RE: Toyota GT86 facelift details
Discussion
I'm really torn about this car.
I want to like (or at least applaud it) because it is a RWD car that is aimed at fun handling rather than outright pace and bragging rights.
BUT it is a bit chavmobile in looks (like a baby GTR), too expensive and not even very light.
Maybe chav is the only market that wants a car that is fun to drive, but I doubt it. Why not make it look a bit more classic sports car and a bit less 1990s Japanese supercar?
I want to like (or at least applaud it) because it is a RWD car that is aimed at fun handling rather than outright pace and bragging rights.
BUT it is a bit chavmobile in looks (like a baby GTR), too expensive and not even very light.
Maybe chav is the only market that wants a car that is fun to drive, but I doubt it. Why not make it look a bit more classic sports car and a bit less 1990s Japanese supercar?
davyvee said:
ORD said:
BUT it is a bit chavmobile in looks (like a baby GTR)
Any better:
Besides the GT is small and Celica-like, not conspicuously over-sized and that does make a difference imo.
i saw a new Prius from behind the other day and took a double take, more than just the tyres!
OwenK said:
Indeed but how does it benefit them making the standard car look a bit rubbish? People who like modifying will do it anyway. People who don't, will be put off the car...
Maybe for the same reason that base model cars sometimes have boring wheel designs and black plastic in place of something else? Maybe so they can "upwell" options and accessories? Maybe because they're Japanese and just a bit weird! 
It is probably a car that looks very different (subjectively) depending on things like colour and wheel choice. To me, it can look reasonably understated and "classy" or horribly chavish, depending on fairly minor changes. Across the whole of the demographic(s) in the relevant market(s), that is probably a good thing.
p.s. It is still too big and too heavy for me
I agree re power, though - the obsession with pushing 300-400hp in increasingly average and dynamically uninteresting cars makes no sense when you can barely ever use full throttle even in a 300hp car. Why not spend less on increasing the hp (which will only mess with the engine's reliability and note) and more on decent steering and suspension and other elements of the package that will actually make a difference to a keen driver (rather than a bloke boasting in a pub)? As regards basic philosophy, this car is such a good thing for the car market. I hope it picks up more sales.
p.s. It is still too big and too heavy for me
I agree re power, though - the obsession with pushing 300-400hp in increasingly average and dynamically uninteresting cars makes no sense when you can barely ever use full throttle even in a 300hp car. Why not spend less on increasing the hp (which will only mess with the engine's reliability and note) and more on decent steering and suspension and other elements of the package that will actually make a difference to a keen driver (rather than a bloke boasting in a pub)? As regards basic philosophy, this car is such a good thing for the car market. I hope it picks up more sales.
ORD said:
It is probably a car that looks very different (subjectively) depending on things like colour and wheel choice. To me, it can look reasonably understated and "classy" or horribly chavish, depending on fairly minor changes. Across the whole of the demographic(s) in the relevant market(s), that is probably a good thing.
p.s. It is still too big and too heavy for me
I agree re power, though - the obsession with pushing 300-400hp in increasingly average and dynamically uninteresting cars makes no sense when you can barely ever use full throttle even in a 300hp car. Why not spend less on increasing the hp (which will only mess with the engine's reliability and note) and more on decent steering and suspension and other elements of the package that will actually make a difference to a keen driver (rather than a bloke boasting in a pub)? As regards basic philosophy, this car is such a good thing for the car market. I hope it picks up more sales.
I completely agree. p.s. It is still too big and too heavy for me
I agree re power, though - the obsession with pushing 300-400hp in increasingly average and dynamically uninteresting cars makes no sense when you can barely ever use full throttle even in a 300hp car. Why not spend less on increasing the hp (which will only mess with the engine's reliability and note) and more on decent steering and suspension and other elements of the package that will actually make a difference to a keen driver (rather than a bloke boasting in a pub)? As regards basic philosophy, this car is such a good thing for the car market. I hope it picks up more sales.
sege said:
Strip some more weight out of it, trim, sound deadening, any unneeded electrics, 15inch wheels with nothing more than a 195 cross section tyre, either remove pas altogether or ideally fit hydraulic pas and tune the geometry to give give better steering feedback but sacrificing front grip, re tune so the rear is still in balance...and err, that'll probably do nicely.
Have you been in one?Trim is basic, sound deadening almost non-existent (drive it in the rain
), 16" wheels are small by today's standards, pas is probably the best I've driven and the geo is pretty much spot on for most of us.Not claiming it's perfect, but it's a very good car fulfilling the original spec.
I'll admit I'm tempted by the Fensport turbo, but that will be when it's relegated/promoted to a weekend fun car in a year or two.
I think the transistion from concept to reality was badly handled...both in terms of the length of gestation and the final product, it is clearly very closely linked the concept... so close as to be agonising, as on first glance there wasn't much about the concept that should have or needed to be changed...obvioulsy there were or must have been significant reasons for the changes, but for me, the moment it appeared production ready, it looked dated.
LordGrover said:
sege said:
Strip some more weight out of it, trim, sound deadening, any unneeded electrics, 15inch wheels with nothing more than a 195 cross section tyre, either remove pas altogether or ideally fit hydraulic pas and tune the geometry to give give better steering feedback but sacrificing front grip, re tune so the rear is still in balance...and err, that'll probably do nicely.
Have you been in one?Trim is basic, sound deadening almost non-existent (drive it in the rain
), 16" wheels are small by today's standards, pas is probably the best I've driven and the geo is pretty much spot on for most of us.Not claiming it's perfect, but it's a very good car fulfilling the original spec.
I'll admit I'm tempted by the Fensport turbo, but that will be when it's relegated/promoted to a weekend fun car in a year or two.
Trim is basic, dash quality needs a lot of work the pretend carbon panelling was looking tired already - the car only had 12k on it. The sound deadening more than effective as the car sounded absolutely lame inside, the exhaust note wasn't good enough although the auto blip on downshifts on the auto box were entertaining. The steering feel utterly perfect, mostly due to the lack of any dead spot in the middle combined with nice weighting to allow minor adjustments with confidence.
I like the GT86 a lot but the one major detail I'd change is making it into a liftback like the original AE86!!!!!
I prefer seeing Japanese cars with smaller wheels and higher profile tyres than the other way around. I've been quite interested in the GT86, but this update along with the fact I'd now have to budget for a new set of wheels and tyres completely puts me off. It'd be okay if it was merely an option rather than standard fit.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff