Opinion of Current 2.0 and 3.0 Owners

[Xxyion]

you guys are trying to make the decision difficult....... i like the BRZ/FR-S but have never driven one. The basic rep. is "fun" which would give the 2.0 Supra some cred.....i have seen some reviews that basically say if the 2.0 had a manual/LSD, the choice would have no doubt been the 2.0 instead of the 3.0. Still think the preference is the 3.0 for the power but a test drive of the two will make the final call.

I have to say the craziest thing is that noone seems to know what kind of diff the 2.0 has. I just watched 4 different reviews on it and half said it was an open diff and the other half said it was a traditional mechanical LSD. Even Toyota's website doesnt tell us what it has, it just shows that it doesnt have the E-LSD.

Here's my 2cents (again i guess). If you plan on having this as a weekend fun car for some backroad carving and maybe plan on doing a little bit of modding, i'd say get the 2.0. 255ish odd hp is perfect for backroad drives. The single piston brakes will give you way more wheel choices than the 3.0 would since you wouldnt have to clear a sset of Brembo's and you arent losing anything by going to coilovers.

However if you plan on either tracking the car and really want to nail fast times. Or if you want a really good GT car and dont plan on modding much, then get the 3.0. The amount of stuff the 3.0 comes with basically makes up for the stuff you would mod the 2.0 with without having to spend the extra labor costs and research involved.

At the end of the day you really cant go wrong with either.

Sponsored

 

[Captain_Kirk]

I wonder if Porsche Cayman GTS/GT4 owners talk down to Cayman S owners like this

If you think this is bad you should see how turbo MK4 owners treat the NAs.

 

[max]

I still think that for most situations the power of the 2.0 is more than enough, unless you plan to take it to the track, in which case is a no brainer.

So i take it you have the 2.0? if so, did you get a chance to test drive the 3.0 and what was the "ultimate" factor in your decision? Money, practicality, etc.?

 

[SupraBC]

So i take it you have the 2.0? if so, did you get a chance to test drive the 3.0 and what was the "ultimate" factor in your decision? Money, practicality, etc.?

No. In fact I didn't test drive either because they're very rare to find here in western Canada still. I believe mine was the first 2.0 sold in BC, but I knew it would be the closest driving experience to my FR-S, which I loved taking to the mountains from time to time.
The ultimate factor was money. I could've still afforded the 3.0 but I would've had to make compromises elsewhere and it didn't feel worth it for my purposes.
Had I considerable more money to also spend on track days or if I was interested in the tuning scene, I'd pick the 3.0 in a heartbeat.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from getting the more powerful car, but decided to chime in as the 2.0 was getting some undeserved bad reputation from some in this thread ?

 

[autopc25]

No. In fact I didn't test drive either because they're very rare to find here in western Canada still. I believe mine was the first 2.0 sold in BC, but I knew it would be the closest driving experience to my FR-S, which I loved taking to the mountains from time to time.
The ultimate factor was money. I could've still afforded the 3.0 but I would've had to make compromises elsewhere and it didn't feel worth it for my purposes.
Had I considerable more money to also spend on track days or if I was interested in the tuning scene, I'd pick the 3.0 in a heartbeat.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from getting the more powerful car, but decided to chime in as the 2.0 was getting some undeserved bad reputation from some in this thread ?

There are several online reviewers who even prefer the 2.0. Tada even said he prefers the 2.0 for a daily driver. I think it's great to have choices so everyone can buy and drive what they want. Congrats on yours!

Attached is an article with quotes from Tada about the 2.0.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2021-toyota-supra-2-0-3-0-vs-toyota-86-which-to-buy/

 

[max]

but I knew it would be the closest driving experience to my FR-S, which I loved taking to the mountains from time to time.
The ultimate factor was money. I could've still afforded the 3.0 but I would've had to make compromises elsewhere and it didn't feel worth it for my purposes.

That is important to me as well.... i make several references to a '93 RX7 that i owned(similar dimensions/power as the 2.0 Supra) and i STILL have not found anything(within a reasonable price-point), that could match that car's "fun to drive" factor... i plan on buying one in about 10 months so i have time to truly evaluate the decision....also, it gives me time to pay off a credit card....hehehe. If you have any "opinions" as to the daily drive-ability of the 2.0, don't hesitate to share.

 

[Xxyion]

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2021-toyota-supra-2-0-3-0-vs-toyota-86-which-to-buy/

great article. interesting how the 3.0 can only achieve the 50-50 weight ratio WITh driver and passenger, whereas the 2.0 achieves it naturally without anyone inside.

It makes sense why Japanese drivers prefer the 2.0. There arent really any long straight roads and having more power doesnt actually translate to better when it comes to driving mountain roads. I find the power complaint comes mainly from Westerners since drag racing is more of a thing here than it is in Japan. We also just naturally have more long straights.

 

[autopc25]

great article. interesting how the 3.0 can only achieve the 50-50 weight ratio WITh driver and passenger, whereas the 2.0 achieves it naturally without anyone inside.

It makes sense why Japanese drivers prefer the 2.0. There arent really any long straight roads and having more power doesnt actually translate to better when it comes to driving mountain roads. I find the power complaint comes mainly from Westerners since drag racing is more of a thing here than it is in Japan. We also just naturally have more long straights.

America is the land of the big, more, super-size, and 1/4-mile. And some bragging rights. Lol. I am glad there are choices like the 2.0 and 3.0 here. Everyone can get what they want. Power corrupts and I am thankful we can get a little extra with a factory warranty if we want it. lol. Everything else that comes with the 3.0 is nice too. For anyone who wants the stuff. Especially the differential, suspension, brakes.

 

[Islindur]

I'll tell U my view.
For reference, I'm in EU, I drive 86 222hp/245nm with short gearing (high 5s 0-60mph), I would rather have light, less powerfull S2000 than 700hp 1900kg Hellcat. I have driven 3.0 a lot on the road + recently some tracking (Supra event on my local track where I lied down the fastest time, within 1.5s from a professional race car driver that drove the Supra for a reference time, so lets say I know something about drving fast).

The answer for your question is what do YOU expect from the car.

The 3.0 is GREAT daily. It sounds amazing stock. It has more power stock than you will ever need. Honestly, where will you use 350hp on a daily bassis? 100-140kph goes in this car in a moment. Press your foot down from 70 and your suddenly at 120. Having said that I would tune it to around 420hp anyway, because I like to mod my cars Engine in just glorious and simply better than smaller B48 in 2.0. The auto is great. Its not PDK fast, but is easily good enough, even for track driving. Brembo brakes are amazing for a stock car (few hours on a track and no sponge feel, great stopping power all day and the car was abused), very confidence inspiring with good pedal feel.
But it does weight over 1500kg (those are the current times, everything is fat now, M2 competition DCT is over 1650kg) and you can feel that, especially on a fast direction changes or comming out of a drift. While very direct, the car is tonned down in feel, but its the cost of being made on BMW parts. The suspension, while great for a daily, is for my liking too soft for the track, the car body rolls 2much (so I would do stiffer springs and bigger front sway bar day 1). So for me 3.0 needs a bit more rawness and bit less weight. I feel like the more hardcore GRMN version is what would please me

The 2.0 is 100kg lighter and dont listen to anyone saying its not much. As others said above, the engine sits further back making this car more front-mid engine car, so its not only 100kg less, its the engine position too that has impact on cars behaviour. It is lighter on its feet, it does rotate better. Its not effortless in direction changes like 86 but it is better than 3.0, there is no arguing on that. Is the lack of adaptive suspension a problem? That you will have to answer yourself. Why? Because even in sport, 3.0 is too soft for me (and I drove in sport suspension setting daily most of the time), so I would go even stiffer with springs. I would do sway bar + springs on 2.0 too to eliminate the roll. Its a sports car after all, so while I appreciate daily comfort I got my priorities elsewhere. Interior is actually the same between both so you get that nice cabin for less. As for LSD - EU cars are open diff, no mechanical LSD. I heared here and there that bump steer is caused also by e-diff calibration among other things (they retunned e-diff for a 2021 model and the bump steer is calmed down). So lack of E-diff may help with that but honestly I dont find bump steer as that big of a problem since it shows mostly when you drive really fast on uneven roads. But honestly, I would love to have mechanical LSD, at least something 86-like. The car doesnt have super advanced torque vectoring systems like McLarens do with open diff. As for power - 2.0 got dynoed at 280hp/416nm stock. Its around 5s 0-60, 13.4s 1/4 and 21.5s 0-200. While visibly slower than 3.0 its not THAT slow as some suggest. I know ppl now require mid-range sports car to have 400-450hp stock and do 0-200 in 13s but in reality its not really usable on a daily basis. Ask your self if you want that punch in the seat till like 180-200kph. Yes? 3.0 for you. Both engines dont have strong top range, 3.0 falls around 6700, no point revving it to 7000. But because the 2.0 is slower you get to rev it more on the street and it doesnt get stupid fast so instantly and revving the the gears up to 6k+ is fun, isnt it? 2.0 has bit bigger turbo lag and it has the feeling it wants to rev less than 3.0. But it still goes suprisingly well, its faster than it seems because of the massive 400nm torque that comes online even lower than in 3.0. Looking at track times - 2.0 is not slow at all -> https://fastestlaps.com/models/toyota-supra-sz-r-n-a -its around old Cayman R/981 Cayman S in therms of speed (or at least it seems so judging by the 2 times it posted so far), and I wouldnt call that slow. Is the 3.0 gearing 2 long for 2.0? I wouldnt say so, 3rd ends around 130kph, 4th goes barely to 160. It has same gearing like my 86 (which is shortened from 4.1 stock to 4.67) and I have been told few times already that I got pretty agressive gearing for a street car. And I have way less power and torque. 718 gears are long - 3rd ends at 160, its where 4th ends in Supra, 4th goes over 200 in a Cayman. THAT is long gearing. So if you drive in power band I dont fee like the gears are missmatched. Interior is actually the same between both so you get that nice cabin for less.
I would like the Brembo brakes from 3.0 on 2.0 not because smaller are bad, but that those bigger are that good. Another thing is 2.0 does not have an oil cooler like the 3.0 does, so for a track driving you would have to consider probably adding one. Also, the 2.0 engine while being closed-deck design like 3.0 is not forged like 3.0 so I wouldnt push it 2hard with tuning. So POTENTIALLY its less durable than 3.0 (3.0 won egine of the year 2020). Wheels on 2.0 are not forged too so while being smaller they dont have to be actually lighter, a +for 3.0. The 2.0 sounds way worse outside than 3.0, like a bland 4cyl turbo. Also way less agressive pops and bangs form the exhaust. Inside the difference is less because you are getting fake engine noise from the speakers and its simmilar noise that is used on 3.0, check this -> Yes it will be harder to sell 2.0 in few years and 3.0 will hold the value better, that is undeniable. Overall 2.0 requires some parts to finish I think, more than 3.0. But you get the lighter feeling. If you start adding 2much, like bigger brakes, heavier LSD etc you will nullifly the weight advantage to some degree.

I feel your dillema, because I will face the same decision. Was about to buy Supra now but due to COVID my plans got delayed. So when I'm about to get 1, used 3.0 will be at the price of new 2.0 or slightly more.
I am personally torn between 3.0 and 2.0. I want to track the car few times a year and not worry and i dont know how the 2.0 will hold up for such hard driving. I want the sound (add to that AWE exhaust - heaven) since its important for me and the smoothness from the 3.0 for a daily. Comming from raw 86 I want the lighter more direct feel for backroad driving from 2.0 (in EU base 2.0 weights 1395kg, like 718 PDK, its actually pretty light for the ammount of things it has). I want the brakes and oil cooler from 3.0.
And on top of that new GR86 comes to EU next year too. And gettin 250hp/270nm from its 2.4 wont be a problem with nice exhaust and tune. All that closed below 1300kg with mechanicall LSD and sweet N/A engine resposivness and superb steering.

Having said all of that - 3.0 Supra is 50% more expensive than 2.0 due to tax here. 47k Euro vs 72k. In USA the difference is much less, which makes the decision even harder. I feel like 2.0 is a bit 2 expensie for USA market, should start at max something like 39.990, not over 40k.
Also, watch this:
its not some random journalist bullshit, but a well rounded view.
Dont look at 2.0 as the "worse" or "unoworthy Supra name" car, the sucesfull Supra race cars were 4cyl. It explores bit different approach to the same concept. You are driving and paying for the car after all so buy what suits your needs the most.

Afterthought: After driving everything in this segment from MX5/s2000 up to F-type/718S/M2C or Mustangs I still, despite having some flaws to improve for my personal liking, vote Supra as the best balanced, well rounded sports car below likes of 911s or more hardcore track cars like 718 GT4. Fuk the haters

 

[SupraBC]

If you have any "opinions" as to the daily drive-ability of the 2.0, don't hesitate to share.

It's a very good daily vehicle if you can get past the fact that it's a 2 seater.

Some reviewers complain about visibility and blind spots. I don't have an issue with it. Mirrors are very good size so if you set them up correctly, this is not an issue. Others said it feels claustrophobic, I haven't felt that either.

I don't expect ride quality to be any worse than your RX7 and it's an auto, which is a blessing in traffic.
Trunk opening isn't huge but the cargo space isn't bad, especially for a sports car. One of the biggest decisive factors for me was the fact that I can still fit my skis inside the vehicle thanks to the open design between the seats and the trunk.

All these points apply equally to the 2.0 and the 3.0
In the end, as I (and others) have mentioned, it comes down to what your needs are to determine if you really need the extra hp and bigger brakes.

 

[Islindur]

As for visibility - I'm tall, 188cm, and visiblity is bad overall, I would say a lot less view than in 86. I dont see traffic lights when they are higher, where in 86 I have 0 problems.
Also the sitting position is higher than in 86 or 718. Its low but I'd like it even lower

 

[max]

The answer for your question is what do YOU expect from the car.

So this may sum it up......i am in the US(good ol KY) but i have no interest in being the "stoplight" king......leave that for others....i commute around 30 miles, one way, to work. My main requirement is: get around that A**hole in the left lane as quick as possible but keeping in mind, the state police are not far ahead on the side of the road. So i need to move in and out quickly but slow it down just as quick..Radar detector saved my butt many times. i don't care about the occasional "hemi or v8 mustang/camaro" flexing their muscles on a straight patch of road. i could give a sh**.....

I don't expect ride quality to be any worse than your RX7 and it's an auto, which is a blessing in traffic.

The one thing i used to do in the RX7 was drive a major curvy stretch of road outside my hometown and the starting point was just as i crossed the bridge over a small lake. i would downshift to 3rd, mash the gas, make one upshift to 4th and see how long it took me to get to 100mph.....NO other car i have owned since, could do it as quick......i think the 2.0 Supra may have more to say about that than the 3.0......The combination of these things are making a good argument for the 2.0..... i just get sick to my stomach thinking of paying that price point for the 2.0.......although, at the time in '93/'94 dollars, the RX7 was about the same price point....of course, there was only one engine choice, 1.3L twin sequential turbo rotary and weight was 2900lbs soaking wet.....

I'll tell U my view.
For reference, I'm in EU, I drive 86 222hp/245nm with short gearing (high 5s 0-60mph), I would rather have light, less powerfull S2000 than 700hp 1900kg Hellcat.

EXACTLY!!!!!! Good post.....you should sell cars.......lol

 

[Islindur]

So this may sum it up......i am in the US(good ol KY) but i have no interest in being the "stoplight" king......leave that for others....i commute around 30 miles, one way, to work. My main requirement is: get around that A**hole in the left lane as quick as possible but keeping in mind, the state police are not far ahead on the side of the road. So i need to move in and out quickly but slow it down just as quick..Radar detector saved my butt many times. i don't care about the occasional "hemi or v8 mustang/camaro" flexing their muscles on a straight patch of road. i could give a sh**.....


The one thing i used to do in the RX7 was drive a major curvy stretch of road outside my hometown and the starting point was just as i crossed the bridge over a small lake. i would downshift to 3rd, mash the gas, make one upshift to 4th and see how long it took me to get to 100mph.....NO other car i have owned since, could do it as quick......i think the 2.0 Supra may have more to say about that than the 3.0......The combination of these things are making a good argument for the 2.0..... i just get sick to my stomach thinking of paying that price point for the 2.0.......although, at the time in '93/'94 dollars, the RX7 was about the same price point....of course, there was only one engine choice, 1.3L twin sequential turbo rotary and weight was 2900lbs soaking wet.....


EXACTLY!!!!!! Good post.....you should sell cars.......lol

Nah I cant sell cars, I wouldnt be able to give ppl bullshit every day just to sell something, if the car X was bad in my view I'd feel I need to tell them so they dont waste their money lol I'm trying to give you all info I gathered + some thoughts from my personal driving experience and I'm trying to be somehow objective, not ignoring the pros and cons of each of them. And I'm not trying to convince you to either of them, because I dont sell them to you lol so I gain nothing anyway, no matter which you chose I completly understand some ppl dont even wanna look at 2.0 coz its small, sounds bad outside and its not really THAT fast and they dont care for that last bit of lighter car feel handling. And its perfectly fine, every1 got their own expectations. Look how many Mustangs drive around, its cheap powerfull V8 and for most ppl its good enough. I was disappointed after driving Mustang coz in fast corners it was still a heavy lump with half-dead steering and that great sounding V8 didnt compensate for that for me, there is no way I would own one. On the other hand my dad would be very pleased with one coz the sound and occasional acceleration from that V8 would be enough for him.
So there are people that go 500hp+ on 3.0 with straight exhausts, and there is me thinking how to remove weight from 2.0 to get to 1350kg not even touching power to get that light car feel. So, different ppl, different priorities

I didnt drive RX7 but having watched some reviews and looking at weight it seems like gocart like feeling car. 86 is like this, Cayman 987.2 is like this. Supra 3.0 is not. Yes it has short wheelbase and it rotates and handles beautifully but its more of a luxury modern-day dual purpouse 1540kg sports car. As I said, it drives great, for me the best in the segment but still its not gocart-like. Its just to heavy to have that feeling. 2.0 should be closer to that.
Best idea is to drive them both. Even if you have to drive few hundreds of km to a dealer for a test drive. You are not in a rush so try to organize it Maybe this 100kg less wont compensate the loss of 3.0 sound and power for you? Or the slower 2.0 will be fast enough and will give you more fun because you get to rev it more on the street (I red already someone prefered 2.0 coz he could use the throttle more than in 3.0 coz of the slower pace = more fun). Or you will enjoy that HUD screen, bigger brakes and heated seats more and fell like you need them. Or the 1400kg car feeling will be the most important part and remind you more of and RX7 than 3.0. Only you can decide
BTW I dont get how 2.0 is slow, its the same speed on 1/4 mile as BMW e92 335i and that was considered fast 10years ago. What happend?
You should be happy with both tho, imo cant go wrong 2much with either of them. There are days I'd go for that 3.0 engine in a heartbeat just paired with good exhaust and never look back

But I'll say it again, 2.0 is expensive in US. 2.0 is around 47k Euro in my country (3.0 71) and I still think it should be few k cheaper to fight the 270-300hp hot-hatches that go for around 35k. And it WILL lose more value over time. Its a car for quite narrow margin of buyers.

Drive them both, thats it. Also, read reviews compilation in sticked thread on main page

 

[max]

I didnt drive RX7 but having watched some reviews and looking at weight it seems like gocart like feeling car. 86 is like this, Cayman 987.2 is like this. Supra 3.0 is not

Great comments: the below links say it all........ heart pounds when i look at these. If the 2.0 Supra comes close, i am sold!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry 3.0 owners...





Doug's review is spot on.........Thanks for your " 2 cents worth".....

 

[SupraBC]

I didnt drive RX7 but having watched some reviews and looking at weight it seems like gocart like feeling car. 86 is like this, Cayman 987.2 is like this. Supra 3.0 is not. Yes it has short wheelbase and it rotates and handles beautifully but its more of a luxury modern-day dual purpouse 1540kg sports car. As I said, it drives great, for me the best in the segment but still its not gocart-like. Its just to heavy to have that feeling. 2.0 should be closer to that.

In this respect the 2.0 also feels like a modern luxury sports car. Yes, turn in is quick and it's playful but you don't get quite the same steering feel that you do in the 86. I could only agree that the 86 will feel closer to the RX7 than the 2.0, and even less so to the 3.0

I think these guys do a great job comparing the 2 of them and I will echo what they say.....In the 86 you feel connected to the road, while in the 2.0 you feel connected to the car.
But as I've said before, personally I think I will enjoy the 2.0 just a bit more on those twisty roads.

i just get sick to my stomach thinking of paying that price point for the 2.0

Maybe what you need is an 86 and tune the heck out of it. I can only imagine that will give you the closest feeling you had in the RX7, and you can get it in a manual too

Sponsored