CarThrottle Asks: Supra Turbo, VR-4, 300ZX, or RX-7?

For those enthusiasts with turbos on the brain, this is a question that has bounced around since the early 90′s. There’s still not a definite answer today – but with the recent...
Share Share on Facebook

 

Share Share on Twitter Share Share ▼

For those enthusiasts with turbos on the brain, this is a question that has bounced around since the early 90′s. There’s still not a definite answer today – but with the recent coverage of 3000GT VR-4 tuner 3SX Performance, I thought it would be a good CT: Asks for our readers to share their input on this question.

The 90′s were arguably the resurgence of real performance, after the mediocrity of the 80′s and the depressing malaise of the 70′s.  Horsepower was no longer taboo, the speed limit was no longer 55, gas was cheap, and financing was easy.  Out of this was born the unique class of Japanese supercars – viciously powerful cars packed with technology, slick styling, turbocharging, and exhilarating performance.  There really are 5 Japanese supercars, but we’ll leave the Acura/Honda NSX out of this – it was at least double the price of it’s competitors, and in many cases not up to par for performance.  Not saying the NSX is a bad car – I mean, it’s hard for any car with chassis input from Ayrton Senna to be bad – but it was more a competitor for the Porsche 911, Ferrari 348, and Lotus Esprit than it’s other Japanese brothers.

Which leaves us with the big four.  I’m talking about the 1990-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4, 1990-1996 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo, 1993-1998 Toyota Supra Turbo, and the 1993-1995 Mazda RX-7.  A brief description of each follows, a spreadsheet of basic specs, and a poll.  Take your pick!

Toyota Supra (MkIV) Twin Turbo

Of all four cars, the Supra is probably the most well-recognized and desired today.  I’m sure the obnoxious Fast & The Furious franchise has something to do with it, but the supercar-munching performance, Toyota reliability, and extreme ease of tuning didn’t hurt either.

The MkIV (fourth-generation) Supra Turbo was a car carefully developed with an ear to the enthusiast community, rather than the bean counters.  It was vastly more powerful than the car it replaced (the MkIII Supra) while being lighter, better handling, more advanced, and a lot prettier.  Many people say that the MkIV Supra shape was the inspiration for a lot of sports cars that followed it; it’s not hard to see a little bit of Supra in the 1998 Ferrari 550 Maranello.  Which is embarrassing for Ferrari, but a good ego boost for Toyota.  It’s a shape that’s aged better than almost everything else from the 90′s, and it’s still gorgeous today.

Toyota put a big focus on weight reduction for the MkIV Supra.  Despite being larger, more powerful, and more advanced than it’s predecessor, it was about 200lbs lighter per model.  For reference, a MkIV Supra Twin Turbo weighed in at 3,417lbs with a 53/47 front to rear weight distribution with a 6-speed manual.  This was done through many small details – extensive use of aluminum, a single-pipe exhaust system, hollow carpet fibers, magnesium steering wheel, plastic gas tank, and a gas-injected rear spoiler.

Performance wise, there wasn’t much for sale in 1993 that was faster than a Supra Turbo.  All Supras for the MkIV chassis ditched the long-running “M” series inline six, which culminated with the 3.0L 24v 7M-GTE with 232bhp in the previous Supra Turbo.  The new engine, the JZ series I6, is one that has reached legendary status among enthusiasts today.  Regular Supras got a naturally-aspirated 3.0L 24v 2JZ-GE which made 220 horsepower, while the Supra Turbo had the more powerful 2JZ-GTE.

This was a fairly complex engine by the standards of the day, and in fact pioneered the art of sequential turbocharging in production passenger cars.  Instead of one big turbo or two small ones, the 2JZ-GTE used two different sizes – a small, low-inertia turbocharger at low RPM’s and a big, fat one at higher rpms, which gave it a more linear powerband than normal turbo setups.  Mazda also used this set-up on the 3rd generations RX-7′s engine , as we’ll read about later.  The turbo version of the 2JZ was rated at 276bhp for the Japanese market (due to the Gentleman’s Agreement between manufacturers) but a full 320bhp and 315lb-ft of torque for export.

The export version had different camshafts, steel turbo impellers (instead of ceramic), and larger injectors to make the extra horses.  Transmission choices were either a Toyota/Getrag V160 6-speed manual, or a Toyota 4-speed automatic.  With all that power, the Supra was mighty fast: C&D recorded a 4.6 second 0-60 time for one of the earliest Turbo’s, although later tests usually showed a time between 4.8-5.2 seconds.  The quarter mile was done in 13.1 seconds at 109mph, which is quick today – and ridiculous for 1993.

