MR2 vs MR2 vs MR-S? Options

[Random_Stranger]

Anyone have any insight on what is the best as far as what is considered the truest of a sports car? I know one of these threads of mine are floating around here somewhere, and I do not mean to post whore, however, I wanted to know if anyone had any experience with any or all three, to see which is the best as far as performance goes. I am starting to feel as if they are each individually special, pending on their usage, and the Toyotas MR vehicle, has never been a car to truly let anyone down or with a frown. Sure there are their favorites, as most guys who are into driving straight will prefer the earliest model due to cost and weight. The mid model do to looks and speed. Possibly the latest model for handling and weight (then I am starting to consider technology now, however looking back on other cars... Say like the RX7.. Totally out classes the newer RX8).

I keep going back and fourth with this because I do need and want another car while i fix this one up and once complete, thinking about the future if I want to dump any more money into this car once the conversion is complete. There is a good chance I could get an MR-S within budget, and I know nobody around where I live fixes those up.

This post has been edited by Random_Stranger: Nov 13, 2009 - 8:29 AM

[SwissFerdi]

I drove a 2004 MR-S about a week ago. It has ZERO body roll..make that negative body roll. Completely stock on 205/15/50 tires. It drove like a beauty. It also had the manual sequential transmission, which was interesting in that it acted like a manual without a driver-operated clutch, not like an automatic with manual functionality.

[Random_Stranger]

I drove a 2004 MR-S about a week ago. It has ZERO body roll..make that negative body roll. Completely stock on 205/15/50 tires. It drove like a beauty. It also had the manual sequential transmission, which was interesting in that it acted like a manual without a driver-operated clutch, not like an automatic with manual functionality.

Yeah I hear that SMT is considered to be rare in one of those, however they for some reason have less HP than the actual MT models, at least that is what I read when I looked up the specs. They look like they would handle well, and they are much lighter than the MK2.

[SwissFerdi]

Yeah I hear that SMT is considered to be rare in one of those, however they for some reason have less HP than the actual MT models, at least that is what I read when I looked up the specs. They look like they would handle well, and they are much lighter than the MK2.

I have no desire to look it up right now, but it probably still goes through a torque converter, hence the power loss. Correct me if I'm wrong.

This post has been edited by SwissFerdi: Nov 13, 2009 - 9:04 PM