brad21 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 So I roll up next to a somewhat ratty looking Supra with a fart cannon at a stoplight after he rounds a corner in front of me while I was waiting at another light. I look over and see nothing as his tint is super dark, the light changes and I launch and take him uphill to about 60-65 mph, then he hits the nitrous or whatever the freak was in that car because he walked away from me, uphill, to what had to be close to 120mph. I backed off at about 75. I was fully loaded too, gas, christmas presents, family, Thule box full on the roof, yada yada. To this point I've never gotten the chance to go at it like this and I figured I was gonna get used by this car, but what the heck... Clear road with a center divider, not much risk. I know those cars are fast, even stock, but what are the numbers on them? I know they're heavy too, but damn this dude was smokin'. Even if I was solo with a 1/4 tank he would have roasted me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerdave Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Was this a last-gen Supra? Those things... not sure what the official 1/4 times were but they had to have been mid to low 13s. And they take very kindly to all sorts of mods. Bulletproof engines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad21 Posted December 28, 2004 Author Share Posted December 28, 2004 Yeah, I would venture to say it was a 99 or newer. Not sure when they changed the body style back in the 90's but it was a stealthy looking car with the small stock spoiler on the back. Corvette/Porsche fast too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad21 Posted December 28, 2004 Author Share Posted December 28, 2004 Quick Google search tells me it's a MK IV with 320bhp stock. Made from 1993.5 to 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Break Beat Zen Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Turbo Inline 6 OWNS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Turbo Inline 6 OWNS!!! Does it? Those things are highway monsters though no doubt. A typical MKIV bone stock Supra should run low-to-mid 13s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-RAY Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 last night was not a good night for the leg gt.on the way back from the store with wife and wagon filled with 4 case of water 120 lb of dog food and 10 bags of food stuff full tank of gas.this 350z cuts in front of me and flashs his rear lights.the wife said what is that all about, i say he whant to run race..the hill is half a mile two lanes that turn into 6 at the top the guy run away from me near the top and flash his lights...the wife look at me at the stop light and said if you are going to act like a 19 teen year old in this car then you better get some go fast parts cause that was embarrassing and you need to work on your shifting..god i love that woman... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dv8ingvector Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally Posted by X-RAY ...the wife look at me at the stop light and said if you are going to act like a 19 teen year old in this car then you better get some go fast parts cause that was embarrassing and you need to work on your shifting..god i love that woman...Your wife OWNS!!! hahah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy05 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Nice wife .. but save it for the track!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenonk Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Twin turbo MkIVs can be very fast with very bullet-proof engines.. Single Turbo ones that are modified dont have a problem breaking a 11 sec run all day long.. 10 second Supra on the street is going to be a rare thing to see.. Although a Supra is known to be a dyno-queen.. there's plenty of them making well above 1000 hp but can't run a faster run than a 10 seconds. But dont let them do highway runs, they will hit above 180 mph with a blink of an eye (after the traction catches up). In Japan, MkIVs are re-fitted using V8s instead (easier to drive with the power always there, not to forget that it's classified in the GT500 [restricted to 500hp] series). Top Secret's JDM 4 cylinder Supra Engine screams a whopping 10,000 rpms+ (talk about a race engine) with I believe a single turbo setup making a reliable 400 to 500 whp (I would have to double check the specs on their car again). Over the years, the Supra has redefined itself as a "track star" in road racing (not really in drag, it's a USA thing for drag setups). When the Supra is reborn again (2006~8), it will be a total super car status (rumors said that the selling price will start $100,000 instead of the old price of $55,000) that will be in tune with a modified NSX and the likes of Porsche, Ferrari, Audi/Lamborghini.. Keefe Keefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGT Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 check out what a US tuner has available on the Toy I-6 motor: http://www.pfsupercars.com/mods/lexus/mods_turbokit.htm The non-turbo motor from the old Supra is basically the motor in the current Lexus IS300 - 6-sp swaps and turbos are common upgrades. Surely, these could be used as baselines to guess at what US market turbo Supras are capable of, as they came with a turbo version of that motor and all the bolt-ons work as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rc0032 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 This is at a shop around the corner from me. http://www.sound-performance.com/projects/sp2.htm Performance: current - 10.2@137MPH w/SP67 on slicks - low boost old - 10.566@129.56MPH w/SP63 on slicks old - 11.093@123.15MPH on stock fuel system w/ SP57 on slicksand http://www.sound-performance.com/customer/markburrell.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatt Marrington Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 hahaha I have been trying to find a woman like your wife for a while dont take that the wrong way. -Hatt 2005 Obsidian Black Legacy GT 5MT Un-Limited Sedan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 You didn't get sprayed - you just saw it when he hit real boost At only 18 psi my brother's SP57 Supra (automatic) traps at 118 mph - enough to make anybody grin stupidly. I don't care about the weight of any car. I raced my Stealth all the time and it weighed 4070 lbs with me in it. Still ran 12.50s though, or 0-89 mph in 7.8 seconds by the 1/8th mile slips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 You didn't get sprayed - you just saw it when he hit real boost At only 18 psi my brother's SP57 Supra (automatic) traps at 118 mph - enough to make anybody grin stupidly. I don't care about the weight of any car. I raced my Stealth all the time and it weighed 4070 lbs with me in it. Still ran 12.50s though, or 0-89 mph in 7.8 seconds by the 1/8th mile slips. Your car might have been quick straightline.... ..bah! I guess I'm just a fan of lightweight cars as my vehicle history reflects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobY Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 yeah dont screw with supras... http://www.to4r.com the fart can probably indicates he's at least BPU... meaning hes churning at least 400rwhp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 < Apologies for the hijacking - inserting canned Stealth defense post here > They're too heavy to handle well. Wait a minute, it pulls more lateral g's than a NSX, Supra, and C5. - http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p16.jpg It only beats the C5 in a slalom - and we all know how poorly C5's handle - http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p17.jpg With that kind of weight, it must stop poorly too. Wat a minute, what's that? It beats the NSX and Viper in braking? It ties the C5 and is only 1 foot behind a Supra? Only 2 feet behind the Ferrari? Impossible! http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p21.jpg Yep, those cars were too heavy to do anything well. It came in last in all the acceleration tests. Too bad it's so hard to make more power out of that engine. I mean, my peashooter 9b stock turbos managed 109 traps with a race weight of 4070 lbs - throw those numbers into a hp calculator and see what it makes. < / Canned post > That's my usual post - I end up having to do this a lot considering I'm on several message boards. This time, though, I can also address the other usual resulting argument that "these measurements don't reflect how the car actually handles." Ok, let's do that now. According to this test, it came in last in the road course. < Waits for laughter > It must be as awful as you thought, right? I mean, even the article complains about its understeer (as does the Porsche, or any AWD car for that matter). In this case, "last" means "behind the C5 by .6 seconds, behind the NSX by .8 seconds, and behind the Supra by 1 second." Considering it was by far the slowest accelerating car in the comparison, wouldn't you think that this difference isn't all that bad? And that considering the extra 100 hp I was packing, a car like mine would have done much better in the overall results? I'd venture to say it would put it behind the Viper, Ferrari, and Porsche - not too bad consdering the pricetags of those cars. Like I always say - its only "problem" is mediocre acceleration, that's easily and cheaply remedied. The rest is just myth and misconception. BTW, you do realize a Lamborghini also weighs 4000 lbs, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Pix are teh borked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 < Apologies for the hijacking - inserting canned Stealth defense post here > They're too heavy to handle well. Wait a minute, it pulls more lateral g's than a NSX, Supra, and C5. - http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p16.jpg It only beats the C5 in a slalom - and we all know how poorly C5's handle - http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p17.jpg With that kind of weight, it must stop poorly too. Wat a minute, what's that? It beats the NSX and Viper in braking? It ties the C5 and is only 1 foot behind a Supra? Only 2 feet behind the Ferrari? Impossible! http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p21.jpg Yep, those cars were too heavy to do anything well. It came in last in all the acceleration tests. Too bad it's so hard to make more power out of that engine. I mean, my peashooter 9b stock turbos managed 109 traps with a race weight of 4070 lbs - throw those numbers into a hp calculator and see what it makes. < / Canned post > That's my usual post - I end up having to do this a lot considering I'm on several message boards. This time, though, I can also address the other usual resulting argument that "these measurements don't reflect how the car actually handles." Ok, let's do that now. According to this test, it came in last in the road course. < Waits for laughter > It must be as awful as you thought, right? I mean, even the article complains about its understeer (as does the Porsche, or any AWD car for that matter). In this case, "last" means "behind the C5 by .6 seconds, behind the NSX by .8 seconds, and behind the Supra by 1 second." Considering it was by far the slowest accelerating car in the comparison, wouldn't you think that this difference isn't all that bad? And that considering the extra 100 hp I was packing, a car like mine would have done much better in the overall results? I'd venture to say it would put it behind the Viper, Ferrari, and Porsche - not too bad consdering the pricetags of those cars. Like I always say - its only "problem" is mediocre acceleration, that's easily and cheaply remedied. The rest is just myth and misconception. BTW, you do realize a Lamborghini also weighs 4000 lbs, right? I've read it already. I'd still take a Lotus Elise over most of the cars listed. Yes, with the 1.8L motor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGT Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I've read it already. I'd still take a Lotus Elise over most of the cars listed. Yes, with the 1.8L motor! I saw a yellow one last week. Scchhhhwwweeeeeeettttnnnnessss!!!! I wish I could afford one as a second car right now. I would own one, if I could fit in it, which is doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I forgot - he's disabled direct linking to that site for bandwidth reasons. Copy / Paste of the URL will make it work. I offered him a script to disable inline linking (using the pics on another website) but still allowing hyperlinks but I guess this does what he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agctr Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 Well the GT is a lot of things but the OLD SCHOOL BOYS can still get up and dance when they want...... Thanks for the post. Be Wise, Choose your runs Wisely...... Obe One.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxerGT2.5 Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 Two cars I won't screw with....the supra and a FD. OBAMA......One Big Ass Mistake America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.