3000gt vr4 vs Supra turbo

so i'm getting on the freeway and this 3rd gen supra is getting on also
but he's in the lane beside me, he's not paying too much attention at first but then he hears my BOV tshhhhhh, so he gets right behind me revving his engine, once we cross the bridge while he's an inch away from my bumber we merge on the freeway. getting on the freeway theres a big circle it swerves around with a limit sign saying 10mph around turn. well :naughty: i took off and and he followed, i hit that corner with every piece of aws that i had and once it straightend out he was about 3 car lengths behind me then i give it all the juice, and gave him about 4 more car lengths. he finally slows down, i can tell cause i really started gaining car lengths.

nice kill. got lucky though cause a 3rd gen Supra Turbo should have you. I know you have some mods and what they are but he should still be a bit faster.

3rd gen or 4th?

i think he's thinking 4th gen,
only way a 3rd gen would stand a chance against a stock vr4 would be on a 60mph roll.

Ha yeah aren't really well known for their blazingly fast acceleration or lack thereof but with a few mods Supra's don't have no problem taking out anything from a roll.

I woulda thought a Mk4 Supra would hand a Vr4 its ass in handling.......maybe he/she wasn't trying on the turn or lacked a set of balls lol. Supras have some excellent road holding stock and Id have to say the opposite of a vr4. I've seen some of those going at it and the body roll and grip didn't look too good, plus it seemed like it had some bad understeer. You own one though what do I know.

I woulda thought a Mk4 Supra would hand a Vr4 its ass in handling.

Third gen Supra means MKIII, as in 88-92 Supras.

nice kill. got lucky though cause a 3rd gen Supra Turbo should have you. I know you have some mods and what they are but he should still be a bit faster.


Well most the racing Ive seen ALOT of modded vr4's walk away from supras. Most recent race was on kazaa. Supra vs 3000gtvr4. the vr4 just walked away from the 4th gen supra. Then after the race was over the supra did a ricer drive by. Not saying supras are slow. But a modded vr4 is something elce.

Nice kill. I woulda slowed down and invited the MKIII for a run from a roll though.. Just to see how I' d do. What mods do you have again, youngvr4?

Third gen Supra means MKIII, as in 88-92 Supras.

Close 86.5 to 93.5, I don't really understand what it was that made them release the MkIII and the MkIV mid-way through a year...but anywho,

SpyderEclipseGst
"Not saying supras are slow. But a modded vr4 is something elce."
http://www.automotivearticles.com/vbulletin/images/clear.gif
I dunno about that one with the same amount of money invested into both I say the Supra would walk it from a roll every time, but from a dig would be a completely different story. Also we are talking MkIV's right and not a Vr4 vs a MkIII which would also be a different outcome since the MKIII's top speed isn't as high as the MKIV.

You must have run into one of those rare non-modified turbo supras and/or a NA model. Supras are a killer from a roll. Heck even on the juice my LS1 wouldn't put a dent in a single turbo Poopra w/ the right fuel modifications.

it was a supra 3rd gen the mkIII, not the 4th gen mkIV.

good kill anyhow, show the Toyota camp whats up lol.

it was a supra 3rd gen the mkIII, not the 4th gen mkIV.

My bad. I wasn't thinking. for some reason I assumed you were takling about 4th gen. In that case you're right you should beat a 3rd gen supra turbo in your VR4 even without mods. They're quick but VR4's are quicker.

Well most the racing Ive seen ALOT of modded vr4's walk away from supras. Most recent race was on kazaa. Supra vs 3000gtvr4. the vr4 just walked away from the 4th gen supra. Then after the race was over the supra did a ricer drive by. Not saying supras are slow. But a modded vr4 is something elce.


heh you really are a DSM/Mitsubishi guy aren't you?

you know what, vr4's are easily modded like any other twin turbo car and if you look at the stats for a vr4 you'll see they are equivalent to the supra. i usually never speak on this cause most people either have something against the vr4 or just really don't know about the car.
old vr4's like the one i have are at speeds of a 300zx and a rx7. but the newer vr4s are at speeds of supra and nsx.
regardless of what everyone is gonna say, "like it weighs too much" just check the stats.
or i'll tell you, 13.5

you know what, vr4's are easily modded like any other twin turbo car and if you look at the stats for a vr4 you'll see they are equivalent to the supra. i usually never speak on this cause most people either have something against the vr4 or just really don't know about the car.
old vr4's like the one i have are at speeds of a 300zx and a rx7. but the newer vr4s are at speeds of supra and nsx.
regardless of what everyone is gonna say, "like it weighs too much" just check the stats.
or i'll tell you, 13.5

www.car-stats.com (http://www.car-stats.com) has the Supra as 13.4 and the Mitsubishi 3000gt Vr4 14.2 both 94's and all other places I've been too also have the 3000gt listed as low 14's. Not to put it down I've seen Supra with no more than 3-4k in mods putting down 500 or so on stock turbo's to the wheels and I myself am not all the knowledgable about the Mitsu' but I'm don't know if it takes to mods as well as the Supra.

Well most the racing Ive seen ALOT of modded vr4's walk away from supras. Most recent race was on kazaa. Supra vs 3000gtvr4. the vr4 just walked away from the 4th gen supra. Then after the race was over the supra did a ricer drive by. Not saying supras are slow. But a modded vr4 is something elce.
Ah, no...... I use to own a Dodge Stealth R/T Twin Turbo, and I have to tell you the car is heavy. Even w/ the suspension equipped to sport mode, the car still felt like a freight train through the turns. Take off wise of course the VR4 is gonna have an advantage. Looking just at stock figs one can see that the supra traps about 5-6 mph higher (power weight ratio is alot better, although the Poopra is heavy too). As far as modding guys, even you know how reliable DSM's can be. The Supra can take alot of boost, due to reinforced internals and intake manifold. I've heard of supras being reliable w/ 650 rwhp, on stock internals. Try to do the same w/ a 3000 GT VR4. I don't care what anyone says though, cause neither one of them feel particularly torquey to me in the lower rpm range. In any event, please point out an 8 second VR4 to me, cause I know that there are a few 8 sec. Supra MKIV's out there.

Ah, no...... I use to own a Dodge Stealth R/T Twin Turbo, and I have to tell you the car is heavy. Even w/ the suspension equipped to sport mode, the car still felt like a freight train through the turns. Take off wise of course the VR4 is gonna have an advantage. Looking just at stock figs one can see that the supra traps about 5-6 mph higher (power weight ratio is alot better, although the Poopra is heavy too). As far as modding guys, even you know how reliable DSM's can be. The Supra can take alot of boost, due to reinforced internals and intake manifold. I've heard of supras being reliable w/ 650 rwhp, on stock internals. Try to do the same w/ a 3000 GT VR4. I don't care what anyone says though, cause neither one of them feel particularly torquey to me in the lower rpm range. In any event, please point out an 8 second VR4 to me, cause I know that there are a few 8 sec. Supra MKIV's out there.

Actually I think the record for stock internal Supra was 958 rwhp meaning it was well over 1000hp in the motor itself.

the low 14's are for the first gen vr4's i'll post some stats since you feel you looked everywhere. and i never said they could mod as good as the supra i said there easily modded cars. and i actually know of and spoke to the guy who broke the record by having 935hp at the wheels on stock internals on the supra. but in the 1/4 and i will prove to you they are almost identical, and you with the stealth, when you ran your 1/4mile what did you run?
stock vr4 i seen ran a 13.9 3 times in a row up here, it was the 1st gen.
i have yet to run my 1/4 mile.

1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4

This Mitsubishi has only undergone minor changes for a decade since its 1990 release. The Spyder came in 1995. Numerous facelifts have kept the styling fresh. It was sold in USA till 1999. Sold as GTO in Japan till 2001.

Base price : $30,000 (used '99) Get a free price quote

Engine : V6, turbocharged, DOHC, front engine AWD
Displacement : 2,972 cc
Valve : 24 valves, 4 valves per cylinder
Transmission : 6-spd manual
Fuel economy : city - 18 mpg
highway - 24 mpg

Suspension : F - Independent MacPherson strut
R - Independent upper and lower A-arms
Brakes : F - Vented discs
R - Vented discs

Horsepower : 320 hp @ 6000 rpm
Torque : 315 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm

Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.0 sec.
0-¼ mile : 13.5 sec @ 105.0 mph
60-0 braking distance : 125 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.90 g

Curb Weight : 3760 lbs(coupe), 3995 lbs(Spyder)
Overall length : 180.7 in.
Wheelbase : 97.2 in.
Overall Width : 72.4 in.
Height : 50.6 in.(coupe), 49.3 lbs(Spyder)

and thats on modernracer.com

*3000GT VR-4, Stealth RT/Turbo:
As quoted from the July 1995, Vol 47, No. 7 issue of Motor Trend:
[NOTE: 1995 3000GT VR-4 tested]
Horsepower, hp @ rpm, SAE net: 320 @ 6000
Torque, lb-ft @rpm, SAE net: 315 @ 2500
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Acceleration, 0-60 mph, sec: 5.4
Standing quarter mile, sec/mph: 13.5/101.6
Braking, 60-0, feet: 118
Handling, lateral acceleration, g: 0.89
Slalom, 600-ft, mph: 68.9

www.gate.net

Year Make & Model (0-60) (1/4 Mile)
_____ _________________________________ ______ __________

1991 Mitsubishi 3000GT SL 8.5 16.4
1991 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.3 13.8
1992 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.8 14.3
1993 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.3 14.0
1994 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.7 14.2
1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.4 13.5
1997 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 4.8 13.6

1983 Toyota Supra 8.9 16.8
1984 Toyota Supra 8.7 16.8
1986 Toyota Supra 7.0 15.4
1988 Toyota Supra 7.9 16.0
1989 Toyota Supra Turbo 6.6 15.2
1991 Toyota Supra Turbo 7.1 15.6
1993 Toyota Supra Turbo 4.9 13.4
1994 Toyota Supra 6.9 15.2
1994 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.3 13.7
1995 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.1 13.5
1997 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.1 13.6


and thats on www.angelfire.com

i'm not saying that the vr4 is better than the supra.
its just the vr4 is very very underestimated and people tend to think that a supra would just destroy a vr4 stock for stock. when really its right on his ass.

I'm not doubting those number but the sites I was looking at had them all listed so I just chose 94 since it would've been the first year for both ( I know it was for the Supra). But even still Vr4 is no slouch.

1st year was actually 93 for the supra and 91 for the vr4.

nice kill buddy.

as for the "out-handling" comment from someone. u've got to remember, on the street...the car isn't always going to make the difference. if Vr4's a better driver, that could make up for ANY slight advantages the 3rd gen had on him (if any).

but in the 1/4 and i will prove to you they are almost identical, and you with the stealth, when you ran your 1/4mile what did you run?

I never got a chance to take it to the track, or to practice AWD launches. The car had too many problems. I lost about $8K on it in a few months. BTW 13.6 sec. is the norm for a 2nd gen. VR4. They only trap at about 101 mph though. I was smoked by a modded one when I had a 98 Cobra (The Cobra was a graduation gift from my pops for getting a Bachelor's Deree. I subsequently sold it for the Stealth. Then had an Integra GS-R, which was totalled in a month and a half). Of course now I own a 2000 Z28. :)

and how does that run for you? is it the best car you've had yet?

yeah, it's the best car i have ever owned. So far I have run a 13.1 sec 1/4 mile at high elevation, while on the juice of course. i can't drive worth a bean. Basically it can trap around 115 mph at sea level.

I have a buddy with a very well done MkIII, and it is a surpirsingly nice and fast car car to be so "mild". Horsepower before the latest turbo upgrade was right at 290rwhp (about 335 at the crank) and torque was over 340 (yes, that's right....almost 400 at the crank). Basically, the car was begging for a bigger turbo with more flow capacity. Obviously this was not stock before the turbp upgrade but it wasn't that tweaked either. I would be very interested to see what she dynoes at now.

As the owner of a turbo car myself, I and any other serious turbo owner know how much power mild mods can make too.However, I do have one problem with the Supra camp, and it mainly pertains to MkIV guys.

The MkIV is a great car, but Supra guys seem worse than average for overestimating their hp numbers. This problem occurs in all camps, but I think it is a higher than average occurence in
Mk-IV Supra-land. In recent years I spent a decent amount of time at the dyno and saw several MkIV Supra owners leave in disbelief at the rating. And, these weren't amatures or ricers. Of course, several did better than expected too, but a disproportionately high number were overly optimistic.

I know there are Supra's over 1000hp, but I believe they are even rarer than most think. I also don't like it when people talk about their hp rating and neglect to mention that the gas they are using might be suuficient for space shuttle duty.

If you are running on a form of fuel that in no way resmbles what you get at the Sunoco that is cool. But please, don't act like you are driving a car as tame as your mom's Acura RL. I think this too is a problem more prevelant in Supra circles.

yeah i think that goes for a lot of other people too, they over rate there hp, hell i might be over rating my hp also. i'm not really rating it but just my assumption is probably over rated. :iceslolan

Ummm. For all those who dont know, a VR4 with 320hp and all whell drive will school a mk4 Supra . The supra is only 200lbs lighter than a VR4 so its o compitition rilly. Ive raced many mk4's and schooled em all:)

Tim

Ummm. For all those who dont know, a VR4 with 320hp and all whell drive will school a mk4 Supra . The supra is only 200lbs lighter than a VR4 so its o compitition rilly. Ive raced many mk4's and schooled em all:)

Tim

if you're talking about the 93+ then yes you will probably school a non-turbo but a turbo supra will walk away from you every time stock for stock.

im talking about my 1998 Mitsubish 3000 GT VR4 STOCK vs, a 1997 Toyota Supra TT STOCK. I have 320hp & AWD vs. 320hp & RWD. Im sorry but i win:)
I have raced countless STOCK supras when my 3kgt was stock and i won. i also have driven and even owned a 1995 Supra TT and the 3kgt is quicker than it.

Tim

got a little quite in here, hello, hello :p

im talking about my 1998 Mitsubish 3000 GT VR4 STOCK vs, a 1997 Toyota Supra TT STOCK. I have 320hp & AWD vs. 320hp & RWD. Im sorry but i win:)
I have raced countless STOCK supras when my 3kgt was stock and i won. i also have driven and even owned a 1995 Supra TT and the 3kgt is quicker than it.

Tim


Real men race from a roll. Ha well I'd say just about everytime you'd beat a Supra from a dig but not from a roll considering it has a higher top speed. And a suspension set-up thats not really made to go from a dig.

Real men race from a roll. Ha well I'd say just about everytime you'd beat a Supra from a dig but not from a roll considering it has a higher top speed. And a suspension set-up thats not really made to go from a dig.


That's why you get Konig adjustables... it'll save you 2lbs and give you better traction for the hole shot...

:rofl:

98 Mitsubishi turbo, anything can happen on the street. From a roll a Supra should mertlize you. Of course from a dig the cars are very equal. Im surprised that you found a stock MKIV supra personally. Almost everyone of them out there is a BPU. Heck i'd race you, but I think you live rather far away from California.

That's why you get Konig adjustables... it'll save you 2lbs and give you better traction for the hole shot...

:rofl:

Even with new and better suspension parts the Supra will always be slower from a dig not to say the car itself is slow but 60' times in Supra's are kinda funny.

Umm If anyone doughts my abbilitie to kill a supra i would welcome the challange. I warn you now my 3000gt isnt stock anylonger, pushing 725 and got 150shot wet direct port. So ya, plz let me know if you would like to raise the supra vs me question il gladly answer it for you

Tim

Even with new and better suspension parts the Supra will always be slower from a dig not to say the car itself is slow but 60' times in Supra's are kinda funny.


Nah dude, the kid that shoulda went to MIT but didn't cuz of his ADD said so. He even showed me on his computer.

Umm If anyone doughts my abbilitie to kill a supra i would welcome the challange.



In a different thread, you said that you pulled 13.9X 1/4 mile times when you were stock. I doubt that time is good enough to pull on MKIV Turbo Supras....

ya stock i did a 13.9 with a bad clutch and i was 17:) Dude i have done it a bit more and am a BIT better at it not. My 3000GT VR4 has 725 hp now, and is HEAVLY modifiedFor engine mods im running HKS Twin Super Sequential blow off vavles, HKS Electronic Valve Controler,JET performance ecu(custom application), twin HKS intercoolers(also custom made), custom bent intercooler piping, 150 shot NOS (direct port), HKS MT-i wiring harness(for turbo timer), Twin HKS TD04L (13G-6) turbos (rebuilt for application), custom made hi flow fuel pump,hi flow BOSCHE fuel filter, 825cc injectors, hi outpur BOSCHE coil, NGK 8.5mm wires, HKS 6G72BT Iridum spark plugs, HKS SMF intake system,UNORTHODOX Ultra G - Performance Clutch Kit With Flywheel and Dual Disc Stage 3 Turbo only (Pinned for race), CENTERFORCE release bearing, custom made triple core rad, CUSCO rear uper strut bar, modified HKS Hipermax DRAG Coilovers, custom camber plates, custum byas diferential, and ill have to try to remember the rest. Ther was alot of time and money put into thins car. I did it all ar KRANGLES. Alot of custom fabrication went on in this car.

And thats the stuff i can think of now i always forget something. But ya im shur i could pull a low 13 hig 12 if it were still stock now:)

Tim

ya stock i did a 13.9 with a bad clutch and i was 17 Dude i have done it a bit more and am a BIT better at it not. My 3000GT VR4 has 725 hp now, and is HEAVLY modifiedFor engine mods im running HKS Twin Super Sequential blow off vavles, HKS Electronic Valve Controler,JET performance ecu(custom application), twin HKS intercoolers(also custom made), custom bent intercooler piping, 150 shot NOS (direct port), HKS MT-i wiring harness(for turbo timer), Twin HKS TD04L (13G-6) turbos (rebuilt for application), custom made hi flow fuel pump,hi flow BOSCHE fuel filter, 825cc injectors, hi outpur BOSCHE coil, NGK 8.5mm wires, HKS 6G72BT Iridum spark plugs, HKS SMF intake system,UNORTHODOX Ultra G - Performance Clutch Kit With Flywheel and Dual Disc Stage 3 Turbo only (Pinned for race), CENTERFORCE release bearing, custom made triple core rad, CUSCO rear uper strut bar, modified HKS Hipermax DRAG Coilovers, custom camber plates, custum byas diferential, and ill have to try to remember the rest. Ther was alot of time and money put into thins car. I did it all ar KRANGLES. Alot of custom fabrication went on in this car.
No offense but that doesn't appear to be big enough turbos for 725 awhp. Do you have a dyno slip to prove this?

Your right:) The original turbos werent big enough to handle that much power. But you see i live in a city where there are alot of shops that do custome work. The only part of that turbo that is actualy the original HKS TD04L (13G-6) is the outer casing, the rest has been changed:) ie, compressor wheel , compressor wheel nut, journal bearings, thrust collar, o rings, carbon seal, lockplates, shaft nuts, bearing housing and turbine shaft. I find it just to hard to say all that so i tell you what i was:)
But i fouy lik wi will get the printoff from my shop. I have a 4 wheel dyno and i did it myself but i would gladly. And if anyone in the Vancouver Canada area wonts to put there 3000GT on a dyno PM me and you can come by the shop.
O and no offense taken, i understand, cant accept something if ther is no profe:)

Tim

first of all in a stock 3000GT VR4 you won't pull a high 12's no matter how good of a driver you are. Stock for stock with equal drivers a TT SUpra will take you out. Just as easy as that. You have to accept defeat. I could beat a TT Supra in my Integra iof the guy doesn"t know how to drive. Obviously a 3000GT VR4 is a much closer race but if you let the numbers speak for themselves you have to accept that stock for stock the Supra IS faster.

Heres the numbers, 320hp AWD 3200lbs, vs. 320hp RWD. Lets look at this again. With the active suspension in the 3000GT set to SPORT and the exhause set to SPORT the 3000GT not only would beat the supra off the line, but it would also take it in the quarter:)
Those are the numbers and i DO win:)

TIm

In all fairness...hp is not just hp. In stock trim a Mk IV Supra has a much nicer torque curve than the 3000GT. And, the Supra also loses a lot less hp to parasitic drag through the driveline than a 3000GT does. The first one is just the way it is (largely due to the fact that the Toyota's six is an inline engine.....better torque than a V naturally by design) and the second one is simple physics as it requires more power to drive four wheels than two.

Not to mention if hp levels aren't in the stratosphere...and sometimes even if they are....AWD is not the end all be all of acceleration. Take a look at the current 911 Turbo with AWD, and the 911 GT2 with the turbo engine but no AWD.

If you opt for the 444hp engine option on the std AWD Turbo hp is nearly the same as in the GT2. The GT2 does weigh less than the Turbo, but most of this comes from it's lack of AWD. A GT2 will leave an AWD 911 Turbo like it is tied down.....Where did the awd acceleration advantage go?. Part of this is the 911's brutal rear weight bias, but not all of it.

AWD definately benefits the 3000GT chassis as it is fwd without it and that is the worst of all worlds. However, from a strictly performance oriented standpoint, unless you are speaking about something with a weird and undesirable front/rear weight bias like a pickup, I do not believe awd offers as much of a peformance advantage over rwd as it offers easier accessed performance.

In other words an inexperienced driver is a lot less likely to get himself in trouble in the 911 Turbo than in the 911 GT2....hence the purpose of the AWD system. But, an experienced driver will drive that GT2 faster...or at least Porsche thinks they will. Put simply Porsche took the awd OUT to go faster, not put it in.

Also, in lower powered (stock) engines...especially those without a good amount of torque. AWD has a tendency to bog the engine down on launch. Folks, put simply, that isn't good. AWD had it's advantages, but it also has it's downside too.

Also, I am no Supra lover.......I would take a last generation 300ZX (Man those things look good.), a 3rd gen RX7 turbo, or probebly even a 3000GT over the Supra as the Toyota just is not my cup of tea. But facts are facts and 3000GT's were never faster than Supra MkIV's stock....unless it was raining.

But then, a LT4 C4 Vette would out 1/4 a Mk IV Supra, so should we all bow to the C4 Grand Sport and should all MkIV Supra guys go throw themselves from a cliff.....of course not. I have a line of cars I would pick over a C4 Vette. But, like a car or not you have to give it it's due.

Alright Tim you just gave Horsepower numbers and talked about active supension on the 3000GT and then said those are the numbers.....what numbers ? We all know how much horsepower each of them have and that the 3000GT VR4 is AWD but we're talking about what's faster here. I've gone into it before and there's no point in going into it again.

Syr74 pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. Read his reply. I could not have put it any better.

I think the problem is that you, Tim, want your car to be faster than it really is(at least in stock form). Now I'm not saying that they are slow in anyway because their not. As a matter of fact I love those things and wish I could afford one but the fact is still that it can't keep up with a Supra TT and I think you're just in denial of that.

Ive owned both cars and i have driven both cars. i know which one is faster. I know how fast my car is and i know how fast a twin turbo supra is. Im not comparing my 3000gt to a supra. Im comparing a stock 3000gt to a stock supra. And the fact is that MY 3000Gt most deffinatly can beat any stock supra. It is no wear near stock anymore.

Anyway the Toyota supra does the quater in 13.9 Secs, where as the 3000GT VR4 does it in 13.4. Thes are numbers from Road and Track. Personal i dispute all the numbers of the quarter miles of any magazine because there are to many variables. Like tires, track temperature, millage on engine, and the lay out of the car. But these are the numbers i found. Althought the supra did make it to 100mph faster than the 3000GT VR4.

Tim

But then, a LT4 C4 Vette would out 1/4 a Mk IV Supra, so should we all bow to the C4 Grand Sport and should all MkIV Supra guys go throw themselves from a cliff.....of course not. I have a line of cars I would pick over a C4 Vette. But, like a car or not you have to give it it's due.
I agree with everything you've said except that one.

Read this:
http://www.geocities.com/ma71supraturbo/articles/mk4/2_95mtsupra.html

Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1:
1/4 mile - 13.6 @ 106.0 mph

Toyota Supra Turbo:
1/4 mile - 13.5 @ 107.1 mph

That's against an LT5 (405HP) ZR1 'Vette. An LT4 (350HP) would have lost even worse.

And here's a Supra that was run by a magazine with a better driver or in better conditions:
http://mkiv.com/publications/car&driver/3_93/6-cd3-93.jpg

As for 98MitsuTurbo, check this out:
http://www.geocities.com/ma71supraturbo/articles/mk4/2_94rtsupra.html

Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4:
320 bhp @ 6000 rpm
315 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
Maximum engine speed - 7000 rpm
Curb weight - 3810 lbs
1/4 mile - 14.2 @ 99.0 mph

Toyota Supra Turbo:
320 bhp @ 5800 rpm
315 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
Maximum engine speed - 6800 rpm

Curb weight - 3550 lbs
13.7 @ 105.0 mph

The trap-speeds alone should tell you something.

While you're at it, check out the acceleration graph they made of each car.

I was going to reply to you last night, but since I like backing my claims up with proof, I waited till today to pull these facts out. I was going to ask you last night what you are smoking, thinking a stock VR-4 is capable of 12's stock...

Anyway the Toyota supra does the quater in 13.9 Secs, where as the 3000GT VR4 does it in 13.4.
Okay...you posted this while I was typing up my last response...I WILL ask you...what ARE you smoking?

Please show me the Road & Track article where they ran these times.

AWD or not, a nearly 300-lb difference in the weight of the cars with similar output WILL have the Supra pulling on you anywhere beyond 10MPH EVERYTIME, stock-for-stock.

Re: Re: 3000gt vr4 vs Supra turbo (Post #51)

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by syr74
But then, a LT4 C4 Vette would out 1/4 a Mk IV Supra, so should we all bow to the C4 Grand Sport and should all MkIV Supra guys go throw themselves from a cliff.....of course not. I have a line of cars I would pick over a C4 Vette. But, like a car or not you have to give it it's due.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with everything you've said except that one.

Read this:
http://www.geocities.com/ma71suprat..._95mtsupra.html

Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1:
1/4 mile - 13.6 @ 106.0 mph

Toyota Supra Turbo:
1/4 mile - 13.5 @ 107.1 mph

That's against an LT5 (405HP) ZR1 'Vette. An LT4 (350HP) would have lost even worse.
Where the hell are you and 98 Mistu Turbo getting your numbers from. A ZR1 running a 13.6 sec. 1/4 mile. That's F#$king BS. They can run low 13's to high 12's all day long. You do know that that car set a record for endurace top speed runs, and held it until the Maranello took it out a decade later. A ZR1 can pull a 12.9 sec. 1/4 mile at 113 mph. That may be from a magazine that had a crappy driver, but overall the ZR1 is faster in almost every mag. BTW the ZR1 has the LT5, the grandsport has the LT4. The LT4 is alot less potent then the LT5. 98 Mitsuturbo, the 3000 GT weighs 3800 pounds, don't read that door handle sticker. They also run an identical 1/4 mile to a Supra (Both 13.6 sec., unless you wanna post all the "my best time for my car are better then your car", in which case my LS1 has your daddy, as Chevy coerced a 13 sec. flat 1/4 mile out of a 98 Z28 when it came out). I'm getting at comparing apples to apples. Whenever I go to LS1.com I don't see any mustang driver's posting the 15 sec. flat 1/4 mile a 2001 Mustang GT conv't ran in Car and Driver. They post the 13.9 sec. pass that Fast Fords and Mustang Monthly got.

Where the hell are you and 98 Mistu Turbo getting your numbers from. A ZR1 running a 13.6 sec. 1/4 mile. That's F#$king BS. They can run low 13's to high 12's all day long. You do know that that car set a record for endurace top speed runs, and held it until the Maranello took it out a decade later. A ZR1 can pull a 12.9 sec. 1/4 mile at 113 mph.

Maybe they did have a crappy driver. Or an underpowered LT5. Stock Supras have also ran 13.0's-12.9's, BTW.

I never said that the ZR-1 is inherently slower. I was showing syr74 that Supras are more than a match for LT4 'Vettes, as he said that the LT4 'Vettes "out-quarter" the Supras stock-for-stock.


BTW the ZR1 has the LT5, the grandsport has the LT4. The LT4 is alot less potent then the LT5.

I know that and yep, know that too. I almost bought an LT4-6M (only the LT4's had the 6M, I know ;)) myself a while back, then realized I couldn't come up with the funds.

They (3000GT's) also run an identical 1/4 mile to a Supra

THAT's the mis-conception I was trying to disprove with my posts above.

With the same driver, from the same magazine, under the same conditions, the 3000GT was not only .5 seconds slower in E.T., which is a LIFETIME at the track, it is also 6MPH SLOWER, which is HUGE. It clearly shows a stock Supra running away from a stock 3000GT anywhere beyond that.

do i have to post the times again
1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4

This Mitsubishi has only undergone minor changes for a decade since its 1990 release. The Spyder came in 1995. Numerous facelifts have kept the styling fresh. It was sold in USA till 1999. Sold as GTO in Japan till 2001.

Base price : $30,000 (used '99) Get a free price quote

Engine : V6, turbocharged, DOHC, front engine AWD
Displacement : 2,972 cc
Valve : 24 valves, 4 valves per cylinder
Transmission : 6-spd manual
Fuel economy : city - 18 mpg
highway - 24 mpg

Suspension : F - Independent MacPherson strut
R - Independent upper and lower A-arms
Brakes : F - Vented discs
R - Vented discs

Horsepower : 320 hp @ 6000 rpm
Torque : 315 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm

Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.0 sec.
0-¼ mile : 13.5 sec @ 105.0 mph
60-0 braking distance : 125 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.90 g

Curb Weight : 3760 lbs(coupe), 3995 lbs(Spyder)
Overall length : 180.7 in.
Wheelbase : 97.2 in.
Overall Width : 72.4 in.
Height : 50.6 in.(coupe), 49.3 lbs(Spyder)

and thats on www.modernracer.com
there times are the same

*3000GT VR-4, Stealth RT/Turbo:
As quoted from the July 1995, Vol 47, No. 7 issue of Motor Trend:
[NOTE: 1995 3000GT VR-4 tested]
Horsepower, hp @ rpm, SAE net: 320 @ 6000
Torque, lb-ft @rpm, SAE net: 315 @ 2500
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Acceleration, 0-60 mph, sec: 5.4
Standing quarter mile, sec/mph: 13.5/101.6
Braking, 60-0, feet: 118
Handling, lateral acceleration, g: 0.89
Slalom, 600-ft, mph: 68.9

www.gate.net

again

Year Make & Model (0-60) (1/4 Mile)
_____ _________________________________ ______ __________

1991 Mitsubishi 3000GT SL 8.5 16.4
1991 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.3 13.8
1992 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.8 14.3
1993 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.3 14.0
1994 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.7 14.2
1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 5.4 13.5
1997 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 4.8 13.6

1983 Toyota Supra 8.9 16.8
1984 Toyota Supra 8.7 16.8
1986 Toyota Supra 7.0 15.4
1988 Toyota Supra 7.9 16.0
1989 Toyota Supra Turbo 6.6 15.2
1991 Toyota Supra Turbo 7.1 15.6
1993 Toyota Supra Turbo 4.9 13.4
1994 Toyota Supra 6.9 15.2
1994 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.3 13.7
1995 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.1 13.5
1997 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.1 13.6


and thats on www.angelfire.com

you can say they been known to run high 12's and all this bs
i've seen a stock vr4 run 13.0 flat was it realy stock?
and you said you seen them run high 12's were they really stock?

those are the numbers 14.2 that carnut posted is for the 1st gen vr4's
95 and up run 13.5.
so the race is the driver PERIOD.

those are the numbers 14.2 that carnut posted is for the 1st gen vr4's
95 and up run 13.5.
so the race is the driver PERIOD.
On the contrary, if you stop and read the article, they are testing the 95 model with the 6-spd and 320HP -- 2nd Gen. 1st-gens have 5-speeds and 300HP.

Also, if you actually read the ACTUAL articles I linked to, as opposed something somebody posted up on a personal website, one of the tests on the Supra netted a 13.1 @ 109 mph.

That other test was obviously in bad conditions, since all the cars, EXCEPT FOR THE SUPRA ran in the 14's. Not saying that VR-4's arent capable of mid-13's, but when everything else is equal, including driver and conditions, the Supra has major E.T. and trap-speed advantages over the VR-4.

What do you think the guy running 13.5's in a VR-4 in certain conditions on the same track, knowing how to launch the car, will run with a Supra? 13.0?

Here's the acceleration graph of each car:

http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/2_94/rt294_06.jpg


Look at where the Supra beats icons like the Ferrari F50, Viper, and the Porsche 911 Turbo in top-gear acceleration here:

http://www.mkiv.com/publications/other/other/caranddriver.jpg

I don't see the VR-4 in that list.

Look, I'm not knocking the VR-4 in any way here, but you gotta be realistic with the power claims. I mean you're right in saying that it's a driver's race, just like it's a driver's race between a Civic HX and a Geo Metro...the HX driver slips up, it's over.

But we know that the same person driving the two cars WILL go faster in one car than the other, ya know?

Motor Trend (About the only mag I trust to run correct 1/4 mile times) ran both the Supra Turbo, and the 3000 GT VR4 against each other. They both ran identical 1/4 mile times of 13.6 sec. The Supra had a noticeably higher trap speed (106 mph versus 101 mph for the VR4). The VR4 had a 0-60 time of 4.8 sec., while the Supra had a 5.2 sec. 0-60 time. Basically the Supra had to play catch-up. I have no doubts about 98Mitsuturbo beating a supra in a stoplight to stolpight race, but from a roll, that's a different story. I think everyone here knows that Supras are notoriously hard to launch, in order to get a decent 60' time.

:iagree: 100%

every time i ever in my life seen the 1/4mile times for a supra the best was 13.4
now all the sudden it runs 13.0, no magazine on this earth from what i've seen at least 5 mags say around the same thing 13.4-13.6
all vr4's exept the one you found, 13.5-13.6

yeah from a roll i'll believe it will eat it but from a dig
it...... is......... the racer :lol2: