RE: Gazoo shows 320hp GT 86
Discussion
why do Japanese tuners insist on putting pointless rollcages in cars which are down right dangerous - the way this one curves AROUND the dash means that in a crash it will just fold up and smash your skull in....FFS just cut a hole in the dash and do it properly, or run it straight down in front of the dash.
This is how we design specific parts of cars to deform in a crash - not the kind of thing you want a rollcage to do!!!
I love the car..yes even the rear wing (it isn't a "spoiler") but I want a proper rollcage in mine please - not that stupid thing
This is how we design specific parts of cars to deform in a crash - not the kind of thing you want a rollcage to do!!!
I love the car..yes even the rear wing (it isn't a "spoiler") but I want a proper rollcage in mine please - not that stupid thing
You would think they could have done a little better with all the advances in the last 30 years , BMW managed to deliver the same spec car nearly 30 years ago and Toyotas original AE86 wasn't bad either.Where's the progress. Now what if BMW built a version of the E30 M3 while keeping the same weight and a new S14 engine with maybe a little turbo thrown in .Now that would be interesting.
.
2012 Toyota GT86: 200bhp , 1240kg , 161 BHP per ton
1987 BMW E30 M3: 200BHP , 1250kg , 160 BHP per ton.
1984 Toyota corolla GT COUPE : 124BHP , 980kg , 127BHP per ton
.
2012 Toyota GT86: 200bhp , 1240kg , 161 BHP per ton
1987 BMW E30 M3: 200BHP , 1250kg , 160 BHP per ton.
1984 Toyota corolla GT COUPE : 124BHP , 980kg , 127BHP per ton
Top lurking there.
As said above about the standard car, "It needs more torque.".
People saying "what's wrong with 'only' 200bhp" are forgetting that there's a world of difference between 200 bhp with (say) 200 lb ft and what this thing has: iirc about 150 lb ft at very high revs.
I'm also mystified by the posts that suggest that giving a GT86 more power will somehow "spoil" it. When - if we believe the first hand experiences we've read - that's exactly what it does need.
As said above about the standard car, "It needs more torque.".
People saying "what's wrong with 'only' 200bhp" are forgetting that there's a world of difference between 200 bhp with (say) 200 lb ft and what this thing has: iirc about 150 lb ft at very high revs.
I'm also mystified by the posts that suggest that giving a GT86 more power will somehow "spoil" it. When - if we believe the first hand experiences we've read - that's exactly what it does need.
ultimategroupB said:
You would think they could have done a little better with all the advances in the last 30 years , BMW managed to deliver the same spec car nearly 30 years ago and Toyotas original AE86 wasn't bad either.Where's the progress. Now what if BMW built a version of the E30 M3 while keeping the same weight and a new S14 engine with maybe a little turbo thrown in .Now that would be interesting.
.
2012 Toyota GT86: 200bhp , 1240kg , 161 BHP per ton
1987 BMW E30 M3: 200BHP , 1250kg , 160 BHP per ton.
1984 Toyota corolla GT COUPE : 124BHP , 980kg , 127BHP per ton
The GT86 is a lot cheaper than the E30 M3 will have cost back in the 80's - they are hardly rivals..
2012 Toyota GT86: 200bhp , 1240kg , 161 BHP per ton
1987 BMW E30 M3: 200BHP , 1250kg , 160 BHP per ton.
1984 Toyota corolla GT COUPE : 124BHP , 980kg , 127BHP per ton
It is also much more economical and safe. I'm sure Toyota could have done better if we still had 1980's petrol prices and 1980's crash safety regulations.
Kong said:
The GT86 is a lot cheaper than the E30 M3 will have cost back in the 80's - they are hardly rivals.
It is also much more economical and safe. I'm sure Toyota could have done better if we still had 1980's petrol prices and 1980's crash safety regulations.
Yes but we're not back in the 80's. I can buy a TV today for next to nothing that would have cost a small fortune in the 80's.It is also much more economical and safe. I'm sure Toyota could have done better if we still had 1980's petrol prices and 1980's crash safety regulations.
It's not about progress, it's about cost.
When a car is built to a budget around specs that one man dictates, then there is going to be a compromise. This is a car for someone that wants RWD with a normally aspirated engine that's reasonably economical that's also fun to drive. By its very definition, it's a niche car with a niche audience.
Just 'cos its power to weight ratio is no better than an early M3 doesn't make it a bad car. Just 'cos it's slower than a hot hatch doesn't make it a bad car. And just 'cos EVO can't drift like Monkey doesn't make it a bad car.
