I have owned an ap2 S2000, drove a first gen Miata and i would absolutely take the MR2 over both. My MR2 feels faster than both. I just picked up my MR2 about 5 days ago so i havent really been able to push it too hard, but i will say that it has plenty of power for how light it is. I bought this car after seeing Spyder Lee's channel amd his MR2 - got the same gen and i plan on making mine a widebody with upgraded suspension, wider rims wrapped in a stickier tire compound and a fully built honda Kswap turbo'd and tuned to produce as close to 600hp at the wheels... basically i intend to turn it into my tracktoy which i plan to thoroughly enjoy as much as possible during the warmer months.
1) the mr2 started life as a lightweight midhsip car with focus on economy due to the streamlined body but it was so good as a sports car that thats what it became. waaay before the miata. The 3gen was going back to its roots after the second gen which sought more performance and gained lots o weight plus toyotas program at that time was to attract youth with well built cars that where easy to drive. 2) all mr2 generations came with mcpherson which is fully independant and everyone agrees that the 3gen is the best handling with many motor journalysts describing it as one of the best handling cars. 3) there was the turbo option with the tte kit that was offered as an upgrade package in toyota dealerships. 4) mr2 doesnt have rollover bars but neither does miata, mgf or barchetta which was the direct competition. 5) who does 1/4 mile times with full tank. 6) define what you mean by competitive with some suspension tuning and bigger wheels and tyres the car is really competitive in compact circuits and faster than the main competition the miata as for straight line speed or all out balance you have a car weighing less than a ton you can do whatever you want with it the technopro spirits mrs in japan is one of the fastest cars in touge showdown and in track it runs the tsukuba circuit in less than a minute plus there are many videos of mr2 making lots of power. 7) as far as swaps go you dont really have to look ant further than toyota you got the 2zz which is on par with the honda b18 and one of the easiest swaps to do then you got the 3s-gte from previous gen mr2 turbo and celica aaand if you want to go completely crazy you can have the same v6 that the lotus evora has which is found in toyota camrys. 8) you dont address the small aftermarket support, the precats failling and the pre facelift piston rings that led to oil burning which was addressed in 2003 with new pistons tha had more oil draining holes and revised piston rings that solved the issue.
If Toyota gave it the 2zz and more stylized, smaller, headlights, I think it would have sold way more than it did. But, as an owner of one, I'm glad they didn't sell many, because of how cool it is to drive such a rare sports car for so little money.
No it doesn't. As I mentioned, only in competitive cases. It's fine as a daily or weekend car. The MR2 gets away with it due to it being lightweight and MR. If it was heavy, then it would put more load on the "inferior" suspension setup.
Agreed indeed.. Bought mine a 2nd hand MRS (what we call it here) being rare and more- notorious looking than Miata, people sometimes mistaken it for Boxter..
Hi @Hockeygod98 . I was looking into buying a Spyder few years ago mainly due to its rarity and that the Spyder fits me better than a Miata (I am 1.86cm), but was put off by all the blown engine incidents. Are Spyders reliable eventually?
I willing to bet that Toyota purposefully did not offer the 2ZZGE motor in the MR2 Spyder because it would have been too close in performance to the Lotus Elise, which at the time had that same motor in there. There must have been an agreement between the two car companies, where Toyota would not do that.
Mcperson strut suspension is no worse than double wishbone, when it's stiffened. Also double wishbone suspension is used mainly in heavier cars, because they have more body roll and the suspension arms itself are taking way more forces.
one of the biggest reasons the car didn't sell is that it was well known for not having a boot. nobody realised that there is a little bit of luggage space behind the seats so people dismissed it as completely impractical. i'm kinda glad though because it means i got to buy mine for practically nothing :-) if you're not transporting any stuff around (like luggage or golf clubs) the mr2 mk3 is genuinely one of the best handling cars you can drive 🤩
I agree with a lot of things other than it "needing" double wishbone suspension. While it's true that it is easier to design a double wishbone to keep good contact patch, the same can be done with McPherson the only issue is it takes more R&D to get it right and McPherson is a more dynamic system, so a smart enough engineer can take advantage of it at with a MultiLink McPherson at the back the way the LFA does. The other benefit can actually steam from an actual common complaint in particular with the AW series in which there is too much camber change within the stock travel (usually the reason cited as for McPhersons are bad but this can totally be a positive), to see the benefit imagine lowering the car to reduce center of gravity a side effect of which would be much stiffer springs and a reduced range in which the shock typically travels, now all of a sudden the amount of camber change is much more optimal with RCA if need be. In this sort of ride height and stiffness a double wishbone's camber would be too static to dynamically change depending on tire load, a dynamic change that McPhersons will by nature still provide you. I'm not saying all these benefits are easy to engineer, just that DWB leaves grip on the table since their camber is somewhat set and forgot, ether for cornering or straight line performance, there is tradeoff. So there's a very good reason some very high dollar car's that aim to set Nür lap records still use multilink. And arguably at the front the caster angle can be set to complement and compensate for McPherson, more importantly it's a lighter unsprung system and on extention when the wheel has less mechanical grip whilst going over a rut the lower arm can swing the inside bottom of the tire closer to the center of the car and take away camber and flatten out meaning you could maintain a flat contract patch just fine whereas the DWB for performance driving would be set up witha lot of camber a prerequisite for optimal cornering only and would have to roll onto that contact patch to even use the rubber fully, or be made flat and lack increasing camber at least for the rear, because it too can benefit from the caster angle to compensate though this would be a linear feed of camber and not as dynamic, for FF a overly flat static rear end could actually be a bonus but for an MR I definitely want Multilink and *some body roll because that helps get mechanical grip since an overly stiff chassis is more prone to sliding. Sorry for long reply, I just really feel the myth of McPherson being an inferior system in each and every way as a myth that really needs to die. Such absolutes in what is good and what is bad is an overly basic way of thinking that leaves out a lot of nuances in just how much potential each system can or can not be made to have.
I'm going to comment as someone who has owned 4 of these: (1) bone stock brand new (2) used and upgraded to 2zz (Celica GTS engine), (3) more used and upgraded to 2zz and driven to 240k miles, (4) currently stock and driven to 150k miles. I've also ridden in one upgraded to a 2GR engine (Camry V6, RAV4 V6, Sienna). The bone stock car with no mods is super fun for driving curvy mountain roads such as the Tail of the Dragon in Tennessee. Switching to Tien S-Tech lowering springs and Koni adjustable shocks with the front shocks set to full hard and the rear shocks set to a 1/4 turn away from full hard makes for downright amazing curvy road handling. The 2zz engine from the Celica GT-S weighs the same as the stock 1zz so handling is not affected and original tire sizes are adequate and you get 40 (approx 30%) more HP. I'm aware of a number of successful turbo'd and supercharged 2zz engine producing up to 240 HP, 100 HP more than (almost twice) the stock 2zz engine. But enter the 2GR V6 engine. A bare minimum 2GR swap brings 275 HP into the picture, along with 150+ additional pounds. At this point you have to start relocating some weight to perpetuate the intended front/rear weight balance of the car, and of course, this much power requires some substantial tire size changes. But with a 0-60 time of 3.5 seconds and gobs of smooth torque available at just about any RPM point, a 2GR swapped MR2 Spyder is in a completely different class than the original design. Personally I have to give Kudos to Toyota for designing a mid engine car that was reasonably affordable and very fun in stock form, and as it turns out, very modifiable. Two companies in the U.S. successfully specialize in MR2 modifications: Monkey Wrench and DDPR. I'm more familiar with DDPR's work and can personally recommend them.
I have a Celica gts 6 speed and I just bought MR2 spyder!! I'm swapping the engine and transmission, engine is full N/A moded.. I also want to see if I can install the tein coilovers from the celica into the mr2 and other goodies like the short shifter, headlights and tires.. I've watched videos about the 2zz mr2 swap but no one really explains how fast is a 2zz mr2.. (faster than or compare to what other cars)
Bash Trifun ...I got rid of my stock ‘09 STI hatch with 305hp. I now have a (previously 1 owner) 32k miles all stock exterior; ‘ 2001 blue Spyder that came with 6spd tranny, headers, 2ZZ AND a Rotrex supercharger that the 1st owner had planned to race only(no Cat Convert). Dyno paperwork says it’s good for 294 Hp. I am now at the 6 month mark of familiarizing myself with how to drive it and I know not to mess with even a stock WRX. Maybe it’s me or I need to take it to a tuner shop, but I doubt that I am breaking 5 seconds before hitting 60. It’s blast on curves, but every stoplight opportunity has me quietly wishing I had a Toy V6, because 0-60 in 3.5 sounds more like it! Not to mention the reliability of a more modern higher displacement engine that would be easy to add a few more ponies. Oh ...and the previous owner had to buy another Supercharger ($3k)just prior to the sale because apparently they have a high failure rate.
Lee, why does everybody go with the 2zz / turbo.... given the weight / restricted space, I'm sure a nice little supercharger would work better than a turbo and although not as much outright power, it should give some nice returns and keep similar driving dynamics with the progressive delivery.... but nobody seems to do them?!?
Chris Ralphs I see quite a few supercharger 2zz's but never really the 1zz. Not sure why as it would be nice to drive. The 2zz is the better engine though. I've stayed 1zz, as soon I'm going to build a spare engine and go for big power.
In addition to your list, here's my 3 reasons: 1.) Competition did not improve the breed. Toyota tried to out-Miata the Miata, but on a shoestring budget. Miata was basically the sole competitor in a dying segment. 2.) Lack of commitment in marketing. Did you EVER see a commercial or an ad for the car? 3.) A new player changed the game! S2000 came out around the same time and completely overshadowed the Spyder.
Also true. I think Toyota was using the sales results from the MK1 GTI as a base to mold this car. "If we take an economy car, change the styling, and give it 15%-20% more power, we'll have a sales leader." Sadly, they forgot to bump the power... and the 2000s automotive world was a total NUMBERS GAME. Miata pulled the grandfathering card and was mostly exempt from that, but new faces had to play by the new rules. And the MR2 Spyder was too much of a departure from the SW20 to retain many previous MR2 customers; at the same time, it wasn't enticing enough to convince new ones, either.
Yeah sucks.. it was pretty much s2000 vs MR-S vs NB Miata. The s2000 beat all these cars stock easily. Better suspension, better engine, etc, but with money modified to each car. The 1.8l Miata in this day and age has supercharger and turbocharger kits that bring it well over s2000s 220hp. Swapping the MR-S 1zz for a supercharged 2zz from the lotus Exige gives the MR-S 240hp making it actually superior to the s2000 being 600lbs lighter. I bought an MR-S recently just to challenge the s2000s on the track. Love this car
Neg Ative except the turbo charged mk2’s sell for 10-20k used with lots of work needed . An mk3 can be had for 2000$ then the swap is about 3500 more assuming you do the installing yourself. You get a bad ass car for 5500
Raevenswood Just bought two turbo MKIIs for $3k. Put the good parts all one car, the shit parts on the other, sold it and made $1k back for the rolling shell. Put that $1k plus another into my car and BINGO - nearly perfect restoration for $4k (Tho the paint could be better)
As you say, the car wasn't designed for racing, the name is a bit of a giveaway, 'Runabout'. The car also wasn't designed to "out-Miata the Miata", it was a continution of a series that goes back to the 80s. The designer of the Spyder has said that his inspiration for the car was the Formula 2 racing cars, and that was obvious in the first model in 2001, the different sized wheels, lighter weight, electronic clutch and flappy paddles, etc. But he wanted to build a cheap to build, cheap to run, FUN CAR TO DRIVE. The main reason the car failed here in Australia was the weak Aussie dollar against the strong Yen and the fact that it then qualified as a 'luxury' car and attracted even more tax, which made it unaffordable new.
This is such an amazing car, even in stock format! It's so easy to sling around corners and steer on the throttle... it's essentially a budget Boxster, but on a quarter of the budget (initial outlay and insurance!!)... just keep it on stock wheel and tyre sized and it's so much fun - anybody who put it on wider tyres and 17" wheels is completely missing the point.
Cost: I was being quoted £1200 a year to insure a Boxster and my 2007 MR2 (last of the facelift Mk3's to be registered) was £12k, more like £15k for a 987.2... I picked my MR2 up for effectively £4000 (after I'd added 4 new Yoko AD08R's)...
This car is hardly as good as a Boxster. Especially a Boxster S which you can buy pretty well right now. The Boxster has likely bottomed out on value as it won't drop any further. The MR2 will keep dropping.
@@PLK123 I would recomend watching "Regular Car Reviews: 2000 Toyota MR2 ZZW30" it will explain allot and overall give the car more of an honest review imo
As an mr-2 Spyder owner .. I can tell you the reason it failed was marketing . The Miata has similar specs .. I do believe the interior had something to do with it as well . The Miata had the classic Euro layout , why the Spyder was .. well Japanese
He means that this car is the face-lift (second version) of the third model of the MR2. He correctly referred to the Roadster as the third version of the MR2 at the end of the video so he clearly knows what he's talking about.
I think the roll bar is a good point but the Miata’s of the same year didnt have roll bars either, the only Japanese roadster to have one at that time was the s2000
@@lewbickerton3188 if you think these are amazing it's you that drives a piece of shit 😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡. I won't embarrass you with what I drive. You wouldn't belive me anyway. Keep failing 👍
Actually the mr2s is way batter car then a mx5. Theres a special way to drive the mr2 hard... i owned every mr2 there is and to me is one of the best cheap sports car ever... YES, the mrs suspension needs improvements big time and also need wider tires. But other than that is a very very good car..
Isn't the Miata suspension architecture way better and then the aftermarket support is bigger. There are potentially many more engine options possible in the Miata easier.
It will only end up being a tall Yaris or prius with too few cylinders, too few horses, and more ground clearance than a Jeep. Some people need firing at Toyota, the EPA, Safety Nazis, and lawyers first. Just make it fun and come with a waiver, Dodge can do it. My proof it would suck, the new Supra, no mtx or Toyota engine.
Thanks for your review, and I cannot but agree with your appraisal. However, as a 60+ years cautious driver a little less than 140 horses under my right foot, that is enough for me in this little GoKart with doors and fenders. The rarity value coupled to Toyota reliability makes this fun little convertible an alternative to the ubiquitous MX5 (which is a great car). Big downer, no luggage space, only room for a toothbrush and a change of underwear.
Tony, the 1zz is a little torquier than the 2zz at low-mid rpm. Surely better to have that on a road car.. 2zz's need to be thrashed to benefit from the extra power, so wether it's better or not depends upon driving style I guess.. In the UK not many roads with the space to open up to ridiculously high 6-8k rpm power band..
Toyota has made some serious blunders since they discontinued the Supra. They sold their souls in favour of market share. Now all they have are bland mass market cars.
@Thomas Headley sports cars allow engineers to push boundaries and exercise their mechanical understanding. without sports cars in your company, your product becomes weak on frail hollow bones. You NEED to be able to implement a higher understanding of performance to have a superior pedestrian product.
@Thomas Headley Sounds like GM philosophy. But you'd still be wrong on the technological front. You might not keep up with Motorsport, but car manufacturers are in it full swing. even the ones who you might have never seen a single sports car from in awhile. trickle down technology is heavily used and relied upon to meet ever tightening standards. even more so today than ever in the 90s. lots of A to B cars utilizing underbody aerodynamics, diffusers, lift reduction. decreased frontal area and drag coefficients in our crap mobiles running circles around even decade old purpose built racecars. The body design on some of these pedestrian vehicles - if fitted with the power - would be much more stable well in excess of 200mph than the cars that were meant to do it in the early 90s. regular cars have dual, 4, and 6 piston calipers with ceramic pads as standard. and things keep getting faster and better as the expectations of regulations increase. Yes race/performance stuff. because it is these things in and of it's very essence that sports cars were MADE to be and do; be the BEST at moving through a space in the least amount of time.
@Thomas Headley And before you mention the bean counters, that's even more of a reason the engineers need to come up with mind-bending tech. because half the battle is releasing a new design that surpasses an older product in performance, AND does it cheaper. right now, with small displacement turbo engines (nothing new, japan already figured this out.) you get a give and take of reliability and performance greater per liter than larger engines. but as time goes by they will either get that polished, greatly reduce the cost of vehicles, or supersede ICE entirely as EVs are starting to show.
@Thomas Headley ??? are you even listening? you simply can't compare the driving forces of military needs and airplanes to the driving forces behind personal vehicle development, the entire structure as high and far as the arms race down to the commercial marketing is entirely different. SUVs and sub compacts are BOTH using more and more technology taken and developed in and originally FOR racing. I'll say it again, racing - in it's essence - is a pursuit of creating the best transport and all that it implies with battling physics on earth. this DIRECTLY gets looked towards for everyday car development. Cars need to be LIGHTER, they need to be SAFER, they need to get better MPG while being more POWERFUL. Materials like aluminium, carbon fiber, shit even the monococue design itself! All solutions found in RACING because they already did what needed to be done. Obviously they aren't putting high compression 2 liter 1000hp 4 bangers into cars, but thats not looking at the whole picture. With that said, the cheaper the car, the less they care to implement, but the wider the production, the more common knowledge gets implemented from the get go in cheaper vehicles. in case you haven't realized, Motorsport is more than just formula one and endurance racing. Everything you see from low profile tires with reduced sidewall flex and less rotational resistance to under body channels used in your so-thought "non-race tech using" SUVs and magnetic ride stability. Off road vehicles use technology trickled down from manufacturers R&D in - where??? - their off road RACING development teams where they compete. If you're stuck thinking of a Ford f150 and why it doesn't seem to fit what i'm saying, a car like that did it's own research with the sheer history laid out over 70 years. but dig deeper and you'll still find modern tech - again, developed and sought via racing - forever being implemented. Extreme mechanical demand reveals mechanical limits. They develop this so you can sit there and not think about it while you mosey around at 65mph safely for years on end in all conditions better and better. The cars they currently make from India and maybe even lower "they dgaf" models like the 10,000 dollar mitsubishi mirage being sold are the exception. NOT the norm. and the survivability of said cars in a crash/let alone their ability/inability to avoid one will speak this in volumes.
I actually got thoughts on your third reason of why it failed. The MRS Spyder uses MacPherson struts at each corner is more on _save space_ . If I have a MRS Spyder, I'll do the 2zz swap. It's my only and favourite option/choice to modify my MRS Spyder.
Is the MR-S clutch pedal suppose to be “soft” compared to the STI? I have an 07 STI and just got an MR-S and pressing down on the clutch it feels very light, however I don’t have any grinds, no problems changing gears.
This was going to be my response too. Glad to know that others know about the Toyota 2GR-FE's potential. Many MR2's make 300 whp with basic boltons and a tune.
Good video but left out a few key points. The MR2 Spyder had more driver room than the Miata. I'm 6' tall and had a 99 Miata. Every dimension was about 1/2" too short. I drove it for two years and finally had to give up because of back problems I was developing from the tight area. I've driven a few of the Spyders and they were very comfortable, in comparison. Handling on both was great, but the MIata had the traditional look, access, and better storage. The general public doesn't appreciate a mid-engine car design.
Great video, as a 3rd gen Mr2 owner I agree with a lot of things you say. I'm currently doing a K20 swap on mine! Stock is a bit under powered but you hardly notice because of the weight.
Its a super fun car to drive even as stock. Have had a lot of fun in mine, especially thouse nice summer days on twisting roads. The only bad thing is there is no trunk, they really screwed the pooch on that one. But yeah, Toyota thought they could compete with the Miata, that nobody ever could, so they lost, like everybody else, and pissed the original MR2 fans off in the process. Toyota raced the car i belive.
Corrrectamundo, went well too! In one promotion for the series, all the major competitors did a lap of the Japanese track, and the MR2 driver had to STOP and wait for the others to catch up so that they could show a 'tight finish' down the home straight.
Well I’m glad calling it a 2nd gen mr2 was just a slip at 00:57 :) I was worried you didn’t know there were 3 generations. :). Not a bad review . I’ll comment that the reason Toyota never put a 2zz in these is because that engine was already licensed to lotus for the Elise and Toyota has a non compete contract with lotus. That said the 2zz swap makes these mr2’s bad ass.
