Standard Bhp Truth?.......

[NEED4SPEED]

What are the standard figures from Toyota for the BHP? I have heard and read the following figures, are they correct? Firstly there are the Revision from 1-4 for the Turbo followed by the UK model.

Imports:

Revision 1 GT Turbo (1989-1991) = 220bhp

Revision 2 GT Turbo (1992-1993) = 230bhp

Revision 3/4 GT Turbo (1994-1998) = 245bhp

Revision 1/2/3/4 G-LIMITED (1989-1998) = 158-200bhp

Rev 1/2 Turbo Import Performance: (0-60 = 5.9?) Max Speed 149 mph?

Rev 3/4 Turbo Import Performance: (0-60 = 5.4?) Max Speed 154 mph?

Rev 1/2/3/4 G-LIMITED Import Performance: (0-60 = 7.4?) Max Speed 140 mph?

UK:

Revision 1/2 2.0 8v (1989 - 1992) = 112bhp (No rear spoiler model)

Revision 1 2.0 16v GT (1989-1991) = 158bhp

Revision 2 2.0 16v GT (1992-1993) = 158bhp

Revision 3 2.0 16v GT (1994-1996) = 173bhp

Revision 4 2.0 16v GT (1997-2000) = 168bhp

Rev 1/2 UK 2.0 8v Performance: (0-60 = 9.3?) Max Speed 120 mph?

Rev 1/2/3/4 UK 2.0 16v GT Performance: (0-60 = 7.7?) Max Speed 137 mph?

Do these figures seem right? As I'm not 100% sure. :(

[Dame]

Sound about right, though as far as I know, Rev 1 and 2 Turbos are both 225HP (3SGTE Rev 1). Nothing changed power wise until Rev 3 onwards.

[screechmr2]

for turbos

rev 1/2 220bhp

0-60 in 5.7, 158mph

rev 3 on

rev3 241bhp,

0-60 in 5.3, 162mph

pretty sure they're the official stats

[pizza boy]

Rev3 onward Turbo models officially produced 241bhp or 245ps. Real figure was very close to 260. Figures were deliberatley downplayed by Toyota Japan...why?...

260bhp Mr2 £24k

280bhp Supra £40k

Looks too close power wise eh...Mr I-know-nowt-about-cars will look at those figures and relative price and think Mr T is havin him on thus Supra sales would suffer.

Its marketing...every manufacturer knows bhp figures sells cars even tho the supras torque (the real measure of a cars power imo) is significantly greater than the mr2 Turbo. So even official figures (on any car) you cannot trust. Paper figures are just very rough guides.

[JohnnyC]

UK:

Revision 1/2 2.0 8v (1989 - 1992) = 112bhp (No rear spoiler model)

Revision 1 2.0 16v GT (1989-1991) = 158bhp

Revision 2 2.0 16v GT (1992-1993) = 158bhp

Revision 3 2.0 16v GT (1994-1996) = 173bhp

Revision 4 2.0 16v GT (1997-2000) = 168bhp

The revision 4 is from 1996 - 1998, and you missed the revision 5 that's from 1998 - 1999 (yes, there are a few 2000 W-reg cars knocking about, but these are just '99 cars that have been stood in the dealership).

Revisions 1 & 2 had 0-60 times of 7.2 (obviously not the 3S-FE), and revisions 3+ were 7.7

[Dan H]

JohnnyC Posted on Mar 17 2004, 10:48 PM

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

QUOTE 

Revisions 1 & 2 had 0-60 times of 7.2 (obviously not the 3S-FE), and revisions 3+ were 7.7

Rev 3+ were slower to 60 than the Rev 1/2's? <_<

[KiwiMR2]

Rev 3+ were slower to 60 than the Rev 1/2's? <_<

More intresting info I posted in another thread (which can be found in a seach)

The 3rd gen 3sge, consisted of different

cams, larger valves, a variable length intake manifold with a step effect were the manifold meets the head, in order to enhance the swirl characteristics of the intake charge.The headers were of larger diameter but shorter length, to aid top end power.

Power was up about 12kw at 129kw(173hp)@7000rpm

(previously 117kw(157hp)@6500rpm).The difference on the road wasn't that noticeable over the previous gen 3sge till at least 5200rpm were the acoustic control system did its jig and openened the second intake track to take advantage of the new engine's mods.In late '95 the compression was lowered back to 10:1 in order to meet the new emission standards and as a result the power came back to 125kw(167hp)@7000rpm .

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[JappyBeast]

I thought that the J-spec n/a's had more horses than the UK spec.

[DeusMR2]

nah they were the same for n/a's across all revisions, they did have more toys tho B)

[pizza boy]

Rev1/2 were faster because they had %$( all safety (no airbags/no side impact bars, no ABS and sometimes no power steering+aircon)makin em lighter, they had shorter gear ratios and the power wasnt sitting at 10 zillion rpm.

Bear in mind im talking about the 3SGE/NA models tho! Every1 knows the score with the Turbo models.

[JappyBeast]

Doesnt the fact that imports are mapped at 100RON make any difference?

A while ago I remember an 'argument' on IMOC between UK spec guys and Import guys...

Import cars are quicker but slowed down by the toys.

So a UK spec MR2 would be quicker than mine because it doesnt have A/C and folding mirrors?

Why did I hear that J-spec n/a's have more punch?

[KiwiMR2]

they had shorter gear ratios

Your talking about NA's, but Im SURE I remeber someone saying that the TURBO versions changed ratios when it went Gen III?? Anyway Iv'e just found out that they are the same from Chassis # 0059266 onwards (Production date 12/91).....The gear ratios are the same for all SW20 turbos, news to me.

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[midmotorsteve]

pizza boys, spot on N/A rev 1+2 are faster accelerating than rev 3+, due to shorter ratios and less weight. Also more power lower down the rev range.

I think rev3+ gear ratios are silly, rev1+2 i think are a bit high 30mph 1st 60 mph 2nd 90 mph 3rd 122mph 4th. But rev3 on 40mph 1st 75mph second etc nuts esp when combined with an engine that delivers its power at 6800rpm it takes getting to 30 mph in 1st before you find the power.

[KiwiMR2]

I think rev3+ gear ratios are silly, rev1+2 i think are a bit high 30mph 1st 60 mph 2nd 90 mph 3rd 122mph 4th.  But rev3 on 40mph 1st 75mph second etc nuts esp when combined with an engine that delivers its power at 6800rpm it takes getting to 30 mph in 1st before you find the power.

Are you talking about the NA??

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[John R]

Does anyone know how fast a rev3+ should go in 3rd gear? I think my clutch might be slipping, just before I got to the redline I was getting about 82.

?

[midmotorsteve]

yes normally aspirated cars rev3+ 100% has longer ratio gearbox. A guy either on here or mr2oc posted saying its wierd the gearbox droppes him out of the tvis zone on redline changes(rev1), eventually found the box had been replaced from a rev3, screwed up acceleration completely.

from the handbook rev2

1st 38

2nd 63

3rd 94

4th 122

anyone got a rev3 handbook see what it says on paper

[Stef Derner]

UK:

Revision 1/2 2.0 8v (1989 - 1992) = 112bhp (No rear spoiler model)

This model is a 16V unit but the head is a low peformance model for economy.

[JappyBeast]

Sometimes I think having the no rear spoiler model would be a blessing... you get to pick from the many spoilers out there and all you have to do is drill!

[Fizz]

Rev3 onward Turbo models officially produced 241bhp or 245ps. Real figure was very close to 260. Figures were deliberatley downplayed by Toyota Japan...why?...

260bhp Mr2 £24k

280bhp Supra £40k

Looks too close power wise eh...Mr I-know-nowt-about-cars will look at those figures and relative price and think Mr T is havin him on thus Supra sales would suffer.

Its marketing...every manufacturer knows bhp figures sells cars even tho the supras torque (the real measure of a cars power imo) is significantly greater than the mr2 Turbo. So even official figures (on any car) you cannot trust. Paper figures are just very rough guides.

that really does sound interestin....

Anyone ever had their standard Rev 3 on the rolling road?

if so.. what were the results?

[pizza boy]

I ave...I straight away RRd mine I just bought me car last year end of summer. It was bone stock 38k miles and it came out at 210bhp@the wheels which = 248bhp@fly.Note this was without oil change and on a hot day too. The RR man told me id be on 250ish in normal driving conditions+oil change.

They also told me they have only RRd one other stock rev4 and it produced 250ish too(better conditions) so thats proof enough.

Modified rev1/2 examples always produced dissapointing figures at thier RR. Hard to find a good rev1/2 tubby these days.

[JappyBeast]

Hard to find a good rev1/2 tubby these days.

Yeah... Jimlads' is a real dogs leg.

[Jimlad]

??? ...... my rev1 is the dogs <the spuds of lurrrrvve>s mate !