The first-generation MR2 is not a common sight anymore, even in its native land. Yet, why do I feel numb and hesitant when contemplating it? Probably because I have zero personal experience about these. That’s not a novel feeling – most of the JDM stuff I find is completely new to me. But this one is an icon! The first mid-engined Toyota, from the wedge era, with a legendary engine and all that.
I’ve tried to get excited about this one, but it’s not really speaking to me. MR2, meh art thou? When I found it initially, though, I was pretty elated: with the exception of the interior, which was impossible to photograph (hence the factory photo above), the car was in mint condition, quite accessible and even the weather was perfect. A very good specimen of its kind, by any measure.
These MR2s were not imported to some European countries for some reason; I never saw these growing up. The second generation is far more familiar to me: those arrived in France in 1990, as we did after our stint in the US, and it so happened that our neighbour had one. Perhaps as a result, I’m keener on the looks of the second-gen MR2 – this first generation’s late ‘70s-tinged edgy-wedgy doorstop shape is not really my bag. Besides, there were already two full-length CC posts written about these, so what, if anything, could be added?
Incidentally, in most Francophone countries, these were known as the “Toyota MR,” as MR2, when pronounced in French, sounds exactly like the word for “shitty.” Toyota is usually good at avoiding these little linguistic mishaps compared to most Japanese carmakers, but in this instance, they did kind of screw it up. There are a few Francophone areas within certain countries that might prove problematic: I’m not sure what happened in Québec, for instance. In Switzerland, where French is spoken by less than a quarter of the population, Toyota just made do with the MR2 name, causing much sniggering in the western side of the Confederation.
Unfortunate alphanumeric aside, the MR2 was a landmark for Toyota – their first true sports car, in a way. Putting that 4-cyl. engine amidships was a radical idea when first attempted back in the ‘60s, but by the ‘80s it was a well-proven solution for fast two-seaters. Therein lies a conundrum: did Toyota get there entirely on their own? There are some interesting discrepancies in the sources about the involvement of Lotus in planning the MR2 – it all depends on what language is searched.
The English-language Interweb is adamant that Lotus and Toyota were thick as thieves in the early ‘80s. Lotus were one of the mid-engine pioneers of the ‘60s, so they definitely had the technological know-how that Toyota lacked. Toyota, on the other hand, has some very interesting engine and component technology available for Lotus to plunder. But the death of Colin Chapman, in December 1982, and the ripple effect of the DeLorean debacle on Lotus scared the Japanese away – though they pretty much had inked the MR2’s blueprints by that point. Toyota, who had an important financial stake in Lotus, quietly sold their shares to GM as soon as they could.
Japanese-language sources, for their part, are keen to play down the Lotus side of the story as much as possible. They talk of “rumours” of Lotus’s involvement and of a Lotus test driver being hired to finalize the suspension settings, or that the Lotus-engineered MR2 had to be entirely re-engineered by Toyota to keep costs low. It is certainly true is that the MR2’s 1000kg weight is not very Lotus-like, but build quality is also in quite a different league. But those suspensions sure look a lot like Chapman struts, and certainly bear no resemblance to anything used in other Toyotas of that era.
The Japanese-language sites also like to mention the Pontiac Fiero and the Fiat X1/9 in the MR2’s origin story, just to water down the British connection even more. The Fiat could have served as inspiration, I suppose, but the Fiero is completely contemporary to the MR2, so I really don’t see what role it could have played. Google translation does not allow me to really ascertain some of the nuances, but the overall effect is clear: this was a Toyota product through and through, end of discussion.
Given that Lotus were getting ready to manufacture a car using Toyota’s 1.6 litre engine (the very one that is in this MR2, if I’m not mistaken), the stillborn Lotus M90 Elan, Lotus’s involvement in the MR2 seems to be a bit more intensive than some folks in Japan would like to think. That’s just my feeling, of course, but given how poisonous Lotus became by the mid-‘80s, Toyota probably wanted to erase that collaboration from the memories of their countrymen, despite Lotus being held in very high regard by Japanese gearheads.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the MR2 went on sale in June 1984 with choice of either an 83hp 1.5 litre engine for the S trim (only available for the JDM) or the 1.6 for the G and G-Limited trim levels. That 4A-GELU engine provided 130hp initially, but it was soon superseded by the supercharged 4A-GZE version – good for 145hp. Transmission was either by a 5-speed manual or a 4-speed auto.
Our feature car’s rear spoiler-mounted LED third brake light means this is a late model. It might even be a Super Edition II, which was sold from January 1989 to the end of production nine months later. Over 160,000 units were sold around the world – the majority (over 95,000) went to North America. Japan only kept around 40,000 for domestic consumption.
This supercharged MR2 may not be my cup of tea, but I do recognize its importance in Toyota’s history, even if that history is somewhat unclear. That just adds a little mystery and controversy to the whole deal – never a bad thing. And I’m sure there are many CCurbivores whose salivary glands will have swiched to overdrive when seeing this machine, as this is probably the best version of this generation MR2, looking like it just came off the showroom floor, and in a very cool colour to boot. Nothing “shitty” about it, if you’ll pardon my French.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1989 Toyota MR2 SC – That’s Mister Two To You, by Ed Stembridge
Curbside Classic: 1986 Toyota MR2 – They Call Me MISTER Two!, by Tom Klockau
Cohort Pic(k) Of The Day: 1988 Toyota MR2 Supercharged, by Jim Klein
Can Toyota ever ever build a sporting car all by itself? The BRX/86 and the Supra/ BMW come to mind as recent (ish) examples.
Theres plenty of examples of Toyota building exellent sports cars by themself, the 2000GT and all but the recent generation of Supra are some, but I think Toyota is smart enough to know that they cant do everything perfectly, and sometimes doing everything themself isnt financially beneficial either, and so they partner with other companies.
Overall compared to the countless celicas, later gen mr2s, plenty of supras, and even the ae86 (and all the other Corolla sport models), the list of cars made with the help of other companies is small.
I went to look at a ratty one of these back in college. Typical Upstate NY rust bucket, but the guy was only asking about $1200 as I recall. I test drove it in the ran on some back roads. Oh man, what an absolute hoot of a car. A veritable go-kart. If I still lived in a place with twisty roads, something like this would be high on the list for a project car/weekend driver.
Dad gave his 1980 Corolla Liftback SR5 to my sister, and replaced it with a spanking new wingless Mister2 in red.
That car was a VERY enjoyable fling in back country CT.
These cars are mind-blowing in their road manners, power trains, and overall competence. What they don’t have are the back stories of a Lotus, or some sort of a human instigator such as a Carroll Shelby or Mr. Honda, or a string of big-time racing victories, to add luster to the model.
Think of them as the go-kart version of the Corolla/Levin of the day.
When these were around I always felt the Fiero was styled a bit nicer (particularly the late ones with the nicer front) but knew the MR2 was the better car. With age I still find the Fiero prettier, but have grown to appreciate the styling of the MR2 so much more. The clear air deflector at the top with TOYOTA on it that reflects onto the backlight is just a genius touch and the interior has always been just perfect to me. I’ll definitely say it looks best in bright colors.
I had a red ’89 MR2. In retrospect, I $hould have kept it! It had adequate legroom, unlike my 4 Miatas, and was just as much fun to drive as my Miatas.
The styling tho left a bit to be desired to my jaded designer eyes. The IP really “irritated” my beedy lil eyeballs, but the ergos were fine!
The 2nd gen MR2 with its mini-Ferrarri look was a very nice looking sports car. The driving dynamics were not nearly as “sharp” as my ’89 MR2s were.
I now consider my ’89 MR2 to have been one of my favorite cars to drive out of the 40+ I’ve owned. We grow smart…..so late.:( DFO
The US only got the supercharged version in ’88 and ’89, making a brilliant little car even more, uh, brilliant, I didn’t realize Japan had it earlier. Although there really wasn’t much need for it, as the standard 1.6l was already a hoot to drive. That blue paint is a bitch to keep looking good, as it seems to attract sap and insect strikes that leave marks if not promptly attended to, our Cressida was what appeared to be the same shade. I’m amazed how good this one looks while obviously left outside on occasion.
The wedgy/angular thing very much fits in with Toyota’s range in 1984/85, especially the Celica and Supra (and even Cressida) although the Corolla, especially the RWD coupes where starting to move away from that, and did even more so with the FWD Celica in ’85 and new Supra a short while later. At the end of MR2 production it was a bit of an outlier design wise among the range, soon solved with the second generation.
I’m not understanding the Chapman strut thing, here the suspension looks like the same (or very similar) to MacPherson struts that many Toyotas wear (including the concurrent AE86/Corolla GTS), at least at the front, nothing particularly different about it. The difference between a MacPherson and Chapman (as I understand it) is that the Chapman doesn’t turn and the axle acts as one of the locating links, which I think applies to the rear here, but not the front. Lotus only used the Chapman strut on the front of the Lotus 17, somehow mounting it rigidly (no turning) if I understand it correctly, but used them on the rear of several cars.
In short I think the rear can possibly be termed a Chapman but not the front in this application although most (vast majority) of sources simply term both ends as MacPherson, seeing as how the Chapman is more or less just a slight adaptation of that design.
The Chapman strut has a key distinction from the MacPherson strut, in that the driveshaft locates the axle, thus only a light radius rod is required. Thus the Chapman strut is only applicable to the rear driven axle, except in the 4WD version of the Fiat 500XL, which uses a Chapmanesque design for the front axle too. As such, a Chapman strut cannot be used on an undriven axle.
In the MacPherson strut on a driven axle, the driveshaft is not a locating member, and as such, it requires a lower track control rod to locate the axle.
It is a very common mistake to call a MacPherson strut a Chapman strut when used on a rear driven axle. In reality almost no cars outside of the Lotus used genuine Chapan struts. His design was inspired by a Goggomobil rear suspension, and its lighter weight by using the axle shaft as a control arm appealed to him. But in reality modern CV joints and the ease of adding a proper control arm for front/rear motion made it essentially obsolete.
From looking at drawings of the MR2 rear suspension, it’s obviously a classic MacPherson strut design. Yet many sources incorrectly call it a Chapman strut.
Ateupwithmotor has a good article on the MacPherson strut, and even he had to revise it later because he too fell for the mistake of calling a rear driven MacPherson strut a Chaman strut.
The term “Chapman strut” needs to be retired except as applied to certain Lotus cars, and a very few rare exceptions, like the Fiat 500XL AWD.
The whole beauty of using a MacPherson strut on the rear of the MR2 and Fiero was that is is essentially the same setup as used on FWD cars. Easy, quick and cheap. If anyone from Lotus had anything to do with the MR2, it would only have been is the actual “tuning” of the suspension components (spring rates, shock valving, etc.) as the basic layout already existed in Toyota’s FWD Corolla, which preceded the MR2 by over a year. Just like GM used the X Car FWD drive train and suspension in the Fiero, so did Toyota use the new E80 Corolla FWD drive train and suspension concept in the MR2.
Toyota: Build to specification
Pontiac: Build to cost
Who won that battle?
Although I much prefer the second gen to this car, I still find the styling attractive, I don’t really see this car as a Japanese Fiero as many in this thread do, but rather a mini-Ferrari
Unfortunately these seems to disappeared from the road very quickly. I don’t know if it was from abuse by their owners, or rust. I read some claims that the engine had head gasket and timing belt issues and the engine location in the middle of the car made it hard to work on.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=201533
That’s how they (or at least the second gen) were described by British media.
“If Ferrari built a cheap car, this would be it”
I got to drive an 86 MR2 in San Diego as an extended rental for a couple months. It was great, and even had a manual. Fun to drive hard, easy to drive for just errands.
It must have been one of the very last manual transmission rentals in the US, along with the Accord hatchback that I had for the next few months.
Nice and CC effect going well as usual I returned early to my living away job last Sunday the brake job on my Superminx got rained off, anyway I came up behind one of these MR2s at the bottom of the Kaimai range some guy in it around my age no badges on the back anywhere nice looking car very clean and tidy black but not quite doing the speed limit so I pulled into the right overtaking lane downshifted and went at the climb, ha;fway past him he changed his mind about cruising and it was on, side by side thru the tight turns all the way up the range those MR2s handle really well and being a Sunday evening the only traffic was going the other direction great drive and I never actually got past him, he went up a side road on the coast side presumably he lives up there its a dead end I carried on back to my motel.
I owned a JDM 1986 supercharged MR2 for under a year about a decade ago. It felt special, with that low cowl, pop-up headlights and 4AG-ZE hissing and whining behind you. It pulled keenly from low-rpm but ultimately ran out of puff at high rpm. The unassisted steering felt great. Ultimately though it didn’t inspire confidence on twisty roads – I could never approach the limits like I could in a Miata. Mine also had aftermarket coil-overs which ruined the ride, and chassis rigidity with the T-Top wasn’t much to write home about. The T-tops also leaked like a sieve which wasn’t much fun living at home without a garage.
I had one epic drive in it over the Australian Snowy Mountains, but on the way back the clutch went to the floor and after that started to slip.
Unfortunately I was a poor student and a car I paid $5K USD for needed a new clutch, a pretty expensive job I couldn’t do on my own, so I sold it for what I paid for it.
It’s come up for sale a few times since and is probably worth 2-3 times as much today, but I don’t really regret selling it.
Nice find – and you’re right – this summer has been a killer. I really cut down on my going out in the daytime too. Can’t wait for “Aki” to get here.