Other than lack of trunk/storage space, which wasn't mentioned in the video-- funny that a lot of the downfalls you mention are addressed in the Lotus Elise: double wishbone suspension, roll bar, Toyota/Yamaha 2ZZGE engine (w/supercharged option)... Too bad the 3rd generation MR2 is the most unloved generation, but the handling/weight is the best of all 3 gens-- it had so much potential... [I have owned all 3 generations of MR2s plus a Lotus Exige S]
The hydralic SMT trans is known to quit. I own one. ZZ1 engine life is 125,000 miles from what Ive read. Although it has its ploblems it is enherntly even more rare becuase of care required. This car with its Mcphearson suspension can be tuned to be a Touge winning when going against tuned S2000s, Civics, BMWs, GTRs, Supras
A few things worth pointing out: - My guess as to why Toyota did not include a roll over bar is due to the car's very low center of gravity. On a track, it would be very difficult to roll this car. - You should have mentioned that the car has provisions for aftermarket chassis bracing built in to the frame. Just adding the front, rear and mid braces changes the car a lot. - The decision to go with MacPherson struts was most likely due to the increase in cabin space over double wishbone, which would have made it smaller like a Miata. Otherwise, good video. I own a 2ZZ MR-S myself and with a long list of suspension mods it can hold its own with the best of them. If you go search for Best Motoring videos featuring this car, you'll see that it was a solid performer out of the box and especially modified, it just came out a little too soon for its own good and stubbornly remained a monospec car in the face of evolving competition.
I agree with your points. My guess with the no roll over bar is due to weight and costs. I'd assume Toyota is expecting buyers to add them in if needed, hence you're mentioning of provisions for it (I'd agree it would stiffen the car up nicely). I'm not sure if any tracks would allow an MR2 Spyder on since it doesn't have a rollover bar standard because that would be a liability issue if something happened. Let me know if you were able to without one. Yes, McPherson is simpler, cheaper$ and easier to package compared to independent/double wishbone which allow more leg space, but wouldn't be inferior but only at the highest level of competition. (I'd think the MR2's weight and engine layout plays a nice role in how the car's able to function well without being independent. Sounds like a very nice car you have there. Not doubting the MR2's performance as it has a lot of potential.
Surely the windscreen acts as a rollover? I can't believe they would have been allowed to sell the car without strenghening the screen so that it could support the weight?
Had my 2001 (black/tan top ) since 2002 with an initial 12k miles.. now 85k miles (garaged 6-9 mos a year up until 2018.. drive as a dsily mainly due to how fuel fficient it is.. biggest draw back is during rain, i keep it under 60 mph and maintain distance and complete and total awareness..
i own 1, and find it is perfect: 1. ok for normal road driving, since power is higher up rev range. 2. perfect for high speed, since poweris at higher rev range needed for overtaking. so I can drive sedate like any small car in local roads and like a supercar on highways. also the fuel economy is good for local driving, as it drives like a small car. toyota's claim a best of worlds is achieved, a perfect little car. if it had all the things you suggest, it would be expensive to run and insure also.
I bought mine 2nd hand; yr 2000, the previous owner had converted it from SMT to 5speed manual.(ZZW30/1ZZ) is it possible to swap again with Celica 2ZZ. Or is it adequate enough if just for fun crusing
Plan to be competitive? install 2zzge + 6 speed transmission with LSD; competition achieved, Toyota reliability still retained. Glad you were aware of this option. Well rounded video.
The only part that matters about this video is the reasons why people would buy it. It's quite underrated, even with the 1ZZ, since it's not meant to be fast. It's a cornering car, take it to the mountain pass and you'll see how good it is. I also think Toyota didn't put the 2ZZ in because people would literally kill themselves from not knowing how to control the power in a rear engine car.
You have some recommendation about the power, but did not mention how to improve the suspension and reduce body roll. What is your opinions/suggestions of that?
+Zixiao Zhao The suspension is ok stock as you'll only notice it's weakness in competition. But to improve it, I'd suggest the below. To improve handling: Coilovers/Better spring and shock combination. Lighter wheels and stickier tires. To improve torsional rigidity: Larger front and rear anti-roll bar. To increase stiffness: Roll bar/rollcage, strut tower bracing
This is an old video i know, but here are my (long) thoughts on it anyways. Concerning your #1 point on drawbacks: First of all Mcphereson struts are independent too, not just double wishbones and multilink. On the front its a traditional A arm + strut tuned quite well from factory, nothing wrong with it, porsche used mcphereson struts in the front for a long time and other high performance cars still ise it as well. On the rear there was no space for a double wishbone due to the transversal engine layout so its 3 links + a strut(a multilink has at least 4 links or more so thats why its called only a mcphereson). The geometry on the rear is actually pretty good thanks to the long rods. The reason mcpheresons have a bad reputation is because they are often used in fwd cars, where you have to make space for both the driveshafts and steering. This results in bad geometry with short control arms and sometimes different left and right side geometry. I'm not saying a double wishbone wouldn't be better but the suspension isn't as much of a handicap as you make it out to be. Only problem with the suspension is that from factory the spyder's rear sway bars and springs are a bit too soft which makes the car less snappy but it holds it back somewhat. On #2 you are 100% right #3: mx-5s have no rollover bars either(there is a factory option but its only for looks, it doesnt do anything) but they are still tracked. Nothing stops you from welding one into the spyder either. I think the reason you dont see them on track is 1: they are rare so even if an owner takes it to the track only a handful of people see it. 2: Weaker aftermarket support. If you dont have a wide selection of racing parts its going to be harder to build it for track. In slalom(or autocross in murica) they are very competitive, they outturn cars they souldn't be able to(like and S2K). About Toyota reliability: the 1zz was meant for a corolla where you drive it below 3000 rpm most of the time so in the spyder, where people rev the shit out of it, it isn't that reliable. The steering column - steering rack connection can also get a bit loose through the years but apart from these it's indeed Toyota reliability.
Judging by the front fog lights and facelift rear lights and sidescoops along with the seats,I'd say this was a 6 speed not 5. Also these cars DO have independent suspension at all four corners.
Wanted to point out that This is a 3rd gen, not 2nd (though you corrected it towards the end of the video). Can't forget the legendary aw11! In my opinion, I think the 3rd gen failed simply because the Miata was just absolutely stellar in it's class. The rollover bar doesn't seem necessary as the mr2 was targeted to be a fun street/daily car. The owner can always add their own cage if they really wanted to track it. Definitely agree with your 2zz comment though heheh. Dope video man :)
If the MRS failed, it wasn't because of the product, but because of the market - Toyota made a great car that no one was looking for. The market now is all about paper-stats with big numbers... the MRS suffers a similar issue the GT86 does, small numbers on the states page aren't appealing - even if they car is the beautifully balanced, sweet handling sportscar that it is, people just wanted a big turbo to boost.
I think there is another reason entirely that caused Toyota to put the axe to this: the economic environment! I think that is the greatest factor. MacPherson strut systems are not as sophisticated, yes, but it isn't a difference that "driver mod" can't fix. In other words, the strut system doesn't make the car so bad that you couldn't outperform the guy in the S2000 in front of you. It really depends more on the driver than anything else. It takes a lot of HP to overcome bad driving.
No, keeping mine stock, apart from cosmetic enhancements (badges and stuff), and some very sticky tyres, 138 horses is enough for me, as an over 60s cautious driver. Really, mine is a garage queen and show car. Love to park next to MX5 and MG TF's and grab all the attention!
LOl, I have a friend with an S2000 and whenever we are out and about the biggest percentage of people walk straight past the S2000 and want to know all about the MR-S
IMHO, I think this is the perfect racer car project. Suspension can be tuned already to handle bestmotoring touge challenge such as the pro spirit MRS. Techno pro also achieve the under 1 min on tsukuba TT with just a 2L NA engine. The potential is already there. So the car truly has all the potential of lotus elise just add 300+ pounds and under 1/8 of the price. Sure double wishbone would have been over-kill but Mac-pherson is also optimal on the perfect tarmac and much lighter. Not to mention, the genius behind the design, you can literally put any FF 2L engines if you had the right resources. Top engine used to be 2zz but now people are putting K20 and 2GRFE (you can make a lighter car than lotus evora!!!) I just think, the MRS was made ahead of its time, you can't produce MR cars this cheap and efficient. Toyota had the right recipe just didn't have enough of budget or market demand. In my opinion, the MRS would have never succeed. I mean can you imagine the carnage on the street with MRS with 180hp stock, and most likely to be tuned to hell. The MR franchise is dead because of its liability issues with accidents, it wasn't just safe on the rain or snow. So it never had a purpose, unlike a miata whose philosophy was making the perfect roadster with "50/50" motto by design. MRS was either a roadster or race car, nothing conventional for the consumer market. MRS was a double edge sword, the potential is still there but I honestly believe it just too dangerous to put too much power on the MRS for average drivers. It would have been a decent track car had it come out with a 2zz or supercharger-package. Maybe toyota didn't want to ruin their partnership with Lotus as their engine supplier. I mean, people would have just bough a 2zz MRS rather than a Lotus Elise, wouldn't you?
Mid engine budget car, for daily and fun. If you want sth strong buy Z4, mr2 gives a little fun with acceptable fuel economy and looks better live then on pics. I think that for any trackdays , best solution to make it more agile is weight reduction and i/h/e, any turbo kit make it more thirsty and it's not the way.
You can get as much luggage into a touring motorcycle as an MR2 Roadster. The MX5 (Miata) wins hands down on that score and that is probably a factor in new car sales. They make a lot more sense on tight/twisting European roads than they would on the vast expanses of American blacktop in my view. I've driven one through the Swiss Alps and can think of few unmodified and affordable cars that would be more enjoyable on that sort of road.
Tight twisting roads is where the MR-S excels. In 14 years of ownership the next time I am caught up by, or worse, passed, by any other vehicle on a tight twisting road will be the first time lol
to me there was never any match between MR2 Spyder and Miata. The MR2 steering in particular always seemed so much better to me. I've owned a stock MR2 spyder for a few years and a stock AP2 S2000 for 2 years. The S2000 is more precise, and flatter and more powerful once you get up there. But I'd argue that the MR2 in the canyons is actually more fun, more involving. The miata to my personal taste, driving wise seemed always more boring. I still have to drive an Elise tho! And I've driven an alfa 4c spyder twice and fell in love with it, so maybe it's just time to save for that!
Came here expecting to be offended, but, these were actually very decent points. Though I would have added a negitive in regards to practicallity. Atleast the SW20 had a rear boot. It's so hard to do grocery shopping with a Spyder.
The MR-S was never ever designed to be a daily runner and would be totally impractical as such. In saying that how much space do you need in a car for your daily supplies from the super market!
I'll play devil's advocate on the double wishbone suspension issue. DW is often used on the rear wheels and is more complicated for front wheel drive cars. Since the MR2 spyder has the trans axle in the back, then it would be much more complicated to include DW suspension, just like a FWD car but even worse because the exhaust is also there. On top of that, it's not needed to keep the wheels on the ground because the Spyder has the engine on top of the rear suspension, with all that weight on the back, it has no problem keeping the wheels on the ground. So DW could be implemented in the front only but this would also increase the overall weight of the car and the cost. So IMO the MR2 Spyder doesn't benefit as much from a Double Wishbone suspension due to its configuration. Would it be nice to have? yea, but due to the increase weight, complexity, and cost vs the small benefits, I think Toyota didn't make a mistake not including them. BTW you can still adjust toe/camber by buying adjustable arms. Also I would advise to invest on good coilovers and bracing anyways. Good coilovers will have no trouble keeping wheels on the ground just the same.
I LOVE mine is dark green. The reason it failed was beacause of the very weak engine 1ZZ when Toyota had the 2ZZ on hand. The reason this happened is because Toyota made a deal with Lotus to use the 2ZZ in the exige/elise. So if Toyota put the 2ZZ on the spyder it would be extremely close to the Lotus for 1/3rd the cost. Toyota also made a couple more mistakes (That are easily fixable) like the pre-cat issue, Not including the hard roof in America, and no sports options like LSD or body kit to help with the roundish look. Another reason it failed is because the Spyder is a succesor to the MK1 not the SW20 (MK2) and a lot of MR2 fans didn't like that. For me I'm more of a fan of the light weight MK1 than the MK2 and I owned both. TL;DR Toyota F*ed up some things but they're fixable with some mods. This is an excellent sports car, light weight, economic, with an unique configuration. I think a lot of people are sleeping on this car.
Honest review. They are a blast to drive. Love mine. Spent a load on it. Love the Lancia Stratos and original Lotus Europa so got this. Cheap, reliable and relatively rare. Too many MX5's in the world. Yawn.
Because of how light it is, I wanna try seeing if I could mod the DDR miami body kit on it... An tuned MRS with a beastly 2GR could make a great supercar... We'll have to see
I have an 05 automatic and I love it.a dealership ruined the motor misdiagnosed the problem only a bad pcv valve hose and not the rear seal a bad pcv will cause seal to leak no nothing about cars.
Good review! One thing I noticed in the beginning of the video, however, you refer to this MRSpyder as the “2nd gen” when, in actuality, it is the 1991-1999 like my MR2 Turbo that is the 2nd gen. The 2000-2007 like the one you reviewed is the 3rd Gen.
Another short coming of the MR2 is luggage space. Especially compared to the miata. At least you can fit enough luggage in the back of the miata for a weekend getaway. The MR2 has nothing. The Pontiac Solstice with the top down is also a complete failure for luggage storage.
*I own an MR2 Spyder and here's the honest to goodness truth:* *1. The Mazda Miata has a TRUNK. The MR2 Spyder doesn't. That's the ONLY reason why the Miata out sold it.* (It may not sound like much, but not having a trunk is a deal breaker for MOST buyers.) *2. The Toyota MR2 Spyder is the only car to ever "out-Miata" the Miata... meaning it was more of a Miata than the Miata was.* (The MR2 Spyder was lighter, had better handling, and had better acceleration, all on regular gasoline. Considering it sold for the same price as the Miata, it was the better sports car of the two.) *3. You actually can put the engine from the Celica GTS into the MR2 Spyder, without any modifications* . It's almost like it was made for it..... because it was. Toyota was going to put the 2ZZ (Celica GTS) engine in the MR2 Spyder in later model years to compete with the expected HP bump that the Miata would receive from Mazda. They expected a HP war between the two cars as we often see. However, sales figures dropped off steadily (see #1) and Toyota decided to pull the plug on the MR2 rather than refresh it again and upgrade the power. And so that's what we're left with. *The MR2 Spyder remains the most affordable mid-engine sports car ever made* . It's closest competitor with the same layout is the Lotus Elise or Porsche Boxster (much more expensive cars) and only the Miata is in the same price bracket. Today, the MR2 Spyder is a highly sought-after collector's car with a much higher resale value than the Miata. A used MR2 Spyder typically sells for Elise or Boxster money now. *They are quality cars and they're extremely rare (which gives them an exotic quality to them)* . I've owned mine for years and it gets the "Ferrari treatment" wherever I go.
Hello GT Content, While not popular in the USA, the MR2/S is very race worthy. I have a 2001 with 1zz engine that failed. It burns oil related to catalytic converter failure on exhaust manifold....So much for Toyota reliability......did not cover this KNOWN issue for owners. Good news is I will replace with 2zz-fe engine. P
You forgot some wording off your title. "TOYOTA MR2 SPYDER : Why it FAILED as a competitive car :/" I love my mr2 and it gets plenty of attention from plenty of fans and mine is pure stock.
I''d say it was the ugly headlights, lack of t-tops, when you drop the top the rear pillars disappear, when it's up they're not all that sharp and angular. More Porsche Boxster looking than Ferrari, so it was meh to more people. SMG was auto based right? So there was mtx and mtx which wasn't clearly understood. Why Toyota and Mazda were lusting after the hairdresser market is beyond me. There was no V6, no 4AGE, no supercharger, no awesome heritage reasons connecting to the Mk1 and Mk2. The answer to a question very few people were asking.
![ปฏิเสธไม่ไหว (Crush on you) - LIPTA feat. No One Else [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NBw1jF342vw/mqdefault.jpg)
![ไลฟ์สุ่ม iPhone 295 บาท... โกงมั้ย?[ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.97 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gdstHEE4UUE/mqdefault.jpg)
The MR2 Spyder was way superior than the Miata on every level.
It didint fail.. people didint understand it.
Correct.
Miata is for Girls end of discussion
Well just like the evo X I didn't feel like it was an MR2 nor the glory or aura that the MR2 SW20 Turbo had set a bar for many tuning opportunities
Agreed!!!!!!!!!! Just Turbo the thing And add a Tein suspension like i did and see for yourself.
@@Rampage00769 How much does a turbo cost for this? And is the Tein suspension only springs or the coilovers? Thanks
I have owned an ap2 S2000, drove a first gen Miata and i would absolutely take the MR2 over both. My MR2 feels faster than both. I just picked up my MR2 about 5 days ago so i havent really been able to push it too hard, but i will say that it has plenty of power for how light it is. I bought this car after seeing Spyder Lee's channel amd his MR2 - got the same gen and i plan on making mine a widebody with upgraded suspension, wider rims wrapped in a stickier tire compound and a fully built honda Kswap turbo'd and tuned to produce as close to 600hp at the wheels... basically i intend to turn it into my tracktoy which i plan to thoroughly enjoy as much as possible during the warmer months.
1) the mr2 started life as a lightweight midhsip car with focus on economy due to the streamlined body but it was so good as a sports car that thats what it became. waaay before the miata. The 3gen was going back to its roots after the second gen which sought more performance and gained lots o weight plus toyotas program at that time was to attract youth with well built cars that where easy to drive.
2) all mr2 generations came with mcpherson which is fully independant and everyone agrees that the 3gen is the best handling with many motor journalysts describing it as one of the best handling cars.
3) there was the turbo option with the tte kit that was offered as an upgrade package in toyota dealerships.
4) mr2 doesnt have rollover bars but neither does miata, mgf or barchetta which was the direct competition.
5) who does 1/4 mile times with full tank.
6) define what you mean by competitive with some suspension tuning and bigger wheels and tyres the car is really competitive in compact circuits and faster than the main competition the miata as for straight line speed or all out balance you have a car weighing less than a ton you can do whatever you want with it the technopro spirits mrs in japan is one of the fastest cars in touge showdown and in track it runs the tsukuba circuit in less than a minute plus there are many videos of mr2 making lots of power.
7) as far as swaps go you dont really have to look ant further than toyota you got the 2zz which is on par with the honda b18 and one of the easiest swaps to do then you got the 3s-gte from previous gen mr2 turbo and celica aaand if you want to go completely crazy you can have the same v6 that the lotus evora has which is found in toyota camrys.
8) you dont address the small aftermarket support, the precats failling and the pre facelift piston rings that led to oil burning which was addressed in 2003 with new pistons tha had more oil draining holes and revised piston rings that solved the issue.
ahhhh someone who knows what theyre talking about
The MR2 is an excellent underrated car.
Zero reason to not drop the 180 engine, they would have taken over the miata sales, truely unforgivable to deliberately make it slow
@@Boberts427 it might be "slow", but it is very responsive and youd be surprised how well it can zip through traffic.
If Toyota gave it the 2zz and more stylized, smaller, headlights, I think it would have sold way more than it did. But, as an owner of one, I'm glad they didn't sell many, because of how cool it is to drive such a rare sports car for so little money.
😀
Does the mc phereson strut setup hurt the handling that bad. I like em and the strut setup really makes me question it.
No it doesn't. As I mentioned, only in competitive cases. It's fine as a daily or weekend car. The MR2 gets away with it due to it being lightweight and MR. If it was heavy, then it would put more load on the "inferior" suspension setup.
Agreed indeed.. Bought mine a 2nd hand MRS (what we call it here) being rare and more- notorious looking than Miata, people sometimes mistaken it for Boxter..
Hi @Hockeygod98 . I was looking into buying a Spyder few years ago mainly due to its rarity and that the Spyder fits me better than a Miata (I am 1.86cm), but was put off by all the blown engine incidents. Are Spyders reliable eventually?
I willing to bet that Toyota purposefully did not offer the 2ZZGE motor in the MR2 Spyder because it would have been too close in performance to the Lotus Elise, which at the time had that same motor in there. There must have been an agreement between the two car companies, where Toyota would not do that.
I wish it was like the new supra where it was faster than the BMW lol
Mcperson strut suspension is no worse than double wishbone, when it's stiffened. Also double wishbone suspension is used mainly in heavier cars, because they have more body roll and the suspension arms itself are taking way more forces.
one of the biggest reasons the car didn't sell is that it was well known for not having a boot. nobody realised that there is a little bit of luggage space behind the seats so people dismissed it as completely impractical. i'm kinda glad though because it means i got to buy mine for practically nothing :-) if you're not transporting any stuff around (like luggage or golf clubs) the mr2 mk3 is genuinely one of the best handling cars you can drive 🤩
Just get rid of the spare and Jack and get a can of Fix-a-flat. That's what I did :p
I agree with a lot of things other than it "needing" double wishbone suspension.
While it's true that it is easier to design a double wishbone to keep good contact patch, the same can be done with McPherson the only issue is it takes more R&D to get it right and McPherson is a more dynamic system, so a smart enough engineer can take advantage of it at with a MultiLink McPherson at the back the way the LFA does.
The other benefit can actually steam from an actual common complaint in particular with the AW series in which there is too much camber change within the stock travel (usually the reason cited as for McPhersons are bad but this can totally be a positive), to see the benefit imagine lowering the car to reduce center of gravity a side effect of which would be much stiffer springs and a reduced range in which the shock typically travels, now all of a sudden the amount of camber change is much more optimal with RCA if need be. In this sort of ride height and stiffness a double wishbone's camber would be too static to dynamically change depending on tire load, a dynamic change that McPhersons will by nature still provide you.
I'm not saying all these benefits are easy to engineer, just that DWB leaves grip on the table since their camber is somewhat set and forgot, ether for cornering or straight line performance, there is tradeoff. So there's a very good reason some very high dollar car's that aim to set Nür lap records still use multilink. And arguably at the front the caster angle can be set to complement and compensate for McPherson, more importantly it's a lighter unsprung system and on extention when the wheel has less mechanical grip whilst going over a rut the lower arm can swing the inside bottom of the tire closer to the center of the car and take away camber and flatten out meaning you could maintain a flat contract patch just fine whereas the DWB for performance driving would be set up witha lot of camber a prerequisite for optimal cornering only and would have to roll onto that contact patch to even use the rubber fully, or be made flat and lack increasing camber at least for the rear, because it too can benefit from the caster angle to compensate though this would be a linear feed of camber and not as dynamic, for FF a overly flat static rear end could actually be a bonus but for an MR I definitely want Multilink and *some body roll because that helps get mechanical grip since an overly stiff chassis is more prone to sliding.
Sorry for long reply, I just really feel the myth of McPherson being an inferior system in each and every way as a myth that really needs to die. Such absolutes in what is good and what is bad is an overly basic way of thinking that leaves out a lot of nuances in just how much potential each system can or can not be made to have.
I'm going to comment as someone who has owned 4 of these: (1) bone stock brand new (2) used and upgraded to 2zz (Celica GTS engine), (3) more used and upgraded to 2zz and driven to 240k miles, (4) currently stock and driven to 150k miles. I've also ridden in one upgraded to a 2GR engine (Camry V6, RAV4 V6, Sienna). The bone stock car with no mods is super fun for driving curvy mountain roads such as the Tail of the Dragon in Tennessee. Switching to Tien S-Tech lowering springs and Koni adjustable shocks with the front shocks set to full hard and the rear shocks set to a 1/4 turn away from full hard makes for downright amazing curvy road handling. The 2zz engine from the Celica GT-S weighs the same as the stock 1zz so handling is not affected and original tire sizes are adequate and you get 40 (approx 30%) more HP. I'm aware of a number of successful turbo'd and supercharged 2zz engine producing up to 240 HP, 100 HP more than (almost twice) the stock 2zz engine.
But enter the 2GR V6 engine. A bare minimum 2GR swap brings 275 HP into the picture, along with 150+ additional pounds. At this point you have to start relocating some weight to perpetuate the intended front/rear weight balance of the car, and of course, this much power requires some substantial tire size changes. But with a 0-60 time of 3.5 seconds and gobs of smooth torque available at just about any RPM point, a 2GR swapped MR2 Spyder is in a completely different class than the original design.
Personally I have to give Kudos to Toyota for designing a mid engine car that was reasonably affordable and very fun in stock form, and as it turns out, very modifiable. Two companies in the U.S. successfully specialize in MR2 modifications: Monkey Wrench and DDPR. I'm more familiar with DDPR's work and can personally recommend them.
Great to hear your experience and insight. Thanks for sharing.
LocalGuide911 I am thinking about getting one and would like your POV. Hit me up at rkunik94@gmail.com. Thanks!!
I have a Celica gts 6 speed and I just bought MR2 spyder!! I'm swapping the engine and transmission, engine is full N/A moded..
I also want to see if I can install the tein coilovers from the celica into the mr2 and other goodies like the short shifter, headlights and tires..
I've watched videos about the 2zz mr2 swap but no one really explains how fast is a 2zz mr2.. (faster than or compare to what other cars)
Bash Trifun ...I got rid of my stock ‘09 STI hatch with 305hp. I now have a (previously 1 owner) 32k miles all stock exterior; ‘
2001 blue Spyder that came with 6spd tranny, headers, 2ZZ AND a Rotrex supercharger that the 1st owner had planned to race only(no Cat Convert). Dyno paperwork says it’s good for 294 Hp. I am now at the 6 month mark of familiarizing myself with how to drive it and I know not to mess with even a stock WRX. Maybe it’s me or I need to take it to a tuner shop, but I doubt that I am breaking 5 seconds before hitting 60. It’s blast on curves, but every stoplight opportunity has me quietly wishing I had a Toy V6, because 0-60 in 3.5 sounds more like it! Not to mention the reliability of a more modern higher displacement engine that would be easy to add a few more ponies. Oh ...and the previous owner had to buy another Supercharger ($3k)just prior to the sale because apparently they have a high failure rate.
I've changed just about everything on mine and it is now an awesome car. 😁😁
+SpyderLEE Nice.
Lee, why does everybody go with the 2zz / turbo.... given the weight / restricted space, I'm sure a nice little supercharger would work better than a turbo and although not as much outright power, it should give some nice returns and keep similar driving dynamics with the progressive delivery.... but nobody seems to do them?!?
love your spyder! one of the best ive seen.
Chris Ralphs I see quite a few supercharger 2zz's but never really the 1zz. Not sure why as it would be nice to drive. The 2zz is the better engine though. I've stayed 1zz, as soon I'm going to build a spare engine and go for big power.
SpyderLEE Nice. Keep me updated.
In addition to your list, here's my 3 reasons:
1.) Competition did not improve the breed. Toyota tried to out-Miata the Miata, but on a shoestring budget. Miata was basically the sole competitor in a dying segment.
2.) Lack of commitment in marketing. Did you EVER see a commercial or an ad for the car?
3.) A new player changed the game! S2000 came out around the same time and completely overshadowed the Spyder.
+Alex Becker #TRUTH
Bad marketing... the sad truth
Also true. I think Toyota was using the sales results from the MK1 GTI as a base to mold this car. "If we take an economy car, change the styling, and give it 15%-20% more power, we'll have a sales leader." Sadly, they forgot to bump the power... and the 2000s automotive world was a total NUMBERS GAME. Miata pulled the grandfathering card and was mostly exempt from that, but new faces had to play by the new rules. And the MR2 Spyder was too much of a departure from the SW20 to retain many previous MR2 customers; at the same time, it wasn't enticing enough to convince new ones, either.
Yeah sucks.. it was pretty much s2000 vs MR-S vs NB Miata. The s2000 beat all these cars stock easily. Better suspension, better engine, etc, but with money modified to each car. The 1.8l Miata in this day and age has supercharger and turbocharger kits that bring it well over s2000s 220hp. Swapping the MR-S 1zz for a supercharged 2zz from the lotus Exige gives the MR-S 240hp making it actually superior to the s2000 being 600lbs lighter. I bought an MR-S recently just to challenge the s2000s on the track. Love this car
Adding more power makes a world of difference in this car. I did the 2zz swap and it is a blast to drive.
Good to hear your experience.
Or you could just own a proper turbocharged MR2 with T-Tops and have more fun?
StarkReality how much did you spend to get a 2zz in your spyder
Neg Ative except the turbo charged mk2’s sell for 10-20k used with lots of work needed . An mk3 can be had for 2000$ then the swap is about 3500 more assuming you do the installing yourself. You get a bad ass car for 5500
Raevenswood
Just bought two turbo MKIIs for $3k. Put the good parts all one car, the shit parts on the other, sold it and made $1k back for the rolling shell. Put that $1k plus another into my car and BINGO - nearly perfect restoration for $4k (Tho the paint could be better)
There are many huge Spyder owners' clubs in many countries. There is nothing "failed" about that!
just like there are many lamborghini clubs who all circle jerk and park next to each other every sunday for coffee. it doesn't make it a success.
As you say, the car wasn't designed for racing, the name is a bit of a giveaway, 'Runabout'. The car also wasn't designed to "out-Miata the Miata", it was a continution of a series that goes back to the 80s. The designer of the Spyder has said that his inspiration for the car was the Formula 2 racing cars, and that was obvious in the first model in 2001, the different sized wheels, lighter weight, electronic clutch and flappy paddles, etc. But he wanted to build a cheap to build, cheap to run, FUN CAR TO DRIVE. The main reason the car failed here in Australia was the weak Aussie dollar against the strong Yen and the fact that it then qualified as a 'luxury' car and attracted even more tax, which made it unaffordable new.
+PortMacOnline Good to know from your experience.
AS you may have guessed, I am a 2001 MR2 Spyder owner and fanboy! :-)
PortMacOnline 😁
This is such an amazing car, even in stock format! It's so easy to sling around corners and steer on the throttle... it's essentially a budget Boxster, but on a quarter of the budget (initial outlay and insurance!!)... just keep it on stock wheel and tyre sized and it's so much fun - anybody who put it on wider tyres and 17" wheels is completely missing the point.
Cost: I was being quoted £1200 a year to insure a Boxster and my 2007 MR2 (last of the facelift Mk3's to be registered) was £12k, more like £15k for a 987.2... I picked my MR2 up for effectively £4000 (after I'd added 4 new Yoko AD08R's)...
+Chris Ralphs #TRUTH
+Chris Ralphs Nice
This car is hardly as good as a Boxster. Especially a Boxster S which you can buy pretty well right now.
The Boxster has likely bottomed out on value as it won't drop any further.
The MR2 will keep dropping.
You failed to realise that it didn't fail at all dude.
Why did it stop production then?
@@PLK123 I would recomend watching "Regular Car Reviews: 2000 Toyota MR2 ZZW30" it will explain allot and overall give the car more of an honest review imo
Naj it really did they're bags of shit.
@@hackedsubtoeqrez8998 Or buy one and see for yourself how shit they are.
@@crunchtimeasmr67 It's usually someone who's never owned one who would say that.
As an mr-2 Spyder owner .. I can tell you the reason it failed was marketing .
The Miata has similar specs .. I do believe the interior had something to do with it as well .
The Miata had the classic Euro layout , why the Spyder was .. well Japanese
Skylin Megas Good to know. As a few other commenters have noted below also. I was more focused on the performance side of things.
Pretty accurate review, but it isn't the second generation MR2 - it's the third generation.
Michael Davidson he said third generation... did you watch the video?
@@jimmytran5328 0:55
He means that this car is the face-lift (second version) of the third model of the MR2. He correctly referred to the Roadster as the third version of the MR2 at the end of the video so he clearly knows what he's talking about.
I like this style of review/format! keep up the good work man!
07wrxtr1 Thanks for the feedback!
i just got mine and i dont regret it.
Is it a good first car?
I think the roll bar is a good point but the Miata’s of the same year didnt have roll bars either, the only Japanese roadster to have one at that time was the s2000
This solidified my decision! I absolutely love this car saving all my money from here on out
Hope you got it,great car
Idiot you regretted it yet
@@crunchtimeasmr67 these are amazing cars so stfu you probs drive a piece of shit
@@lewbickerton3188 if you think these are amazing it's you that drives a piece of shit 😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡. I won't embarrass you with what I drive. You wouldn't belive me anyway. Keep failing 👍
@@crunchtimeasmr67 please tell me what you drive. You probs think its good but it would be shit since you clearly have no sense
Actually the mr2s is way batter car then a mx5. Theres a special way to drive the mr2 hard... i owned every mr2 there is and to me is one of the best cheap sports car ever... YES, the mrs suspension needs improvements big time and also need wider tires. But other than that is a very very good car..
Isn't the Miata suspension architecture way better and then the aftermarket support is bigger. There are potentially many more engine options possible in the Miata easier.
Totally disagree. The mx5 is better in every aspect.
@@alansmilealot yes miata is all round way better. Its not even an argument.
@@crunchtimeasmr67 also the miata online community is way bigger, there are ones per city, miata.net, miataturbo and so on. mr2 community is dying
@@alansmilealot very true, there is a huge miata/mx5 community
I hope in the future Toyota bring back the MR2
samory wilson as an SUV crossover
oh my god I hope not
samory wilson maybe with pop-up headlights?
...........One can only dream........
It will only end up being a tall Yaris or prius with too few cylinders, too few horses, and more ground clearance than a Jeep. Some people need firing at Toyota, the EPA, Safety Nazis, and lawyers first. Just make it fun and come with a waiver, Dodge can do it. My proof it would suck, the new Supra, no mtx or Toyota engine.
I'd like for Toyota to leave the MR2 in the past, as I fear what they'd produce now would only disappoint.
Thanks for your review, and I cannot but agree with your appraisal. However, as a 60+ years cautious driver a little less than 140 horses under my right foot, that is enough for me in this little GoKart with doors and fenders. The rarity value coupled to Toyota reliability makes this fun little convertible an alternative to the ubiquitous MX5 (which is a great car). Big downer, no luggage space, only room for a toothbrush and a change of underwear.
+Tony Freegard Nice to hear your perspective.
Tony, the 1zz is a little torquier than the 2zz at low-mid rpm. Surely better to have that on a road car.. 2zz's need to be thrashed to benefit from the extra power, so wether it's better or not depends upon driving style I guess.. In the UK not many roads with the space to open up to ridiculously high 6-8k rpm power band..
Toyota has made some serious blunders since they discontinued the Supra. They sold their souls in favour of market share. Now all they have are bland mass market cars.
+Jeremiah P #TRUTH
@Thomas Headley sports cars allow engineers to push boundaries and exercise their mechanical understanding. without sports cars in your company, your product becomes weak on frail hollow bones. You NEED to be able to implement a higher understanding of performance to have a superior pedestrian product.
@Thomas Headley Sounds like GM philosophy. But you'd still be wrong on the technological front. You might not keep up with Motorsport, but car manufacturers are in it full swing. even the ones who you might have never seen a single sports car from in awhile. trickle down technology is heavily used and relied upon to meet ever tightening standards. even more so today than ever in the 90s. lots of A to B cars utilizing underbody aerodynamics, diffusers, lift reduction. decreased frontal area and drag coefficients in our crap mobiles running circles around even decade old purpose built racecars. The body design on some of these pedestrian vehicles - if fitted with the power - would be much more stable well in excess of 200mph than the cars that were meant to do it in the early 90s. regular cars have dual, 4, and 6 piston calipers with ceramic pads as standard. and things keep getting faster and better as the expectations of regulations increase. Yes race/performance stuff. because it is these things in and of it's very essence that sports cars were MADE to be and do; be the BEST at moving through a space in the least amount of time.
@Thomas Headley And before you mention the bean counters, that's even more of a reason the engineers need to come up with mind-bending tech. because half the battle is releasing a new design that surpasses an older product in performance, AND does it cheaper. right now, with small displacement turbo engines (nothing new, japan already figured this out.) you get a give and take of reliability and performance greater per liter than larger engines. but as time goes by they will either get that polished, greatly reduce the cost of vehicles, or supersede ICE entirely as EVs are starting to show.
@Thomas Headley ??? are you even listening? you simply can't compare the driving forces of military needs and airplanes to the driving forces behind personal vehicle development, the entire structure as high and far as the arms race down to the commercial marketing is entirely different.
SUVs and sub compacts are BOTH using more and more technology taken and developed in and originally FOR racing. I'll say it again, racing - in it's essence - is a pursuit of creating the best transport and all that it implies with battling physics on earth. this DIRECTLY gets looked towards for everyday car development. Cars need to be LIGHTER, they need to be SAFER, they need to get better MPG while being more POWERFUL. Materials like aluminium, carbon fiber, shit even the monococue design itself! All solutions found in RACING because they already did what needed to be done. Obviously they aren't putting high compression 2 liter 1000hp 4 bangers into cars, but thats not looking at the whole picture. With that said, the cheaper the car, the less they care to implement, but the wider the production, the more common knowledge gets implemented from the get go in cheaper vehicles. in case you haven't realized, Motorsport is more than just formula one and endurance racing. Everything you see from low profile tires with reduced sidewall flex and less rotational resistance to under body channels used in your so-thought "non-race tech using" SUVs and magnetic ride stability. Off road vehicles use technology trickled down from manufacturers R&D in - where??? - their off road RACING development teams where they compete. If you're stuck thinking of a Ford f150 and why it doesn't seem to fit what i'm saying, a car like that did it's own research with the sheer history laid out over 70 years. but dig deeper and you'll still find modern tech - again, developed and sought via racing - forever being implemented. Extreme mechanical demand reveals mechanical limits. They develop this so you can sit there and not think about it while you mosey around at 65mph safely for years on end in all conditions better and better. The cars they currently make from India and maybe even lower "they dgaf" models like the 10,000 dollar mitsubishi mirage being sold are the exception. NOT the norm. and the survivability of said cars in a crash/let alone their ability/inability to avoid one will speak this in volumes.
I like your focus on car histories and some of the forgotten models. Keep it up
Ivan Mazur Thanks! Will do.
"This is where the fun starts" Proceeds to create the most anti climatic experience. Ever.
Mr2 spyder suspension is done by lotus and kills the mx5. How do I know this my boss was senior management at Toyota for over 30 years
Nice! I have a 2zz swapped Spyder with a roll bar, 1/4 mile 14.2 @99.1 New England Drag way!
J melo Sounds like a fun car You have there.
Woo! High five fellow 2ZZ owner :D
Built a N/A Aw11 pulling those numbers 15 years ago, Very quick car that embarrassed a lot of expensive cars and V8s .
How much did it cost you to do the swap?
I have a 2001 and it looks and drives Awsome I love it!!💗💙💝💜
Get a a mazda mx5 you'll fall in love.
I forgot to sub to this channel. One of the best auto channels ever!
+GTR Wendy Thanks!
I actually got thoughts on your third reason of why it failed. The MRS Spyder uses MacPherson struts at each corner is more on _save space_ . If I have a MRS Spyder, I'll do the 2zz swap. It's my only and favourite option/choice to modify my MRS Spyder.
MacPherson was used not just because of cost, it was a packaging issue as well. Look at the 4C (macpherson rear)
Is the MR-S clutch pedal suppose to be “soft” compared to the STI? I have an 07 STI and just got an MR-S and pressing down on the clutch it feels very light, however I don’t have any grinds, no problems changing gears.
I love how this car handles I want one. I'd even keep it stock too so I could get good milage out of it. Million mile MR-S
Iv a MINT 2002 mk3 with a hardtop 30k miles will full Toyota service history from new. She may be old but she's gold 👌
You can also swap the engine for a 2GR Camry / RAV4 one for that 270+HP oomph.
Pat Woo Good to know
This was going to be my response too. Glad to know that others know about the Toyota 2GR-FE's potential. Many MR2's make 300 whp with basic boltons and a tune.
It gets better. DDPR in Sealy, TX has swapped in a built 2GR + dual stage turbo and achieved 600+ HP in this car.
Good video but left out a few key points. The MR2 Spyder had more driver room than the Miata. I'm 6' tall and had a 99 Miata. Every dimension was about 1/2" too short. I drove it for two years and finally had to give up because of back problems I was developing from the tight area. I've driven a few of the Spyders and they were very comfortable, in comparison. Handling on both was great, but the MIata had the traditional look, access, and better storage. The general public doesn't appreciate a mid-engine car design.
I think the reason why they didn't want to put 2zz in the mr2 because lotus Elise won't get there sales
I have a 2005 and I love it.
Great video, as a 3rd gen Mr2 owner I agree with a lot of things you say. I'm currently doing a K20 swap on mine! Stock is a bit under powered but you hardly notice because of the weight.
+KS Auto Nice! Keep me updated.
Its a super fun car to drive even as stock. Have had a lot of fun in mine, especially thouse nice summer days on twisting roads. The only bad thing is there is no trunk, they really screwed the pooch on that one. But yeah, Toyota thought they could compete with the Miata, that nobody ever could, so they lost, like everybody else, and pissed the original MR2 fans off in the process. Toyota raced the car i belive.
Peder Tjärnberg Yes, I recall one being raced in the GT300 class in Japan.
Corrrectamundo, went well too! In one promotion for the series, all the major competitors did a lap of the Japanese track, and the MR2 driver had to STOP and wait for the others to catch up so that they could show a 'tight finish' down the home straight.
Well I’m glad calling it a 2nd gen mr2 was just a slip at 00:57 :) I was worried you didn’t know there were 3 generations. :). Not a bad review . I’ll comment that the reason Toyota never put a 2zz in these is because that engine was already licensed to lotus for the Elise and Toyota has a non compete contract with lotus. That said the 2zz swap makes these mr2’s bad ass.
Yeah, a slip 🤣
I was aware of the contract with Lotus, but not as "non-compete". How did the GT-S get away with it?
GT Content gts was a different class couldn’t compete but an mr2 with that engine is nearly as good as a lotus
Other than lack of trunk/storage space, which wasn't mentioned in the video-- funny that a lot of the downfalls you mention are addressed in the Lotus Elise: double wishbone suspension, roll bar, Toyota/Yamaha 2ZZGE engine (w/supercharged option)... Too bad the 3rd generation MR2 is the most unloved generation, but the handling/weight is the best of all 3 gens-- it had so much potential... [I have owned all 3 generations of MR2s plus a Lotus Exige S]
The hydralic SMT trans is known to quit. I own one. ZZ1 engine life is 125,000 miles from what Ive read. Although it has its ploblems it is enherntly even more rare becuase of care required. This car with its Mcphearson suspension can be tuned to be a Touge winning when going against tuned S2000s, Civics, BMWs, GTRs, Supras
A few things worth pointing out:
- My guess as to why Toyota did not include a roll over bar is due to the car's very low center of gravity. On a track, it would be very difficult to roll this car.
- You should have mentioned that the car has provisions for aftermarket chassis bracing built in to the frame. Just adding the front, rear and mid braces changes the car a lot.
- The decision to go with MacPherson struts was most likely due to the increase in cabin space over double wishbone, which would have made it smaller like a Miata.
Otherwise, good video. I own a 2ZZ MR-S myself and with a long list of suspension mods it can hold its own with the best of them. If you go search for Best Motoring videos featuring this car, you'll see that it was a solid performer out of the box and especially modified, it just came out a little too soon for its own good and stubbornly remained a monospec car in the face of evolving competition.
I agree with your points. My guess with the no roll over bar is due to weight and costs. I'd assume Toyota is expecting buyers to add them in if needed, hence you're mentioning of provisions for it (I'd agree it would stiffen the car up nicely). I'm not sure if any tracks would allow an MR2 Spyder on since it doesn't have a rollover bar standard because that would be a liability issue if something happened. Let me know if you were able to without one.
Yes, McPherson is simpler, cheaper$ and easier to package compared to independent/double wishbone which allow more leg space, but wouldn't be inferior but only at the highest level of competition. (I'd think the MR2's weight and engine layout plays a nice role in how the car's able to function well without being independent.
Sounds like a very nice car you have there. Not doubting the MR2's performance as it has a lot of potential.
Surely the windscreen acts as a rollover? I can't believe they would have been allowed to sell the car without strenghening the screen so that it could support the weight?
@@MrPro10 It does, doing your best not to roll a soft topped car is your best bet tho lol
Not a single "um" or "er" in your unscripted narration. Beautifully done.
+Thomas Corfield Thanks!
It definitely needed more power. I did the 2zz swap + had it stroked to 2.0liters.
+Angel Serrano Nice!
I really like your content and have been subscribed since you had 5k. Can't wait to see you get huge and keep the good stuff coming!
Thank you! (Fingers crossed)
Finally a Balanced and Decent review of this often misunderstood Toyota!
I've had so many offers to buy mine I've lost count. But nothing ever breaks, so I'm keeping it.
Had my 2001 (black/tan top ) since 2002 with an initial 12k miles.. now 85k miles (garaged 6-9 mos a year up until 2018.. drive as a dsily mainly due to how fuel fficient it is.. biggest draw back is during rain, i keep it under 60 mph and maintain distance and complete and total awareness..
i own 1, and find it is perfect: 1. ok for normal road driving, since power is higher up rev range. 2. perfect for high speed, since poweris at higher rev range needed for overtaking. so I can drive sedate like any small car in local roads and like a supercar on highways.
also the fuel economy is good for local driving, as it drives like a small car. toyota's claim a best of worlds is achieved, a perfect little car. if it had all the things you suggest, it would be expensive to run and insure also.
I bought mine 2nd hand; yr 2000, the previous owner had converted it from SMT to 5speed manual.(ZZW30/1ZZ) is it possible to swap again with Celica 2ZZ. Or is it adequate enough if just for fun crusing
Still have mine and I still love it.
Plan to be competitive? install 2zzge + 6 speed transmission with LSD; competition achieved, Toyota reliability still retained. Glad you were aware of this option. Well rounded video.
2nd generation MR2? Damn, dude straight glossed right over the AW11, the original, the classic. You're losing some credibility right there my man...
The only part that matters about this video is the reasons why people would buy it.
It's quite underrated, even with the 1ZZ, since it's not meant to be fast. It's a cornering car, take it to the mountain pass and you'll see how good it is. I also think Toyota didn't put the 2ZZ in because people would literally kill themselves from not knowing how to control the power in a rear engine car.
I recall something about the 2ZZ being saved for the Lotus at the time. Not definite on this as it was some time ago, so fact check to confirm.
Agreed, the MR-S has more than sufficient engine power for its intended purpose, especially with its great power to weight ratio.
You have some recommendation about the power, but did not mention how to improve the suspension and reduce body roll. What is your opinions/suggestions of that?
+Zixiao Zhao The suspension is ok stock as you'll only notice it's weakness in competition. But to improve it, I'd suggest the below.
To improve handling: Coilovers/Better spring and shock combination. Lighter wheels and stickier tires.
To improve torsional rigidity: Larger front and rear anti-roll bar.
To increase stiffness: Roll bar/rollcage, strut tower bracing
I have always thought those were sweet little cars. A couple grand in mods and it will be a fun great car. Great video keep making great content!
Anthony Hodgson Thanks!
Would’ve loved to throw a 2GR V6 in mine if I still had it. All the power in the world couldn’t make me comfortably fit in it, though.
Best handling car on earth for 1000 sterling, did 10:20 a Nurburgring, fully laden with passengers and boxes of wine we bought in France.
This is an old video i know, but here are my (long) thoughts on it anyways.
Concerning your #1 point on drawbacks: First of all Mcphereson struts are independent too, not just double wishbones and multilink. On the front its a traditional A arm + strut tuned quite well from factory, nothing wrong with it, porsche used mcphereson struts in the front for a long time and other high performance cars still ise it as well. On the rear there was no space for a double wishbone due to the transversal engine layout so its 3 links + a strut(a multilink has at least 4 links or more so thats why its called only a mcphereson). The geometry on the rear is actually pretty good thanks to the long rods. The reason mcpheresons have a bad reputation is because they are often used in fwd cars, where you have to make space for both the driveshafts and steering. This results in bad geometry with short control arms and sometimes different left and right side geometry. I'm not saying a double wishbone wouldn't be better but the suspension isn't as much of a handicap as you make it out to be. Only problem with the suspension is that from factory the spyder's rear sway bars and springs are a bit too soft which makes the car less snappy but it holds it back somewhat.
On #2 you are 100% right
#3: mx-5s have no rollover bars either(there is a factory option but its only for looks, it doesnt do anything) but they are still tracked. Nothing stops you from welding one into the spyder either. I think the reason you dont see them on track is
1: they are rare so even if an owner takes it to the track only a handful of people see it.
2: Weaker aftermarket support. If you dont have a wide selection of racing parts its going to be harder to build it for track.
In slalom(or autocross in murica) they are very competitive, they outturn cars they souldn't be able to(like and S2K).
About Toyota reliability: the 1zz was meant for a corolla where you drive it below 3000 rpm most of the time so in the spyder, where people rev the shit out of it, it isn't that reliable. The steering column - steering rack connection can also get a bit loose through the years but apart from these it's indeed Toyota reliability.
Judging by the front fog lights and facelift rear lights and sidescoops along with the seats,I'd say this was a 6 speed not 5. Also these cars DO have independent suspension at all four corners.
Wanted to point out that This is a 3rd gen, not 2nd (though you corrected it towards the end of the video). Can't forget the legendary aw11! In my opinion, I think the 3rd gen failed simply because the Miata was just absolutely stellar in it's class. The rollover bar doesn't seem necessary as the mr2 was targeted to be a fun street/daily car. The owner can always add their own cage if they really wanted to track it. Definitely agree with your 2zz comment though heheh. Dope video man :)
nice vid! love watching your vids. Im always learning alot.
+John Neth Awesome! That's what I hope to do as well as learn from other commenters too.
I believe this is the 3rd generation. 1st and 2nd generations everybody seemed to love.
If the MRS failed, it wasn't because of the product, but because of the market - Toyota made a great car that no one was looking for. The market now is all about paper-stats with big numbers... the MRS suffers a similar issue the GT86 does, small numbers on the states page aren't appealing - even if they car is the beautifully balanced, sweet handling sportscar that it is, people just wanted a big turbo to boost.
I think there is another reason entirely that caused Toyota to put the axe to this: the economic environment! I think that is the greatest factor.
MacPherson strut systems are not as sophisticated, yes, but it isn't a difference that "driver mod" can't fix. In other words, the strut system doesn't make the car so bad that you couldn't outperform the guy in the S2000 in front of you. It really depends more on the driver than anything else. It takes a lot of HP to overcome bad driving.
And therein lies a lot of the reason for unjustified criticism of the MR-S.
No, keeping mine stock, apart from cosmetic enhancements (badges and stuff), and some very sticky tyres, 138 horses is enough for me, as an over 60s cautious driver. Really, mine is a garage queen and show car. Love to park next to MX5 and MG TF's and grab all the attention!
LOl, I have a friend with an S2000 and whenever we are out and about the biggest percentage of people walk straight past the S2000 and want to know all about the MR-S
IMHO, I think this is the perfect racer car project. Suspension can be tuned already to handle bestmotoring touge challenge such as the pro spirit MRS. Techno pro also achieve the under 1 min on tsukuba TT with just a 2L NA engine. The potential is already there.
So the car truly has all the potential of lotus elise just add 300+ pounds and under 1/8 of the price. Sure double wishbone would have been over-kill but Mac-pherson is also optimal on the perfect tarmac and much lighter. Not to mention, the genius behind the design, you can literally put any FF 2L engines if you had the right resources. Top engine used to be 2zz but now people are putting K20 and 2GRFE (you can make a lighter car than lotus evora!!!)
I just think, the MRS was made ahead of its time, you can't produce MR cars this cheap and efficient. Toyota had the right recipe just didn't have enough of budget or market demand. In my opinion, the MRS would have never succeed.
I mean can you imagine the carnage on the street with MRS with 180hp stock, and most likely to be tuned to hell. The MR franchise is dead because of its liability issues with accidents, it wasn't just safe on the rain or snow. So it never had a purpose, unlike a miata whose philosophy was making the perfect roadster with "50/50" motto by design. MRS was either a roadster or race car, nothing conventional for the consumer market.
MRS was a double edge sword, the potential is still there but I honestly believe it just too dangerous to put too much power on the MRS for average drivers. It would have been a decent track car had it come out with a 2zz or supercharger-package. Maybe toyota didn't want to ruin their partnership with Lotus as their engine supplier. I mean, people would have just bough a 2zz MRS rather than a Lotus Elise, wouldn't you?
Mid engine budget car, for daily and fun. If you want sth strong buy Z4, mr2 gives a little fun with acceptable fuel economy and looks better live then on pics. I think that for any trackdays , best solution to make it more agile is weight reduction and i/h/e, any turbo kit make it more thirsty and it's not the way.
You can get as much luggage into a touring motorcycle as an MR2 Roadster. The MX5 (Miata) wins hands down on that score and that is probably a factor in new car sales.
They make a lot more sense on tight/twisting European roads than they would on the vast expanses of American blacktop in my view. I've driven one through the Swiss Alps and can think of few unmodified and affordable cars that would be more enjoyable on that sort of road.
Tight twisting roads is where the MR-S excels. In 14 years of ownership the next time I am caught up by, or worse, passed, by any other vehicle on a tight twisting road will be the first time lol
It’s perfect as is. Performance for street needs like braking and handling, with good MPG
Total agreement, especially the MPG.
Its literally a better, mid engined miata. Lighter, wider wheel base, and cooler
But does it come with a bumper to bumper million mile lexus warranty
Anthony Hodgson 😂
to me there was never any match between MR2 Spyder and Miata. The MR2 steering in particular always seemed so much better to me. I've owned a stock MR2 spyder for a few years and a stock AP2 S2000 for 2 years. The S2000 is more precise, and flatter and more powerful once you get up there. But I'd argue that the MR2 in the canyons is actually more fun, more involving. The miata to my personal taste, driving wise seemed always more boring. I still have to drive an Elise tho! And I've driven an alfa 4c spyder twice and fell in love with it, so maybe it's just time to save for that!
+Giulio Carmassi Interesting experience.
Came here expecting to be offended, but, these were actually very decent points. Though I would have added a negitive in regards to practicallity. Atleast the SW20 had a rear boot. It's so hard to do grocery shopping with a Spyder.
The MR-S was never ever designed to be a daily runner and would be totally impractical as such. In saying that how much space do you need in a car for your daily supplies from the super market!
The Mrs improves its handling at the cost of power. Also it's rare to see one in games too
this car fail because is ugly and dosnt look a real Mr2 from '90, Miata is sexy, good looking car
I'll play devil's advocate on the double wishbone suspension issue. DW is often used on the rear wheels and is more complicated for front wheel drive cars. Since the MR2 spyder has the trans axle in the back, then it would be much more complicated to include DW suspension, just like a FWD car but even worse because the exhaust is also there. On top of that, it's not needed to keep the wheels on the ground because the Spyder has the engine on top of the rear suspension, with all that weight on the back, it has no problem keeping the wheels on the ground. So DW could be implemented in the front only but this would also increase the overall weight of the car and the cost. So IMO the MR2 Spyder doesn't benefit as much from a Double Wishbone suspension due to its configuration. Would it be nice to have? yea, but due to the increase weight, complexity, and cost vs the small benefits, I think Toyota didn't make a mistake not including them.
BTW you can still adjust toe/camber by buying adjustable arms. Also I would advise to invest on good coilovers and bracing anyways. Good coilovers will have no trouble keeping wheels on the ground just the same.
I LOVE mine is dark green. The reason it failed was beacause of the very weak engine 1ZZ when Toyota had the 2ZZ on hand. The reason this happened is because Toyota made a deal with Lotus to use the 2ZZ in the exige/elise. So if Toyota put the 2ZZ on the spyder it would be extremely close to the Lotus for 1/3rd the cost. Toyota also made a couple more mistakes (That are easily fixable) like the pre-cat issue, Not including the hard roof in America, and no sports options like LSD or body kit to help with the roundish look. Another reason it failed is because the Spyder is a succesor to the MK1 not the SW20 (MK2) and a lot of MR2 fans didn't like that. For me I'm more of a fan of the light weight MK1 than the MK2 and I owned both.
TL;DR Toyota F*ed up some things but they're fixable with some mods. This is an excellent sports car, light weight, economic, with an unique configuration. I think a lot of people are sleeping on this car.
Take a 2ZZ MR2 Spyder for a drive then review it
I wonder if you could swap the suspension for a double wishbone
Honest review. They are a blast to drive. Love mine. Spent a load on it. Love the Lancia Stratos and original Lotus Europa so got this. Cheap, reliable and relatively rare. Too many MX5's in the world. Yawn.
Neill Brierley I got one because I was lusting after the Europa as well, and the Porsche 914
Good man. Just checked out the 914. It looks awesome. We have great taste lol.
keep up the good work man
samory wilson Thanks!
Spot on review. The Miata is a better roadster. Still, this car has so many great features
Because of how light it is, I wanna try seeing if I could mod the DDR miami body kit on it... An tuned MRS with a beastly 2GR could make a great supercar... We'll have to see
I have an 05 automatic and I love it.a dealership ruined the motor misdiagnosed the problem only a bad pcv valve hose and not the rear seal a bad pcv will cause seal to leak no nothing about cars.
Does celica run faster than MR2 despite running on the same 1.6cc?
Good review! One thing I noticed in the beginning of the video, however, you refer to this MRSpyder as the “2nd gen” when, in actuality, it is the 1991-1999 like my MR2 Turbo that is the 2nd gen. The 2000-2007 like the one you reviewed is the 3rd Gen.
Another short coming of the MR2 is luggage space. Especially compared to the miata. At least you can fit enough luggage in the back of the miata for a weekend getaway. The MR2 has nothing. The Pontiac Solstice with the top down is also a complete failure for luggage storage.
*I own an MR2 Spyder and here's the honest to goodness truth:*
*1. The Mazda Miata has a TRUNK. The MR2 Spyder doesn't. That's the ONLY reason why the Miata out sold it.*
(It may not sound like much, but not having a trunk is a deal breaker for MOST buyers.)
*2. The Toyota MR2 Spyder is the only car to ever "out-Miata" the Miata... meaning it was more of a Miata than the Miata was.*
(The MR2 Spyder was lighter, had better handling, and had better acceleration, all on regular gasoline. Considering it sold for the same price as the Miata, it was the better sports car of the two.)
*3. You actually can put the engine from the Celica GTS into the MR2 Spyder, without any modifications* . It's almost like it was made for it..... because it was. Toyota was going to put the 2ZZ (Celica GTS) engine in the MR2 Spyder in later model years to compete with the expected HP bump that the Miata would receive from Mazda. They expected a HP war between the two cars as we often see. However, sales figures dropped off steadily (see #1) and Toyota decided to pull the plug on the MR2 rather than refresh it again and upgrade the power.
And so that's what we're left with. *The MR2 Spyder remains the most affordable mid-engine sports car ever made* . It's closest competitor with the same layout is the Lotus Elise or Porsche Boxster (much more expensive cars) and only the Miata is in the same price bracket. Today, the MR2 Spyder is a highly sought-after collector's car with a much higher resale value than the Miata. A used MR2 Spyder typically sells for Elise or Boxster money now. *They are quality cars and they're extremely rare (which gives them an exotic quality to them)* . I've owned mine for years and it gets the "Ferrari treatment" wherever I go.
The NSX idiots think this car is worthless, but it is reliable and fast. Bad thing is: no pop-up headlights like the last generations.
Hello GT Content,
While not popular in the USA, the MR2/S is very race worthy.
I have a 2001 with 1zz engine that failed. It burns oil related to catalytic converter failure on exhaust manifold....So much for Toyota reliability......did not cover this KNOWN issue for owners.
Good news is I will replace with 2zz-fe engine.
P
2zz-ge
P
You forgot some wording off your title. "TOYOTA MR2 SPYDER : Why it FAILED as a competitive car :/"
I love my mr2 and it gets plenty of attention from plenty of fans and mine is pure stock.
The car is fine for what it is. Reasonable accurate review sir. Thx
I''d say it was the ugly headlights, lack of t-tops, when you drop the top the rear pillars disappear, when it's up they're not all that sharp and angular. More Porsche Boxster looking than Ferrari, so it was meh to more people. SMG was auto based right? So there was mtx and mtx which wasn't clearly understood. Why Toyota and Mazda were lusting after the hairdresser market is beyond me. There was no V6, no 4AGE, no supercharger, no awesome heritage reasons connecting to the Mk1 and Mk2. The answer to a question very few people were asking.
+PGTMR2 Good points.