Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Difference between the import/UK version?


Attero
 Share

Recommended Posts

LOL! And it seems everybody is adding to it:p

Well heres my 2 pennith, The J spec could be bought with practically any options, so there are an awful lot of J spec cars equipped with any, or most of the UK options, plus others that where not even in the UK options list.

IBTL;)

 

Really? I have never seen an early model J-spec RZ (which by definition was the top of the range for standard equipment) with 4 pot brakes. That's not to say it's impossible (especially if 93 UK spec had 4 pots) but in all the Supras in Australia (and I've seen, if only on the web, most of them) there isn't one that came like that from Japan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

the radiator may be smaller on the facelift but it is made of aluminium and has a better cooling efficiency so it is not a downgrade.

 

I beg to differ - my late model radiator couldn't cope with 15 psi on the 4294, but the borrowed early model coped fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I have never seen an early model J-spec RZ (which by definition was the top of the range for standard equipment) with 4 pot brakes. That's not to say it's impossible (especially if 93 UK spec had 4 pots) but in all the Supras in Australia (and I've seen, if only on the web, most of them) there isn't one that came like that from Japan.

 

With regards to the "bigger" brakes the UK spec came with, the following models (+ year) of Supra had said brakes as a factory option:-

 

1993-1997 SZ

1994-1997 SZ-R

1994-1997 SZ-R Aerotop

1995-1997 RZ-S

1993-1995 RZ

1993-1996 GZ

1993-1994 GZ Aerotop

1997-2002 SZ

1997-2002 SZ-R

1997-1998 SZ-R Aerotop

1997-2002 RZ-S

 

The 1995-1997 RZ and 1997-2002 RZ came with the same brakes as the UK spec as standard fit.

 

All of the others are a factory option and - in my eyes - not modified as such as I consider that more of an aftermarket definition.

 

All of the bolded examples are of which Thorin's car may fall into when stating "1994 J-Spec".

 

Given that it is a 6 speed (RZ/RZ-S), it still complies as they are in said category.

 

:)

 

By all means rarer yes, but far from not plausible :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong again.

 

By all means rarer yes, but far from not plausible :)

 

Well, I stand corrected. Never seen one, but there is the possibility it exists - which is obviously what Thorin has :p

 

But as to the "RZ" concept - my understanding was that RZ-S had lower specifications, and RZ was all options as standard. Does RZ only mean 6 speed turbo, then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

280BHP on J-Spec? Mine managed 352BHP with no cats! :D

 

When I was researching between the 2, I found the UK ones cost more (could be because they were more rare?)

 

Performance wise not much difference, they both have pro's & con's.

 

The facelift IMO do look just as nice as UK infact I think it looks nicer than a UK Spec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GZ was the higher spec'd model by default, but RZ or RZ-S could be specced up the same anyway.

 

http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/showthread.php?t=59334

 

Had a quick squizz at the link - and while it is pretty clear about most things in contention, it doesn't make any indication about diff size, driveshaft size, and radiator size. Nor does it show the V161 change to late model VVTi Supes. Perhaps this would be useful information to add to the PDF?

 

While it seems that owners *could* up-spec their cars, in my experience there are very very few that actually did.

Edited by sdistc
clarification (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Brian Mallon
I beg to differ - my late model radiator couldn't cope with 15 psi on the 4294, but the borrowed early model coped fine.

i found the radiator efficency for you

 

radiator heat transfer.. copper 82.7kw/h copper(auto) 87.9Kw/h (Aluminium -96/4+) 92.0 kw/h

 

from

 

http://www.mkivsupra.org.nz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of inciting another argument, believe what you will about the ability of the late model aluminium radiator to cope with the heat produced by a single turbo. I and a number of the other 97+ 67mm+ singles found that a larger capacity radiator (for me, the early model was a temporary fix while PWR was on back order) was better able to keep temperatures down in normal and hot (25+ degrees) weather.

 

As far as I'm concerned, if you drastically increase the heat generating capacity of the engine this should be countered by increased cooling capacity. This is more pronounced with the smaller capacity later model radiators - which may be more efficient, but simply don't have the capacity to deal with rapid changes in coolant temperature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.