Why MR-S has only 138HP???

Why MR-S has only 138HP??? Register Help Home Forum New Posts FAQ Calendar Community Groups Reported Items Top Posters Forum Actions Mark Forums Read Quick Links Today's Posts Contribution Actions Contribute Blogs What's New? Contribute Advanced Search Forum Toyota MR2 Generations MK 3 MR2 - Spyder Why MR-S has only 138HP???
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. Page 1 of 8 12345678 Last Jump to page: Results 1 to 20 of 149 Thread: Why MR-S has only 138HP??? Thread Tools Show Printable Version Display Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode 08-06-2006, 05:24 AM #1 1994MR2 View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries No Skills Join Date Mar 2006 Location Bay Area, CA Posts 88 Thanks  4 Thanks  0 Thanked in0 Posts Total Contributions For
1994MR2     $ 0.00 Why MR-S has only 138HP??? I am always wondering why only 138HP. Why not a 170HP VVTL-i for the NA version + a Supercharged or Turbocharged version? I meant the next generation (MR-S) should be more powerful than the previous one (MKII). Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 12:16 PM #2 Raptor13x View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Legendary Join Date Apr 2006 Location Ypsilanti, MI Posts 3,997 Thanks  7 Thanks  51 Thanked in41 Posts Total Contributions For
Raptor13x     $ 0.00 Because Toyota went lame on us. Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 12:56 PM #3 Enthalpy View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries EMS Harmonizer Join Date Feb 2006 Location Denver, CO Posts 1,228 Thanks  8 Thanks  58 Thanked in45 Posts Total Contributions For
Enthalpy     $ 0.00 There are tons of factors to which we aren't privy.

It could be regulatory, like CAFE.

It could be market analysis.

It could be engineering philosophy of a balanced setup.

The 1zz has more low-end torque. It could be that type of marketing thing.

See what I mean? Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 02:53 PM #4 Spyderwoman View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Visit Homepage wet Join Date May 2006 Location Amsterdam, The Netherlands Posts 59 Thanks  0 Thanks  0 Thanked in0 Posts Total Contributions For
Spyderwoman     $ 0.00 There is indeed an engineering philosophy of a balanced setup behind it.
They wanted it to perform both as a sporty car and a smooth driving city car. That's why they settled for this engine.

I wouldn't mind giving up some of the smooth driving for some extra power, even though I have to spend a lot of my time in traffic jams. Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 04:03 PM #5 ursoboostd View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries huh Join Date Jun 2005 Location Cincinnati area Posts 375 Thanks  4 Thanks  4 Thanked in3 Posts Total Contributions For
ursoboostd     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Raptor13x Because Toyota went lame on us. . Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 04:53 PM #6 3sgtepower View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Banned Seller Join Date Feb 2006 Posts 1,573 Thanks  6 Thanks  41 Thanked in37 Posts Total Contributions For
3sgtepower     $ 0.00 Its because Toyota hasnt sent a *real* car to america since 1997 when the MKIV Supra was discontinued. Sorry MKIII owners but when I rode in my Aunts, I felt it was underpowered. You need atleast a 10:1 lb/ft torque/weight ratio to get through day to day traffic IMO.

It also looks like it was more marketed to the cutesy wutesy Miata market of people, where the MR2 Turbo and alltrac was more like toyota's evo/wrx/silvia killer of the time. Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 06:55 PM #7 AndrewMcG View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Visit Homepage Its not lag, Its foreplay Join Date Feb 2005 Location Albuquerque Posts 756 Thanks  6 Thanks  19 Thanked in17 Posts Total Contributions For
AndrewMcG     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by 3sgtepower Its because Toyota hasnt sent a *real* car to america since 1997 when the MKIV Supra was discontinued. Sorry MKIII owners but when I rode in my Aunts, I felt it was underpowered. You need atleast a 10:1 lb/ft torque/weight ratio to get through day to day traffic IMO.

It also looks like it was more marketed to the cutesy wutesy Miata market of people, where the MR2 Turbo and alltrac was more like toyota's evo/wrx/silvia killer of the time. 10:1 ???? Just for a good daily? The stock mr2 is fairly fun to drive and has plenty of torque for "day to day traffic". It has a 14:1 ratio. The mk3 Supra actually is very close to that figure as well with 240hp and weighs about 3500lbs. Or were you talking about an NA Supra? In that case, it will feel underpowered. Hell, an NA mk1 is a tad underpowered for daily driving but it still isn't that bad and it comes in at a 20:1 ratio. Sorry, but 10:1 puts a car in a "very fun to drive" catergory for me. Still not fast, but very fun. For a mk2 mr2 to have a 10:1 ratio it would need about 250ft.lbs. of tq. at the wheels. An mr2 at that point is very fun to drive and it is a low 13 sec. car at that point. You don't need to run deep 13's to have good "day to day" torque.
Originally Posted by Weasy2k ^ Until then...welcome to the V6 "Engine Stand" club! Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 07:22 PM #8 3sgtepower View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Banned Seller Join Date Feb 2006 Posts 1,573 Thanks  6 Thanks  41 Thanked in37 Posts Total Contributions For
3sgtepower     $ 0.00 Well the cargo capacity is pretty pathetic on them. The frunk is good for holding a purse, and there isnt a trunk.

But I guess Ill change my viewpoint and admit that your right in that 10:1 lb ft torque to lb ratio is excessive for a daily driver. Reply With Quote 08-06-2006, 07:24 PM #9 Raptor13x View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Legendary Join Date Apr 2006 Location Ypsilanti, MI Posts 3,997 Thanks  7 Thanks  51 Thanked in41 Posts Total Contributions For
Raptor13x     $ 0.00 There is no such thing as too much power. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 04:37 AM #10 1994MR2 View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries No Skills Join Date Mar 2006 Location Bay Area, CA Posts 88 Thanks  4 Thanks  0 Thanked in0 Posts Total Contributions For
1994MR2     $ 0.00 The handling is excellent but will be better if it has more stock HP. I guess they wanna keep the price down. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 05:56 AM #11 Raptor13x View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Legendary Join Date Apr 2006 Location Ypsilanti, MI Posts 3,997 Thanks  7 Thanks  51 Thanked in41 Posts Total Contributions For
Raptor13x     $ 0.00 They could have easily offered two versions like they did with previous models. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 09:21 AM #12 Enthalpy View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries EMS Harmonizer Join Date Feb 2006 Location Denver, CO Posts 1,228 Thanks  8 Thanks  58 Thanked in45 Posts Total Contributions For
Enthalpy     $ 0.00 Offering two versions isn't easy. It requires a ton of engineering and manufacturing effort.

Both efforts prevent you from pursuing OTHER efforts on MORE PROFITABLE cars. It's called, "opportunity cost" and it's a huge driver (pun intended) in the car industry, as with any other. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 01:29 PM #13 Raptor13x View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Legendary Join Date Apr 2006 Location Ypsilanti, MI Posts 3,997 Thanks  7 Thanks  51 Thanked in41 Posts Total Contributions For
Raptor13x     $ 0.00 With how similar the 140hp engine is with the 180hp engine, it wouldn't have taken much engineering effort to offer both. Besides, both engines are already offered in the Celica. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 02:10 PM #14 Mach2 View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Flame Retardant Join Date Jan 2006 Location Texas Posts 746 Thanks  59 Thanks  7 Thanked in7 Posts Total Contributions For
Mach2     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Raptor13x With how similar the 140hp engine is with the 180hp engine, it wouldn't have taken much engineering effort to offer both. Besides, both engines are already offered in the Celica. +1

I will say this however I will write letters, complain, yell, and beg for them to bring out Challengers, R34 GTR's, 2009 Supras, and Shelby gt500's. Then they make em' & come up to me and be like so which one do you want? And I be like "are you crazy ?!? I cant afford the SChit!"
My point it is that it would be grea if they did these things, but I do beleive they lose money on so many performance ventures they dont want to really get into it.

I can hear em in the showroom now, " Where do you want all these Yaris's? " " SIGH* Just put em over there by the corollas..."

