So much so, in fact, that back in the day, Clarkson rated it just as highly as his beloved Cosworth, choosing the Escort in a twin-test only because it came in a good deal cheaper than the Celica. Four-wheel-drive and home to a stonking 239bhp engine (or 252, if you go for a Jap import model), it was blisteringly quick. The GT-Four is oft forgotten in the annals of rally-inspired performance heroes, but it shouldn’t be. Pros: Manic rotary engine, sharp looks, huge fun to drive Its one saving grace is that prices are low enough to mitigate the cost of that engine these days – bag a good one like this, own it for a year, look after it, and if you’re lucky, you might just get away with the bargain of the century. But for its caveats, in other words, the RX-8 is a great car. Which is a great shame, because when it’s working it’s an utterly beguiling power unit, and it’s mated to an utterly beguiling car – great looking, fantastic to drive and even vaguely practical, of sorts. Its prodigious oil thirst seems trifling next to its need for frequent rebuilds and propensity to throw its toys out if you turn it off when it’s cold too often. The RX-8 would finish so much higher in this list if it wasn’t for the inherent foibles of the Wankel (any excuse to say that word legitimately) rotary engine. Pros: Simplicity, poise, roofless thrills, sharper than an MX-5Ĭons: Not fast in a straight line pre-facelift engines have a tendency to implode
So what if it looked a bit like a squished Boxster? From behind the wheel, you’d be smiling too much too care. Contentiously, too, it was an even better driver’s car than the MX-5.
Jdm cars 5k full#
It turned on a pin, exhilarated with a raspy, rorty engine note, and best of all, it was a full convertible too. No, it couldn’t offer the outright shove of the Turbo, and nor did it feature the retro charm of the original, but the Mk3 was a pure, unadulterated blast from start to finish. But why? And indeed, why not the earlier turbo, or the Mk1? Simple, really: the Mk3 MR2 was the best of the bunch. Yes, the one that looks like it’s trying to imitate a Boxster. Pros: Great looks, immense performance, T-top, rear-drive If you can stomach that, though, aim for a good, solid UK car like this one. With two turbos, two intercoolers and that V6 crammed under the bonnet, access was tight to say the least, and any big jobs need an awful lot of labour time. Inside, a swoopy interior with plenty of space (up front, at least) made it a great grand tourer, and the T-top roof even meant you could get the wind in your hair if you fancied it. The 300ZX was big in every way: big power, big weight, big girth, and just… well… big! That said, it handled sweetly and offered a massive 300bhp wallop from its 3.0-litre twin-turbo engine, making it one of the performance car bargains of the ’90s. Pros: Understated good looks power tractionĬons: Driving experience considered a little bland, despite power Plenty of aftermarket tune-ability and cracking looks make this one to grab while you can. But unlike its little brother – the 3 MPS, with which it shared an engine – the 6 offered all-wheel drive, giving it the ability to put all that power down. Understated and underrated though it might be, the 6 MPS was a devastatingly potent bit of kit, offering 256bhp from its 2.3-litre turbocharged engine. It probably won’t even be the fifth thing they think of – but that shouldn’t put you off. But which should you choose? Here’s our top ten.Īsk someone to think of a fast Japanese car, and the Mazda 6 MPS probably won’t be the first thing they think of. But whatever your opinion of them, nobody in their right mind would disagree that the Japanese have been at the forefront of automotive innovation for years.Īnd despite their huge popularity, you'll be glad to hear that you can go out armed with no more than £5,000, and come back with one of these Banzai engineering marvels. If you've liked our Facebook page, you’ll have seen plenty of banter flying around between owners of Japanese cars and their Euro- and US-owning counterparts.
0 kommentar(er)
