RE: Toyota GT86 Aero: Review
Discussion
I have to say, I like that aero kit, but I am partial to a Toyota with a body kit, reminds me of my old Celica GT...
And for comparison
I loved the celica with it's on off power, no torque then a hit of high lift cam. I the GT86 is like that or similar to Honda's VTEC then it should be fun, the lack of torque though was a bit tiresome with the Celica although Stage 2 cams sorted that out a bit.
And for comparison
I loved the celica with it's on off power, no torque then a hit of high lift cam. I the GT86 is like that or similar to Honda's VTEC then it should be fun, the lack of torque though was a bit tiresome with the Celica although Stage 2 cams sorted that out a bit.
The Crack Fox said:
White car with silly styling? Who do they think will buy that? No 17 year old could afford it and no grown-up would be seen dead driving it.
It is just a car. I really don't get the 'won't be seen dead in it' thing. What you actually mean is, you care too much what other people might think and in turn would be too embarrassed to drive that particular car. You know when a horse has been thoroughly beaten to death, and then reanimated with some wings and a nice new set of shoes.
This horse has taken that beating twice now, and is just a bloody pulp.
Toyota PLEASE give this more power, a 0-60 of 7.7 seconds is beyond reasonable for a sports car.
I'd put that diesel barge test together but don't have any diesels slow enough to make the fight fair...
This horse has taken that beating twice now, and is just a bloody pulp.
Toyota PLEASE give this more power, a 0-60 of 7.7 seconds is beyond reasonable for a sports car.
I'd put that diesel barge test together but don't have any diesels slow enough to make the fight fair...
GravelBen said:
Its a fine line between hyperbole and just plain talking rubbish - the fastest diesel Golf has 107bhp/ton, compared with 160bhp/ton for the GT86.
Golf gtd has 181bhp and is 1377kg so circa 130bhp/tonne?For me the gt86 would be far more fun, I see it as a more practical mx5 competitor, and it's not that far off price wise for the base model.
Would love one on different wheels and rear lights, no spoiler and the supercharger ;-)
It's not about speed, it's about driver involvement.
How many posts have we seen on here in recent years bemoaning the increase in turbocharged engines and heavy cars and this car... is none of those things. Yet it gets beaten up every time it is mentioned.
Nope, it's not quick. Yes it is bloody good fun. If you're just driving "normally" then sure, it's not going to seem anything special, but get a bit stone age with it and throw it about a bit and the chassis is a delight. You shouldn't be able to throw it into a bend and pick your exit angle with only 200hp (after all, it's so underpowered) but you can and it rewards you for doing so.
I'd love one. I just couldn't make the numbers stack up at the time as, unfortunately, I'm not a powerfully built director and would have had to purchase one on finance. £300 a month at the time for the deposit I could stretch to was unappealing.
Fun car. Much more in the way of power would start to ruin it.
How many posts have we seen on here in recent years bemoaning the increase in turbocharged engines and heavy cars and this car... is none of those things. Yet it gets beaten up every time it is mentioned.
Nope, it's not quick. Yes it is bloody good fun. If you're just driving "normally" then sure, it's not going to seem anything special, but get a bit stone age with it and throw it about a bit and the chassis is a delight. You shouldn't be able to throw it into a bend and pick your exit angle with only 200hp (after all, it's so underpowered) but you can and it rewards you for doing so.
I'd love one. I just couldn't make the numbers stack up at the time as, unfortunately, I'm not a powerfully built director and would have had to purchase one on finance. £300 a month at the time for the deposit I could stretch to was unappealing.
Fun car. Much more in the way of power would start to ruin it.
How has 200 BHP become seriously underpowered? Has anyone seen the power and torque curves on a dyno plot (genuinely interested as I haven't)?
It weighs 1275 KG's with 200 BHP; the EP3 Civic Type R had 197 BHP with 1204 KG's to pull. I know that is a lower power to weight ratio; but not by a country mile. I never heard of the Civic Type R being described as underpowered.
It weighs 1275 KG's with 200 BHP; the EP3 Civic Type R had 197 BHP with 1204 KG's to pull. I know that is a lower power to weight ratio; but not by a country mile. I never heard of the Civic Type R being described as underpowered.
GravelBen said:
dukebox9reg said:
With all the wings etc your going to look even more silly getting blown into the weeds by a Golf Diesel.
Its a fine line between hyperbole and just plain talking rubbish - the fastest diesel Golf has 107bhp/ton, compared with 160bhp/ton for the GT86.Like I said I know the GT86 isnt all about straight line, its about fun but in a straight line its beaten by Golf GTD. The GT86 Aero should earn its stripes (well wings etc) with a bit more grunt. The MX5 doesnt try to give the pretense that its a rocket, the Aero does.
And there's no point throwing bhp/tonne into the mix as a single point of argument because in a straight line especially in gear etc torque plays a massive part and the GT86 being 127lbft/ton vs 187lbft/ton. And just look at the numbers GT86 60 in 7.4 (7.9 for the auto) Golf GTD 7.3 (manual and auto) and the top speed is also higher in the Golf so yeah it is quicker. Is it more fun, no put your missing my point. I think the Aero is stupid due to the 'look at me' looks and an appliance diesel hatch is quicker.
I must add I don't like Golfs. Just an easy comparison. As others have said one for 20k is fine, 28k with its 'look at me, i'm a sports car' look is silly.
danp said:
GravelBen said:
Its a fine line between hyperbole and just plain talking rubbish - the fastest diesel Golf has 107bhp/ton, compared with 160bhp/ton for the GT86.
Golf gtd has 181bhp and is 1377kg so circa 130bhp/tonne?Never been a big fan of massive wings on cars. No exception here; looks ridiculous and can't serve any purpose on a car that doesn't really need any sort of rear spoiler.
exceed said:
Toyota PLEASE give this more power, a 0-60 of 7.7 seconds is beyond reasonable for a sports car.
Yeah, completely agree. A sports car is defined purely by a specific 0-60MPH time and the GT86 just doesn't hit it. This car needs a turbocharger/supercharger so it can out-drag a diesel hatchback. Come on, Toyota, give us that!I have to admit I love the idea of a nicely handling car and 200 bhp is ample for having fun,
but it has less power than my diesel Mondeo and I would imagine the Mondeo would pump it anywhere but the twisties.
Litchfield have the right answer in the form of a charger kit for just over 4grand. but add that into the mix and your looking at a seriously fun car 280bhp epic handling and enough grunt to have people take it seriously.
maybe Toyota/Subaru are working on a hot turbo version (please let it be with a 3l 6 pot turbo)
but it has less power than my diesel Mondeo and I would imagine the Mondeo would pump it anywhere but the twisties.
Litchfield have the right answer in the form of a charger kit for just over 4grand. but add that into the mix and your looking at a seriously fun car 280bhp epic handling and enough grunt to have people take it seriously.
maybe Toyota/Subaru are working on a hot turbo version (please let it be with a 3l 6 pot turbo)
spameister said:
had ham said:
odd looking, slow, plasticky crap, doesn't sell.
Hyperbole much?I drove one, thought it was very, very poor.
But that's opinions for you, like an a
hole, everyone has one! 
Personally I think the whole argument comes dowmn to the 86 vs MX5, the 5 is cheaper and more engaging, the 86 is no more practical really, overpriced and pretending to be something it isn't.
As mentioned before; if they cut the price, put it on steel wheels and gave it solid paint, potentially no AC and keep fit windows and aimed it directly at a base model MX5 market then they would have a winner. Instead they stick daft wheels and a dafter bodykit on it to make it look faster and to give it a "sportscar" edge when it clearly is not that.
As mentioned before; if they cut the price, put it on steel wheels and gave it solid paint, potentially no AC and keep fit windows and aimed it directly at a base model MX5 market then they would have a winner. Instead they stick daft wheels and a dafter bodykit on it to make it look faster and to give it a "sportscar" edge when it clearly is not that.
M@1975 said:
Personally I think the whole argument comes dowmn to the 86 vs MX5, the 5 is cheaper and more engaging, the 86 is no more practical really, overpriced and pretending to be something it isn't.
Hello,As someone who went from an MX5 to a GT86, I disagree with parts of your statement.
The MX5 was a fine car, but the GT86 is slightly faster, more engaging and is definitely more practical.
The only thing I miss is being able to drop the roof. But then, during the cold dark days of winter when I'm commuting along a motorway, I'm thankful for the hard top.
Also, can you clarify - "pretending to be something it isn't" - because I don't understand what you mean. As far as I can tell, the aim was to make a modestly powered, competitively lightweight, front engined RWD coupé. No one has tried to claim it's anything more than that, it's not as far as I can tell been advertised as a fire breathing powerhouse, and I seem to remember that the guy who developed it pretty much shrugged when someone asked how fast it went around the Nurburgring. So I don't understand this particular criticism.
EDIT: Doh. I completely forgot the whole point of the thread was discussing this spoiler, which definitely hints at "I need something the size of an ironing board to keep all this power in check!". Yeah - that is silly.
Edited by Conscript on Friday 13th March 09:49
article said:
Yes, the sound isn't brilliant but it's an absolute tonic after an onslaught of turbos.
Am I the only person in the world who actually likes the sound of the GT86? I'm struggling to think of a current four-cylinder hot hatch that sounds better from the inside.ETA As for the comment above on practicality, I'm not sure I agree. The GT86 is usefully more practical than an MX-5 and it could be a real deal clincher if you have a young child. Obviously not as a regular family car, but even if you very rarely use them, a pair of rear seats with ISOFIX mounts will make it far easier to justify a sports car to your other half. I speak from experience. You could get a four-door hot hatch, but some people just prefer sports cars.
Edited by Chris71 on Friday 13th March 10:02
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff