Explain This One To Me

[Stu8]

Why is it that people on here say the Rev2 is quicker than the Rev3 and onwards.

I've looked at the specs about ten times and still cant find any solid truth in that statement.

I mean i'm not saying the Rev 3 is quicker but please elaborate how the Rev 2 is quicker, as it's starting to hurt my brain. lol :P

[mr2nut123]

well i dont really know as i havent driven a rev3 but i heard there was many safety updates such as massive bars down the doors,air bag, strengthened bodywork etc. which added weight so the engine was increased to make up for it. im sure theyre just about equal in speed overall but people with rev3's like to think otherwise :P i could be wrong and will probably get slatted for it but sod it :D

[Stu8]

what air bag? lol

what is the weight difference anyway?

As for power there's much debate about that, I bought mine totally standard, then re-built the engine (better safe than sorry) and then I put it on the rollers at Prosport. now i expected 240bhp, but It shot up to 265bhp.

How does a totally stock engine gain another 25bhp :bookworm:

anyway thats my own personal experience.

Anway just because I've got a rev 3, that doesnt mean I think it's quicker. :)

[houston]

when u say quicker do u mean acceleration? bhp isnt the only thing affectin this, torque is what u wantiun to be lookin at, and mr2nut is right, the rev3 has a lot more safety features added due to regulations which weighs it down a lot more.

tvis also has a bit play in it

[Stu8]

The ACIS on the rev 3 helped to boost low-end torque and provide more vivid acceleration

And to be honest strengthening the car wasn't a bad idea. :D

When I say Quicker; I mean quicker in all the aspects of the word. ;)

thats what I get the impression they mean when they say it anyway.

[Jimlad]

rev 1 baby... proper stripped out racer ?!?!!

[KiwiMR2]

Why is it that people on here say the Rev2 is quicker than the Rev3 and onwards.

I've looked at the specs about ten times and still cant find any solid truth in that statement.

<_< IMO It IS quicker.

Iv'e seen HEAPS of test's showing stock Type III's getting mid-high 13's...not many if any Type I & II's do that. Most decent Type III's end up with higher STOCK HP figures.....Toyota's quote of 245 is up for debate....at the time the Supra couldn't be officialy made to look not worth it's value.

The weight thing is CRAP, side intrusion beams.....bo ho, some of the options avalible for the GT & GT-S mean they can weigh anywhere between 1220 kg's & 1400 kg's so that's all crap.

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[System~G]

Back in the good old days when I still had my Rev3 and Nicola had her Rev2 (yes the driveway looked amazing B) ), I did a couple of tests between the two revisions.

Performance wise Nicola's car pulled a bit quicker (not much at all) lower down the rev range, but my Rev3 gained and overtook in the higher rev range.

Nicola Rev2 suffered severely with the rear end stepping out on roundabouts where mine held perfectly. Nicola's caught me out so many times it scared me.

Nicola's car physically felt a lot lighter - steering, sticking to the road, accelleration, braking etc...

The handling of the Rev2 was improoved 200% after we fitted decent rubber to the rear and it didn't scare me as much afterwards, but I still didn't have the guts to throw it in the twisties like I could my Rev3.

Myself and Ryan used to have a lot of spirited fun in our cars along long dual cariageways. His was a Rev1 with a filter and exhaust. My Rev3 was completely standard at the time. The Rev1 pulled away from mine right through the rev range each and every time often leaving me behind and me often finding it difficult to catch up. I was well annoyed and bought an induction kit imediately and had also planned to do the exhaust but had to reluctantly sell... :(

[EarL]

rev 1 baby... proper stripped out racer ?!?!!

←

Yeah! Baby!

Revision 1 = more fun! The purists choice.

Rev 1/2's were more torquey low down due to the cylinder head design. Rev III's had more grunt at the top end because of the raised compression and boost increase (and different turbo).

Horses for courses and all that. :) ;)

[KiwiMR2]

Now I have some time I can explain a bit more what I think :)

All this is with regards to the TURBO versions...not the NA's. Essentially the Type III has bigger injectors (more fuel), a better turbo ( runs more stock & can run higher & more efficiently), has a more modern ECU with better fuel maps (L-Jetronic vs D-Jetronic), No afm etc. etc.

