered.........right now.
- kamesama980
- Senior Standardshifter
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:38 pm
- Location: Columbus, IN
Re: 2.slow vs Supra
The bottom end is identical between the turbo and non-turbo engines except for compression ratio. crank, rods, pistons. bolting a turbo onto a NA is doable up to 350-400 hp without additional work. I saw one supra up for sale making 1600 hp on the factory bottom end.tehfade wrote:Sweet motor + crap car = Toyota Supra
I love the 2JZ--it has such a nice tone to it--but the MKIV Supra is just about the ugliest ricemobile ever. (Except the interior, which is sexy)
I find it interesting though, how easy to mod the Supras are. You see people making 500, 600 horsepower and even more, with only easy top-end stuff like boost controllers, fuel systems, intake/exhaust, whatever. Nobody does the more "traditional" engine stuff like heads, cams, boring/stroking, porting, etc. Makes you wonder how reliable any of the modded Supras are, what with all that power on a stock bottom end.
they do port heads but not much. there are stroker kits up to 3.4l available. the reason people don't mix/match heads and cams is because these engines are built right from the factory unlike american v8s which are crazy restricted and poorly done from the factory so mix/match/upgrade is easy. there are also only 2 engines in the JZ series that you could mix parts from... the 1JZ 2.5l only available in japan and the 2JZ available everywhere and there are some people that put a 1JZ head on a 2JZ bottom end because it flows better. numerically, a highly modded muscle car v8 is making as much hp/liter as a 2JZ with exhaust and porting.
-Russ
2012 Nissan Frontier 4.0l M6 4x4
1990 Toyota Cressida 3.0l M5
1994 Pontiac Firebird LT1 M6
1970 Volkwagen Beetle M4
1990 Suzuki VX800 SM5
2012 Nissan Frontier 4.0l M6 4x4
1990 Toyota Cressida 3.0l M5
1994 Pontiac Firebird LT1 M6
1970 Volkwagen Beetle M4
1990 Suzuki VX800 SM5