10 Reason Mk3 Supras are Garbage.

Actually, let's be honest here, they are most likely the worst Toyota ever built. These are my top 10 reasons for hating the mk3 supra. How do I know them so well? I worked on them for nearly 2 years, I drove both RHD and LHD mk3's with all sorts of different engines, stock and modified. I've spent a lot of time wrenching on them, and man do they suck badly.  Let's begin: 10. Racing History:  Let's be honest, there's really nothing special here, Bjorn Waldergard won one event with the MK3 supra in a Beijing Rally, and a few British fellows ran it in BTCC for a while. No real pedigree here. 9. Steering Angle:  This is straight up a joke, it can't be real, no way it's even considered safe or functional to have so little steering lock for daily use. You think I'm kidding, but that's full lock below. 8. Weight: This really should be the #1 reason why there's no point in driving an mk3 Supra for any sort of 'sporting' purposes. What's that? you've never known what the weight of a mk3 supra was? Pictured below is a vehicle that weighs nearly identical, and actually produces more power. (Note: 3800lbs, that's right, the CK short bed, short cab, not only weighed 3800lbs, but it actually produced 230hp and 300ft/lb of torque. Although the 1JZ variant is comparable) 7. Aftermarket Styling: Yes it's a slick looking exterior, simply put, it's the only selling point of the car. However, the aftermarket stuff? yeah, look below... 6.Targa Top:  So you have an oval, pretty strong shape, egg's are 3d ovals and resist deformation pretty well. Then you cut a huge chunk out of it. Now you've got an easily crushable "C" shape. Thus is the Targa roof. How bad is it for chassis flex? Toyota actually had high grade, long threaded allen bolts to hold it square when in. When out, people started putting in targa supports to help reduce the horrible flex. 5. Steering Stablizer:  The whole Geometry of the MK3 Supra suspension is fucked, and to help reduce bump steer, and ultimately any sort of driver feedback that's left after the hefty power steering, was a shock, bolted to the steering rack to help reduce...something. Road feel mostly, or resist the horrible bumper steer associated with #4. This Stablizer, much like the Cressidas (Although they had different front suspensions and shared the rear) resists and sometimes completely removes the affects of caster during cornering. It reduces the speed of turn by adding a dramatic amount of resistance. 4.Suspension Dynamics: These are just plain FUCKED. For some reason, Toyota decided that going from a single lower control arm McPherson strut setup, that had proven extremely well in the Corolla's, Celica's, and Celica Supras of the past, had to go, and in place a needlessly complex, and albeit poorly designed multi-link/double wishbone setup in it's place. You want to know how bad it is? Camber actually becomes positive on compression and negative on extension. Seriously look vvv. 3. Cock Riders: This isn't about the owners. The amount of people floating around the internet praising the mk3, simply because of it's loose relation to that of an mk4 Supra most of them having never owned a Supra in their lives. Although this makes me curious of the dynamic of buying and polishing a turd. 2. 7M/1G: Pretty weak sauce. So you buy a 3800lb driveway ornament and want to go fast. In North America, your faced with the 7M, and Japan, luckily enough got the 1jz, however, they too got the 7M and even worse, the 1G. Every other M series engine was decent, the 7M screwed that right up. It's head design is the fault. People will tell you it was a bad factory gasket, or under torqued bolts. However, even with those factors coverd, the real core of the issue was a bad head design. Getting past the common, and often debilitating issue of 7m's blowing gaskets (try pushing that thing!) The power of a 7m is a joke. Remember that Toyota publishes not the wheel horse power, but the crank. By the time that inline 6 delivers it's 200hp N/a to the rear, it's about 160hp, got a turbo? Roughly 190hp. Brutal for that amount of weight, but look out! There's even a worse motor: the 1GGTE. Although not plagued with head gasket failures and people thinking they can build the ultimate 7m, only to fail like the next guy, the 1ggte had it's own issues, spinning bearings, and well, being 2 liters! Such a tiny inline 6, and it needed twin turbo's just to make the 210hp. Unless your supra screwed and end up with an n/a 1GGE at 150hp. And the Number 1 reason MK3 supra's are garbage! *Drum Roll* . . . . . . . . . 1.  Burgandy:

Share this post


Leave a comment

Note, comments must be approved before they are published

422 comments

  • Steering lock is more then most other cars back in the 80’s, yeah its not as much as modern cars but they are over 20 years old, cut them some slack. They weigh 3226 Lbs Wet Not 3800 Its heavy but considering today most “Performance” cars weight upwards of 4800lbs, 3200 isnt as fat as you make it out to be, yes there were lighter cars, but they were also lower powered, or were deathtraps. Targa and t-tops, were popular back then and lots of cars had them, it was the “cool” thing back then. I don’t like them but I can see the appeal, and all targa’s, convertibles, and t-tops, had massive body flex. Steering yeah was very light and there wasn’t a lot of road feel in 86.5 and the 87 years, but was fixed in 88 and subsequent years. The suspension is what you would expect from a multi-link double wishbone setup, nothing major in today’s standard about average these days, but on par with other suspensions in the same era. The camber issue you called out however, you had to have been in a rather fucked up test model. Ive never seen another supra with that problem, and Ive got 20 years of experience. The rally model pictured has a completely different setup. That much camber is helpful for off road racing, and the setup was far stiffer, hence the camber staying negative in a jump like that. The 7-m and the 1-jz, were plenty powerful to move the 3200lbs car, Unless you drove the auto. With the auto yes your HP stats were about right on. The auto trans was garbage, but then again most are. Buying an auto in a sports car is just stupid. There was roughly a 10-15Hp drop in the stick model’s putting them at about 185-190 on the NA, and about 215-220 on the Turbo. The four cylinder was just bad, but it was the 80’s just about every performance car had a 4 cylinder model and they all were shit, hence why no one really bought them. I will agree Toyota dropped the ball on the Head gaskets, However they swapped materials for them which lead to the late 86 launch due to having to refit thousands of cars, and Toyota hadn’t really tested the new gasket material. Uncharted waters will always lead to issues with all car’s. For your number one, remember that style changes through the years. That said, yeah its hideous, but at least its not GM’s velvet red. shudders Toyota set out to do everything with the Mk3. Luxury, performance, reliability. However they achieved average if not slightly above, in all fields. Are they the most amazing car ever? No. But Garbage? No.

    • Phil
  • Pogięło cie gościu, tyle w temacie. Jesteś małym, smutnym kołkiem. Niech ktoś Ci to przetłumaczy. Supra MKIII Rullzz, greetings from Poland. ;P

    • Eugene
  • if you dont know what your doing then of course its going to be garbage to you

    • Anonymous
  • I enjoyed your opinion. I’ve owned a mk3 for 5 years. Make 400rwhp daily on only one head gasket. Yupp it’s a 7mgte too.
    Oh and my double wishbone suspension means I don’t have to bother with those garbage strut bars.
    I’ll agree about the targa though.
    Good read, kind of a laugh. I bet you drive Nissans now.

    • Dave
  • I own an 1988 mk3 supra turbo a, its a completely stock 7mgte and it make 240 whp. Trust me I’ve dyno’d it and everything. 7m’s aren’t a joke. what do you drive a ka24? i would whoop your ass it any kind of race.

    • Anonymous