Should I buy an N/A auto

Hi

I'm brand new to this site as am thinking of buying a mkiv Supra. I'm going to go for a NA auto (I'm right in thinking this will be an import, yes?).

As the cars I am looking at are between 8 and 12 years old, I'm worried about rust. Am I best off buying a fresh import and getting it undersealed or should I find myself a UK spec car. What are these cars like for rust???

Also, is the NA auto any good. I have to have auto for personal reasons and NA for financial/insurance (not 30 till later this year) reasons. I have 5k to spend.

Thanks

Ian

insurance in my case, 20, 1 years no claims the twin turbo was cheaper to insure than the NA, from what ive heard the auto version of the NA is not a good combination

from what ive heard the auto version of the NA is not a good combination

its just the least popular choice in general............there's nothing particularly bad about them. TBH Rust is pretty much a non issue with supra's really, certainly structurally.

You can get a good na auto for very little money £3-3.5K.

Hi

A UK car would be too expensive, they only come in Twin turbo, no NA's.

So it would have to be an import, they're both NA and TT.

I don't think it would be particularly easy to get a good TT for 5K.

But you should get a nice NA car.

depends what you are coming from!

What you had, used to driving?

I've had cracking cars in the past, 4 wheel drive, turbos, V8s, V6s and hot hatches and I still loved my N/A auto Supra

Yes there is faster but not much better looking

Hi

Also, is the NA auto any good. I have to have auto for personal reasons

 

 

Ian

What are they, then?

I'm coming from an S14a 200sx (auto). people don't seem to be liking the the NA automatics!? Surely there is still a small amount of fun to be had. My S14a is a blast.

Of all the supras the NA auto comes out the slowest. For the same money you could get a TT auto. I'd advise it, insurance will not differ.

I'm coming from an S14a 200sx (auto). people don't seem to be liking the the NA automatics!? Surely there is still a small amount of fun to be had. My S14a is a blast.

Sorry but maybe my previous post wasn't clear enough, the N/A is still a good car and yes you can have plenty of fun in it!

Go and test drive one, you'll soon make your mind up but just dismissing it because a couple of folk knock it is not a wise move IMO

Of all the supras the NA auto comes out the slowest. For the same money you could get a TT auto. I'd advise it, insurance will not differ.

A TT Auto insured for the same money as a NA Auto???

Are you sure?

NA's are usually more to insure.

A NA auto is by no means slow

NA's are usually more to insure.

Only when comparing a Jspec NA to a UK TT due to the extra premium for imports surely.

Only when comparing a Jspec NA to a UK TT due to the extra premium for imports surely.

Nope, when comparing a n/a to a jap tt , but you'll always get people come on here saying they insured their n/a for a few hundred pounds, but all they've done is insured their mk4 as a mk3 non turbo, happens quite a lot, and the reason n/a's are generally more expensive is that the n/a was never offically made here so it gives insurance companys a reason to bump the price a little more.

i have had my n/a auto for two years now and have been more than happy ,ok its not tt quick but it looks the same .and slower than a manual ??? -1/2 a sec to 60 .its still a quick car and generally n/a is more reliable than the tt. just take a look in the tech help section .if you can afford it go tt .but you cant go wrong with the n/a auto .theres only one place supras are prone to a bit of rust thats the rear hatch where the bottom corner of the glass meets the body .good luck in your search

My car before I converted it was an NA/auto. There was nothing at all wrong with it, I got just as much of a buzz driving it as I do the tiptronic/single I've got now.

Yes, you can bugger about in a manual a little more, but for general driving the auto is very very nice.

For the same money you could get a TT auto. I'd advise it, insurance will not differ.

TTs down to £3k now then?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with owning an NA Auto Supra, you will get folk saying its not a drivers car or TTs are better and all that guff, but for a car being used as a daily driver as opposed to a weekend car you cannot go wrong with an NA. Fine if you just want a weekend car go for the TT but you will struggle to find one for 5k and if you do buy a Supra you need to factor in the maintenance costs as well, be it an NA or TT

There is absolutely nothing wrong with owning an NA Auto Supra, you will get folk saying its not a drivers car or TTs are better and all that guff, but for a car being used as a daily driver as opposed to a weekend car you cannot go wrong with an NA. Fine if you just want a weekend car go for the TT but you will struggle to find one for 5k and if you do buy a Supra you need to factor in the maintenance costs as well, be it an NA or TT

Personally for 3k-4k I think you should check out the soarer, more gadgets and available in 4.0 v8,2.5tt and same 3.0 as the n/a supra, so 3k could get you an n/a auto or a 2.5tt soarer, this would be an auto too, and it's a great box like the supra, lovely car and huge bang for buck.

Oh and the 3.0 soarer can be picked up for less than 2k, v8's around the 3-4k mark too.

Don't forget aristo's...

They are really coming down as well, all the performance of a tt in a 5 series sized car.

A TT Auto insured for the same money as a NA Auto???

 

Are you sure?

Well not exactly the same but I would dismiss a £100 either way. Not because I can afford it, but if someone is paying say £800 a year, then £900 is not that much more.

Based on the specs, the NA auto is slower than the NA manual, whether thats just 1/2 a sec to 60, it is still slower.

I never said it was a slow car, the words in my post say it is the slowest of all the supras.

I bet you could get a good TT for around 5K with a good search but with high miles. As long as it's been cared for, it's still a good solid engine and gearbox.

My NA is over 200,000 Km, what's that? 130,000 miles, still going strong even if it's not worth a squirt of piss.

Don't forget aristo's...

 

They are really coming down as well, all the performance of a tt in a 5 series sized car.

Still waiting to find a reasonably priced Aristo - all I can find on Autotrader is £10 motors and an old dog:(

If £5k is your budget then you will get a very nice auto N/A. It's true the TT is more desirable but their value reflects that.

Also, the N/A is a quick car in it's own right and people lose sight of that fact by always comparing the NA with the TT.

With NA autos going for as little £3k now you'll find yourself a very nice example. Don't worry about rust and the like as most NA's probably spent half their life in Japan.

Hi

 

I'm brand new to this site as am thinking of buying a mkiv Supra. I'm going to go for a NA auto (I'm right in thinking this will be an import, yes?).

 

As the cars I am looking at are between 8 and 12 years old, I'm worried about rust. Am I best off buying a fresh import and getting it undersealed or should I find myself a UK spec car. What are these cars like for rust???

 

Also, is the NA auto any good. I have to have auto for personal reasons and NA for financial/insurance (not 30 till later this year) reasons. I have 5k to spend.

 

Thanks

 

Ian

In short yes, cheap tt's tend to go wrong more/cost more to fix, also a lot of power straight away if you are not used to rwd. For me import tt was slightly more to insure than n/a with sky and both more than a uk tt