More Reliable, NA or Turbo?

[NSXN8]

Thanks JekylandHyde. I've got another question for you. Someguy, in a different forum was saying how the MR2 Turbos are much more reliable than the NAs. Is this True? I haven't done much research on the topic, but i would imagine that they are pretty much the same car, but one has a turbo and one doesn't. Does the turbo come with many more options than the NA? I just can't figure out why the Turbo would be more trouble free. Thanks.

-Nate

[JekylandHyde]

The turbo MR2 uses the 2.0 3SGTE engine while the NA MR2 uses the 2.2 5SFE engine.

It would be accurate to say that the 3SGTE is a siginificantly better engine in many respects. The NA engine does not take abuse are serious modifications well.

Straight out of the box, both engines will last a very long time without mods. They are both "realiable". The 3SGTE is just an amazing motor...

[NSXN8]

Hey, thanks for all the info! I had no idea that the two engines were so different. By the way, i didn't mean to start a new thread, i thought that writing in the box "Post Subject" would just just put a subject at the top of my post under the original thread. I prefere NA engines, but if I ever buy an MR2 (and i hope to someday own one) i will definately go with the Turbo. What is the HP difference?

[JekylandHyde]

The turbos were rated at 200HP stock and the NAs I believe were around 135... the differnce is significant.

They way they respond to mods is even more significant.

I love Jekyl (my NA). It is a beautiufl car, it handles wonderfully and it has a smooth enjoyable power band, but it is not and will never be the high performance sports car that Hyde is (my turbo mr2).