Mitsibushi GTO/GT3000 Twin Turbo

[TW]Fox;16586508 said:
1997 Golf GTI 2.0:

150bhp, 1100kg (Very light? Wow, is it really this light?) 0-60 8.0 seconds.
Click to expand...

That can't be right, there wasn't a 2.0L Golf with 150bhp in 1997 was there? (only the 115bhp slug) It would have been a 1.8T, either 1203kg or 1238kg depending on the number of doors. The properly lardy ones were the R32's at >1400kg.
 
Dogbreath said:
That can't be right, there wasn't a 2.0L Golf with 150bhp in 1997 was there? (only the 115bhp slug) It would have been a 1.8T, either 1203kg or 1238kg depending on the number of doors. The properly lardy ones were the R32's at >1400kg.
Click to expand...

1997 is the end of the Mk3. You are thinking of 1998's Mk4.

The Mk3 Golf GTI 16v had a 2 litre engine developing 150bhp.
 
[TW]Fox;16585879 said:
Because its a Supra. The GTO is unloved and is simply another generic Japanese coupe. The Supra is iconic - probably undeservedly so but you could spend a load of time and effort fiddling with a Supra and it would just seem... more worth it, somehow.
Click to expand...

Mitsubishi fanboyisms aside (as I don't really like any other Mitsubishi other than the Evo's), I'd disagree with it being unloved. They do have a niche following, but they simply didn't sell as much in the first place.

The running costs were higher and it had a higher list price than the Supra.

It's a very quick capable car with lots of toys for its age. But its has a complex 4WD system which is expensive to maintain. Engine is very capable, but it's no 2J-to-the-izzo.

What you have to remember is that they were both £50k motors in their day, and so their running costs now will be indicative of that.

Tuning wise, the transfer box is the weak point on the GTO.

I love everything about the Supra except the looks. If it looked like the GTO it would be a no brainer for me.

If you've hankered for a GTO then go for it. But the age old recommendation applies - drive both and buy the one that suits you best.
 
Get the GTO MR 6 speed
That way you don't have to worry about the active aero's, ecs suspension, adjustable exhaust and 4ws. The 6speed is the stronger box, watch out for 2nd gear crunch, quite normal and i've been quoted ~£500 to get sorted inc parts and labour.

That rules out 75% of the usual issues you get with these cars. + it looses quite a few pounds to the point were its not that bad weight wise (considering!).

Running costs, well i get 250miles to a tank. There are plenty of these cars being broken so spare parts are a plenty, and not that expensive if you know were to look. If your ok with a spanner and can follow a workshop manual they are not that hard to work on either!

Heres mine

34242664.jpg


Personally i think it looks as good as the supra, but without the scene tax (surely that bubble has to burst at some point!)
 
LizardKing said:
Get the GTO MR 6 speed
That way you don't have to worry about the active aero's, ecs suspension, adjustable exhaust and 4ws. The 6speed is the stronger box, watch out for 2nd gear crunch, quite normal and i've been quoted ~£500 to get sorted inc parts and labour.

That rules out 75% of the usual issues you get with these cars. + it looses quite a few pounds to the point were its not that bad weight wise (considering!).

Running costs, well i get 250miles to a tank. There are plenty of these cars being broken so spare parts are a plenty, and not that expensive if you know were to look. If your ok with a spanner and can follow a workshop manual they are not that hard to work on either!

Heres mine

34242664.jpg


Personally i think it looks as good as the supra, but without the scene tax (surely that bubble has to burst at some point!)
Click to expand...

Supra are expensive (realtively anyway) because they are awesome, not because of scene tax. Engine and drivetrain in them are seemingly indestructible, quality way beyond any offering from Mitsi, Nissan, Subaru...

jellybeard999 said:
Those lights don't do you any favours though ;)
Click to expand...

Standard ones :/ Don't like the facelift ones, they have mk5 Fiesta syndrome in that the front and rear ends look like they are from different generations and just stuck together.
 
Clarkey said:
Supra are expensive (realtively anyway) because they are awesome, not because of scene tax. Engine and drivetrain in them are seemingly indestructible, quality way beyond any offering from Mitsi, Nissan, Subaru...
.
Click to expand...

I never questioned there engineering ;) you cant deny they dont suffer from a scene tax, very few 12-15year old cars can command similar prices to a supra turbo manual.

The MkII lights are very marmite i agree :), but they do look a lot better in the flesh.
 
Clarkey said:
Supra are expensive (realtively anyway) because they are awesome, not because of scene tax. Engine and drivetrain in them are seemingly indestructible, quality way beyond any offering from Mitsi, Nissan, Subaru...
Click to expand...

If this is the case please explain to me why cars that share many of these "seemingly indestructible" components with the MKIV are comparatively worth bugger all?

Soarer - Same Chassis, nearly identical suspension setup (slightly stiffer springs to deal with slightly more weight), same brakes as a JDM Supra, etc. The TT Soarer doesn't have the same engine found in the TT Supra, but they are very closely related and is a brilliant engine in it's own right. A good Automatic Twin Turbo Soarer will set you back £1,500 - £2,000, while I doubt you'll find a Automatic Twin Turbo Supra worth looking at for less than £5,000...

And in the case of the 3.0 NA Soarer things are even closer. Mechanically the car is nearly identical to an Automatic N/A Supra. Same engine, same gearbox plus the similarities as mentioned above (baring brakes, which are SLIGHTLY smaller IIRC)). People struggle to get a grand for tidy looking 3.0 Soarers, whilst you'd be fighting chavs away with a stick if you advertised a shabby NA/Auto MKIV Supra for £2,500.

Aristos - A part from a few minor differences, it is exactly the same engine you'll find in a TT Supra which is one of the Supra's biggest selling points without a doubt. The going rate for a MK1 Aristo is £1,500-£2,000, and as mentioned you're looking at £5,000+ for a Auto TT Supra.

I seriously can't see anything else that justifies Supra prices other than good old scene tax.
 
Joshy said:
If this is the case please explain to me why cars that share many of these "seemingly indestructible" components with the MKIV are comparatively worth bugger all?

Soarer - Same Chassis, nearly identical suspension setup (slightly stiffer springs to deal with slightly more weight), same brakes as a JDM Supra, etc. The TT Soarer doesn't have the same engine found in the TT Supra, but they are very closely related and is a brilliant engine in it's own right. A good Automatic Twin Turbo Soarer will set you back £1,500 - £2,000, while I doubt you'll find a Automatic Twin Turbo Supra worth looking at for less than £5,000...

And in the case of the 3.0 NA Soarer things are even closer. Mechanically the car is nearly identical to an Automatic N/A Supra. Same engine, same gearbox plus the similarities as mentioned above (baring brakes, which are SLIGHTLY smaller IIRC)). People struggle to get a grand for tidy looking 3.0 Soarers, whilst you'd be fighting chavs away with a stick if you advertised a shabby NA/Auto MKIV Supra for £2,500.

Aristos - A part from a few minor differences, it is exactly the same engine you'll find in a TT Supra which is one of the Supra's biggest selling points without a doubt. The going rate for a MK1 Aristo is £1,500-£2,000, and as mentioned you're looking at £5,000+ for a Auto TT Supra.

I seriously can't see anything else that justifies Supra prices other than good old scene tax.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what are you on about? The package I'm on about is clearly the 2JZ-GTE and V160, things that the cars you mention don't have :confused:

An Aristo is a 4dr barge, cannot be compared to a proper 'sports car'.
 
Last edited:
Clarkey said:
Standard ones :/ Don't like the facelift ones, they have mk5 Fiesta syndrome in that the front and rear ends look like they are from different generations and just stuck together.
Click to expand...

Are they? They look like they've a stuck on mask :s

I thought the early ones were popup lights and the later just a solid cluster, without any body coloured parts.
 
Clarkey said:
I'm sorry, but what are you on about? The package I'm on about is clearly the 2JZ-GTE and V160, things that the cars you mention don't have :confused:
Click to expand...

What do you mean clearly? You didn't mention the 2JZGTE engine or the V160 transmission once in your post.

Anyway, that's largely irrelevant. The point of my post was to show that disproportionate values (compared to closely related cousins) apply to all MKIVs, regardless of Engine or Transmission choice.

Clarkey said:
An Aristo is a 4dr barge, cannot be compared to a proper 'sports car'.
Click to expand...

The Supra is hardly what most would call a sports car. Anyway, again that is besides the point. You claimed that the Supra prices were justified by the quality of the engine/drivetrain, which they are obviously not if you can get a car with the same engine for a fraction of the price.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;16588337 said:
Errr the engine and transmission are pretty fundamentally, it was very clear what he meant.
Click to expand...

How is it clear? Never once does he mention if he is talking about all Supras, just the manuals ones, just the Turbocharged ones, just the turbocharged manual ones, etc. Not all Supras were Six Speed TTs...

I made the assumption that he was referring to All MKIV Supras as they All carry a premium that really can't be explained by anything other than "scene tax".
 
Last edited:
Guy across the road bought one of these few weeks back lovely sound but its been badly hit with the mod ugly stick before he got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom