4th Oct 2005, 08:30

I own a 1992 gt-s, Increase the boost and watch you're turbo life go downhill, The fuel consumption is excellent for such a powerful car, compare it to scoobs n evo's and you're laughing.

The car is a bit Jekyll and Hyde, impossible to lose in the dry and impossible to keep on the road in the wet! Its all good fun though!

10th Oct 2005, 11:06

Your comments on fuel consumption don't sound right, my N/A MR2 struggles to get 250 miles out of a tank driving quite steadily so a turbo will have no chance, 200 miles maybe. Still, people aren't exactly going to buy this car for economy!

24th Mar 2006, 12:41

My car is fairly stock.

Only have a performance air filter, response has become better, but the sound didn't change much (I was hoping it will sound a bit more like a Ferrari being mid-engined and all)

Now you can hear the turbo whine twice as loud (which I haven't decided if I like yet). It sounds like every time I open the throttle the air-condition goes MAD!

As far as the fuel consumption goes.. hm I get about 50-60 miles on a 10 pounds note. and my car is tuned so I don't know what is the first guy is talking about.

10th Jun 2006, 06:12

Well he posted it in 1999 the price of petrol has gone up hugely since then. Which is why his fuel consumption sounds so good.

9th Feb 2007, 15:26

In reply to earlier post - the turbo would give better fuel consumption if driven on the turbo and not like a loon as you get better volumetric efficiency from the cylinders which = better fuel consumption, Though who wouldn't drive the Turbo hard lol, you don't buy a car like this for fuel consumption. Wish I'd got the turbo instead of early 158bhp GT model : (.