12th Feb 2006, 15:21

How much do these cars weigh?

20th Feb 2006, 14:40

Between 860kg (early models) and 920kg later models and glanza.

19th Mar 2006, 16:44

I doubt the quarter mile is 15sec flat. These little cars tend to die off after 60mph where there weight advantage is taken away. Id say its more like 16 flat.

30th May 2006, 09:25

What can I say - I got totally owned by one of these this morning on the motorway! I nailed my V6 2.5 Vectra in the outside lane, but the little Toyota thing stayed up my behind the whole time! Normally I would get pretty damn angry at anyone driving like this at 90mph, but I have to admit I found it funny that this little midget gave out that sort of performance!

12th Sep 2006, 13:55

I have a 1995 Starlet Turbo. I am from Scotland. I have raced 3 souped up Honda Integra's. I have a stage two turbo in my car, it is chipped, and I also have a throttle body, which cost 1000, and 2000 to fit. I don't just beat the Integra, I have blown so many off it's a joke.

I have spent a lot of money on my car, and I find it hard to understand why someone would write a comment to say a Honda Integra is faster than a Starlet, when a lot of people know if you have a stage two turbo, it beats an Impreza STi, and they must be 200 something bhp.

16th Oct 2006, 09:27

I don't think anyone ever said they beat a integra Type R.

And anyway, turbo charging a Type R is just a waste of money since the performance increase isn't that much better than a stock Type R, unless of course your gonna spend a heap of money to do it, in which case you've just moved into another price/performance bracket contending with cars such as Skyline GTR, Subaru STi, Nissan 350z, etc. all of which are more comfortable cars to drive with better luxury options. Above post says they have 325hp from a Type R, can you get all that power to the ground or is it just wasted burning out tyres?

Anyway, fact is the starlet gt is great value for money. hehe.

25th Oct 2006, 12:16

Starlets and type-r's are quite fast, but they are cars for people who cant afford a luxury performance car... a BMW 325ci is the car you want.

25th Oct 2006, 13:00

That's the sort of comment you would come to expect from an arrogant BMW owner, But there are far more exciting cars than BMWs, although the M3 and M5 would get your pulse going. But people do choose small fast hatches because they are fun cars. I spent quite a bit buying my car, its not a hatch, but also it certainly isn't a BMW either.

26th Oct 2006, 06:27

'Starlets and type-r's are quite fast, but they are cars for people who can't afford a luxury performance car... a BMW 325ci is the car you want'.

What a stupid comment, and why a 325ci. If your theory is correct then surely a 325ci is for people who can't afford a 330ci, which are for people who can't afford an M3...grow up, not everyone wants to be fast & flash.

7th Nov 2006, 09:51

The bm owner is obviously nuts! I have a BMW E30 M3 and a starlet Turbo 92 manual and I have spent £4k on the car and mods to the starlet. The BM cost me £10k, but is concourse. They are 2 different cars and are god for 2 different styles of driving. My starlet is approx 2seconds faster though to 100mph, but then the bm takes over. My cars reflect my personality as they are rare, fun and fast. His car however is one of the uk's most common company cars that 17 year old salesmen get to run about in. THINK ABOUT IT!

11th Nov 2006, 03:35

OK then lets think about it. Why have you got a e30 version of the M3??? Is it cause you can't afford a newer one? I know that someone else on here said that I can't, but they don't know, and if you have a look an e30 M3 has the same hp of my e46 325ci, same 0-60, but your m3 only does 142mph top end, whilst my 325 cruises past doing 149.

If a 17 year old salesman was going to have a company car, I think he would have a big smile on his face when he races an 'M3' and flies it.

And another thing your car was made in the 80's, so it has probably lost quite a few hp's by now, where as mine was made after 2000 so I don't think that would have lost too much.

30th Nov 2006, 05:01

A stock e36 325i does 0-60 in 7.5 standard, but the e30 m3 does.

(2.3l-16v I4) - 143 kW/195 bhp 0-60 mph - 6.9 s. Top Speed: 140 mph

(2.5l-16v I4) - 175 kW/238 bhp 0-60 mph - 6.2 s. Top Speed: 150 mph. (mine)

Looks like the BM owner doesn't know as much as he thought.

Also my car has increased in value by over 2k since I bought it as it is concourse, but yours will have depreciated like hell.

Who said mine is stock??? I would happily flatten any m3 apart from the new one standard. Oh yeah, the 0-60 is a second and a half faster on my m3 than the 325i, do you not understand how much more torque I have after that to 150 mph.

30th Nov 2006, 05:17

My Starlet runs the q mile in the low 12's. Still fancy it??

My mothers CLK AMG cannot pace it to 120mph!

29th Jul 2007, 17:12

Why are you all going on about Brake My Windows (BMW)? This is supposed to be a site for the Starlet.

But the gentleman who's saying why did the other gentleman buy an old M3? Have you ever thought it's now a collector's item; it may not be quite as fast as the latest ones, but he can have more fun than if he was driving a computer box. A car that does what he wants to do so if he flings it off the road (touch-wood it doesn't happen); it's his fault if the computer slings it off the road. He can come out with dignity that it wasn't his fault. However in the old M3, if he catches the car back, he looks like a hero.

You're running down others wheels, and you only have a 325ci. What's the matter? Too scared to buy the beast? Afraid it might bite you?

To the last person about how his mothers CLK can't catch up; she's probably not wasting her time and car on your little thing.

The one thing that I know is that the ST165,185 & 205 Celica GT4 will obliterate any Starlet, any day, in stock to stock, or if you prefer modified in the exact same way, as yours would still be left behind. A Celica GT4 in stock form is no match for a CLK.

A Celica GT4 has a twin entry turbo 4WD two 2.0ltr engine bred for the rally racing. In comparison the 1.3 is nothing; just a Japanese hatchback that came from eighty's thinking when the dullest cars had a chilli put in their engine (Corrola GTi, MG Metro turbo, Fiat Uno turbo, ect.)

Don't misunderstand me; the Starlet's are good cars, I'm thinking of buying one myself. Nonetheless, I don't think that the 1.3 turbo FWD can outpace two litre turbos/superchargers and the new vvtli (and such). Hell, I doubt it's ability to stick with the Renault Clio Sport 172 or Honda's Interga type-R, but I'm a fair man willing to give it a try.

If anyone knows where I can get an unmodified original specification Starlet GT or Glanza anywhere in England (preferably round the Midlands), please let me know. My email is JS012C3200@BLUEYOUNDER.CO.UK.

If you have any comments about what I have written, please do contact me.

Thank You.