I beleive 2/3rds of the automotive world may be behind me on that one.. Last edited by Mach2; 08-07-2006 at 02:33 PM. I no longer own either of the cars in my signature lol

Originally Posted by Gairloch : once is an incident, twice is coincidence and three times is a pattern. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 03:50 PM #15 Mekkahfire View Profile View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Visit Homepage Gone But Not Forgotten Join Date Mar 2005 Location Westerville OH Posts 1,351 Thanks  9 Thanks  4 Thanked in4 Posts Total Contributions For
Mekkahfire     $ 0.00 How would a Celica GT-S motor hurt the cars "smoothness" in any way, shape, or form? www.DJKiddquikk.com - www.myspace.com/chrisschnell

Originally Posted by PETC Trust me, it's so much easier just to put (spy cams) in the bathroom. I've already got a plan. Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 06:08 PM #16 aQuarius26 View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Visit Homepage Cage Fighter Join Date Aug 2005 Location DENVER @5280ft. Posts 152 Thanks  1 Thanks  1 Thanked in1 Post Total Contributions For
aQuarius26     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Enthalpy It could be engineering philosophy of a balanced setup. Weather or not its true... Id have to say Im glad there isnt more stock HP. Then the great Power:Weight ratio would be skewed...

Originally Posted by 3sgtepower Sorry MKIII owners but when I rode in my Aunts, I felt it was underpowered. Rode in?... You should have driven... and actually takin it through some twisties yoruself... Then see what you think... Still underpowered? Maybe for your tastes, but you'll be amazed and have a grin on your face the whole time...

In the end it all depends on what your goal is... I personally like a well balanced car, and prefer spirited mountain drives... So for my preference, with money as a realistic factor, this car is as good as it gets.

Besides, you've always got the option of swapping the 2ZZ from a Celica GT-S, gaining 40hp, and retaining stock reliability with relative ease and a fair price. Last edited by aQuarius26; 08-07-2006 at 06:20 PM. MY MR-S '02 MR-S
www.RMMOC.com Rocky Mountain MR2 Owners Club
Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 07:29 PM #17 Raptor13x View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Legendary Join Date Apr 2006 Location Ypsilanti, MI Posts 3,997 Thanks  7 Thanks  51 Thanked in41 Posts Total Contributions For
Raptor13x     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Mekkahfire How would a Celica GT-S motor hurt the cars "smoothness" in any way, shape, or form? It was a good enough motor for the Lotus Elise... Reply With Quote 08-07-2006, 08:53 PM #18 Mekkahfire View Profile View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Visit Homepage Gone But Not Forgotten Join Date Mar 2005 Location Westerville OH Posts 1,351 Thanks  9 Thanks  4 Thanked in4 Posts Total Contributions For
Mekkahfire     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Raptor13x It was a good enough motor for the Lotus Elise... QFT. www.DJKiddquikk.com - www.myspace.com/chrisschnell

Originally Posted by PETC Trust me, it's so much easier just to put (spy cams) in the bathroom. I've already got a plan. Reply With Quote 08-10-2006, 12:46 PM #19 Just Wong It View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries Visit Homepage Toyota Join Date Feb 2005 Location Atlanta,Ga Posts 1,403 Thanks  8 Thanks  17 Thanked in10 Posts Total Contributions For
Just Wong It     $ 0.00 so this car is pretty much balanced out right? for hp and its weight? Reply With Quote 08-10-2006, 01:24 PM #20 Enthalpy View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message View Blog Entries EMS Harmonizer Join Date Feb 2006 Location Denver, CO Posts 1,228 Thanks  8 Thanks  58 Thanked in45 Posts Total Contributions For
Enthalpy     $ 0.00 Originally Posted by Raptor13x With how similar the 140hp engine is with the 180hp engine, it wouldn't have taken much engineering effort to offer both. Besides, both engines are already offered in the Celica. You are definitely not an engineer, nor do you know how involved it is to do this. You can't simply swap an engine in. There's a lot involved, including reserving factory time to do this. That time could be better used producing other engine options for more profitable cars.

I am a professional Mechanical Engineer, and I admit I have no idea what it takes to offer different engine options. Reply With Quote Page 1 of 8 12345678 Last Jump to page: « Previous Thread | Next Thread » Posting Permissions You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off

Forum Rules

-- BlueSteel -- vB4 Default Style -- Default Mobile Style Contact Us Toyota MR2 Message Board Archive Top All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32 PM. Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2004-2017 - East Coast Imports, LLC vBulletin Skins by Bluepearl Skins