Anyone Own an NSX & a Supra TT: Need Advice!

Originally posted by BoostedMR2:
I just didn't want to hurt the original poster's feelings by calling the Supra what I think it really is -- a high-powered GT car.

I don't know why Supra owners take offense at that description, or calling it a "muscle car". The Supra has so much in common with other muscle cars such as the Mustang or Camaro/Firebird. They're all high-powered, heavy rear-wheel-drive cars, inexpensive to buy but expensive to insure, inexpensive to modify to awe-inspiring levels of power and acceleration, and with similar owner demographics as a result. So what's the big deal?
 
because unlike all the other cars you mentoined, its also a great handling car. its another example of a well engineered car that is all around great at everything and poor at none. hey i might be an nsx owner, but i can appreciate a well engineered vehicle when i see one. you guys also are constantly talking about "stock" supras... a stock supra in the hands of a car nut is a myth, none of them are stock. it takes $5 in parts to up the boost in the things. toyota was well aware of this when they built the car of course, and knew the info would get around. i put the supra into the catagory with the 300zxtt, rx7tt and 3000gt vr4 and of all those cars, IMO the supra is the clear all around winner. unbeatable price/performance ratio while still being very reliable (and this is coming from someone who also owned a 300zxtt prior to the NSX). kudos given where kudos due, its not the supra's fault many of the owners are jerkoffs :P, but they are not in the same catagory as the mustang/camaro crowd, that same crowd is calling all of the cars above overpriced riceboy cars. ken, its no secret you think the supra is a fat pig, i for one think you're an idiot for that opinion, but thats just me
smile.gif
. when it takes $5 to mod the thing to 450hp, thats the baseline that needs to be used when making any judgement or comparison.
 
Originally posted by robr:
when it takes $5 to mod the thing to 450hp, thats the baseline that needs to be used when making any judgement or comparison.

This logic is flawed. First, why set the threshold at $5k? Why not $6k, $10k, or $2k?

Second, I can take a Mustang/Camaro, spend a few grand on NOS, and have even better performance than a BPU Supra at a MUCH lower overall pricing point.

So should we change the basis of comparison for those cars and elevate their overall pecking order?

BTW, I am assuming you mean $5k and not five bucks.



[This message has been edited by 8000RPM (edited 29 July 2002).]
 
no, i mean five dollars. welding tips to increase the boost is all it takes. the supra stock fuel injectors are large enough to deliver enough fuel to run as high as (i believe its) 18-20 lbs of boost. at least these are my recollections from when i was spending thousands of $$$ to mod the 300zxtt to reach equivalent levels of HP that supra owners were getting for change they could find in the couch.
 
btw we're also not talking about a 1/4 mile car here, the supra does quite admirably at a real road racing course, again unlike the camaro/mustang... and of course nitrous isnt particularly useful in that type of environment except for passes down the straights (assuming your race is short enough that you dont run out).

im looking for the info now about the $5 welding tip mods. i'll post the url when i find it.
 
Interesting.

A friend of mine with a '96 ZTT spent two bucks on those boost thingys that you insert into the vaccum hose, and instantaneously increased boost significantly. He gained at least 50 rwhp from the $2 investment.

BTW, I owned two 300ZXTTs, a '91 and a '95, both with increased boost as well.
 
http://mkiv.christurner.net/faq/faqtt.html

what about the stock fuel system in the tt? does it need to be upgraded as well?
the stock 2jzgte twin turbo fuel system is a remarkably good system straight from the factory. the in-tank pump, fuel filter, fuel pulsation damper, injectors, and boost dependent fuel pressure regulator are all capable of high fuel flow. toyota did its homework here, as the tt's fuel pump and injectors both max-out at about the same fuel flow.
fuel pump: the stock pump is a denso unit, capable of supporting up to 450 rear-wheel horsepower (rwhp) reliably. push it up to 500 rwhp, and you start gambling. go past 500 rwhp, and you are flirting with disaster! the pump is controlled by the fuel pump electronic control unit (ecu) located under the plastic panel just behind the rear driver-side shock tower. the ecu controls the pump at two different speeds based on engine load. at low engine loads, the pump is operating at reduced capacity due to reduced voltage from the ecu. once you floor it, however, the fuel pump operates at full capacity. also, the fuel pump ecu is equipped with a fuel pump system diagnostic function.


4. what is the free fuel cut defenser (ffcd)? *read why the greddy bcc is better then the ffcd mod
the free fcd is basically a low-buck way to bypass the computer's fuel cut control. this is critical to maximizing your hp output when your boost levels go over say, 14-15 lbs of boost. here's how you do it within 5 minutes and for less than a dollar!! this modification requires no soldering or tapping into the harness and is reversible within minutes. please be aware though that with this mod, you have no fuel cut. you need to ensure you don't boost too high! to install the "free" fcd, completely remove the 4-inch vacuum line that connects the pressure sensor switch to the "y" connector. (you'll find the pressure sensor switch on the passenger side of the intake air manifold on the throttle body towards the top. the correct sensor is marked "sensor turbo pressure" in green.) notice that the vacuum line is attached to the bottom of the sensor switch. leave the wire connector attached. cap the bottom of the switch with a 1/8-inch cap. cap off where the 4-inch hose connected at the "y" with another 1/8-inch cap. (note: when you slip the cap onto the sensor turbo pressure - you must make sure not to trap too much air in the cap. one tt owner had some difficulties because the sensor thought it "saw" high boost all the time.

fuel rail and injectors: the stock fuel rail and injectors are quality units, capable of supporting the same hp as the stock fuel pump. the injectors are rated at 530 cc/min. at 36 psi of fuel pressure, and are a two-hole, side-feed, low resistance design. these injectors enable the hot injector to be cooled by its fuel supply, increasing both hot starting and drivability. but, push your power past 475 rwhp, and watch your exhaust gas temperatures (egt) climb due to a leaning-out condition.

after doing the ffcd mod then do the vsv mod and your car goes from 320 stock hp to 400-420hp car for under $5.
http://www.mkiv.com/techarticles/vsv/vsv.htm
 
the 300zxtt was good for up to 400hp without having to swap out the fuel injectors, but to get there you also needed an exhaust, an airbox and a new CPU (usually jim wolf) was highly recommended, but yes, you could just bump the boost up to 14 lbs or so on the 300zxtt, but you were looking at about a 50-60hp gain without the other mods. so it was certanly not a BAD car for getting great HP out of, but once you hit 400hp or so (at which point you've already spent around $2k) it started to get very expensive (new fuel injectors, new intercoolers, larger turbos). so $2000 on a 300zxtt got you to 400, where $5 on a supra got you to 420. throw the $2k at the supra youre at 450-475, after that you started having similar issues.

anyway this isnt 300zxtt vs. supra, its just supra vs itself.
 
robr,

A properly set up Camaro (and I suppose Mustang too) can be made to handle very well on a road course.

At my last track event at the Glen there were a number of last-gen Camaros set up very nicely and their drivers often out drove the typical foreign sports cars.

I had to laugh when I overheard a track local tell his buddies how upset the high-end Ferrari and Porsche drivers get when a solid-axle, V8 pushrod Craftsman truck runs rings around them. LOL!

-Jim

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html
 
Originally posted by robr:
because unlike all the other cars you mentoined, its also a great handling car. its another example of a well engineered car that is all around great at everything and poor at none. hey i might be an nsx owner, but i can appreciate a well engineered vehicle when i see one.

Then you ought to take a look at some of the other muscle cars lately, because some of the other ones are also well engineered, despite your sideswipes at them. Have you checked out the Mustang Cobra R, the one with I think 380 hp that they only made 300 of? It's a pretty awesome ride.

Originally posted by robr:
i put the supra into the catagory with the 300zxtt, rx7tt and 3000gt vr4 and of all those cars, IMO the supra is the clear all around winner. unbeatable price/performance ratio while still being very reliable (and this is coming from someone who also owned a 300zxtt prior to the NSX).

Actually, these are four very different cars, and I put them in very different categories. The Supra is heavy (3500 pounds) but able to be made wicked fast with some fairly inexpensive modifications. The 300ZXTT is also heavy and able to be made wicked fast, but it's much more of a luxury sport coupe than the others, less of a pure sports car. The third gen RX7 is extremely light (2800 pounds) and offers great handling, almost as nimble as the NSX, much more so than the other three. Unfortunately, its reliability is simply dreadful. The 3000GT VR4 took heavy to a whole new level (3800 pounds) and has a generally crappy feel throughout, unlike the others, but has nice grip in the wet (only one here with 4WD). Four different cars, each excelling in different areas.

Originally posted by robr:
ken, its no secret you think the supra is a fat pig, i for one think you're an idiot for that opinion, but thats just me
smile.gif
.

I don't think it's a fat pig, but I DO think it's overweight by a good 500 pounds or more, and it takes a lot of horsepower to overcome all that extra weight. While power-to-weight ratio is only one number that doesn't tell everything, it does tell a lot about a car's capabilities. The main advantage of the Supra is that it's easy to modify so that you can have enough power to compensate for the added weight. I'd much rather have a car that's significantly lighter in weight to begin with, even if it comes with a horsepower disadvantage. So yes, on a road course, I'd prefer the NSX (or a third gen RX-7 with a mechanic and a parts car). If that makes me an idiot, well, then I guess that makes me an idiot. In fact, I guess that makes us all a bunch of dunces.
dunce.gif
dunce.gif
dunce.gif
dunce.gif
dunce.gif
 
There are other cars that are heavy that handle extremely well(ie Viper GTS)so the fact that the Supra is heavy doesnt hold water with me.It can still get around a road course well(see-One Lap of America) Not to knock my fellow NSx brothers but what did they place at One Lap? I believe the Supra ran 4th overall.Damn good in capable hands (like any good performance car)Bottom line is you already have a Supra and the NSX is the next logical step up.Good luck with your search.

Joe

------------------
97 NSX-T BBSC Spa Yellow
93 Supra TT T-61
97 Viper GTS w/Corsa,K/N
 
The Dodge Viper comes with 460 horses from the factory. The Supra comes with 320. Yet they both weigh about the same 3500 pounds.

ANY car can be modified for power and handling. You can make an awesome 800 hp car out of a Supra, or out of a Dodge Neon for that matter, and run it in One Lap. But a much fairer comparison (because it doesn't depends on the particular mods that any one individual chooses to make) is stock vs stock. And in stock form, the Supra is just a decent muscle car, very good at some things, not as good at others.
 
not when stock gains 100+ hp for $5 and toyota put the car out there full well knowing everyone would take advantage of that. "stock" to me is 420hp for the supra, and it should be to you too for as i pointed out, NOBODY that has half a brain is running with 320hp.
 
Originally posted by robr:
toyota put the car out there full well knowing everyone would take advantage of that.

Do you have any factual evidence that supports this contention, or is this mere conjecture?

I don't mean to doubt you personally, but it sounds awfully far-fetched that Toyota would intentionally design the capability for an extra 100 hp, but intentionally not make it available (let alone that they would intentionally leave it attainable for $5, when they could have just as easily done this themselves). Dontcha think?

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 30 July 2002).]
 
fair enough, im not sure what i can dig up but again i recall the same sort of innuendo and hinting we get from woodwork making the rounds where toyota cant come out and officially say it, but i have no reason to doubt it. the mods i posted aren't exactly rocket science and probably much of why they didn't do it had to do with emissions and someone being conservative. the fuel delivery system was clearly over engineered, if all toyota wanted was 320hp, they could have chopped a few hundred bucks off of parts by going with cheaper components here. to take a 320 hp car and drop in a fuel delivery system that can handle up to 475hp couldn't have been an engineering accident. i'll see if i can dig up some of this info as well, but it's probably not enough to factually prove anything directly.

[This message has been edited by robr (edited 30 July 2002).]
 
Posted by Nsxtacy:

"The 3000GT VR4 took heavy to a whole new level (3800 pounds) and has a generally crappy feel throughout"

My vote for best quote of this thread.
biggrin.gif
 
$5 will not get you 450hp on the Supra. You need at least a downpipe which costs beyond $5. It doesn't matter if you raise the fuel or increase the boost. A congested turbo will not boost high enough mechanically for 450hp.
 
Originally posted by robr:
fair enough, im not sure what i can dig up but again i recall the same sort of innuendo and hinting we get from woodwork making the rounds where toyota cant come out and officially say it, but i have no reason to doubt it. the mods i posted aren't exactly rocket science and probably much of why they didn't do it had to do with emissions and someone being conservative. the fuel delivery system was clearly over engineered, if all toyota wanted was 320hp, they could have chopped a few hundred bucks off of parts by going with cheaper components here. to take a 320 hp car and drop in a fuel delivery system that can handle up to 475hp couldn't have been an engineering accident. i'll see if i can dig up some of this info as well, but it's probably not enough to factually prove anything directly.

It seems to me that the reason that the Toyota Supra and MR2 are so easy to get extra power out of is two-fold.

Reason number one is that in Japan there exists a gentleman's agreement between the major manufacturers that all domestic brand cars to be sold in the home market be limited to 280ps (283.92 hp). I think this is the "innuendo" that you are recalling. In Japan's home market, the Supra was limited to 280 ps, whereas the export model was always intended to produce 320 ps.
Many cars in Japan are released in either se-tuned form, or with bogus power claims from the manufacturer that dramatically under represent the amount of power the car is making.

Reason number two for why it is so easy to get an extra 200-300 horsepower out of an MKIV Supra (or 100-200 more out of an MKII MR2 for that matter) is simple: in the Toyota tradition, these are over engineered cars and, turbo ones at that.

While I can't speak in too much detail with respect to the specifics on the Supra, I know in the MR2 community we have similar Home Depot DIY $5 ball and spring boost controllers and $0.97 fuel cut defensers that will allow for significant power increases well above the 200 hp that these cars were released with in the U.S. As a matter of fact, in Japan, turbo MR2s were released with 225 hp, and later, 245 hp from the factory indicating that Toyota knew the 3SGTE motor to be capable of more than the stock power levels it was released with here in the U.S. Of course, in Japan the cars were released without EGR systems, restrictive secondary catalytic converters, and were run on the equivalent of 94-95 U.S. octane fuel, so a bit more power was available without putting too much of a strain on the motor.

That said, we have seen MR2s make 100 to 200 more horsepower at the rear wheels with simple bolt-on upgrades and Supras make 200-300 more horsepower at the rear wheels doing the same.

So why shouldn't everyone here in the U.S. just crank up the boost to these power levels? Simple: octane limitations and cooling. Even by removing the restrictive emissions devices, as the boost level is turned up, the car's cooling requirements and need for propensity to detonate on low octane fuel also go way up.

Here is a neat article that I ran across on the importance of upgrading the intercooler on Supras (scroll down for the section on "Intercooler Efficiency"):
http://www.mkiv.co.nz/techo.htm

While a $5-6 in parts allows the boost to be turned up on either the Supra or MR2 motor, even with stock turbos and internals, unless the owner is willing to put another $1,000+ into an upgraded intercooler to cool the intake charge, as well as $500-$2,000 for either a remapped factory ECU or stand-alone ECU with adjustments made for the ignition and fuel maps for U.S. pump gas (a $500-1,000 water injection system also helps tremendously here as well) these cars really shouldn't be taken up to the power levels that their owners here in the U.S. regularly take them.

Yet, human nature being what it is, most new MR2 and Supra owners are quick to learn of the neat and cheap ways to crank up the boost long before they have investigated the precautions that need to be taken before doing so.

With an upgraded cooling system (and I'm talking about intercooler, coolant and oil cooling each being addressed) and a some dyno time spent remapping fuel and ignition timing curves, stock Toyota turbo motors are engineered to reliably make incredible amounts of power. Otherwise, they will just make big power for a short while until something breaks.

FWIW, I drive an MR2 with JDM motor that makes 292 rwhp with stock internals on 91 octane pump gas. Of course, it cost me a lot more than $5 in parts to get it there. It also took 100 dyno runs to get everything dialed in properly. There are other MR2 owners making 400+ horsepower on their cars with minimal investment, but the trick will be in seeing whose motor stays intact over the long run.

As much as I like the NSX, if NW93TT really wants a reliable mid-engined two seater that feels like an elemental sports car (the sound of the motor just inches from the driver's head, the nimble precision that only a lightweight mid-engined car can offer) and is also looking for power potential, it is still much easier (and less expensive) to squeeze big power out of Toyota factory turbo motor than adding forced induction to an NSX.

-- DavidV
biggrin.gif

www.boostedgroup.com



[This message has been edited by BoostedMR2 (edited 30 July 2002).]
 
Don't know if this counts but I did trade in my Supra to get my NSX. It was an 1989 MKIII Supra with a big single turbo and thousand of $$$ in upgrades, but I still wasn't happy with it. In comparision between the two cars there isn't one. The Supra to me is more of an untamed beast when highly modified. I view the Supra more of a 1/4 mile machine as oppose to the NSX. The NSX on the other hand is much more refined in my opinion then the Supra. I would opt to get the NSX over the Supra for fun factor and reliablity. Here was my MKIII before I traded it away and eventually ended up in Philly. http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/nmymirr69/lst?.dir=/89+Supra&.view=t

[This message has been edited by NMYMIRR (edited 30 July 2002).]
 
Originally posted by NMYMIRR:
Don't know if this counts but I did trade in my Supra to get my NSX. It was an 1989 MKIII Supra with a big single turbo and thousand of $$$ in upgrades, but I was still not happy with it . In comparision between the two cars there isn't one. The Supra to me is more of an untamed beast when highly modified. I view the Supra more of a 1/4 mile machine as oppose to the NSX. The NSX on the other hand is much more refined in my opinion then the Supra. I would opt to get the NSX over the Supra for fun factor and reliablity. Here was my MKIII before I traded it away and eventually ended up in Philly. http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/nmymirr69/lst?.dir=/89+Supra&.view=t
 
Originally posted by nsxbadboy:
There are other cars that are heavy that handle extremely well(ie Viper GTS)so the fact that the Supra is heavy doesnt hold water with me.It can still get around a road course well(see-One Lap of America) Not to knock my fellow NSx brothers but what did they place at One Lap? I believe the Supra ran 4th overall.Damn good in capable hands (like any good performance car)Bottom line is you already have a Supra and the NSX is the next logical step up.Good luck with your search.

Let's see, the Viper has what size tires compare to the Supra, do the physics. I am no expert driver, but according to Mario Andretti, the Viper ACR handling is not good in his comparision test with other sports car (F355, Zanardi NSX, Porsche and Vette). I think experts don't classify handling as the fastest time around the track.

The Supra finished 4th, great. That is mainly because he can drive well, the NSX driver sure did not impress anyone consider the SUV ran faster times. I am sure the NSX can beat a SUV easily but it did not happen at the one lap. The Supra TT ran 1:44 per lap at Road Atlanta on street tires. From what I know, there are only couple NSXs at NSXPO at Atlanta that ran that time and one is on race tires and one on street tires (SP9000) (Both Supercharged).

Go to Chin Motorsports at Sebring 8/11 and you will see WRX smoking just about every NSX there. Of course, mainly driver. It just seems there are very few good drivers on road course in Supra and NSX. I can think of couple NSX drivers, Supra would be the one lap guy and SW.

At the Open track challenge, the NSX did alot better but that is again attribute to driver. If you want to see good drivers, I would recommend go to the Viper forums and check out their times by good Viper drivers.
 
Whoever posted about adding Rims to the car and lowering it make the look Unbelieveable is totally right....the stock looks real good, but with this one addition, you are turning heads everywhere even your own...cant beat the look I say...

or cant beat the engine behind your ears either at 7-8k RPM.....
 
The NSX that ran One Lap had a lot of problems. One that I know of was a warped rotor. At my local track (Hallett), they ran if I remember correctly, a 1:44 which about what a stock MR-S Spyder runs w/ a good driver. My best there is a 1:31.75. At the very least, they should have run in the 1:36's.

So I'm not sure if their laps times, at any track, are indicative of what they normally could have done given a properly functioning car.

Oh, and if I remember correctly, the Supra had a best time of 1:31 and change - ON STREET TIRES. This guy was indeed a "hotshoe" driver and benefited from other Supra guys giving him some track recon advice. I'm not sure how much HP he was running but I know it wasn't 320.
smile.gif


[This message has been edited by Ponyboy (edited 31 July 2002).]
 
Its nice to see we finally agree that the Supra is a well handling car.Its also a very good braking car.Not bad for a heavy car.Was the NSX at One Lap stock?

Joe

------------------
97 NSX-T BBSC Spa Yellow
93 Supra TT T-61
97 Viper GTS w/Corsa,K/N
 
Back
Top