When a car is built to a budget around specs that one man dictates, then there is going to be a compromise. This is a car for someone that wants RWD with a normally aspirated engine that's reasonably economical that's also fun to drive. By its very definition, it's a niche car with a niche audience.
Just 'cos its power to weight ratio is no better than an early M3 doesn't make it a bad car. Just 'cos it's slower than a hot hatch doesn't make it a bad car. And just 'cos EVO can't drift like Monkey doesn't make it a bad car.
russy01 said:
Erm off topic but are your tyres lined with diamonds. I have a 2006 s2000 - tyres are £150 a pop (recommended Bridgestones - Yokohama ad08 are only £175)
I'd love to hear your opinion when you have the gt86 but from looking at numbers only I think you'll be left cold after the s2000.
hmmm.. RE050As i think they were? ok my bad maybe, poss the garage were ***ing me over, i had them done at the same time as i had a new roof just after i'd bought the car - (found a pin hole in the roof above my shoulder and went OCD on it so had to buy a new one, and a "rub down", though the Honda dealership gave me 50% off the roof as it'd just gone out of 3yr warranty and i'd just bought it from the same dealership group.. i shoved new rubber on it all round for good measure at the same time and im sure in the bill the rears were like 250 a piece and 200 fronts (plus fitting etc), ..but maybe their "goodwill" in the roof was clawed back massively on the tyres.. I'd love to hear your opinion when you have the gt86 but from looking at numbers only I think you'll be left cold after the s2000.
.. the rears were getting on for needing replacing again 9000 miles later so have just got shot of it - just makes waiting on the GT all the more harder at the moment.. 
yeah i dont think the lack of torque will bother me initially, to be honest ill be taking it easy in the run-in as i plan on keeping this car a while, and certainly using it alot more than my old s2k (i hated driving that car with the roof up - my first convertible though so maybe its just not my thing - as much as i loved it top down) hopefully by thew time the GT is run-in TRD will have some official tuning bits i can nab to give a little more poke - that twin charger doesnt interest me though, just a little more would probably be nice
the s2000 also has 150lb/ft torque.. and that never really bothered me, was easy enough to get sideways when you wanted to on its fat 245 section tyres.. ok its somewhat faster but still, same torque.
will be interesting to see what toyota comes out with in the future anyway (and Subaru of course) .. wonder if they'll have something that would make buying £8.5k's worth of Toyota/TRD brakes [6 pot front, 4 pot rear] worthwhile.. http://www.fensport.co.uk/Parts/Model_108/Category... ?!
- eta, those brakes only fit the forged 18" alloys too.. at a grand a piece..!
Edited by StormLoaded on Thursday 17th May 23:45
I'd have reservations about just bolting on a Turbo and Supercharger onto the standard engine (unless it's the same short engine as used in the 2.0 JDM STI).
I've already wondered if a 2.0 JDM STI engine and gearbox would fit in a BRZ, I think it's got the similar mounting points from what I've read....
Pretty easy (if expensive) to get circa 400bhp from that engine with a few bolt on modifications (like the Litchfield Type 20)
Obviously not worth doing to a new car, but a 4-5 year old high mileage one...
I've already wondered if a 2.0 JDM STI engine and gearbox would fit in a BRZ, I think it's got the similar mounting points from what I've read....
Pretty easy (if expensive) to get circa 400bhp from that engine with a few bolt on modifications (like the Litchfield Type 20)
Obviously not worth doing to a new car, but a 4-5 year old high mileage one...
Johnboy Mac said:
I reckon you're right on running costs, one of the big plus points for this new car and what will really support this is, as I mentioned earlier, it's a non turbo Jap car built in Japan. I'd have little worry about buying one outside of the warranty period.
Really? My non-turbo mostly Jap Toyota Aygo had the water pump fail in warranty and then out of warranty had a fractured front wiring loom that caused an injector to stick WIDE open and the lacquer started peeling off of the front bumper (this was a car kept in London)...Sure it could be an isolated case but, I don't subscribe to the notion that Japanese/German cars are super reliable, they're just not as unreliable as the French/Italians
Moogle said:
Johnboy Mac said:
I reckon you're right on running costs, one of the big plus points for this new car and what will really support this is, as I mentioned earlier, it's a non turbo Jap car built in Japan. I'd have little worry about buying one outside of the warranty period.
Really? My non-turbo mostly Jap Toyota Aygo had the water pump fail in warranty and then out of warranty had a fractured front wiring loom that caused an injector to stick WIDE open and the lacquer started peeling off of the front bumper (this was a car kept in London)...Sure it could be an isolated case but, I don't subscribe to the notion that Japanese/German cars are super reliable, they're just not as unreliable as the French/Italians
ks. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff