- The riddle pf the Toyota GT86- the car for purist drivers.

[MartynVRS]

Squadrone Rosso said:

Stiffer body shell (more spot welds) & slightly revised suspension. The rest, inside & out, is just cosmetic.

We love our Sept 15 GT86. Had loads of more powerful cars but it's a proper smile machine if you actually enjoy the art of driving.

Interested to see how this new one feels. May see if my local dealer has one to try.

As for people suggesting MX5 I don't see it as an option when it's hardly practical, even compared to the 86 which gets at least 4 wheels in the boot. I know if I had one there would be no issue getting all the kit I'd need for a weekend away fishing. Plus I've never been interested in a soft top as I don't want any loss in rigidity. The fun in a car for me is driving.

[V8RX7]

MartynVRS said:

As for people suggesting MX5 I don't see it as an option when it's hardly practical

Plus I've never been interested in a soft top as I don't want any loss in rigidity. The fun in a car for me is driving.

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

People have asked why it doesn't sell - we are giving the reasons.

[Flibble]

V8RX7 said:

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

You can use them to carry loads inside the cabin though, which makes it more practical than an MX5.

[MartynVRS]

V8RX7 said:

MartynVRS said:

As for people suggesting MX5 I don't see it as an option when it's hardly practical

Plus I've never been interested in a soft top as I don't want any loss in rigidity. The fun in a car for me is driving.

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

IMO it doesn't. If I wanted open top as it were I'd buy a bike, which I did. I have no interest in an open top car whatsoever. I've had people in the back of an 86. It's a squeeze no doubt but fine for a short journey. My brother always leaves his seats flat most of the time but they can be used.

[JB!]

yonex said:

JB! said:

An R is 40k+

If I buy a new GT86 at 22/25k and spend 15 on it, I'll have a better starting chassis, and 15k to spend to destroy a standard R...

Different starting points, one is a hot hatch on steroids, one is a purpose built RWD chassis.

I think it's mental dumping circa £40K into a GT86. There's some serious metal out there for that money and all of them, to a car, will be a better financial bet plus likely be faster etc

The point you raise on the Golf R is an interesting one. Revo Stage 1 (£700) will bring 350-370HP, Stage 2 400HP. Whilst I am all for a bit of modifying let's not get carried away with things. A 4WD Golf with 400HP isn't going to get 'destroyed' by many things!

Really?

I'm pretty sure 20K's worth of Evo 9 would see off an R, but we are digressing, plus not all of us give a flying fk about "sound financial investments"

Tuvra said:

JB! said:

An R is 40k+

If I buy a new GT86 at 22/25k and spend 15 on it, I'll have a better starting chassis, and 15k to spend to destroy a standard R...

Different starting points, one is a hot hatch on steroids, one is a purpose built RWD chassis.

Golf R £40k? They are £27,574 on Broadspeed.

So lets put a £28,174 Golf R (£600 Revo Stage 1) versus a £28,274 GT86 and lets see what destroys what.

I'm not knocking the GT86 in anyway, I know full well the R is a completely different kind of car versus the GT86, I just think the statement "Truth to be told, GT86 has way more potential than Golf R ever has" is absolute bks. Finding a handful of cars that were set up at huge costs (probably by development/tuning companies) to do one thing means absolutely nothing when considering its "tuning potential".

Nobody buys a bone stock R, and the 28K GT86 is far from the bone stock model.

The tuning potential of an R is: A map. Pretty sure you need to do pistons and rods after 450bhp ish. Don't get me wrong, that's a quick car.

If you want more, you are now opening up your engine, and spending money on a new turbo, Direct injectors, high pressure fuel pump as well as internals, and you still are driving just a golf, that looks like a GTD. Still drives like a GTD, and out on the roads, there will always be someone who has spent less and is faster than you, hell my 300bhp MK1 golf weighs almost half an R, and costs buttons to build, plus you'll have packaging issues and associated temperature issues, weight distribution...


The point i'm making is this, The GT86 chassis is miles better. I've driven alot of modern VAG stuff, and owned loads, I've had circa 50 VAG cars, the reason I bought a twin? VAG don't make any fun cars for sensible money, nothing RWD, and the 4wd stuff is boring. The FA20, while a little flat standard, runs 8 injectors, and is a very flexible engine, low boost circa 5-6psi people are seeing 300ish bhp, and that isn't silly money to spend.

My MK1 golf will always be quicker than my BRZ in a straight line, but you don't have to be going at silly speeds to enjoy the Twin chassis. If I want a fast car, Engines are easy to build, and make fast, chassis are harder to develop on your jack jones.

[Squadrone Rosso]

We are DINK but the 86 is my wife's daily. That said, it hardly gets used as she works from home most of the time (did under a 100 miles in December).

We toured France & Italy in it last year. Very practical & great fun. Brilliant MPG with the cruise set to 90mph on the French Autoroutes (40+ mpg).

I love the MX5 too (or rather, the Fiat 124) but it wouldn't fit in to our lifestyle.

We have a classic S4 Alfa Spider which is way more practical for touring. Decent behind the seats stirage shelf and a very good boot. Taken that overseas many times.

No where near as good to drive quickly as the MX or FIATA. That said, the GT86 easily outdrives both, inc the 124 Abarth.

Driven them all back to back so direct comparison.

Having a car with modest but sufficient power re-focuses the mind & teaches you how to drive again.

Anyone can blat past anything in a sterile but powerful tin box but a purpose built pure sportscar is something else.

[danp]

V8RX7 said:

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

People have asked why it doesn't sell - we are giving the reasons.

There isn't a lot of room in the back (similar to a 911?) but crucially for me (and no doubt lots of 911 buyers) you *could* get two children in, or adult(s) at a push. Makes it far more likely to get past my wife.

That means I could use it for the school run, perhaps as a 2+1 with the front passenger seat forward. You can't do that in an mx-5/Boxster/Elise etc so massively more useful to me as a fun daily driver.

Shame they never put the convertible concept into production tho'...

[Devil2575]

V8RX7 said:

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

People have asked why it doesn't sell - we are giving the reasons.

I'd say it doesn't sell for two reasons:

1. It's not a convertible. A significant proportion of people who buy the MX5 are not interested in how it drives, they care that it's a cute little two seater convertible. Our 50 year old secretary drives one. The GT86 is never going to sell to people like this.

2. It's on paper stats are not good enough. Despite what they might say an awful lot of enthusiasts want a car that gives them bragging rights. You only have to read the threads about M3s not being "special enough" anymore because you can make your 320d look superfically like one. People are more bothered about what other people think that they are about how enjoyable the car is to drive.

[threespires]

The cars tested at Guadix on Tuesday were the 2017 Subaru BRZ Performance Pack editions. The test was for US journo's. Subaru's sell very well in the US.

[s m]

danp said:

V8RX7 said:

But as stated as you can't use the seats in the back the GT86 isn't the practical family car - it's the fun one.

To me a fun car has to be convertible

People have asked why it doesn't sell - we are giving the reasons.

There isn't a lot of room in the back (similar to a 911?) but crucially for me (and no doubt lots of 911 buyers) you *could* get two children in, or adult(s) at a push. Makes it far more likely to get past my wife.

That means I could use it for the school run, perhaps as a 2+1 with the front passenger seat forward. You can't do that in an mx-5/Boxster/Elise etc so massively more useful to me as a fun daily driver.

I think that is one of the reasons the Mazda RX8 sold comparatively well - coupe-looks but with 4 doors so it could be used as a family runaround. I think people bought them mainly for this and in spite of, not solely because of, the engine.

They also did 2 engine levels of performance. Maybe that might have helped, like it did with the much higher sales of Toyota's earlier coupe, the Celica that ran from 2000 to 2006-ish. When the 140BHP version came out 2000 it was just under 20k. I think the 189 version got as high as 22.5k in the production run but the 140 dipped as low as 16500-ish new later on. Maybe a lower powered ( 140/150 bhp version ) GT86 might have boosted sales. The Celica is similar weight/accommodation, praised highly for handling and n/a engine but it sold more in the UK in most of the years 2000-2005 than the GT86 has done in any 5 years. Maybe the majority of Celica sales were the low power model - who knows? I think a lot of previous buyers might prefer a SUV/soft-roader now

[philwhite]

Well I absolutely love mine, yes it isn’t the fastest thing on the road, but it’s more than quick enough to have fun, the handling and feedback is spot on, as is the driving position. I haven’t experienced the Primacy’s so cannot comment as mine came with Yoko Advans, but these are great and the back end gives way both progressively and predictably, however it still remains quite playful. I find the engine okay too, it certainly feels like a 200bhp car and I would argue that the book 7.7 to 60 is a little pessimistic.

I remember seeing a review stating that Toyota has built the car everyone wanted in 1997, which is probably true, and is exactly why I bought it. When I first started driving nearly 20 years ago I lusted over Preludes, 200sx’s, Celica’s etc. and my tastes haven’t really changed since, I consider myself to be a bit of a dinosaur in terms of what I want from a car, and the GT86 was exactly that car

The worlds moved on and coupes are out and we’re now in the age of the hyper-hatch, the GT86 just cannot compete in these top trump stakes, however comparisons to Golf R’s et al are pointless as they simply do not share the same market, most Golf R drivers probably didn’t give the 86 a second thought when choosing. In fact the only car in recent years that can draw comparison to the GT86 is the RX8, both being smallish 2+2 rwd coupes (sort of anyway).

Fact is, even though it may not have sold fantastically in the UK, the GT86 has found itself a niche in the market, being largely owned by enthusiasts who tend to hold onto them, which means the residuals are very good. Plus the aftermarket scene is unbelievable for such a recent car, there is an almost limitless supplier of performance and cosmetic enhancements. The GT86 may not be the cult modern AE86 Toyota had hoped, but I think it will be well remembered.

[Flibble]

Book 0-62 is pessimistic since the 2nd to 3rd change is at around 60 mph, so there's an extra gear change there that many other cars don't have.

[em177]

philwhite said:

The GT86 may not be the cult modern AE86 Toyota had hoped, but I think it will be well remembered.

The AE86 was never lauded as a cult at the time. That doesn't happen overnight.

[JB!]

philwhite said:

I remember seeing a review stating that Toyota has built the car everyone wanted in 1997, which is probably true, and is exactly why I bought it. When I first started driving nearly 20 years ago I lusted over Preludes, 200sx’s, Celica’s etc. and my tastes haven’t really changed since, I consider myself to be a bit of a dinosaur in terms of what I want from a car, and the GT86 was exactly that car

Exactly!

In 1997 I was 9, I grew up with GTRs, NSX, Supras on my wall, and wanted an S-chassis, an RX7 FD, R34 GTR...

You can't buy those new anymore, this thing is as close as you can get to a "new" S-chassis car.

[s m]

em177 said:

philwhite said:

The GT86 may not be the cult modern AE86 Toyota had hoped, but I think it will be well remembered.

The AE86 was never lauded as a cult at the time. That doesn't happen overnight.

True, they've already sold more than twice as many GT86s in UK as they ever sold AE86s

( I'm not sure if there were restrictive import quotas back then but it wasn't a big seller compared to other coupes of the time like the Manta )

[DoubleD]

Squadrone Rosso said:

Truckosaurus said:

Are there any meaningful changes to the new model or is it just a facelift?

Stiffer body shell (more spot welds) & slightly revised suspension. The rest, inside & out, is just cosmetic.

We love our Sept 15 GT86. Had loads of more powerful cars but it's a proper smile machine if you actually enjoy the art of driving.

So they havent done anything to change the cars weak point, its engine. Before you say, no im not talking about the BHP figure.

[James_G]

philwhite said:

In fact the only car in recent years that can draw comparison to the GT86 is the RX8, both being smallish 2+2 rwd coupes (sort of anyway).

I wonder how a GT86 would compare against a Ginetta G40R as a weekend/track car. Clearly a lot more road focused, but in many ways very similar. 2l engine, RWD, emphasis on handling etc, etc.

[JB!]

James_G said:

I wonder how a GT86 would compare against a Ginetta G40R as a weekend/track car. Clearly a lot more road focused, but in many ways very similar. 2l engine, RWD, emphasis on handling etc, etc.

I think the Ginetta would win hands down for track work, but the twin would be a much nicer road car.

[CABC]

JB! said:

I think the Ginetta would win hands down for track work, but the twin would be a much nicer road car.

twin would be a nice place to drive to/from track. And it can carry a lot in the boot.
I think we'll see lots on track in coming years for this reason. 5yr old+, lose some weight, add power.
They'll be a support community and market that will develop too. Those in the know choose old MX5, Renault, BMW because the modding costs and support network are well known.

[Gary C]

JB! said:

James_G said:

I wonder how a GT86 would compare against a Ginetta G40R as a weekend/track car. Clearly a lot more road focused, but in many ways very similar. 2l engine, RWD, emphasis on handling etc, etc.

I think the Ginetta would win hands down for track work, but the twin would be a much nicer road car.

Whats all this "twin" stuff ?