RE: Toyota GR Supra: Driven
Discussion
Having test drove the M40i Z4 and being disappointed, this was never really going to be anything else other than a coupe version of the same car and that's certainly what it sounds like from the review:
Gutsy but lacklustre engine
Mediocre exhaust note
Playstation transmission
Refined and pleasant cruiser
...what I really wanted was a 911 GT3 for £50k in Toyota clothes. Of course it was never going to happen.
Gutsy but lacklustre engine
Mediocre exhaust note
Playstation transmission
Refined and pleasant cruiser
...what I really wanted was a 911 GT3 for £50k in Toyota clothes. Of course it was never going to happen.
Jon_S_Rally said:
I remain very confused by this car to be honest. The Supra was a big GT car, so I don't understand why they have brought the badge back for a this segment.
I think you are confusing the MK IV Supra and thinking it was the only car to bear the name. Not so:
Sure they are more GT than outright sports car, but then this new one would seem to be also.
Jon_S_Rally said:
In some shots, the rear quarter view and side profile look good but, in others, not so much. Sadly, from any angle, the front end looks awful. The whole car is just a bit fussy and over-complicated.
Perhaps I will be proven wrong and it will be popular but, in this badge-obsessed world, I can see the BMW version out-selling it, while this ends up rather forgotten.
Sorry Toyota, it's a no from me. An opportunity missed.
Do you really think the MK IV was a pretty car from every angle? I'd say your description above fits it almost as well tbh. And I'm not sure it was exactly a HUGE seller.Perhaps I will be proven wrong and it will be popular but, in this badge-obsessed world, I can see the BMW version out-selling it, while this ends up rather forgotten.
Sorry Toyota, it's a no from me. An opportunity missed.
Just over 11,000 according to here:
http://mkiv.com/specifications/sales_numbers/retai...
I'm pretty sure BMW sold a lot more Z3's....
This is growing on me, I like it.
I prefer the looks of the Mk4, it such a pure looking design, no bad angles, stunning front end and a slightly alien, almost sinister look to the rear, it looks right from every angle.
But, let us not forget the abominations the actual owners visited on so many of these, way worse than what Toyota have done, left alone or with subtle mods they are gorgeous, not the case when F and F'd to death with Veilside kits, flip paint and s
t like that.
Also, everyone keeps mentioning the Nissan GTR, the Supra was never really the most direct competitor to the high tech four wheel drive Nissan with four wheel steering and all that, Nissan had the 300 ZX which was the more logical Supra competitor, and that got binned off in 1996, the 300 ZX was sort of succeeded 9 or so years later by the 350Z and then the 370Z, not the R35 GTR.
Look back at the Mk 1, 2 and 3 Supras, none were tech fests, they were slightly chest wiggy big Japanese GT's, so this being smaller and a 2 seater is the biggest deviation. Most Supras werent tuned MK4 TT's, they were 3 litre cruisers with an auto box, sometimes just a Celica with a big engine and arch extensions.
Funny how things have gone, its faster, by some margin than any Supra that has preceeded it, thats with the cooking engine borrowed from a BMW hatchback, the equivalent perhaps to the MK4's NA version ? 9.5 secs to 100 mph, vs 13.1 for the MK4.
I bet in reality, this is actually faster than a lot of the tuned MK4's out there, and a JB4/Bluespark will add another 90 ish bhp for not much money.
I think its probably fast enough for most but will be interesting to see if Toyota and BMW fit something a bit spicier, will BMW do an M version, and if so, will they let Toyota have it.
I bet someone plonks a 2JZ in one, wonder what the tuners can do with the B58, I know there are plenty of 1000 bhp Supra Mk4's but short of bragging rights, scaring young ladies out of their tops and drag racing, what is the actual point for a road car ?
I prefer the looks of the Mk4, it such a pure looking design, no bad angles, stunning front end and a slightly alien, almost sinister look to the rear, it looks right from every angle.
But, let us not forget the abominations the actual owners visited on so many of these, way worse than what Toyota have done, left alone or with subtle mods they are gorgeous, not the case when F and F'd to death with Veilside kits, flip paint and s
t like that.Also, everyone keeps mentioning the Nissan GTR, the Supra was never really the most direct competitor to the high tech four wheel drive Nissan with four wheel steering and all that, Nissan had the 300 ZX which was the more logical Supra competitor, and that got binned off in 1996, the 300 ZX was sort of succeeded 9 or so years later by the 350Z and then the 370Z, not the R35 GTR.
Look back at the Mk 1, 2 and 3 Supras, none were tech fests, they were slightly chest wiggy big Japanese GT's, so this being smaller and a 2 seater is the biggest deviation. Most Supras werent tuned MK4 TT's, they were 3 litre cruisers with an auto box, sometimes just a Celica with a big engine and arch extensions.
Funny how things have gone, its faster, by some margin than any Supra that has preceeded it, thats with the cooking engine borrowed from a BMW hatchback, the equivalent perhaps to the MK4's NA version ? 9.5 secs to 100 mph, vs 13.1 for the MK4.
I bet in reality, this is actually faster than a lot of the tuned MK4's out there, and a JB4/Bluespark will add another 90 ish bhp for not much money.
I think its probably fast enough for most but will be interesting to see if Toyota and BMW fit something a bit spicier, will BMW do an M version, and if so, will they let Toyota have it.
I bet someone plonks a 2JZ in one, wonder what the tuners can do with the B58, I know there are plenty of 1000 bhp Supra Mk4's but short of bragging rights, scaring young ladies out of their tops and drag racing, what is the actual point for a road car ?
300bhp/ton said:
Do you really think the MK IV was a pretty car from every angle? I'd say your description above fits it almost as well tbh. And I'm not sure it was exactly a HUGE seller.
Just over 11,000 according to here:
http://mkiv.com/specifications/sales_numbers/retai...
I'm pretty sure BMW sold a lot more Z3's....
The supra was hugely expensive new, i drove one when i ordered my first ST205 GT4, if i can remember correctly the supra was 40% more than the GT4 which was already a hugely expensive car compared to more normal stuff Just over 11,000 according to here:
http://mkiv.com/specifications/sales_numbers/retai...
I'm pretty sure BMW sold a lot more Z3's....
the new one looks awful, and the inside is just a BMW
Agree with others about the proportions: overhangs are too long, roof-line is too high.
The interior is hilarious - a BMW cockpit with a Toyota steering-wheel lobbed in as an afterthought. Pride, anyone?
How much torque can the gearbox take? Much, I suspect. Sufficient for a remap from the usual suspects, say c. 430bhp / 450lb ft?
The interior is hilarious - a BMW cockpit with a Toyota steering-wheel lobbed in as an afterthought. Pride, anyone?
How much torque can the gearbox take? Much, I suspect. Sufficient for a remap from the usual suspects, say c. 430bhp / 450lb ft?
Edited by NGK210 on Wednesday 15th May 17:08
NGK210 said:
How much torque can the gearbox take?
It's a ZF8 but there's various different versions. The HP50 has a limit of exactly 369Nm (500Nm, hence the name) which is suspiscious; I rather suspect the engine's torque is limited for that very reason but that obviously means there's no tuning overhead without pushing it out of spec. 300bhp/ton said:
Do you really think the MK IV was a pretty car from every angle? I'd say your description above fits it almost as well tbh. And I'm not sure it was exactly a HUGE seller.
Just over 11,000 according to here:
http://mkiv.com/specifications/sales_numbers/retai...
I'm pretty sure BMW sold a lot more Z3's....
That 11,000 is I think US cars? Just over 11,000 according to here:
http://mkiv.com/specifications/sales_numbers/retai...
I'm pretty sure BMW sold a lot more Z3's....
The Japanese vin numbers suggest over 44,000 were made for the domestic market, plus others for Europe/ROW.
Dave Hedgehog said:
The supra was hugely expensive new, i drove one when i ordered my first ST205 GT4, if i can remember correctly the supra was 40% more than the GT4 which was already a hugely expensive car compared to more normal stuff
I honestly don’t know UK prices. I did look up a US article were it said $36,000 for a non turbo and $40,000 for the turbo variant. Which is right in the ball park of a Corvette starting at $35,000 for the same time period. I also was thought the ST205 was priced high. Higher than an Impreza Turbo or Evo at the time. Partly because it was plush with leather and air con and things. Would be keen to know some figures.
Dave Hedgehog said:
The supra was hugely expensive new, i drove one when i ordered my first ST205 GT4, if i can remember correctly the supra was 40% more than the GT4 which was already a hugely expensive car compared to more normal stuff
the new one looks awful, and the inside is just a BMW
Found some prices. the new one looks awful, and the inside is just a BMW
Good retro vid review here:
https://youtu.be/TlF9Uz6hhIY
Priced almost the same as a 968 Porsche and a C4 Corvette.
The 300ZX, RX-7 and Stealth all a bit cheaper. Based on the Cayman and C7 Vette. It would seem this Supra is pitched very much the same.
If anything it shows what a bargain the 370z is more than anything. It’s maybe cheaper to buy now than the 300ZX was.
I really like the looks, far more striking than most cars of same price point. I would consider one over my 911, had they have made it a 2+2 like older supra models. See why they went with supra name from marketing point of view but for the true jdm fan it's likely to cause upset, still all publicity is good publicity as if people are complaining, least they are taking about it.
Toyota probably know that combustion engined sports cars are going to be fairly short lived and didn't want to invest too heavily at the moment so went with what BMW could make from their parts. As does feel like they tried hard on their 80s and 90s sports cars.
The fact it has such high rigidity is them putting a positive spin in the side effect from using the chassis from a car designed be a convertible then adding a roof and is likely the cause for extra weight. I doubt anyone said a lexus LFA lacks rigidity let's make this heaver and more rigid.
Toyota probably know that combustion engined sports cars are going to be fairly short lived and didn't want to invest too heavily at the moment so went with what BMW could make from their parts. As does feel like they tried hard on their 80s and 90s sports cars.
The fact it has such high rigidity is them putting a positive spin in the side effect from using the chassis from a car designed be a convertible then adding a roof and is likely the cause for extra weight. I doubt anyone said a lexus LFA lacks rigidity let's make this heaver and more rigid.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff