:tongue: :tongue: :tongue: :tongue:

Nobody said that the zed is not a pretty car.

In my eyes it's gorgeous, that's why I almost bought one about a year ago. I test drove quite a few. Long or short versions, they are low-slung, sexy and mean.

Unfortunately they are also heavier than the supra and the sleek bonnet that makes them so pretty doesn't allow for much airflow around the engine --- leading to all sorts of heat-related issues.

 

In the end I went for the supra because of the higher-bhp potential and better (overall) reliability track record.

 

Looks-wise, I think that the zed is marginally prettier (in my eyes), but performance is another matter. Once a boosted supra gets going, it's GONE

A *stock* UKSpec supra with the traction control fuse off can do 180 mph on a long straight, real ones (Toyota figure)

Uprated ones, still on stock turbos/fuelling/etc can do 190+ on GPS instruments, on the Autobahn.

The zed can't match that, can it?

 

Not questioning your stats, but terminal speed is more about gearing than bhp. Assume that the UK Soop has a 6 speed box?

 

Steve :)

i might be wrong hear but a zed is restricted by it's gearing to, they will pull to 182mph then run out of revs.

Pmsl, this is a great thread! hope the Supra boys take it for what it is. IMO the old 'stock supra is faster than stock Zed....' argument is a waste of time anyway. A Zed running 400 hp is going to be faster than a Supra running 300. A Supra running 500 is going to be faster than the Zed,and so on. It just comes down to how much money you have to chuck around. Maybe you can do more on a Supra for less but its still big cash. Supras age better under the engine bay but fifty percent of Supras and Zeds have rebuilt/modded engines anyhow, so thats irrelevent. Nobody can argue that the Supra looks as good as the Zed. End of the day we all drive the cars for similar reasons; an affordable supercar. I wave at all jap performance cars, although the majority of non-Zeds don't wave back so I just look a fool. But I feel warm inside knowing I'm spreading the love, AND DRIVING THE BEST CAR!!!!!

i might be wrong hear but a zed is restricted by it's gearing to, they will pull to 182mph then run out of revs.

I'm talking about a bone-stock UKSpec supra with the 155mph limiter removed (by pulling out the TC fuse)

They are not my stats, they are Toyota's own figures.

 

The zed does have shorter gearing from what I remember, meaning that it has an advantage on everyday acceleration runs.

The supra trades off in-gear acceleration for top speed potential. After all, 326bhp stock is more than 280.

WAAHAAY :dance:

 

Some great combacks from the Supra Guys

BUT

The guy who says "The Back lights on a 300 annoy me" Is Priceless

WAAHAAY :dance:

 

Some great combacks from the Supra Guys

BUT

The guy who says "The Back lights on a 300 annoy me" Is Priceless

 

Is that because it's the only view of the Zed he gets as it goes past him and off into the distance??? :tongue:

Guys I am a zed owner as you all know.

 

1st thing, the zed isnt as fast as a supra, face facts, it isnt

 

however, the zed isnt that much slower

 

BUT

 

the Zed is a much better looking car, was an event that caused toyota to change their thinking and make a better car and more than anything else.

 

The Zed is not well known. I still get people asking what mine is.

And its vastly underrated, which is good, very good, especialy to thoes supra boys who end up in th rear miror

The guy who says "The Back lights on a 300 annoy me" Is Priceless

The supra's front lights flashing are more annoying, as you probably already know :duffer: :wack:

Its like Royal said, its all relevant to how much you put into ya car, and whos driving it. I know of a guy wiv a 300 (you know who you are ;)) that will kill a load of Sup's But at the end of the day....

 

 

IT WAS ONLY A BLOODY PHOTOSHOP PIC FOR A LAUGH!!!!!

After all, 326bhp stock is more than 280.

 

Yep, but then the Supra comes out of the box with 11.5psi boost. A zed on 11.5psi will also make at least the same bhp figure.

 

I can live with only being able to do 182mph topspeed ;)

 

The Zed and the Supe are so close to each other, that it really just comes down to which one you prefer, for me it will always be the zed for many reasons.

look what they've posted

The supra trades off in-gear acceleration for top speed potential. After all, 326bhp stock is more than 280.

 

Why are you comparing the MK4 Supra then? The zed is quite old. In reality, you should be comparing it to the MK3, which is beats hands down. :)

 

It's like comparing a MK2 Ford Fiesta XRpoo with Corsa GSi.

 

I'm just thankful that all the chavs lust after this rather than a nasty kitted zed.

 

 

 

:)

look what they've posted

I think our version was way better :p

I've got a 12-page document written by Toyota for their own dealers, comparing the supra mkiv to the zed.

It is point by point, since they were commercial rivals at the time and their salespeople should be prepared for factual comparisons by punters.

 

If anyone's interested I could post the link here, but I warn you that the supra wins most of the points. After all it had the advantage of being designed later on, with the GTO and the zed in it's sights as prey.

I've got a 12-page document written by Toyota for their own dealers, comparing the supra mkiv to the zed.

It is point by point, since they were commercial rivals at the time and their salespeople should be prepared for factual comparisons by punters.

 

If anyone's interested I could post the link here, but I warn you that the supra wins most of the points. After all it had the advantage of being designed later on, with the GTO and the zed in it's sights as prey.

 

No offence, but Toyota are hardly gonna write one sayin that the zed is better. are they??

yes they are, or else their dealers/salespeople would be ridiculed by knowledgeable punters.

 

This was not meant to be published for the general public, not a marketing document.

yes they are, or else their dealers/salespeople would be ridiculed by knowledgeable punters.

 

This was not meant to be published for the general public, not a marketing document.

 

so you're telling me that if they thought the zed was better, they'd tell their sales persons to tell the punters that??? nope sorry, they'll point out only the good parts, key points to help with sales.

I've got a 12-page document written by Toyota for their own dealers, comparing the supra mkiv to the zed.

It is point by point, since they were commercial rivals at the time and their salespeople should be prepared for factual comparisons by punters.

 

If anyone's interested I could post the link here, but I warn you that the supra wins most of the points. After all it had the advantage of being designed later on, with the GTO and the zed in it's sights as prey.

 

I dont doubt. The Supra is Toyota's copy of the Zed. It was one the one car that Toyota engineers had in mind when building the Supra.

 

But like I said above, IMO the differences are not enough to warrant selecting one car over the other, if you prefer the other.

Why are you comparing the MK4 Supra then? The zed is quite old. In reality, you should be comparing it to the MK3, which is beats hands down. :)

 

No, You cant compare the Mk3 Supra with the zed. The Mk4 and Z32 are rivals.

 

Nissan never gave the Mk3 Supra a thought when designed the 300zx. It was designed to better the current top Sports cars - Porsche 911, Porshe 928, Corvette. (and beat the opposition it did :))

 

The Zed came out first, making it older, becuase toyota had to go back to the drawing board to redesign the Mk4 before its release becuase the Z32 exceeded all expecations.

I've got a 12-page document written by Toyota for their own dealers, comparing the supra mkiv to the zed.

It is point by point, since they were commercial rivals at the time and their salespeople should be prepared for factual comparisons by punters.

 

If anyone's interested I could post the link here, but I warn you that the supra wins most of the points. After all it had the advantage of being designed later on, with the GTO and the zed in it's sights as prey.

 

Well there you go then. The zed was out way before the MK4 Supra was. If the zed was no good, then why did they use it as a base to aim for.

 

GTOs are not particularly good cars.

OK guys, I won't bother anymore, got nothing to prove.

 

Let's just stick to the photoshop jokes, shall we? :)

OK guys, I won't bother anymore, got nothing to prove.

 

Let's just stick to the photoshop jokes, shall we? :)

 

Good idea me thinks, ;)

Bit Harsh..

 

You made some good points John A.

OK guys, I won't bother anymore, got nothing to prove.

 

Let's just stick to the photoshop jokes, shall we? :)

 

 

 

"EXACTLY"

 

Thats what it started as!!!!

My 300ZX is fantatic. Ok there are some that are a lot nicer. But they aint mine so to me not as fantastic? The same goes for a Supra owner. in my opinion the Toyota is ugly and thats why I didnt buy one. You can buy a stock "ANYTHING" but then do your own thing and make it better. So the moral of this story is "we was only joking" but as a novice in the jap sports car world I can state one fact.......every time nissan have produced a new sports car Toyota go and follow suit and bring out a "better" one? So its ok for you to live in the shadow of a superior car builder. lets see you at the POD? :tongue:

I've got a 12-page document written by Toyota for their own dealers, comparing the supra mkiv to the zed.

It is point by point, since they were commercial rivals at the time and their salespeople should be prepared for factual comparisons by punters.

 

If anyone's interested I could post the link here, but I warn you that the supra wins most of the points. After all it had the advantage of being designed later on, with the GTO and the zed in it's sights as prey.

 

 

There is one thing we are going to agree on.....

 

 

The GTO is crap