What engine would make you consider buying a new GT86.

[dhariwab]

DJRC said:

Toyota have done their market research superbly. Its a motor that appears more interesting than it is for people who think they are more interesting than they are and reckon they have more driving talent than they do. I hope Toyota sell a stload of them.

Was in my local toyota dealer on the weekend looking for a shopping cart for my mum and got talking to salesman about gt86. He said one of the first gt86s sold in the country by them was to quite a focused driver who always pushed it to the limit. Apparently his cockpit routine was get in, belt up, traction control off (he never drove a car with it on). Two weeks later it came back on the back of a flat bed the one side all caved in after he lost it, so I dont think much micra driving (30 in a 50 zone) happened in that case.

[300bhp/ton]

gofasterrosssco said:

300bhp/ton said:

I think a supercharged engine would be pretty cool in such a car, but logic would say Subaru are more into turbo power and Toyota also have fairly good history here too. So logically a 250, 280 level turbo 2.0 or 2.5 would seem to hold very little R&D costs and offer up the HP boost people claim to want.

A simple, low-boost (non chargecooled), cheap supercharger using a roots type unit (like an Eaton or similar) would give a chunk more power / torque, be relatively compact and light and avoid complication with ancillary systems required for turbo installation... It probably wouldn't be as efficient as a turbo though.. And Toyota have dabled with superchargers before.

I agree Toyota have dabbled before, but it is a Subaru engine which since the early 1990's has been turbo charged in any interesting car it's found a home in.

Personally if you want revvy performance I reckon a centrifugal blower would likely suit the car more than a Roots, although a Roots would give a hefty low rpm/mid rpm torque boost. But high rpm power, performance and PEAK power would suffer.

[300bhp/ton]

Urban Sports said:

How about a V8?

Do they make one that would fit without having to raise the bonnet 2 foot in the air though for pedestrian safety regs.

That aside I agree something like a GT86-R or Grand GT86 with a V8 would make for an interesting rival to a Corvette and the 330hp V6 370z. Especially for the American market. Sadly I can't see such a car ever making it's way to the UK though. V8's are not mass market sellers here and are hammered by the idiotic road tax schemes. Not too mention such a car would likely end up north of £50k as a UKDM vehicle and I just can't see that many willing to spend out that price on only a Toyota, even more so when the same car/looks can be had for half that amount.

[CJP80]

Rawwr said:

Misinterpretation. 89 people have voted. It's multiple select. Even I ticked two options.

Noted. Fair to say people would like a bit more poke though.

[Megaflow]

Urban Sports said:

How about a V8?

Yes. Or a nice V6 or a 300bhp turbo I4.

What the silly flat four?

[kambites]

CJP80 said:

Rawwr said:

Misinterpretation. 89 people have voted. It's multiple select. Even I ticked two options.

Noted. Fair to say people would like a bit more poke though.

We already knew that some would and some wouldn't. It's interesting to see how few people would buy any potential forced induction car though. Leaves Toyota with a bit of a predicament - do they spend the money to produce a more powerful N/A engine for it; produce a forced induction car that will only sell in small numbers; or just stick with the model they have.

From the results of this, my guess would be that we'll see a ~250bhp turbocharged car. There seems little point in going for a supercharger if it would be no more popular amongst "enthusiasts", because the worse fuel economy would certainly make it less popular amongst other people. Maybe we'll also see a more powerful N/A engine, but I suspect the development costs would be quite a lot higher.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 16th August 11:30

[ZesPak]

chrisispringles said:

I'm glad that it isn't hugely powerful because this whole power arms race that has happened over the last ten years or so has ruined the market for proper driver's cars IMO.

Agreed with this. Not everyone wants a M5 with a gazillion cylinders and supercar horsepower, that also costs as much as a small country to run.

What Toyota/Subaru do with this is do a one-up on the MX-5. It's already a lot more powerful than the MX5, yet that car is praised everywhere as being the son of god.

Imagine if they bring out the next MX-5, they may need to rival this. And an Alfa version is coming on the same chassis. In a time where every second article you read makes you think that the car as we know it is not long for this world, I'm glad that some manufacturers still think about the "commonman" pistonhead, rather than making their drive-worthy cars just as a Halo model for the oil sheiks.

Also, good to see Toyota back, looked like they had abandoned people that like driving cars for some time. I hope the GT86 does them well, I'm not in the market for one but if I was, I'd be at their door no doubt.

[900T-R]

kambites said:

I think Toyota would like to argue that this car isn't of modern-day size and weight. As has been pointed out many times, it's pretty much the same weight, size and power as an E30 M3.

It's 1200+ kg, or the same as my old Saab 900 Turbo and nearly 100 kg more than my Cooper S. TBH for me to prefer a smallish N/A four banger over FI the car must be nearer an Elise's weight.

[kambites]

900T-R said:

kambites said:

I think Toyota would like to argue that this car isn't of modern-day size and weight. As has been pointed out many times, it's pretty much the same weight, size and power as an E30 M3.

It's 1200+ kg, or the same as my old Saab 900 Turbo and nearly 100 kg more than my Cooper S. TBH for me to prefer a smallish N/A four banger over FI the car must be nearer an Elise's weight.

So you think the E30 M3 would have been better if it was turbocharged (obviously I don't know whether you've driven one at all)?

[bicycleshorts]

Now we need a poll for "What roof would make you consider buying a new GT86?"



From: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=111...

[Big Fat Fatty]

ZesPak said:

Agreed with this. Not everyone wants a M5 with a gazillion cylinders and supercar horsepower, that also costs as much as a small country to run.....

.....Also, good to see Toyota back, looked like they had abandoned people that like driving cars for some time. I hope the GT86 does them well, I'm not in the market for one but if I was, I'd be at their door no doubt.

Agreed with all of that, I'm actually considering one at the moment and 200bhp is plenty for me. I find driving hugely underpowered cars just as fun and rewarding as something with a billion bhp/litre, not that I've driven many of those though.

[900T-R]

kambites said:

So you think the E30 M3 would have been better if it was turbocharged (obviously I don't know whether you've driven one at all)?

I wouldn't rate 2.3 litres as 'smallish'... Big-banger 'fours' can feel marvellously gutsy. I'd say given what a slug the Z3 (basically the same underpinnings) was with the 1.9 litre 16 valver, the extra capacity in the M3 wasn't just for sh*ts and giggles (as a homologation special, surely it'd have fitted in with more series as a 2 litre?), it was because it needed it.

And no, unfortunately the E30 M3 was a bit before my time as a car hack, and a bit too rare/expensive to have featured in my direct environment...

[edit] Personally I'd have thought the 2.5 litre N/A version of the Scooby engine (at least they did one for Stateside Impreza coupes and of course the Legacy/Forester etc back in the day) would have been a better match, even with the same output. Still would crave more cylinders and a somewhat more exotic sountrack, though ).

Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 16th August 11:43

[cptsideways]

I thought the whole point of this car was it's DIY'able tuning capability. Virtually every JDM tuning shop has something lined up for it, a think a Rotrex type supercharger would suit it fine.


Me I'd screw a Toyota six pot in there 500hp & be done, but then again I have a few engines lying about


Considering I ordered one over three years ago on the premise it would be a sub 18k car I'm a little disappointed. I'm just going to have to wait a few years to buy a used one.

[VinceFox]

Personally, i see a lot of the appeal of this car harks back to a time when breaking the 200bhp mark set your car apart from the majority of daily encountered cars. That line is now drawn at 300 bhp imho.

Edited by VinceFox on Thursday 16th August 11:47

[Matt UK]

I would never consider buying a GT86

[s m]

kambites said:

900T-R said:

kambites said:

I think Toyota would like to argue that this car isn't of modern-day size and weight. As has been pointed out many times, it's pretty much the same weight, size and power as an E30 M3.

It's 1200+ kg, or the same as my old Saab 900 Turbo and nearly 100 kg more than my Cooper S. TBH for me to prefer a smallish N/A four banger over FI the car must be nearer an Elise's weight.

So you think the E30 M3 would have been better if it was turbocharged (obviously I don't know whether you've driven one at all)?

For turbo fans yes...for n/a ones no...

Ironically, it very nearly was. Engine designer was a big turbo fan ..especially for it's intended use. It was BMW board that decided it wouldn't fit in with their ethos at the time

[300bhp/ton]

900T-R said:

kambites said:

So you think the E30 M3 would have been better if it was turbocharged (obviously I don't know whether you've driven one at all)?

I wouldn't rate 2.3 litres as 'smallish'... Big-banger 'fours' can feel marvellously gutsy. I'd say given what a slug the Z3 (basically the same underpinnings) was with the 1.9 litre 16 valver, the extra capacity in the M3 wasn't just for sh*ts and giggles (as a homologation special, surely it'd have fitted in with more series as a 2 litre?), it was because it needed it.

And no, unfortunately the E30 M3 was a bit before my time as a car hack, and a bit too rare/expensive to have featured in my direct environment...

[edit] Personally I'd have thought the 2.5 litre N/A version of the Scooby engine (at least they did one for Stateside Impreza coupes and of course the Legacy/Forester etc back in the day) would have been a better match, even with the same output. Still would crave more cylinders and a somewhat more exotic sountrack, though ).

Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 16th August 11:43

Isn't the 2.5 a less revvy motor, so while you'd gain small low end grunt gains (0.5 litre really isn't much) I doubt you'd see huge power gains and I suspect maybe 1000rpms less.

[BarbaricAvatar]

With not much effort i'm sure they could make it 200kg lighter. Then 200HP would be enough.

[bicycleshorts]

BarbaricAvatar said:

With not much effort i'm sure they could make it 200kg lighter. Then 200HP would be enough.

Difficult in modern cars, especially in a GT car like this where bucket seats/no stereo/no soundproofing would be very tedius indeed.

People say this is a 'small' car but if you parked a mk1 MX5 (950kg) next to it, it would be massive.

[s m]

BarbaricAvatar said:

With not much effort i'm sure they could make it 200kg lighter. Then 200HP would be enough.

The Autocar project is along those lines - don't think they'll get it anywhere near 1000kg though - certainly below 1200 is achievable