RE: Facelifted GT86 specs and prices

RE: Facelifted GT86 specs and prices

Author
Discussion

K2MDL

2,673 posts

220 months

Friday 16th September 2016
quotequote all
PomBstard said:
Learn2MergeInTurn said:
Im sorry but for a car to look that sleek and sporty... And then to install a 2.0L flat 4 with no turbo and 200bhp...whats the point in owning one?
To ask that question is to miss the point of this car
Totally agree. And get ready to take these to BBR and see what they can extract from them. Ask for Richard, he drives one there.

smm3008

19 posts

98 months

Friday 16th September 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
philwhite said:
OwenK said:
Luckily most of the flaws with it have been fixed by the aftermarket, but come on Toyota. I just want a more powerful one that I don't have to sacrifice my warranty for. You can still sell the NA entry level version alongside, and provide debate fodder for endless "Original 200hp GT86: purist's choice?" press articles. But when your market is telling you they love the car except for this one element, and you roll out model year update after model year update without addressing it, that's just bloody mindedness.
I've never understood this either, Toyota have stood firm that they developed the car to be tuned by third parties and weren’t going to go down the power route themselves. I get this, but what I don’t get is why they (or maybe even just a few dealers) haven’t partnered with someone like Cosworth, and offered their supercharger though the dealer network so the warranty can be preserved at least.
But how many of the people complaining it doesn't have enough power would actually go out and buy one if they released a 250bhp turbocharged version for, say, £30k + options?
I'd be surprised if it was more than 1% tbh...

RemarkLima

2,375 posts

213 months

Friday 16th September 2016
quotequote all
Tuvra said:
RemarkLima said:
Absolutely, those wheels look so much better! The original wheels have to be one of the worst points of the old car IMHO.
I think the new ones are just as bad tbh, the old wheels wern't that bad, just looked st in standard "two colour" form, painted one colour they are not a bad looking wheel:-



Wow, yeah, one colour they look pretty good... And without the spoiler it's looking pretty resolved I think...

grumbledoak

31,545 posts

234 months

Friday 16th September 2016
quotequote all
I don't like the new "square over round" dash details.

I think the old one, white and red:

but with the 0 - 7,000rpm at 6:00 -> 12:00 would have been nicer.

Otherwise, minor tweaks. Still love mine.

cb31

1,143 posts

137 months

Friday 16th September 2016
quotequote all
LordGrover said:
A slightly clearer image:

Digital screen looks like something I could design, basically an embarrassment.

What is it with the speedo too? 0-70mph in around 90 deg of the dial, doesn't show much granularity.

On the car I love the concept though not sure I would actually buy one. With only 4 seats it is a bit of a compromise, not being able to fit the whole family of 5 in it could only ever be an third car but then there are more exciting options. Obviously that's just me though.

peter450

1,650 posts

234 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
PomBstard said:
Learn2MergeInTurn said:
Im sorry but for a car to look that sleek and sporty... And then to install a 2.0L flat 4 with no turbo and 200bhp...whats the point in owning one?
To ask that question is to miss the point of this car
If the point was to make a car that nobody buys then it's been a great success I've hardly seen any of these out on the road. The basic ingredients are al here and I'm sure they looked closely at the 200sx when making this car, perhaps a little two closely. It would not have been hard at all for them to offer this car with a supercharger pack in the options list and I've no doubt it would have sold much better.

The chorus 5 years ago was nice car but needs a bit more power I'm amazed that this has been addressed with a 5hp upgrade somewhere amoung the numerous updates done since launch.




SSBB

695 posts

157 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
cb31 said:
LordGrover said:
A slightly clearer image:

Digital screen looks like something I could design, basically an embarrassment.

What is it with the speedo too? 0-70mph in around 90 deg of the dial, doesn't show much granularity.

On the car I love the concept though not sure I would actually buy one. With only 4 seats it is a bit of a compromise, not being able to fit the whole family of 5 in it could only ever be an third car but then there are more exciting options. Obviously that's just me though.
I think a 90 deg arc for 0-70 is fairly normal these days. It just looks weird because of the dial orientation.

ETA: agree that new lcd doesn't look right, the way it is sat inside the circular bezels. The old 80's style 7 segment lcd speedo was part of the charm imho.

Edited by SSBB on Saturday 17th September 08:56

Evolved

3,568 posts

188 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
Another own goal.

skyrover

12,674 posts

205 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
shame they could not have bored/stroked the motor out to 2.2 or 2.4 litres for a little more grunt.

peter450

1,650 posts

234 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
skyrover said:
shame they could not have bored/stroked the motor out to 2.2 or 2.4 litres for a little more grunt.
Yeah, they needed to do something to help the dealers IMO it's very hard to sell a sports car if it doesn't actually have much performance.

Turning Japanese

65 posts

102 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
OwenK said:
I don't understand what they're doing with this car. It's like someone high up at Toyota/Subaru has a grudge against it.

First version:
- Widely praised concept cars... followed by a production version crippled with chavvy Lexus lights and Halfords wheels
- Boxer engine for weight distribution and a more exotic powertrain.. That they manage to make feel gutless and sound pants
- Cheap affordable sportscar... That launches for about 5k more than the competition and many people are willing to pay
- Rubbish lease deals compared to the usual German competition

Then on this version:
- They still refuse to offer a more powerful version even though the casual buyers AND the enthusiast markets are both CRYING OUT for it. Even a dealer fit option. TRD used to sell you a dealer fit supercharger for your pickup truck or Scion tC for example and that's a little Civic type car for God's sake!
- They go to the effort of re-tooling for new bumpers and lights, but don't actually make them that much better.
- They add a screen in the dash but make it look utterly naff (who signed off on the styling of that?)
- They keep sticking that crap little spoiler on it instead of the pretty TRD or FiveAxis ducktails.


Luckily most of the flaws with it have been fixed by the aftermarket, but come on Toyota. I just want a more powerful one that I don't have to sacrifice my warranty for. You can still sell the NA entry level version alongside, and provide debate fodder for endless "Original 200hp GT86: purist's choice?" press articles. But when your market is telling you they love the car except for this one element, and you roll out model year update after model year update without addressing it, that's just bloody mindedness.


With a hunk more power and some decent styling you would have a genuine junior Cayman on your hands - especially as the actual Cayman is now also a four pot turbo.
Keep selling the NA version, but don't ignore the market or tell them they've misunderstood the car...
They can look lovely when dressed up with some tasteful bits.

Edited by OwenK on Friday 16th September 16:33
Some really great points and I feel exactly the same.

The new Mx5 was only going to be offered with the 1.5 engine originally but mazda realised that some people would want more power and that it would affect sales so they added a 2.0 option even though they claim the 1.5 is purer.
I think Toyota should offer a GT86 with a small turbo that offers 250bhp and fills out the torque curve a bit. I think it would sell. Everyone I speak to about the GT86 dismiss it as being to slow.


GroundEffect

13,844 posts

157 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
Those complaining about the performance...how many have actually driven it?


grumbledoak

31,545 posts

234 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
Those complaining about the performance...how many have actually driven it?
None of them. You see it in all these threads - "I was seriously considering a GT86 but they just aren't quick enough so I bought a Ford Ka." Yeah, sure you were.

Vyse

1,224 posts

125 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
The arch gap though.

CABC

5,589 posts

102 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
Turning Japanese said:
OwenK said:
I don't understand what they're doing with this car. It's like someone high up at Toyota/Subaru has a grudge against it.

First version:
- Widely praised concept cars... followed by a production version crippled with chavvy Lexus lights and Halfords wheels
- Boxer engine for weight distribution and a more exotic powertrain.. That they manage to make feel gutless and sound pants
- Cheap affordable sportscar... That launches for about 5k more than the competition and many people are willing to pay
- Rubbish lease deals compared to the usual German competition

Then on this version:
- They still refuse to offer a more powerful version even though the casual buyers AND the enthusiast markets are both CRYING OUT for it. Even a dealer fit option. TRD used to sell you a dealer fit supercharger for your pickup truck or Scion tC for example and that's a little Civic type car for God's sake!
- They go to the effort of re-tooling for new bumpers and lights, but don't actually make them that much better.
- They add a screen in the dash but make it look utterly naff (who signed off on the styling of that?)
- They keep sticking that crap little spoiler on it instead of the pretty TRD or FiveAxis ducktails.


