autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mr2 why always 1993?

To: ax-digest@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: mr2 why always 1993?
From: Smokerbros@aol.com
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:41:02 EST
In a message dated 2/3/2006 8:12:41 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
hillman@planet-torque.com writes:

The only really significant differences are, '93+ has 15"  wheels,
versus 14s for the earlier cars, 94+ has some cosmetic changes  which make
them more desirable to 18-20 year olds, and hence, significantly  more
expensive.  Non-California '93+ allegedly have 5 additional hp  from a
different head, but I'm not sure that's ever been verified on a  dyno.



The rear lower trailing arms, or lower control arms, got longer in '93,  
making it rotate less than '91-2.  '91-2 used to be the standard of the  class, 
winning C/S in at least '97-99 before the cars got moved to E.   There may also 
be other years. In '91-2 the extra 5 hp for 49 state cars was due  to one 
catalytic converter instead of two (inline).
 
Charlie
ex C/S MR-2 driver




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>