Toyota MR2 roadster

tres · 2 Jun 2015 at 20:28

Is it a mistake to look at a MR2 Roadster (2000 - Mk3?) 1.8 VVT-i with 110k miles on, as an impulse buy? How are they with regards to reliability? Found a very cheap cat C (wing/suspension spring). Tempted to be impulsive.

Lopéz · 2 Jun 2015 at 20:35

Category C and the only damage is the wing and one suspension spring? That sounds extremely specific damage, was it shot with a sniper rifle?

tres · 2 Jun 2015 at 20:39

Apparently so! Possibly a panel or two more. I don't know a huge amount about cars, just found this. Seems very cheap. 12 months MOT. Should last a year, right?

robinbanks · 2 Jun 2015 at 20:59

if i remember they have problems with rust and some exhaust problem. But i would have thought the exhaust problem would have been fixed on nearly all of them. Apart from that they are good fun. Good upgrade is to put a 2zz in them

oh one other thing they don't have a boot....

sovietspybob · 2 Jun 2015 at 21:14

Can get lots of issues especially on older cars of oil problems which lead to the bores going oval and that's pretty much the end of the engine. Make sure it's not using any oil or puffing out any blue smoke.

Kaeo · 2 Jun 2015 at 21:21

Very much as above, the most important thing here is oil use. Difficulty is up to a point topping it up can keep it going for ages, but it can suddenly burn a lot and total the engine.

Fantastic cars and replacing panels etc is very easy, they just bolt on. Just very much buyer beware, in the same sort of way a cheap rx-8 can be great.

rodenal · 2 Jun 2015 at 21:29

It's fine for a few hundred quid, no more

As above the engines will eventually fail, a 2000 car isn't worth very much to start with and this one's been written off - needs to be throwaway money

For the record I really really like them, but you just need to be realistic about what you're getting into

tres · 2 Jun 2015 at 21:40

appreciated, thanks chaps.

semi-pro waster · 2 Jun 2015 at 22:20

I had a MkII for about a year and enjoyed it but the boot on it was tiny, I believe that the boot on the MkIII is even smaller so do be sure you can live with it before purchasing. I don't know if the rusting problems continued between the versions but it was certainly what killed mine as a viable car. If it's cheap and you can live with the compromises then all the best with it.

Kaeo · 2 Jun 2015 at 22:34

Mk3 has no boot, just storage compartments behind the seats. There is still an issue with the rear subframe rusting from the inside out on some cars.

Edit:- On a random note, selling mine was one of my biggest regrets

The Running Man · 3 Jun 2015 at 07:54

Great fun handling cars. Engine is gack and will kill itself and drink a lot of oil in the process.

Excellent basis for a track car if you can afford a 2zz upgrade.

Bensons · 3 Jun 2015 at 09:37

It's a Japanese car, you'll be fine. Go for it!

rodenal · 3 Jun 2015 at 17:21

Eh, no!

Evo8 · 3 Jun 2015 at 17:24

I love mine but luggage space is limited. For the record, my 06 plate doesn't suffer and will never suffer from the exhaust/cat problem and it doesn't use any oil at all.

Vix · 3 Jun 2015 at 18:14

The pre facelift cars, before 2003, were the ones with the pre-cat problem, but hey if the engine blows up you can always throw in a 2ZZ

I like mine but I just use it for posing with the roof off. They are fun to drive but certainly not the most chuckable mid engined RWD out there, and yeah there is no room for stuff. I wouldn't use it as a dedicated track car unless it was caged. But I work for a track day organiser so I've seen what uncaged convertibles look like upside down.

Saying that, why not have a bit of fun

Evo8 · 3 Jun 2015 at 18:17

Vix said:
They are fun to drive but certainly not the most chuckable mid engined RWD out there

Because you'll go through a hedge backwards. I wasn't even on the power and managed to spin mine 90 degrees in the wet.

Vix · 3 Jun 2015 at 18:21

More that they don't have the power and the suspension is too wafty. Mines never actually tried to throw me off the road yet. I'll make sure I don't try too hard though.

Kaeo · 3 Jun 2015 at 20:11

I believe the final update to the oval bore issues was in 2005, the post 2003 cars are still occasionally prone to this, though it's far less common. I had a 2003 facelift which had 0 problems, but a friends 2004 ate itself within 3 weeks of starting to burn oil.

Anyway, to answer the op properly, cheap 2000/X cars are probably a landmine.

Evo8 · 4 Jun 2015 at 16:26

Kaeo said:
I believe the final update to the oval bore issues was in 2005, the post 2003 cars are still occasionally prone to this, though it's far less common.

Correct. Mine is a 06 plate which is nice.

fastwunz · 4 Jun 2015 at 16:50

Vix said:
The pre facelift cars, before 2003, were the ones with the pre-cat problem, but hey if the engine blows up you can always throw in a 2ZZ

I like mine but I just use it for posing with the roof off. They are fun to drive but certainly not the most chuckable mid engined RWD out there, and yeah there is no room for stuff. I wouldn't use it as a dedicated track car unless it was caged. But I work for a track day organiser so I've seen what uncaged convertibles look like upside down.

Saying that, why not have a bit of fun

you dont really pose with the roof off in an Mr2 do you?