Jump to content
SAU Community

Anyone driven a supra??


Recommended Posts

Guest Oz Elitesport

Had a drive in a N/A supra today. Thought it went fairly hard, liked the interior, but thought the sitting position sucked.

I luv my R33 Gts25t, but would be interested in hearing comments from people that have driven the twin turbo version or dragged one of them.

Does a gts25t have any chance against one of these (both stock)? What 1/4 mile times do they run?

Oz

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/12081-anyone-driven-a-supra/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've driven an NA Supra.... it goes alright. I personally don't like the interior that much. I've also been driven in a 200rwkw RZ Supra... that was a very tuff car.

I would say a stock 33 GTS-T would easily beat a Supra. My friends Supra and another friend's 32 GTS-T are about evenly matched.

i dont know what the rules are there anywhere in the US.

dont know any of the procedures... if u have to own it in another country before u can bring it in or what.

im going to Japan to live for a year or so cause i want to bring in a modified R32 GTR or R34 GTT... leaning more towards the GTR

should have it on the rd here in AUS by the time im 24 hopefully.

get an RZ supra with a t51r turbo kit!

i bought a skyline cause it has a decent back seat. i'd seriously consider the supra if straight line speed is what your after and convenience was not a concern - because they seriously haul a55.

my experience with driving an RZ supra was that it was driving me rather than me driving it? ie. it didn't really feel as though i had complete control of the car...and this wasn't because i was sitting on the redline lighting up the rear wheels.

:D

I've had a run in with a TT Supra, I was borrowing my brother GTR at the time, I got a good start with only all four paws slipping ever so slightly, got to say through in gear I have not had somthing that close, still a few car lengths behind, it was definatly modded up, as is the GTR

Hi all, just thought I wouls share my views on this topic.

I have been in the fortunate position to have owned and driven both the Supra (RZ TT 6sp) and the Skyline (R32 GTR).

I guess when choosing between the two, it really depends on how you get your thrills. The Supra and the Skyline are two completely different cars in how they react given certain situations.

I still remember the awesome grip offered by ATESSA during Hi RPM getaways. That is something that the Supra will never do efficiently - get away from a standing start quickly. Sure it has Traction control, but it is useless as it cuts engine power so much.

You learn to turn it off when you get into the car.

However, rolling starts are a completely different story - the torque differences between the 2JZ and the RB26 are just like night and day - you can definately feel that extra torque, and in a rolling start, stock GTR's better watch out! This aspect makes driving around town a whole lot easier for those lazy to stir the 'box alot. The boost also arrives a hell of a lot earlier - 1000 Rpm or so earlier due to the sequential turbos of the Supra. Again power at low Rpms does help around town, which is where most people are going to be driving their cars around anyway.

I cant compare the handling too objectively, as my Supra now has the full JIC coilover treatment, bigger 17" wheels, and better rubber than the Skyline, whereas the skyline was a bog stocker, but even so, I felt that the Skyline hid its porcine weight a lot better than the Supra does. The Skylines handling is sharp and once you get used to ATESSA (on the GTR) quite enjoyable to drive. It does suffer a little from power understeer in certain situations though in stock form - something im sure could be dialed out of the car with some suspension upgrades.

The supra however, currently is very direct and handles like the go-karts I race. Good point in and very little body roll. Again - its not the standard suspension, which I suspect will be softer and more compliant, which will definately not help its cause around corners due to its weight! The supra is a large heavy car, and it never lets you forget that it is really. You feel you have prescence on the road, but I find that its driving position and design of the car makes it hard to see out of and over the bonnet. It isnt because I'm height challenged either, but more to do with the sitting position. To generalise away from what I drive now though, I would say it offers less feedback and certainly a vague feeling of precisely where you are going than the skyline does.

The supra's RWD really allows you to have quite awesome fun though - especially in the wet (in an off-road controlled environment! :D ). You can get the Dorifto you know that you have always wanted (come on, you all know you want it!) very easily due to the low RPM torque characteristics of the engine, or you can light up the rear bags for as long as you want, if thats your thing!

From an aesthetic point of view however, I have to say that a properly sorted Supra certainly looks the goods and would shat all over the R32 in this department - even if it is only a N/A . It certainly doesn't take a whole lot to tart up a Supra - bodykits are a plenty! As was previously mentioned before though, rear seat room is a joke in the Supra. I have a Recaro drivers seat in my Supra, and that negates the possibility of anything except a dog in the back seat behind me. Thing is, even if you could get enough legroom in the back for someone, they better be a dwarf, as the low glass hatch is going to give you some headaches (as you bash into it multiple times) for two people however, it is comfortable and has good legroom. The skyline however is the car to have if you want the flexibility of having the ability to carry 4 people in reasonable comfort. For me, the skyline wins, as I cannot recall how many times I have had to leave people stranded for only having 2 seats in the car.

Personally, I think that the cokpit design for both cars is pretty ordinary (its better in the R33). The Supra designers were on drugs when they did the design, as it seems their brief was to use as much of the interior space on the dash as possible - as such the dash posesses way too much space for all the buttons, and you get heaps of space between all the functions required - hello plastic city. The R32 design is sound, but hey, these cars are getting old, and they are starting to look that way too - but let me add that in my opinion, its certainly better that the Supra.

Side point => Best dash, cokpit, and seating design ever - S6,7,8 RX7 (but dont get me started on that car as well....)

To conclude - whichever car you decide to get really depends on what you are after. If you are into the looks side of things (ahem....a rice boi), I'd say that there is no better place to start than with a Supra. Buy a updated 96+ model with the bigger brakes, new dash, and grey taillights, then wack your choice of body mods onto that. I'm sure you wont be dissapointed. Dont forget, the US Supra scene is HUGE (much bigger than anywhere else in the world I think) so parts and support would be much easier to obtain. Nothing quite so frustrating as waiting a week for a part from Japan to get your car back on the road.

However, if you are more of a driver, and enjoy a challenge, then I'd have to say buy a R33 GTS-t and extract the performance out of that - it has a good engine and suspension, its RWD :D, and quite restricted from the factory. If properly modified, you may be able to keep up with some of the BPU Supra TT's in the States. Dont forget though, R33's are rarer over there, so I would guess you would stand out a whole lot more (than say here in Sydney).

So decide what you want out of your car and choose appropriately!

Hope this long a$$ reply can help you out - let me know if there is any other aspects that I havent covered sufficiently as I'm more than happy to help out with some information.

Cya,

Chris

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...