Luckily most of the flaws with it have been fixed by the aftermarket, but come on Toyota. I just want a more powerful one that I don't have to sacrifice my warranty for. You can still sell the NA entry level version alongside, and provide debate fodder for endless "Original 200hp GT86: purist's choice?" press articles. But when your market is telling you they love the car except for this one element, and you roll out model year update after model year update without addressing it, that's just bloody mindedness.


With a hunk more power and some decent styling you would have a genuine junior Cayman on your hands - especially as the actual Cayman is now also a four pot turbo.
Keep selling the NA version, but don't ignore the market or tell them they've misunderstood the car...
They can look lovely when dressed up with some tasteful bits.

Edited by OwenK on Friday 16th September 16:33
Some really great points and I feel exactly the same.

The new Mx5 was only going to be offered with the 1.5 engine originally but mazda realised that some people would want more power and that it would affect sales so they added a 2.0 option even though they claim the 1.5 is purer.
I think Toyota should offer a GT86 with a small turbo that offers 250bhp and fills out the torque curve a bit. I think it would sell. Everyone I speak to about the GT86 dismiss it as being to slow.
some valid points made.
i would have thought Toyota would have done a little tinkering with the engine by now. Factory fit turbo is not what this car is about though, that should remain aftermarket (dealer option would be even better).

The fact remains that this is a pure car on low grip eco tyres that is a hoot to drive if you know how to use a gearbox. We should celebrate the diversity of cars on offer rather than seek uniformity, especially when that uniformity means turbos, weight, torque vectoring and remoteness. There's choice already there.

nickfrog

21,194 posts

218 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
Vyse said:
The arch gap though.
Maybe it's function vs "fashion". Less travel would probably spoil how it handles. But it might look cool, innit.

peter450

1,650 posts

234 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
Those complaining about the performance...how many have actually driven it?
You can get a pretty good idea about a cars straightline performance from having driven other cars

OwenK

3,472 posts

196 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
Those complaining about the performance...how many have actually driven it?
Me!
Loved the drive.. Right up until I came to make an overtake on a fast B-road, put my foot down for a swift pass and.. The engine just didn't feel like enough.
Yes you can fix it with a bolt on supercharger or something but that blows your warranty which means you might as well do it on a second hand one rather than a brand new one.

Currently I drive a PCP Fiesta ST and am looking to replace it soon, something new or with some manufacturer warranty left on it, a bit prettier and a bit more special feeling and ideally matching the driving fun the ST offers. I've followed the little 86 since the first concept was revealed and love the idea but the slight lack of power just means it doesn't quite tick enough boxes. If it could have matched the ST's torquey drive I'd be happily looking at another PCP or lease on a new 86. As it is, it's not quite enough, I don't think it'd satisfy me long term as my only car, which means I'm looking at a second hand one to pootle about in while I save up a bigger deposit to get to the echelon above - Caymans etc.

In the 90s you could get three sports coupes from Toyota in the form of the Celica, MR2 and Supra and all three had entry level cooking models AND a turbo nutter version. It honestly feels like the 86 is being held back so that someone in an office in Japan can go "look, people just don't want sports cars anymore" and kill off the sports car division stone dead for another decade.
At least there's a new Supra coming, I wonder how they'll hamstring that one?

Edited by OwenK on Saturday 17th September 12:31

skyrover

12,674 posts

205 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
nickfrog said:
Vyse said:
The arch gap though.
Maybe it's function vs "fashion". Less travel would probably spoil how it handles. But it might look cool, innit.
arch gap doesn't always look bad with dished wheels and wider tyres




Swordman

452 posts

165 months

Saturday 17th September 2016
quotequote all
The original car is better for the following reasons:

Better instrument cluster - looks better resolved and analogue fuel gauges are better than digital ones.
Better looking
GT86 piston logos not present on new car

The new one does have nicer rear lights, though.