How do you guys feel about a 90-92 MK3 Supra?
11-18-12, 03:59 PM
#46
the amount of money it will take to restore one of these, do an entire engine swap, body work, paint job, interior, coilovers/suspension, body kit, transmission etc..... I mean why bother?
even one of these in brand new condition wont be turning any heads and u certainly wont be attracting any women with it lol
even one of these in brand new condition wont be turning any heads and u certainly wont be attracting any women with it lol
11-18-12, 04:42 PM
#47
Driver
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ga
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 87 supra project ive always loved the way they looked.So i have that as my project and my 97 SC400 as my daily.I rather have it that way i trust my sc and know its dependable i dont have to worry about having a project as my daily and never knowing if its going to breakdown on me.this pic is almost a year old and it dosent have the side skirts on but i love it
11-18-12, 07:59 PM
#48
Driver
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the amount of money it will take to restore one of these, do an entire engine swap, body work, paint job, interior, coilovers/suspension, body kit, transmission etc..... I mean why bother?
even one of these in brand new condition wont be turning any heads and u certainly wont be attracting any women with it lol
even one of these in brand new condition wont be turning any heads and u certainly wont be attracting any women with it lol
11-18-12, 08:18 PM
#49
LOL you have no idea what you are talking about. When you get a chance take a trip over to Supraforums and take a look at the MKIII section. Theres a picture thread over there that would change your mind sir. When done correctly, the MKIII Supra is just as impressive as the SC.
I think this is one of those cars that maybe has a cult following of sorts but to the average person its still just some 80's car that maybe youd buy as a winter beater.
and not trying to argue but I dont think this mk3 is anywhere near the sc lol ,,,just my opinion man
(edit) i checked supraforums as you recomended and its pretty much more of the same ,, anyways im not bashing it im just saying for the money it takes to properly restore one ud be better off getting something else , again just my opinion
also we got quite a bit of them in our classified sections, I dont think many people are buying them here.
Last edited by 1WILLY1; 11-18-12 at 08:48 PM.
11-19-12, 04:12 AM
#50
Driver
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like you said, im not looking to argue, because its really just a matter of opinion. Theres 2 picture threads on Supraforums - the "aggressive" pic thread and the "clean" picture thread - in those 2 threads there are some PRIME examples of what the MK3 can be, some that would rival several SCs posted in the Ultimate SC pic thread. They are totally different cars, owning both i know.
I think any car this age, even the SC, can be expensive to modify, it really depends on what you start with. I just feel that the MK3 Supra gets a bad rap from a lot of misinformation that spreads around.
I think any car this age, even the SC, can be expensive to modify, it really depends on what you start with. I just feel that the MK3 Supra gets a bad rap from a lot of misinformation that spreads around.
11-19-12, 05:40 AM
#51
Just to chime in....I have an 84 Supra with a transplanted 89 7MGTE. The car is about 600lbs lighter than the MKIII, rare, and just better looking. The 7M has had its issues with BHG, but like others have stated, metal HG, and ARP studs is all that it takes to make it reliable and safe. Recently got 27.5mpg to boot. Love my Supra. (My SC400 sits in the garage when the Supra wants to run).
11-19-12, 09:46 AM
#52
Driver
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...mk3-mild-build
thats my boy.. 1 of the cleanest MKIII in the united states IMO..
thats my boy.. 1 of the cleanest MKIII in the united states IMO..
11-20-12, 12:07 AM
#53
Like you said, im not looking to argue, because its really just a matter of opinion. Theres 2 picture threads on Supraforums - the "aggressive" pic thread and the "clean" picture thread - in those 2 threads there are some PRIME examples of what the MK3 can be, some that would rival several SCs posted in the Ultimate SC pic thread. They are totally different cars, owning both i know.
I think any car this age, even the SC, can be expensive to modify, it really depends on what you start with. I just feel that the MK3 Supra gets a bad rap from a lot of misinformation that spreads around.
I think any car this age, even the SC, can be expensive to modify, it really depends on what you start with. I just feel that the MK3 Supra gets a bad rap from a lot of misinformation that spreads around.
But yea man hope im not coming across as bashing u or ur car i see u have one in your sig ,,,thats not the case,,,but I just dont really dont see it as being a worhtwhile investment
sorry bro, i guess im just not a supra guy
11-20-12, 02:03 AM
#55
To the OP: A70/MKIII's aren't hideous by a long shot if we're talking the 90-92 versions. TT wheels do help them out tremendously though. I'm not a fan of aftermarket body panels on them. I have a soft spot for A70's myself and arguments about their chassis design vs the SC/MKIV aside, they have one really important advantage if you live in Cali: you can buy an MKIII with an emissions legal turbocharged engine. That and the factory looks go a long way in my book.
11-20-12, 03:16 AM
#57
I have a 87 supra project ive always loved the way they looked.So i have that as my project and my 97 SC400 as my daily.I rather have it that way i trust my sc and know its dependable i dont have to worry about having a project as my daily and never knowing if its going to breakdown on me.this pic is almost a year old and it dosent have the side skirts on but i love it
11-20-12, 06:27 AM
#58
ive had 2 mk3 supras, 1 current rb swapped 240sx, and a newly swapped 1jz sc400..
and i must say
-the interior on the mk3 is very outdated. the stock seats are meh.
-the 7m (is) garbage, the oiling system is very poor.
-the 89-92's do look the best.
-i swapped a 7mgte into a n/a hardtop(****).
-imo they feel lighter than the heavy *** sc.
-went to a drift event this weekend in stl and there was a 240sx with a 1jz swap. and it moved so perfectly
-my s13 rb20 det swap weighs 2,700lbs vs my 1jz swap(with supra seats) weighs 3,700lbs (do the math)
-the 240sx is a solid car.
and i must say
-the interior on the mk3 is very outdated. the stock seats are meh.
-the 7m (is) garbage, the oiling system is very poor.
-the 89-92's do look the best.
-i swapped a 7mgte into a n/a hardtop(****).
-imo they feel lighter than the heavy *** sc.
-went to a drift event this weekend in stl and there was a 240sx with a 1jz swap. and it moved so perfectly
-my s13 rb20 det swap weighs 2,700lbs vs my 1jz swap(with supra seats) weighs 3,700lbs (do the math)
-the 240sx is a solid car.
12-22-12, 07:57 AM
#59
I built and 88 7mgte w/ 89-92 tailights and had paint and body work done all for under 6k including the price of the car. Actually it was my very first car.
600hp+ car and I agree it does feel lighter than the sc.
Before I built it with just an intake, open dp, BC set @ 12, and HKS SSQV bov I managed to pull out a 13.8 @ 106mph 1/4 just shifting into 4th and hitting fuel cut right before crossing the line.
My ole lady liked the way my old MK3 looked than she liked my SC.. I actually really like the way both of them look. Actually a lot of girls that knew me liked the mk3 over the SC. Due in part because they said the SC looked ghetto and anyone that has seen the SC on here will beg to differ and I would too. The SC down here is a car you would see in some shady nieghborhoods down here.
The stock seats in the MK3 are lazy boyz with sport compared to the MK4 seats in my MK4 & SC. I hate MK4 seats because they are the most uncomfortable seats I've ever been in.
Never had problems with my oiling system with the 7m either. But with the 7m's I have built for myself and friends everything was new toyota parts in the oiling system.
I agree that the interior of the mk3 is dated and so is the sc.
Everyone has their opinion. Some people will love the SC or Mk3 and some won't. I've seen MK3's turn heads along with SC's and I've seen people that didn't think to much or highly of any car.
Back in the day it didn't cost much to properly build a 350+hp mk3(when 350hp was a mark everyone was aiming for because nothing came out from the factory close to that hp). Everything was cheaper and @ that time the mk3 didn't have much of a following. Fast forward to today where the mk3 has started getting attention of people and people wanting to build them because they've seen them in action etc the price of parts and everything else has sky rocketed.
To each his own. Would I build another mk3 if I came across one cheap enough? Hell yeah I would and the same goes for the SC.
600hp+ car and I agree it does feel lighter than the sc.
Before I built it with just an intake, open dp, BC set @ 12, and HKS SSQV bov I managed to pull out a 13.8 @ 106mph 1/4 just shifting into 4th and hitting fuel cut right before crossing the line.
My ole lady liked the way my old MK3 looked than she liked my SC.. I actually really like the way both of them look. Actually a lot of girls that knew me liked the mk3 over the SC. Due in part because they said the SC looked ghetto and anyone that has seen the SC on here will beg to differ and I would too. The SC down here is a car you would see in some shady nieghborhoods down here.
The stock seats in the MK3 are lazy boyz with sport compared to the MK4 seats in my MK4 & SC. I hate MK4 seats because they are the most uncomfortable seats I've ever been in.
Never had problems with my oiling system with the 7m either. But with the 7m's I have built for myself and friends everything was new toyota parts in the oiling system.
I agree that the interior of the mk3 is dated and so is the sc.
Everyone has their opinion. Some people will love the SC or Mk3 and some won't. I've seen MK3's turn heads along with SC's and I've seen people that didn't think to much or highly of any car.
Back in the day it didn't cost much to properly build a 350+hp mk3(when 350hp was a mark everyone was aiming for because nothing came out from the factory close to that hp). Everything was cheaper and @ that time the mk3 didn't have much of a following. Fast forward to today where the mk3 has started getting attention of people and people wanting to build them because they've seen them in action etc the price of parts and everything else has sky rocketed.
To each his own. Would I build another mk3 if I came across one cheap enough? Hell yeah I would and the same goes for the SC.
12-22-12, 08:24 AM
#60
1JZ Single SC400
iTrader: (59)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Alabama, Roll Tide!
Posts: 8,518
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
12 Posts
I think the MKIII was actual great for its time. I dont see rebuilding one a problem. There are many ideas that could bring back the MKIII. I say there is nothing wrong with them. I had one for only 11 months. I loved it. It was an 90 turbo. White with cloth burgundy interior with targo top. I drove my buddies which was on very poor shape compared to my SC, I was still impressed with it. I hate the way the dash and panels crack, but Toyota still seem to use them till today.