andyoz
pfm Member
Just had a look and it does look even tighter than my Cayman in some respects.
Surprised they kept the battery in the rear - should be in the front for balance/space surely?
Track Car Suggestions
- Thread starter andyoz
- Start date
Just had a look and it does look even tighter than my Cayman in some respects.
Surprised they kept the battery in the rear - should be in the front for balance/space surely?
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
The spare's in the front so already balanced?
Save a couple of quid on cabling to starter and alty. Makes a difference. Kaisen, remember. They invented it.
andyoz
pfm Member
Ah right, I'm sure there's a reason. I'd say many must lose the spare and move that battery or go to Li-Ion one.
andyoz
pfm Member
And wiring weight adds up fast too!
I'm always shocked at that.
My knees/legs are shot from crouching in Cayman boot half of the weekend. It's a good workout actually.
-alan-
pfm Member
The battery on that MRS is - almost - in the 'middle', ie ahead of the rear axle. Maybe there to help left-right weight distribution ? - esp for a right-hand drive version with an a big lump of meat plonked firmly right of the centreline. (Spare wheel and jack are the first things to get dumped in the paddock during a trackday btw. Couple that with a spread of anywhere from 55-110kg lump of driver on one side - and occasionally similar on the passenger seat, and precise corner weighting kind of goes out of the window 
)
The MRS's are good fun - but only ever came with the lower powered 1ZZ engine. You'd have to fit your own 2ZZ lump, or buy one already converted. Still a fair bit heavier than the Elise though, and of course without the super stiff chassis and everywhichway adjustable fancy suspension ..
)The MRS's are good fun - but only ever came with the lower powered 1ZZ engine. You'd have to fit your own 2ZZ lump, or buy one already converted. Still a fair bit heavier than the Elise though, and of course without the super stiff chassis and everywhichway adjustable fancy suspension ..
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
I agree, it’s still a clear evolution of the classic Golf shape, it got a bit lost on the MK5, MK6 and MK7 got a bit closer again, MK8... don’t know what they’ve done there!
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
Great car, something I’d definitely consider when buying my next convertible sports car, although the 987 is getting to be pretty affordable and IMHO, looks even better... drives pretty similar though, they are after all the same chassis with updated aesthetics.I think the 986 Boxster is starting to age well and they are coming into their own design wise. I've noticed an slight uptick in prices of good lower mile examples too and people actually want the earlier ones with the orange headlight indicators now! (higher milers are still silly cheap). The softer design lines that made them look date compared to new stuff say 5 years ago (the wee side vent) is starting to become retro or something ---- they have FUTURE CLASSIC written all over them haha
andyoz
pfm Member
Interior still lets the 986 down.
IMO a base 987.2 Boxtser with the lovely 2.9 engine would be a good buy long term - saw a 40k mile red go for £14k over Covid. You just might need to update the suspension but they are coming due anyway. The gen 2 base shared the same brakes as the 3.4 S...not the case with the Gen 1 so that's important.
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
Nice sweet spot... I’d definitely feel safer with the 2.9 too, no IMS or bore scoring issues to worry about!
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
IMS and scoring in the 987.1 is not as big an issue that it was in the 997.1.
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
No I know the bore scoring was more of an issue on the larger capacity engines, not sure about IMS... to be honest, if I were buying a car with an M96 engine, I’d try and find one in need of a clutch, cost that in when buying and get an uprated IMS bearing fitted whilst it’s already apart... then not worry about it again.
andyoz
pfm Member
On Cayman 987.1 there is potential Bore Score issues with 3.4. All the Caymans came with the stronger IMS. The early 987.1 Boxsters had the weaker IMS but most have been changed now during new clutch install.
The 987.2 base model is interesting as that 2.9 isn't a DFI engine like the 3.4 in the 987.2S. DFI can have it's own wee issues with coking up of the inlets but it's not a biggie (DFI was driven by enviro as well as other benefits). The 2.9 seem a perfect thing for a classic Porsche. Remember many of the air cooled 911's people get all hot and bothered about were barely 250hp I think and the 987.2 Base is more than that. IMO a Cayman needs the chunkier motor but not the softop as it's a different vibe.
The 987.2 base model is interesting as that 2.9 isn't a DFI engine like the 3.4 in the 987.2S. DFI can have it's own wee issues with coking up of the inlets but it's not a biggie (DFI was driven by enviro as well as other benefits). The 2.9 seem a perfect thing for a classic Porsche. Remember many of the air cooled 911's people get all hot and bothered about were barely 250hp I think and the 987.2 Base is more than that. IMO a Cayman needs the chunkier motor but not the softop as it's a different vibe.
-alan-
pfm Member
Yup - Toyota Corolla twin cam if memory serves correct (the fwd one).
In terms of why they ended up in the Lotuses - I can't remember exactly what the connection was, but Lotus had done some work with Toyota before, and the powers that be agreed to let them install both the 1ZZ and 2ZZ engines in the 111 Elise range. The 130ish bhp 1ZZ only went into a small batch of S2 Elises early on, and was then dropped permanently in favour of its meatier sibling.
The 1ZZ is a good engine in its own right though. Underpowered - relatively speaking - so should be good in terms of longevity in something like the MRS.
andyoz
pfm Member
The MR2 mk3 is a weird car.
They made it mid-engined to appeal to the 'drivers' but I bet it was mostly women that bought them and lets face it most don't care where the engine is.
The looks of them put most fellas off (at least in stock form when compared to the min Ferrari look of the Mk 2)
If they'd gone that extra stretch and made it more upmarket they could have had a real Jap Boxster contender?
They made it mid-engined to appeal to the 'drivers' but I bet it was mostly women that bought them and lets face it most don't care where the engine is.
The looks of them put most fellas off (at least in stock form when compared to the min Ferrari look of the Mk 2)
If they'd gone that extra stretch and made it more upmarket they could have had a real Jap Boxster contender?
-alan-
pfm Member
Yeah - I never really understood how the MRS came into being after the previous version of the MR2. It went backwards to a much simpler car in many ways - lighter and less powerful (and probably cheaper to build). It's the kind of thing which many journalists often tell manufacturers they should be doing both in the car and the bike worlds - building more back-to basics-machines - but when they do the buyers' response is always a resounding 'Mehhh'
andyoz
pfm Member
Yeah - I never really understood how the MRS came into being after the previous version of the MR2. It went backwards to a much simpler car in many ways - lighter and less powerful (and probably cheaper to build). It's the kind of thing which many journalists often tell manufacturers they should be doing both in the car and the bike worlds - building more back-to basics-machines - but when they do the buyers' response is always a resounding 'Mehhh'
Yep, why leave the more premium Celica as a FWD and the lesser MR2 as a RWD...
andyoz
pfm Member
Maybe I should mod the Cayman, definitely a classic in the making when the stance is well setup like this
https://www.facebook.com/john.gaydo...99294220586/10158299292355586/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/john.gaydo...99294220586/10158299292355586/?type=3&theater