The Supra was about more than just straight-line performance, of course.  Double wishbone independent suspension at all corners and sticky tires allowed the Supra to grip a skidpad at 0.95 g’s, and the sophisticated 4-channel ABS brake system meant it would do 70-0 in 149 feet – a record the 1997 Supra held until the $440,000+ Porsche Carrera GT broke it in 2004.

Today, Supras are synonymous with import tuning.  Titan Motorsports in Texas has a 1300+bhp Supra that runs mid-7′s in the quarter mile, and the stock bottom end of the 2JZ is strong enough to support north of 700bhp before things start to bend.  By now, there aren’t a whole lot of stock Supra Turbo’s left, but you wouldn’t leave it stock anyway, would you?

1990-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4

If you’ve been reading CarThrottle the past week or so, you’re probably already somewhat familiar with the 3000GT VR-4 (and the Dodge Stealth R/T Twin Turbo, it’s identical cousin).  The 3S cars (as they’re referred to) were part of Mitsubishi’s 2-part replacement for the Starion.  While the DSM’s (Eclipse/Talon/Laser) went for light weight and four cylinders, the 3000GT (also called the GTO in some markets) went in a different direction, packing as much technology as possible into a low, sleek 2+2 coupe.

The spec list read like the Swiss Army Knife of sports cars.  There was a 3.0L V6 up front, with twin-cam four valve heads on top and twin turbochargers below, breathing through a set of twin side-mounted intercoolers.  Total power for early VR-4/ R/T Turbo’s was 300bhp and 300 lb-ft of torque from 10psi of boost.  Power was transferred through a Getrag 5-speed manual and a viscous center coupling (which was where the VR-4 designation – viscous real time 4WD – came from) to all four wheels – the only car among the four that wasn’t RWD, and the only one with a sideways-mounted engine.

That wasn’t all, of course.  The VR-4 also packed four-wheel steering (as did the 300ZX) which could turn the rear wheels up to 1.5° opposite of the fronts above 31mph for sharper turn-in.  There were three-position variable rate shocks at all four corners.  Active aerodynamics adjustable spoiler angles depending on speed.  The VR-4 even packed a variable exhaust system, which used a solenoid-controlled series of flaps to make the exhaust louder or quieter depending on your mood.

All this stuff is really cool, but it had a downside: the VR-4 is far and away the heaviest of the four, outweighing the flyweight RX-7 by nearly 1,000 pounds, and the Supra and 300ZX by about 400lbs.  The 4WD grip meant it was about as quick off the line as the others, but the advantage starts to fade at higher speeds as the tubby VR-4 gets left behind.  Skipdap grip was comparable, but the VR-4 handling balance leans more towards understeer than tail-out drifting antics; all that weight over the front wheels doesn’t help.

Still, what the VR-4 lacked in hard-core sports car ass-whooping abilities, it made up for in overall usefulness.  Driving a Supra Turbo or RX7 on a slick road was an exercise in underwear swapping, whereas a VR-4 would pretty much pound over whatever crappy road you thrashed it down.  It could actually go places besides sideways and backwards when it snowed, and as an added bonus the sound a VR-4 with upgraded turbos makes when hitting boost redefines the term “insane.”

Changes over the (unusually long) life of the VR-4 were minimal.  It gained 20 horsepower and 9 lb-ft of torque in 1994 when the standard boost level was upped from 10 to 12psi, making it a touch faster.  The 5-speed box was also replaced by a new Getrag 6-speed manual the same year, which gives a closer gear spread but is a somewhat fragile transmission.  There was a folding-hardtop convertible (designed by ASC/McLaren) that was available in tiny quantities for a while, but keep in mind that a VR-4 Spyder weighs approximately 4,100 pounds, which is absurd.  Skip it.  The last year of VR-4′s in the US, the 1999, was arguably the best looking – new headlights, a huge Evo-style spoiler on the back, gorgeous chrome wheels.  By then the price tag had crept up to $44,600 as a result of the disparity between the Yen and US dollar – which was a problem all four of these cars shared in the US market as time progressed.

By now we’re all familiar with the aftermarket possibilities of the 3000GT VR-4; rest assured that if you want a 700awhp VR-4 it’s doable.  So is the VR-4 your kind of car?  Or do you want something lighter and simpler?  Like…

Mazda RX-7

Looking at the engine specs, it seems the little Mazda is hopelessly outgunned against monsters like the Supra and VR-4.  255 horsepower?  217 lb-ft of torque?  Pffft, what is this, a Mustang GT?  Go home.

Well, no.  Looking at the spec charts, the little Mazda actually has a superior power to weight ratio to the 300ZX and the VR-4, and it’s within a hair’s width of the Supra.  Why?  Well, the RX-7 only weighed 2,800 pounds – a half ton lighter than the VR-4.  It is closer to the classic definition of a sports car than the other three, which all bend towards “really fast GT”.  Not only is it the lightest, but the mass is the lowest down and the most centralized- all thanks to the RX-7′s gift/curse, it’s engine.

While the rest of the world figures the best way to turn dead dinosaurs into horsepower are a few pistons moving up and down, Mazda likes dancing to the beat of a different drum, which is why they’re the only brand that gave the Wankel Rotary engine more than a half-assed chance.  And the engine under the 3rd-generation RX7 was a beast:  a revised version of the old 654×2 13b side-port rotary, fortified with twin-sequential turbochargers (like the Supra) and a front-mounted intercooler.  Those 255 horsepower might not sound like much, but they thumped the lithe RX-7 down the road at a pace that embarrassed 5.7L Corvettes of the time.  The powerband is wide – since the rotary goes in a circle instead of up and down, it’s not hard to get to the 8,000rpm redline, highest in this group.  The 5-speed manual (there was an optional automatic, but you’ve gotta be kidding) had short throws and close ratios, keeping the boosted rotary on the boil when you wanted it to be.

The downside is fragility.  An FD3S (the chassis code of the 3rd-generation RX7) is one of the greatest driver’s cars ever – when it’s running.  They call RX-7′s “Lawn Ornaments” for a reason.  The big problem was… well, there were a lot.  Heat buildup under the hood was massive, and in their quest for lightness Mazda specified a fairly tiny coolant radiator, which is wholly inadequate for track driving on a hot day.  An overheated rotary is a much bigger problem than a blown head gasket on a piston engine, requiring an expensive rebuild for warped seals.  The turbos themselves weren’t all that reliable either, with frequent failure of the flapper valve between the two twins.  Finally, Mazda still hadn’t perfected the art of making a sturdy apex seal – the seal on the tip of the rotor – and adding a bunch of boost didn’t help either.  Catastrophic engine melt-downs are a fact of life for 3rd-gen RX-7 owners.  Maybe that’s why so many of them have GM LS1 V8′s now?

Unlike the Supra, 300ZX, and especially the 3000GT, there was no wimpy base model RX-7.  You could get a Dodge Stealth with a 12-valve SOHC 6G V6 which would do 0-60 eventually.  The regular Supra was a nice car, but shared it’s 220bhp I6 with the Lexus SC300 and wasn’t especially quick.  The 300ZX non-turbo had 222bhp and did 0-60 in the mid-7′s.  You could order your RX-7 in Fast, Fast and Comfortable, or Really Fast With Suspension Made Of Granite. That would be base, Touring, and the extreme R1 package – which featured a Torsen LSD, stiffer shocks, no interior luxuries, and a ride so hard you’d cry.

So the RX-7 was a not a car with compromise in it’s dictionary – unlike the VR-4, it was basically a one-trick pony.  But that one trick – plastering a mile-wide smile on the driver’s face – is what it’s all about.  Right?

Nissan 300 ZX Twin Turbo

Note: tell me you’ve seen this picture before!

The 300ZX was the oldest car of this group (introduced in 1989, versus 1990 for the VR-4, and 1993 for the Supra and RX-7.)  So while it was always a little slower than it’s newer competition, that’s not to say it had nothing going for it.  Like the Supra, it struck a delicate balance between race car and commuter rocket, and it did so with great success.

Part of the reason the 1990-1996 300 ZX was such a beloved car was just how disappointing it’s predecessor was.  The Z31 300ZX was a better car than a 280ZX, but only barely.  It’s single-cam non-intercooled turbo V6 mustered up 205 horsepower, meaning it would routinely get beaten by fuel-injected 5.0 Fox-body Mustangs off the light, despite being about twice the price.  Plus, it looked like a melted doorstop.  Meh.  So when the new 300 ZX came out in late 1989, the world was pretty much knocked on their collective asses.  Remember, this was before the Acura NSX, the new Supra, etc etc – this was the first Japanese car the US had seen that was truly deserving of the supercar title.  And, it was gorgeous.  In fact, still is today – can  you name any other 22 year old designs that still look fresh and modern?  It’s a short list.

The ZX didn’t ooze aggression like a C4 Corvette or VR-4, either.  It was sort of subdued – no flashy ornate styling gimmicks.  Which is why a VR-4 looks like a product of the 90′s, while a good-condition Z32 still turns heads.

Under the hood was a vastly-updated version of the previous 300ZX’s engine.  It was still a 3.0L 60° alloy V6, but twin-cam four valve heads replaced SOHC 2v units, while the single turbocharger was replaced by two smaller ones.  Power went up dramatically: an even 300bhp, and 283lb-ft of torque, with minimal lag or peaky delivery.  Transmission choices were a 5-speed manual or 4-speed auto; again, who would buy a car like this with two pedals?

While the regular 300ZX could be had in 2 seat or 2+2 form, as well as a convertible, Nissan only ever put the VG30DETT engine in 2-seat hard top cars.  So if you needed a back seat, you’d need a Supra or VR-4 – although the back seats on both of those were more of a joke than a practical consideration, perhaps to keep insurance lower.

The Twin Turbo Z did pack some cool tech – variable valve timing, HICAS hydraulic four-wheel steering, 2-mode variable shock absorbers, etc – but was more of a driver’s tool than the VR-4 was.  It was a little slower than the Supra and RX-7, but when we’re talking 2 or 3 tenths of a second, who cares?

The 300ZX was probably the best-rounded of all four cars, not being the best at anything or the worst.  The dual-mode suspension actually worked, delivering a comfortable ride in Touring mode and stiff, agile handling in Sport.  The powerband was more linear than the peaky RX-7 or the “whoa, afterburners kicked in!” Supra, and the interior was much higher quality and more comfortable than the VR-4 or RX-7.  You could take your wife to the grocery store in comfort, then do donuts in the parking lot until the tires blew while she was picking out asparagus.

The engine itself is fairly reliable – Nissan’s V6′s have always been robust, and this one wasn’t really very high-strung – but working on them is an unholy pain in the ass.  The turbochargers can become victim to heat buildup and go bad early, and you can’t even see them from the top – unlike the other three cars, Turbocharger replacement is absolutely an engine-out job on a 300ZX.  The stock clutch was usually good for 60-70,000 miles, although there are aftermarket replacements that last much longer.  But these minor concerns didn’t lessen the fact that the 300ZX was – and is – a completely fantastic car.

If you’ve got all these twin turbos and 4WS and this and that mixed up in your head, I’ve put together this handy spec chart of all four to compare side-by-side, if you’re a numbers sort of person.  Best in comparison figures are in bold, obviously.  Or if you’re a zealot, skip this and just vote for what you picked before you even started reading.  Hey, I did.  (hint: it’s the 300ZX.)

Toyota Supra Turbo Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo Mazda RX-7 R1
Body 2dr 2+2 liftback 2dr 2+2 liftback 2 door 2 seat liftback 2 door 2 seat liftback
Base Price (1993) $37,000 $37,250 $37,090 $32,500
Drivetrain Front L RWD Front T AWD Front L RWD Front L RWD
Engine I6, iron block/alum head V6, iron block/alum heads V6, aluminum block/heads 2-rotor Wankel Rotary
Displacement 2997cc (3.0L) 2972cc (3.0L) 2960cc (3.0L) 654x2cc (1.3L)
Valvetrain DOHC 24v DOHC 24v DOHC 24v Side Ports
Aspiration Twin Sequential Turbo, intercooled Twin Turbo, twin intercooled Twin Turbo, twin intercooled Twin Sequential Turbo, intercooled
Compression Ratio 8.5:1 8.0:1 8.5:1 9.0:1
Bhp @ rpm 320 @ 5600 300@6000 (90-93)

320@6000 (94+)

300@6400 255@6000
Torque @ rpm 315 @ 4000 306@2500(90-93)

315@2500(94+)

283@3600 217@5000
Redline 6800rpm 7000rpm 7000rpm 8000rpm
Transmission Getrag 6MT 5MT (90-93)

6MT (94+)

5MT 5MT
Curb Weight 3,417 3,790-3,803 3,474 2800
Lb/bhp 10.67 12.63 (90-93)

11.88 (94+)

11.58 10.98
0-30 mph 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1
0-60 mph 4.8 5.2 5.0 5.2
0-100 mph 11.7 14.4 13.1 14.5
¼ Mile ET 13.4 s. 13.9 13.7 13.8
¼ mile @ MPH 107mph 98mph 102mph 101mph
Top Speed 158mph 154mph 153mph 158mph
Lateral Accel. 0.95g 0.92g 0.95g 0.98g

What's Your Favorite 90's Japanese Supercar?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Side note: it’s interesting to see what the Yen-dollar exchange rate did to all these cars.  If you notice, the price of all of them in 1993 were within spitting distance, except the RX-7 – right around $37k before delivery, taxes, options, etc.  By the end of their life cycle, they had basically priced themselves out of existence.  The VR-4 rang up the register in 1999 at $44,600 before options, meaning it was more expensive than a Corvette (C5), Porsche Boxster, BMW M Roadster, and other sports cars with “heritage.”  The RX-7 left the market in 1995 with an MSRP of $37,800 – up 5 grand in 2 years.  The Supra didn’t increase as much, with a 1998 MSRP for a Turbo T-Top Manual at $40,508 plus options.  And the 300ZX in Turbo form was up to $43,979 by 1996.  This wasn’t the only factor at play with the death of this class of car; the market shifting towards SUV’s, rising insurance premiums, etc did them in as well – but the price inflation was a bit nuts.

Share Share on Facebook

 

Share Share on Twitter Share Share ▼
  • Rigval

    Hello,

    Having driven the 3000gt the rx7 FC & FD models as well as taken a ride in the 300zx as well as the supra, I have to say the best of them all in terms of driving pleasure has got to be the rx7s. These were as you said machines without compromise…and they felt fabulous. Everytime I drive one I totally feel that THIS is what a sports car should feel like…and power delivery isn’t as peaky as you think. Rotaries are very linear in delivery, then you add a turbo which isn’t linear (i.e boost comes in at a certain rpm) it produces a driving experience unlike any other. Its peakiness depends on the size of the turbo you stuff in it I suppose. But its a beautiful car to drive, everything is properly weighted. But when you think about the engine going to heck every 120,000km or so, you better have deep pockets.

    The 3000gt WAS SO dull a car to drive I remember driving one at around 100mph and all I could think of while taking some corners in it was “What would be my dinner for tonight? a Burger or something else?”. It may be more packed with gadgets than a James Bond car,but this was the case when electronics and gizmos dulled a car to bits. It was safe…but I rather have a bit more soul and interaction in a sports car.

    The 300zx was also a porky car and like the 3000gt had under bonnet heat issues. two friends of mine still have theirs and they’re just cruisers…not real b-road eaters.

    The supra was devilishly good, in an old skool sort of way – much like driving a nissan 350z but with a longer bonnet and a turbo bolted to it. It had the looks and also the push. I was much slimmed down from the previous supra and was loved by most. In these parts of the world it still holds its 2nd hand value and unlike the 3000gt and the 300zx is still revered by tuners over here.

  • Griffin

    What about the Subaru SVX?!!! Although not a “japanese supercar” it’s still freaking awesome and severly underrated. I mean it was called the poor mans Porsche Carrera 4s by Road and Track. COME ON! what more could you need!

    R.I.P. Subaru SVX
    1992-1997
    Gone but not forgotten.

    • http://www.saabsnaab.com James

      Hey, the Subaru SVX is a really cool car. Just not comparable with these four performance-wise, really. A neat car with those split windows – you can smoke a cigarette on the highway with the windows open in a storm and not get wet! and AWD is nice. The 3.3L 24v H6 is a sweet motor (sounds great through straight pipes!)

      Sadly the SVX might be the only car with a more explosion-prone transmission than my beloved 900 Turbos. A serious failure point. A friend of mine had one, blew the stock transmission. Rebuilt it with some Legacy parts and a super-deep 4.44:1 final drive. Sprayed a 75 shot of N02 on it. Blew it up again. Gave up on it and got a Merkur XR4Ti, which was a lot more reliable for a fun beater. That says a lot.

      That said, I do love the interios, the styling, all that – but compared to the 4.8 to sixty, 160mph Supra Turbo, the SVX is slow as a greyhound bus.

  • Zach

    I chuckled out loud at your conclusion, as I as well am deeply in love with the 300ZX, way before reading this article! Very well written and unbiased comparison, I would never have guessed you were a 300ZX fan until you said it. But when I read your conclusion, I laughed out loud, and my exact words were “Cheers to you buddy” :) So, cheers to you fellow Z car enthusiast, cheers to you! :D

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/mdpalmerNG?feature=mhee mdogg

    I don’t know where you got the pic of the silver FD Rx-7, but that’s mine parked in front of my old house years ago :) Random as hell. I was happily rotary powered for about 5 years, car made about 300 whp and ran the 1/4 in low 13s at ~108-113 mph (yeah big diff in mph). They are great motors if you know how to take care of them. The turbo control system can be troublesome, but for convenience I converted them to non sequential operation (pretty laggy until 3.5-4k rpm). Got sick of that and wanted torque after a ride in a corvette ZR1. I put an ls1/t56 trans in the car and now it makes 350 whp and gobs more torque from idle up to redline. I couldn’t be happier. I didn’t swap motor for reliability, I did it for torque/throttle respose. I love vettes but they are $$$ and I like to be different, not to mention lighter :) Car gained about 100 lbs overall (2900 lbs wet, almost full tank gas), corner balanced /w 50/50 front/rear distribution, new radiator is heavier and I ditched A/C, still have P/S. I love it, it is really tons of fun to drive, makes a perfect street car. Anyway, I love the rx-7s, light and small. I also love the supras and 300zx, both are awesome and I always give thumbs up/honks when I see them!

  • Shawn

    Coming from the owner of 3 of these cars…I do not have a 300zx yet, I have to say in stock form, the rx-7 but modded…I love my VR-4. with 638 at the wheels, no backseat and a few aftermarket weight mods, the 3700 lb car will lay a c6z06 down in 1 mile all day long. cant beat that 1.3 60ft with street tires :D

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=2734772 James

      1.3 60 foot – holy crap, I wonder what that feels like. Watching a powerful VR-4 launching at the tree is an impressive thing!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=2734772 James

      638whp? What turbos are you running, twin HX35′s? :-D

      • Shawn

        Dynamic racing dr1000s…and they have a few that are bigger…people have put down over 1000whp with these cars…and more if you stroke out the motor

  • Shawn

    Also, i think the 1/4 mile numbers are off a lil. The rx7 has a time of 14.5 seconds 0-100 but runs the 1/4 in 13.9 at 101? Also, the vr4 in stock form was 13.5 easy and wen the japs drove it they got 12.8…americans couldnt launch an awd car back then lol…here is the docs.
    I am quoting motor trend on that one as they compared the vr4, supra, and a porshe in 96 i think, and here is the links for those statements

    Moter trend test, 4.8 0-60/13.5 to 100 vs the supra 12.3 0-100…
    http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/112_9705_mitsubishi_3000gt_vr4/index.html

    Japanese vr4 vs skyline stock race…vr4 wins 12.8 to 12.b.9
    http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?xl=xl_blazer&v=Y1AUqzkfmlA

  • Johnny

    Just FYI the 3000GT’s 5 and 6 speeds were both made by Getrag.

  • richard

    just had to say iv been in all 4 cars before and i do like the rx7 alot but value for money you cant beat the mitsubishi vr4 iv owned one for 10 years it takes the kids to school happly and my girlfriend has no problems driving such a powerfull car
    well looked after it just keeps going and going when the need arises turn the boost up and it still holds its own some sell for well under a grand and its a whole lot of car for that money

  • Peter Mangnall

    I personally have a 1990 300zx Twin turbo… And i have taken the engine out and done timing belt changes and stripped the engine down to the block and rebuilt it… I am 100% sure now there are now mods to the actuall engine or any like that.. What i am getting at is that this car is stock and it runs mid 13′s maybe low with slightly bigger tires at the rear… There are no boost adjustments that i have seen… It does 5 second flat with underrated tires and spinns all the way till third.. Any ideas on what could be different on it ?

  • Andrzej

    As time has shown the car to have was the Supra. That’s what I have driven since 2000. My Supra is 20 years old and it does look and drive as if it was brand new. I have one of the nicest 100% Supras in the country.

    But the other cars are also beautiful. I loved those Jap sports cars of the 90′s. The RX7 was probably the most fun though. Will buy them all one day.

  • repeter

    I don’t remember MSRP for all these vehicles but I do remember when I went shopping back in 1997 the Supra Turbo was around $54,000. The non-turbo madel was closer to $37000 loaded and it was a similar story for the VR4. Hell I had a magazine cut out of a Mitsubishi ad hung on my wall that advertised the VR4 as well equipt for around $52,000.
    Sales weren’t as grand as they hoped partly because the Corvette could produce similar performance for around $39,000 and had a better reputation for reliability when compared. At that time most common commuter cars from Japan had been praised for their utilitarian reliability but their Hi-performance machines had yet to have gained as much popularity in that respect. They were reputed to be expensive to fix as well. Turbo’s had a reputation for inconsistent reliability back then either.

  • repeter

    I don’t remember MSRP for all these vehicles but I do remember when I went shopping back in 1997 the Supra Turbo was around $54,000. The non-turbo madel was closer to $37000 loaded and it was a similar story for the VR4. Hell I had a magazine cut out of a Mitsubishi ad hung on my wall that advertised the VR4 as well equipt for around $52,000.
    Sales weren’t as grand as they hoped partly because the Corvette could produce similar performance for around $39,000 and had a better reputation for reliability when compared. At that time most common commuter cars from Japan had been praised for their utilitarian reliability but their Hi-performance machines had yet to have gained as much popularity in that respect. They were reputed to be expensive to fix as well. Turbo’s had a reputation for inconsistent reliability back then as well.

  • John Adams

    In the years I spent with my 91VR4 and my 94 Stealth RT/TT I found most Supras could not compete with any VR4 in the 1/4 mile track in stock form. The Supra’s power band is in the higher rpm’s. That said in a 1/4 mile the VR4 would always beat the Supra. If the race were from a rolling start or in excess of the 1/4 mile the Supra would beat the VR4. As for the 1/4 mile times for the stock VR4, they are off a little. Especially when I turned in a 13.4 on a stock VR4 with 96,000 miles on the clock up in Maryland. Aside from the miles on the engine, that was also with a bad 2nd gear syncro and a stock clutch with 36k miles on it.
    I also disagree with the look of a VR4 being in the 90′s realm. To me anyway, it’s stands up, “looks wise” way into the upper 2000′s against anything out there.
    We in the 3s community have always said it was the most misunderstood car on the market. You don’t know what it is until you have owned one.

  • Alf

    Stealth TT owner here, I agree with the others for the misinformation on the 3S. It’s a whole hell of a lot faster than that. ALL of the RX-7s here, save for 1 project and 1 track car, don’t run or have V8s in them. There are no 300ZX turbos, and not even a NA Supra here so I can’t speak for those.

  • ticket magnet

    Someone should mention that the zx is electronically limited. Get rid of that and it will do 180+. Mine did when it was stock. The supra is limited I’ve been told but I’m not sure about the top speed

  • Paul__Revere

    You could not have picked a worse representation of a 300ZX on you tube than someone who screwed their Z up with a FMIC and cant even get the front fascia back on

TRENDING

Image source: Mercedes AMG Petronas
6 Memorable Moments From The Chinese Grand Prix

Lewis Hamilton made it three wins out of four after dominating the fourth round of the 2014 season in China

Picture 17
5 Reasons Why Ambitious Petrolheads Should Enter GT Academy

Sony & Nissan’s annual competition to turn gamers into racers is back – and you mustn’t miss out.

Wallmart wave
Walmart’s Crazy Carbonfibre Lorry Concept Makes Haulage Hot

The futuristic Wave concept features the largest panel ever constructed from carbonfibre, and is dripping with innovative features

VW Golf R 400_01
Say Hello To The R400: The Hot VW Golf On Steroids

This production-based concept packs a massive 395bhp from its turbocharged 2.0-litre four-pot

BlhycpZCQAAPiyl
This Jag F-Type Owner Learns Why You Should Never Skip Traffic Through A Construction Zone

Just because you’re driving an expensive Jag doesn’t mean you can skip traffic and get away with it

Harley son
Is This Biker Right To Let His Six-Year-Old Son Ride His Harley?

When this video depicting a Harley-Davidson rider letting his son take control of his bike landed, the internet was up in arms. What do you think?

original (3)
This Flaming Ferrari F1 Car Is Your New Desktop Wallpaper

Give your computer desktop a dose of old-school cool with this flame-spitting Ferrari F1 car

Screenshot 2014-04-19 at 12
When You’re Out Of Matches All You Need Is A Hot Rod

These guys light a bonfire thanks to a pair of flaming hot rod exhausts