[suprajake]

Never tracked mine, but with 100% all original, untouched suspension from 1995 on 18” wheels... I wouldn’t call mine “soft”. I think it still feels feels great. I do like those gunpowder grey wheels. I’d like to do that in a nice bronze on my satin OEMs.

 

[Por2geezSupra]

Let's not get carried away here. My car with a downpipe, TRD cat-back and 100 octane gas dyno'd 425 rwhp. It ran low 12's/upper 11's at 117-118. I added a GReddy 3 row, dyn'd 457 rwhp and traps went up about 3 mph. ET's stayed the same due to poor 60' times.

Stock it went 13.6-ish at 104-106.

This was in 1999.

A 3.0L Accord will do precisely none of that.

spot on. In the last few years I’ve noticed more of these comments regarding stock twin cars and comparing them to modern minivans in terms of performance, and I think it just boils down to people who have absolutely no experience with one in stock form and weren’t around when that was the norm. A stock car makes 300 to the wheel and a properly setup bpu car makes 400rwhp + depending on fuel. Let’s be honest, unless you’re talking about the highest performing muscle cars or super cars, your modern affordable sports cars is making that kind of power…

 

[Lagtime]

spot on. In the last few years I’ve noticed more of these comments regarding stock twin cars and comparing them to modern minivans in terms of performance, and I think it just boils down to people who have absolutely no experience with one in stock form and weren’t around when that was the norm. A stock car makes 300 to the wheel and a properly setup bpu car makes 400rwhp + depending on fuel. Let’s be honest, unless you’re talking about the highest performing muscle cars or super cars, your modern affordable sports cars is making that kind of power…

Those are decent times today, but they were absolutely crushing in the late 90's, esp a street car with full amenities that would trap 120+. Highway killer. Many are not old enough to have context of what those times and trap speeds meant 20+ years ago.

 

[CasperMK2]

Never tracked mine, but with 100% all original, untouched suspension from 1995 on 18” wheels... I wouldn’t call mine “soft”. I think it still feels feels great. I do like those gunpowder grey wheels. I’d like to do that in a nice bronze on my satin OEMs.

When my Supra was bone stock, I wouldn't call it soft either. Yes, it was a comfortable car, but not the soft ride they describe in the video. Now with the Superpro bushings and HKS Hipermax IV (still on default setting), it is a firm ride.
The only thing I really dislike about our cars is the brake pedal feel. It doesn't give me any comfort. I tried different pads, brake lines, motul fluid, bled it multiple times. It is just meh... Maybe a BBK will be better. Although the OEM brakes are very good at stopping the car.

Casper

 

[suprajake]

The only thing I really dislike about our cars is the brake pedal feel. It doesn't give me any comfort. I tried different pads, brake lines, motul fluid, bled it multiple times. It is just meh... Maybe a BBK will be better. Although the OEM brakes are very good at stopping the car.

Casper

Agreed. My brake feel is also lacking. OEM rotors w/ Hawk Streets and upgraded fluids. It will stop, no doubt, but lots of effort required.

 

[Supra Schnauzer]

MKIV Supra with 2JZGTE best car ever f’n made. Period. 😎

 

[95MKIVTT]

Generally, I think it's a good review of the car although they fail to mention how the Supra fared against its direct competition (Z32 TT, 3000GT VR-4, R-7, Corvette) and the NSX. The MKIV Supra was virtually undefeated in comparison tests of the day.



I'm not contesting that the NSX, RX- 7 and maybe others had/have a subjectively sharper driving experience than the MKIV Supra. That said, when the numbers were added up, the MKIV Supra was almost always the winner. Feel versus metrics, which one is more important? IMO, reviewers often get this part wrong.

as well as the Viper RT10, 911Turbo and the ZR1 all of which the Supra bested or equaled in terms of handling in the 1993 Motor trend shootout thanks to Hiromo Naruse's dedicated input

 

[95MKIVTT]

spot on. In the last few years I’ve noticed more of these comments regarding stock twin cars and comparing them to modern minivans in terms of performance, and I think it just boils down to people who have absolutely no experience with one in stock form and weren’t around when that was the norm. A stock car makes 300 to the wheel and a properly setup bpu car makes 400rwhp + depending on fuel. Let’s be honest, unless you’re talking about the highest performing muscle cars or super cars, your modern affordable sports cars is making that kind of power…

not only that but these kids dont seem to undertstand that even the Ferrari F40, Lamborghini Muria, 69-72 Chargers which were ubermesch fast for their day can be beaten out by the said minivans. But of course every time I mention the cars these ricers respond with "yeah but... but THOSE WERE like um Da PinnACLE of fAstness!!!

Never tracked mine, but with 100% all original, untouched suspension from 1995 on 18” wheels... I wouldn’t call mine “soft”. I think it still feels feels great. I do like those gunpowder grey wheels. I’d like to do that in a nice bronze on my satin OEMs.

again, the fact it was able to beat out the 911 turbo, RX7 and the ZR1 in handling in the 1993 motor trend shoot out bone stock makes it highly underrated in that category.

 

[95MKIVTT]

pretty good and this guy Albon does mention the little known facts of how well it handled and fared against more expensive and more handling focused cars of its time but one thing that this guy as well as others miss is the involvement of Hiromo Naruse whose handling focused attitude is what made it what it was. As for not being a $200000 driving experience, errr again neither are the classics of that time, heck the 2000gt isn't either nowadays but its historic for BEING so why don't these kids get that?

 

[Theneil300]

I wanted to just check to see, and the “kia Carnival” makes just shy of 290 horses, and is far from the most powerful shitbox minivan, where the contemporary mustang 5.0 makes 480. I have driven Supras and all sorts of other things, and it’s a 90s ride, is what it is. They are sick, I love them and more so the 2jz, they are also old, and stock they are just slow. I also think a tank full of 100 octane and a 150 shot of nitrous and that accord 3.0 might hurt some feelings at the drag strip too 😂
I very much realize and appreciate it was the best car of the 90s except maybe the Mclaren F1, but it’s shockingly high sticker price makes comparing it to contemporary cars easier, and the contemporary sporty cars blow it out of the water spectacularly. For reference the 2023 mustang gt5.0 is 40k, the same as the Supra was in 93 8 economic crashes later, with the dollar currently worth half of what it was. Fortunately the tech (especially tire and fuel injection tech) can be implemented and I love to see it , let’s just be real about the performance of cars 30 years ago, it is absolutely true, minivans are now faster.
Again I’m sorry

 

[shenofjo]

at the end of the day, savagegeese reached the current conclusion given the information and the jdm RHD supra it had. I would say the conclusion thus far is based on incomplete set of data points without having tested a usdm, BPU car, as well as various APU setups.

Until next time!

 

[KGraeme]

Generally, I think it's a good review of the car although they fail to mention how the Supra fared against its direct competition (Z32 TT, 3000GT VR-4, R-7, Corvette) and the NSX. The MKIV Supra was virtually undefeated in comparison tests of the day.

These guys are highly respected reviewers but I fear they fell into the same trap as many in the mainstream media did back in the day; that is to say they made comments similar to the Savage Geese comments.....until the objective data was presented. These data had the Supra winning virtually all of the traditional performance tests against competition that "offered a better driving experience".

I'm not contesting that the NSX, RX- 7 and maybe others had/have a subjectively sharper driving experience than the MKIV Supra. That said, when the numbers were added up, the MKIV Supra was almost always the winner. Feel versus metrics, which one is more important? IMO, reviewers often get this part wrong.

One of the more egregious examples occurred many years ago when C/D named the Honda Prelude the "Best handling car in the world" when the Porsche 944 was the outright winner of every performance test, but was undid by the "feel" of the Prelude according to the writers.

The reviewers rightly noted all the work and engineering that went into the MKIV 's suspension and therein lies the magic, IMO, getting the GT ride and road manners while getting the sports car performance metrics at the same time. Tough to get this right without resorting to electronically controlled suspensions even in 2023.


Ken.

I think it's both.

 

[KGraeme]

at the end of the day, savagegeese reached the current conclusion given the information and the jdm RHD supra it had. I would say the conclusion thus far is based on incomplete set of data points without having tested a usdm, BPU car, as well as various APU setups.

Until next time!

This is very puzzling.

 

[KGraeme]

I'm still frustrated about the body style switch from MKIII to MKIV....
I don't know if I'll ever get over it.

I don't think I can get over it.

 

[JoeSupra]

I watched the video the other day. I knew exactly what was going to be said before it was said. One thing I will agree heavily with them is these cars don’t give you $100,000 driving experience. After driving a NSX home for a friend I knew exactly what they were talking about. Supras feel/experience will always be top dawg for me but driving that NSX made me look at cars differently.

 

[FastTurbo]

I don't think I can get over it.

Oh do tell.

 

[nomiezvr-4]

I watched the video the other day. I knew exactly what was going to be said before it was said. One thing I will agree heavily with them is these cars don’t give you $100,000 driving experience. After driving a NSX home for a friend I knew exactly what they were talking about. Supras feel/experience will always be top dawg for me but driving that NSX made me look at cars differently.

The cockpit and seating positionof the na1 nsx is unmatched. Its so wild.

 

[FastTurbo]

As a car to want to live with as dare I say a daily driver, it does not get much better then an na1 nsx. It doesn't have the power but it doesn't need it, it makes up for that in sound, handling, and comfort. I'm old. Maybe a comptech supercharger.

 

[Small Shot]

Worth is 100% subjective. There are certain intangibles that go along with it. Especially folks in my age group. I am in my early 40s.

A MKIV is 100% worth the price of admission. Even more so if the mofo is clean!! All too often do I hear/read it is not worth it. However, it is often difficult to ignore the financial position of the one spewing this non sense. People buying a MKIV are not cross shopping a modern day shit box mustang or minivan

Comparing decades old sports cars to todays cars is just pure stupidity. Remember folks you don't debate with stupidity because you will be beat by experience of that side. Lastly, someone should tell all those old muscle car/vintage exotic car buyers that todays Kia will kill them light to light in a race. Their cars are not worth the 1M+ that were paid

 

[Wreckless]

I got to drive an '05 NSX 6-spd in 2006 or so. Like actually whomp on it a good bit, not beat on it but really push the car. It forever changed my opinion of the NSX and Hondas in general.

I came terribly close to buying a '92 NA1 for $20k in '08 or so. Even navigated getting it financed only to tap out because I was worried about having a car payment. Wish I hadn't passed that up...