|
kambites
32,864 posts
90 months
|
I've always thought 200bhp/tonne feels about perfect for the road, but I think I'd be happy with the 160bhp/tonne that this has.
|
|
|
Captain Muppet
5,970 posts
134 months
|
Beefmeister said: I drove it up the hill at Goodwood last week, and in all honesty - it is too slow. Going up hills in makes cars feel slow shock. Glad my test drive is in Norfolk.
|
|
|
Andy665
1,076 posts
97 months
|
Its too slow - not exactly a well reasoned statement is it
Compared to a 458 Italia - it is slow
Compared to snail - its very quick
To me, top speed is irrelevant from 71mph onwards, 0-60 figures are for pub banter, what puts a smile on my face is communicative steering, progressive, strong brakes and a balance of power / grip that provides adjustability and fun
My GTV V6 is quicker than a GT86 but I know what has made me smile me in the last week - it ain't the Alfa, as much as I love it
Want loads of power buy a GT-R, want fun at sensible speeds then buy a GT86
|
|
|
s m
Original Poster
8,115 posts
72 months
|
Captain Muppet said: Beefmeister said: I drove it up the hill at Goodwood last week, and in all honesty - it is too slow. Going up hills in makes cars feel slow shock. Glad my test drive is in Norfolk. Just looking at 1987 test of E30 M3 - 200bhp - test weight 1252kg E30 M3 - 0-100 19.0 seconds, 0-120 29.8 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 92mph GT86 0-100 18.8 seconds, 0-120 30.7 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 91.5mph Looks like the horses are pretty much there then
|
|
|
BigTom85
704 posts
40 months
|
s m said: Just looking at 1987 test of E30 M3 - 200bhp - test weight 1252kg
E30 M3 - 0-100 19.0 seconds, 0-120 29.8 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 92mph
GT86 0-100 18.8 seconds, 0-120 30.7 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 91.5mph
Looks like the horses are pretty much there then I know 25 years have passed, but blimey I wasn't expecting that!
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Chris71
19,999 posts
111 months
|
s m said: Captain Muppet said: Beefmeister said: I drove it up the hill at Goodwood last week, and in all honesty - it is too slow. Going up hills in makes cars feel slow shock. Glad my test drive is in Norfolk. Just looking at 1987 test of E30 M3 - 200bhp - test weight 1252kg E30 M3 - 0-100 19.0 seconds, 0-120 29.8 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 92mph GT86 0-100 18.8 seconds, 0-120 30.7 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 91.5mph Looks like the horses are pretty much there then Indeed. The only time I've driven one was on the Hill Route at Milbrook - which, as the name implies, isn't exactly flat - and it didn't feel especially slow. Quicker in a straight line than the current MX5, I'd say. Nowhere near, say, a Megane 265, but it's not that sort of car...
|
|
|
SSBB
506 posts
25 months
|
Looking at the paper figures, it seems perfectly judged for UK roads, with enough headroom left for a TRD/STi turbo special.
|
|
|
the-photographer
830 posts
45 months
|
| Car | Weight KG (inc driver & 90% fuel) |
|---|
| Atom | 531 | | Caparo T1 | 689 | | Lotus Exige S | 1010 | | GT86 | 1235k + 68kg = 1303 | | Audi TT 211 PS manual | 1355 | | Megane RS 265 | 1388 | | Audi TT 272 PS 4wd/manual | 1488 | | Cayman S | 1425 | | SLK 350 | 1505 | | Audi TTRS | 1525 | | BMW 135i | 1530 | | BMW 1 Series M Coupe | 1570 | | 370z | 1571 | | SLK 55AMG | 1575 | | S3 | 1590 | | BMW Z4 sDrive35is | 1600 | | BMW 335i M Sport | 1600 | | BMW M3 Coupe | 1655 |
This is from ages ago and really needs the addition of GT86 competitors.
|
|
|
Conor D
1,836 posts
44 months
|
s m said: The Toyota claimed weight for the car was 1275kg - this came in at 1235kg actual.
I reckon that was without driver/passenger and V-box I have the Toyota handbook in front of me here, weight's down as 1240-1275 (minimum-maximum).
|
|
|
kambites
32,864 posts
90 months
|
Conor D said: I have the Toyota handbook in front of me here, weight's down as 1240-1275 (minimum-maximum). Does it say whether that includes a driver?
|
|
|
woots787
80 posts
18 months
|
The too slow thing is tricky. It should have similar straight line pace to my 330, which doesn't feel quick but is more than adequate for overtakes and fun on a roads. When is a car quick, would the owner of red victor consider a 599 to be disappointing? For me they did the right thing as more power means more weight and a higher price tag.
|
|
|
wackojacko
8,462 posts
59 months
|
I did think about buying one.
That thought was immdeiately scrapped when I found I can have a 130i for 8 grand.
|
|
|
Beefmeister
10,826 posts
99 months
|
Okay, 'too slow' may be misleading. What surely no-one can deny is that it has an engine with poor performance in most of the rev range, with most of it up top. If you were going along 4th at 40mph you'd need to drop 2 gears for an overtake IMO, when a drop to 3rd would normally be required. People only seem to see the negatives in what i've said - i really liked the car in every respect other than the engine responsiveness and power band. The performance would be adequate if it were £19-20k, not £25k. Captain Muppet said: Beefmeister said: I drove it up the hill at Goodwood last week, and in all honesty - it is too slow. Going up hills in makes cars feel slow shock. Glad my test drive is in Norfolk. I hope you intentionally missed off a  smiley there. There are bits other than hills on the Goodwood track...
|
|
|
otolith
19,408 posts
73 months
|
Beefmeister said: If you were going along 4th at 40mph you'd need to drop 2 gears for an overtake IMO, when a drop to 3rd would normally be required. I used to have to do that in the Civic Type-R and RX-8 (both about the same power to weight ratio as this, both engines that need revs). It's not a problem. I'm pretty sure that if I wanted to I could get a GT86 into three figures on the back roads round here - how fast do you really want to go?
|
|
|
Bezza1969
627 posts
17 months
|
s m said: Just looking at 1987 test of E30 M3 - 200bhp - test weight 1252kg
E30 M3 - 0-100 19.0 seconds, 0-120 29.8 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 92mph
GT86 0-100 18.8 seconds, 0-120 30.7 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 91.5mph
Looks like the horses are pretty much there then I'd agree, but what I dont understand is why it is 2+ seconds slower to 100 MPH than the Ep3 Civic Type R which also had 197 BHP, similar torque and weighed only 31KG less. Now if the GT86 had the Civic Type R power plant I think it would be perfect! anyway, who is right people, EVO or AUTOCAR? !!
|
|
|
kambites
32,864 posts
90 months
|
Beefmeister said: The performance would be adequate if it were £19-20k, not £25k. For the same money, what offers a chassis as accomplished as the GT86 does and more performance? In fact for 25k; what mass produced car offers a chassis as accomplished as the GT86 at all?
|
|
|
ghibbett
774 posts
54 months
|
Bezza1969 said: I'd agree, but what I dont understand is why it is 2+ seconds slower to 100 MPH than the Ep3 Civic Type R which also had 197 BHP, similar torque and weighed only 31KG less. Gearing perhaps?
|
|
|
braddo
2,992 posts
57 months
|
s m said: Just looking at 1987 test of E30 M3 - 200bhp - test weight 1252kg
E30 M3 - 0-100 19.0 seconds, 0-120 29.8 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 92mph
GT86 0-100 18.8 seconds, 0-120 30.7 seconds, ss 1/4 15.7 @ 91.5mph
Looks like the horses are pretty much there then That is striking.
|
|
|
Captain Muppet
5,970 posts
134 months
|
Beefmeister said: Captain Muppet said: Beefmeister said: I drove it up the hill at Goodwood last week, and in all honesty - it is too slow. Going up hills in makes cars feel slow shock. Glad my test drive is in Norfolk. I hope you intentionally missed off a smiley there. There are bits other than hills on the Goodwood track... I've driven the hill climb. It all goes up hill, even the bit past the house (it's about 1 degree as far as I can remember - it's been a long time since I saw a gradient plot of the track). If you drove it somewhere else other than "up the hill" it would have been nice to say so in your post.
|
|
|
s m
Original Poster
8,115 posts
72 months
|
Conor D said: s m said: The Toyota claimed weight for the car was 1275kg - this came in at 1235kg actual.
I reckon that was without driver/passenger and V-box I have the Toyota handbook in front of me here, weight's down as 1240-1275 (minimum-maximum). I'm just quoting the Autocar test chap - looks like they've used the max claimed figure. Anyway, I'm sure they'll be some tolerance built into the Millbrook scales - perhaps the high figure is autobox???
|
|
