89 Camaro vs JDM SW20 MR2 Turbo

[TRD2000]

ok i'm going to be biased on this one but i want to know what everyone elses thoughts are and why??

[kman10587]

What trim level on the Camaro? And what aspects of each car are you comparing?

[TRD2000]

what trim levels are there?
don't know too much about them...

and any aspects you want to bring up, just a general comparison.

[ricesucks]

Is the camaro a 8? I would take the mr2 turbo, handles better, looks better IMO, is prolly the same speed...and is better on gas...

[ghetto7o2azn]

you have to be more specific on the turbo or na mr2 also what year jdm mr2

your missing a lot of key things for us to even begin comparing the cars

[TRD2000]

well i said "turbo" mr2 so not the n/a

i didn't realise that the camaro came as a 6...

i guess the the older 89-92 MR2 rather than the 93- as that was made round the same time..

[kman10587]

If you're talking about the SW20, then it's the 91-95 model (don't know how long it lasted in Japan), which received minor upgrades in 1993. In this case, I think you should compare it to the 93-97 Camaro Z28, which is priced similarly and was engineered about the same time. I know that the Camaros are very quick around a road course, but I'd bet a properly driven MR2 Turbo could beat it. That said, I'd rather have the Camaro, for its more stable, solid feel, and more conventional FR platform.

[Jimster]

Well since you're in NZ, then the Camaro is guaranteed to be a Z28, VERY few people wasted thier time importing and converting the 6 Cylinder Mustangs and Camaro's.

And on Manfield (Closest track to New Plymouth, of course), I'd probably give the advantage to a well driven MR2.

Though if it were a drag at Masterton (Closest part-time strip, jeez I'm such an expat, lol), then I'd be picking the Camaro as the Victor.


All depends on mods though, but I spoke of both cars as if they were stock.

[TRD2000]

Originally Posted by kman10587

If you're talking about the SW20, then it's the 91-95 model (don't know how long it lasted in Japan), which received minor upgrades in 1993. In this case, I think you should compare it to the 93-97 Camaro Z28, which is priced similarly and was engineered about the same time. I know that the Camaros are very quick around a road course, but I'd bet a properly driven MR2 Turbo could beat it. That said, I'd rather have the Camaro, for its more stable, solid feel, and more conventional FR platform.

production started in 89 for the SW20. and i did say JDM. i'm not sure if it finished in 97 or 98 for the turbo. you're right though, it is probably a better comparison cause thats when the camaros 5.7 started producing enough power to compete. back in 88 the camaro's 5L produced 170hp the 89 mr2 produced 220, it wasn't until 91 that the camaro caught up with a bigger engine that produced around 240, but it weighed 1500kg compared to the MR2 at 1250... so power to weight the MR2 still had it. even in a straight line!

[kman10587]

Originally Posted by TRD2000

production started in 89 for the SW20. and i did say JDM. i'm not sure if it finished in 97 or 98 for the turbo. you're right though, it is probably a better comparison cause thats when the camaros 5.7 started producing enough power to compete. back in 88 the camaro's 5L produced 170hp the 89 mr2 produced 220, it wasn't until 91 that the camaro caught up with a bigger engine that produced around 240, but it weighed 1500kg compared to the MR2 at 1250... so power to weight the MR2 still had it. even in a straight line!

My bad, the SW20 did start in 1989, just after the previous one left the U.S. market. The JDM MR2 Turbo makes around 250 hp and the Camaro Z28 makes 275. The Camaro also makes a lot more torque. Power-to-weight, the MR2 Turbo has it by a little bit, but for whatever reason, Camaros seem to put out better times. It could be the torque difference, the suspension difference, aerodynamics, or gearing; I'm not a drag racing expert, so I won't speculate as to why.

[MR2Driver]

Last production year for the SW20 was 1999, in 2000 it became the MR-S

Heres my biased comparison:

Looks: MR2, no question, a 1994+ MR2 looks orgasmic. The best looking Camaro's are decades old.

Performance: While the Camaro engine is more ideal for drag racing, and offers up more Torque, I prefer the performance potential of the 3S-GTE (~300RWHP low 12's) and the weight of the engine's effect on a road car.

Handling/Feel: The Camaro is an understeery kinda car, which offers up a more predictable and stable ride. But the ride itself isnt as smooth as the MR2 and I dont like understeer nor do I care for predictability. I respect driver's car's. I like having a car that requires effort for the best results. The MR2 feels nimble and the cornering is more enjoyable for me. The brakes on the also Camaro SUCK compared to the 93+ MR2 brakes.

Ride/Interior: Im not a fan of the Camaro's ride, or steering response, and while the MR2's interior isnt the most luxurious its still a heck of a nice interior in comparison.

Prestige/Rarity: Dime a dozen vs Once in a blue moon

Reliability: "I love what you do for me, Toyota"

[uranium235powered]

3S-GTE all the way! The performance potential, the power, and the reliability. I've heard that the 3S-GTE's are known to go 200,000+ miles

[JekylandHyde]

Originally Posted by uranium235powered

3S-GTE all the way! The performance potential, the power, and the reliability. I've heard that the 3S-GTE's are known to go 200,000+ miles

Now you can know it

I have 200,222 miles on an unopened 3SGTE putting out 351 rwhp.

[emokid15]

ill pick the Mr2. Looks Better then a camaro.

[Ground Rat]

Thirdgen F bodies were dogs from the factory.