Advice Wanted
 

Hey guys, obviously I'm new here. I was recently looking for a project-type car and came across a 1987 Supra. The price is easily within my budget but I will admit I do not know a ton about Supras so I figured I would come on here and ask for some advice.

The car like i said is an 87 and is an NA. It has 150,000ish miles on it and is supposedly running just fine. It is an automatic which is obviously not a plus but oh well. Here's a few pics of it. It obviously is not in the best shape. Any opinions or thoughts would be great.

http://www.krugauto.com/car/87whtsupra-8296(ad).jpg
http://www.krugauto.com/car/87whtsupra-82963(lg).jpg
http://www.krugauto.com/car/87whtsupra-82962(lg).jpg
http://www.krugauto.com/car/87whtsupra-82964(lg).jpg
http://www.krugauto.com/car/87whtsupra-82965(lg).jpg

Looks rough and beat. It all depends on what you want to do with it and how much you have to spend? Probably not worth a whole lot, I'd say about 1500 at the most. And just because it runs doesn't mean it doesn't have a few problem hidding for down the road.

Well thanks but unfortunately it ended up being sold last night. Not that it matters anymore but the asking price was $900 on it

I just picked up a 800.00 beatup Supra. Well worth it if you have the time, patience, devotion and knowledge. This one looked nice at a distance, but it has the usual Supra warts and bondo on the doors and fenders..

The worst part about the car is the hack job that the previous owner did on all the little things.. so easy to do properly, but all done wrong.. and now.. so many little things wrong that I will have to tear out the interior just to get things like lumbar support, the hatch, etc.. to work. Good rubber, 3" exhaust (cats removed), fairly strong engine (albeit supposed to have a BHG), aftermarket stereo (AND the original one), nice grey leather interior.. all glass is good except for some scratches from running the wiper without blades (duh).

So.. if you read that (the above part), it sounds bad and good, but in the end, I can get the car on the road in very decent condition (ignoring the body flaws) for about 1000-1500 on top of my 800 spent on the car.

If you are considering to do the same type of deal, educate yourself heavily and pay close attention to the complaints on the forums. I used most of what I learned here to knock the price down from 2000 to 800. The less you pay at the start, the less risk involved. I dont think its that difficult to recoup 900.00 if you part out a junk Supra.

if it wasnt a turbo i wouldnt bother with it..
and whats with everyone knocking automatics.. you know there faster, right?

Faster?

A lot of problems with automagics that I like to avoid (not the car itself.. automatics in general) Frees up a hand perhaps for that Tim Hortons coffee.. or to flip fingers at people if your so inclined.. other than that...

I believe its a true statement to say that a standard equipped car will outlast an auto.

Hmmmmm
 

Don't be cracking on the NAs..lol I like mine just fine. Never had a problem with my Auto Trans either on my Black one.

Not cracking on them, my Cressida is auto.. my Odyssey is auto.. I had a Ford Taurus that was auto.. : )
The only problem with an auto is that it takes one hand off of the car (but again.. thats personal preference). My friends used to tell me that I drove autos like manuals and manuals like autos.. (back when I drove a lot simply for the enjoyment)

The only Toyota I have owned as an auto, though, is the Cressida and that's simply because I bought it for my wife (and now selling it after almost 12 years of driving with NO maintenance other than an oil change every 1-2 years.) Going to see if I can get 400 for it.. :)

Autos are perfectly fine.. but some prefer them, some dont. Im in the dont category, because I feel manuals give me more control over the car. Works for me.

faster indeed..
time off throttle is time off the throttle..
manual car, you shift and have to rebuild boost. automatic maintains boost through the gears.

On the topic of Auto vs Standard...

I've always been told that there is a slight loss of power using an auto tranny due to the nature of how an automatic works (specifically the torque converter). It seems to me (albeit I am not an expert on the subject, just a 23 yr old enthusiast) that there should be some wasted energy pumping fluid to spin a torque converter that in turn spins the transmission's input shaft. Not to mention the wasted energy in the form of heat in an auto vs standard transmissions...

I would imagine the loss is minimal, but I tend to think that if one was to shift at the EXACT same speed as an automatic, the standard transmission would be faster....

Oh, except turbos, because as Green has pointed out, constant spool would MORE than compensate the loss