Basicly all these add up to more power a lot easier. To be fair once some serious moding starts it's pretty much the same but essentially out of the box it's a better all round package I reakon. My 1990 GT running 13 psi with an intake & cat-back exhaust wasn't as quick as my 1993 Type III with JUST a cat-back exhaust, it just wasn't as quick of the mark (lsd vs no lsd & it is really very noticable), it didn't pull as hard although they were both running 13 psi, and to me it felt heavier....Gt vs GT-S, both T-tops. Al is a classic example of a really quick Type I....hell, the way he has mastered his launch Im 99% sure he'd beat me, but he has a CT20b running higher boost.

Anyway there will always be case's were you get an oddball type I or II that is hell quick, or a type III that isn't so quick....so many factors involved but over the years Iv'e seen enough time slips & driven both versions to be convinced without a doubt in standard-mildly modded form they are QUICKER :)

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[KiwiMR2]

Rev 1/2's were more torquey low down due to the cylinder head design. Rev III's had more grunt at the top end because of the raised compression and boost increase (and different turbo).

304 Nm

(224 lb ft)

@ 3200 rpm (Type I & II)

VS

304 Nm

(224 lb ft)

@ 4000 rpm (Type III upwards)

Boost can vary a fair bit...a health Type I or II should see near fuel cut (around 12 psi) in standard trim vs the 13 psi for the Type III, so only one psi in it however it will boost ALL the way to redline....a CT26 won't.

Cheers

KiwiMR2

[houston]

rev 1 baby... proper stripped out racer ?!?!!

←

Yeah! Baby!

Revision 1 = more fun! The purists choice.

Rev 1/2's were more torquey low down due to the cylinder head design. Rev III's had more grunt at the top end because of the raised compression and boost increase (and different turbo).

Horses for courses and all that. :) ;)

←

rev 1, cos its just better :P i forgot stu8 has a turbo and heres me goin on bout n/a's!

so when people say rev3 engines are more tuneable does that just mean they get more power from mods?

[midmotorsteve]

i've always understood n/a rev1&2's to be quicker than rev3s as the toyota brochures state 0-60 for rev1 /2 7.2 sec and 0-60 rev3 7.7 sec.

turbos i always thought were quicker rev3 on

[Stu8]

cheers Kiwi

My last run I did a 12.8 but mine aint standard. lol

And I'll be trying to do Better this Sunday

I think I'll have to borrow a Rev 2 see how it handles round Outlon Park....

Any offers. :P

[Bibbs]

Rev1/2 NA's have more low down torque.

On Tubbies the Rev1/2 will spool quicker .. but looses out at higher revs ..

I have a 1/4 mile vid of rev2 vs rev3 .. the rev3 wins by less than a second.

[Stu8]

shame mine aint standard.

though i've raced a few modded rev 2's at the Pod.

[Jimlad]

I had a play with Pizza boy... I pulled away alot quicker than him... bit he sook crept ahead in the higher rev range... :(

saying that.. neither of our cars are standard though.

[Stu8]

has yours got de-cat and uprated actuator Jim?

[Jimlad]

yeah.... but... my car needed a remap desperatley (still does)... so I suppose not a very accurate comparison.

[Stu8]

Same here, i've noticed it spools in next to no time and keeps the boost much better now. :)

If you need a re-map then that just proves how much better it is.

[Fizz]

Rev1/2 NA's have more low down torque.

On Tubbies the Rev1/2 will spool quicker .. but looses out at higher revs ..

I have a 1/4 mile vid of rev2 vs rev3 .. the rev3 wins by less than a second.

←

i have the same vid.. think they are both white tubbies... but.. i have also been told that they aint standard? and to prove that they are..

[DeusMR2]

im pretty sure the rev2 vs rev 3 thing applies to NA's only. For tubbies the rev 3 is quicker in all(?) respects

[Stu8]

Rev1/2 NA's have more low down torque.

On Tubbies the Rev1/2 will spool quicker .. but looses out at higher revs ..

I have a 1/4 mile vid of rev2 vs rev3 .. the rev3 wins by less than a second.

←

i have the same vid.. think they are both white tubbies... but.. i have also been told that they aint standard? and to prove that they are..

←

You what?

[Bibbs]

Rev1/2 NA's have more low down torque.

On Tubbies the Rev1/2 will spool quicker .. but looses out at higher revs ..

I have a 1/4 mile vid of rev2 vs rev3 .. the rev3 wins by less than a second.

←

i have the same vid.. think they are both white tubbies... but.. i have also been told that they aint standard? and to prove that they are..

←

You what?

←

There are the jap "vs" videos on the net .. and they race two white tubbies .. the Rev2 does a 14.4 and the rev3 does a 13.6 (or something like that) ..

They are stock cars, they don't do many modded ones in the comparisons.