RE: Toyota GR Supra vs. BMW M2 Competition
Discussion
kambites said:
Can't remember exactly where; it was a TV (YouTube maybe?) documentary which included interviews with some of the key people from both companies. One part which stuck with me was that BMW apparently shipped Toyota an engine which Toyota stripped down and destructively tested, which ended up with Toyota going back to BMW with a whole load of parts (I think it mostly simple things like bolts and bearings, rather than major components) which they demanded be upgraded to meet their engineering requirements.
Obviously it's thoroughly a BMW design, but it's not quite just a question of Toyota accepting an off-the-shelf BMW engine.
I don't believe any of that. I think it's literally an off-the-shelf BMW engine.Obviously it's thoroughly a BMW design, but it's not quite just a question of Toyota accepting an off-the-shelf BMW engine.
loveice said:
I agree. That wasn’t my argument, was it? The example I gave didn’t ask “who makes the better camera”, I simply asked “who makes the better sensor”...
As in this case, BMW makes both cars (Sony makes both Nikon and Fuji’s sensors). So you cannot ask who makes better of the two as both are made by BMW. The difference between the two cars (or from my example the difference between Sony’s sensors used in Sony cameras and Sony’s sensors used in Nikon/Fuji cameras) are not to do with who made better products. It’s about if Toyota’s tuning (when I say “tuning”, I don’t just mean the engine, it’s actually the whole setup I’m referring to) of their BMW made Supra are better suited for British petrolheads’ way of thinking than BMW’s own tuning to their Z4 or M2.
Since all products are made by the same manufacturer and somehow there’re differences between the two products, then we shouldn’t ask who made better... we can only ask whose tuning are better suited for whatever the condition.
Neither Toyota nor BMW make the Z4/Supra, their manufacture is outsourced to Magna Steyr in Austria.As in this case, BMW makes both cars (Sony makes both Nikon and Fuji’s sensors). So you cannot ask who makes better of the two as both are made by BMW. The difference between the two cars (or from my example the difference between Sony’s sensors used in Sony cameras and Sony’s sensors used in Nikon/Fuji cameras) are not to do with who made better products. It’s about if Toyota’s tuning (when I say “tuning”, I don’t just mean the engine, it’s actually the whole setup I’m referring to) of their BMW made Supra are better suited for British petrolheads’ way of thinking than BMW’s own tuning to their Z4 or M2.
Since all products are made by the same manufacturer and somehow there’re differences between the two products, then we shouldn’t ask who made better... we can only ask whose tuning are better suited for whatever the condition.
nuttywobbler said:
I don't believe any of that. I think it's literally an off-the-shelf BMW engine.
You may, of course, believe whatever you want. It is an off-the-shelf BMW engine in that BMW did all the major design work, own the design, are using it in several of their models. However, from what I remember this particular version of the B58 was developed with the collaboration and hence with Toyota's requirements in mind.
ETA: It's probably a bit of a moot point anyway. BMW may not generally achieve Toyota levels of reliability but they still build bloody good engines.
kambites said:
You may, of course, believe whatever you want.
It is an off-the-shelf BMW engine in that BMW did all the major design work, own the design, are using it in several of their models. However, from what I remember this particular version of the B58 was developed with the collaboration and hence with Toyota's requirements in mind.
Sounds like an old wives tale to me. I'd wager that Toyota had absolutely no input whatsoever into the engine. Perhaps we could find a more definitive source, or a parts list of the Supra engine vs another version of the B58.It is an off-the-shelf BMW engine in that BMW did all the major design work, own the design, are using it in several of their models. However, from what I remember this particular version of the B58 was developed with the collaboration and hence with Toyota's requirements in mind.
nuttywobbler said:
Sounds like an old wives tale to me. I'd wager that Toyota had absolutely no input whatsoever into the engine. Perhaps we could find a more definitive source, or a parts list of the Supra engine vs another version of the B58.
What is interesting is that in drag races between the Supra and the Z4 the Supra is noticeably quicker from both standing and rolling starts. E65Ross said:
nuttywobbler said:
Sounds like an old wives tale to me. I'd wager that Toyota had absolutely no input whatsoever into the engine. Perhaps we could find a more definitive source, or a parts list of the Supra engine vs another version of the B58.
What is interesting is that in drag races between the Supra and the Z4 the Supra is noticeably quicker from both standing and rolling starts. It will be identical hardware though.
Do they come on the same tyres?
Suspension calibration can make a surprising amount of difference to traction from a stand-still, too. And of course calibration differences can make that ZF gearbox behave completely differently in different cars, although BMW are usually as good as anyone at getting it right.
Suspension calibration can make a surprising amount of difference to traction from a stand-still, too. And of course calibration differences can make that ZF gearbox behave completely differently in different cars, although BMW are usually as good as anyone at getting it right.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 23 July 14:50
E65Ross said:
nuttywobbler said:
Sounds like an old wives tale to me. I'd wager that Toyota had absolutely no input whatsoever into the engine. Perhaps we could find a more definitive source, or a parts list of the Supra engine vs another version of the B58.
What is interesting is that in drag races between the Supra and the Z4 the Supra is noticeably quicker from both standing and rolling starts. E65Ross said:
What is interesting is that in drag races between the Supra and the Z4 the Supra is noticeably quicker from both standing and rolling starts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60cxIFwHJNU376bhp 5:56 in video
I wonder if they've kept the Z4 in a lower state of tune to keep off the M2's toes?
Oily76 said:
Neither Toyota nor BMW make the Z4/Supra, their manufacture is outsourced to Magna Steyr in Austria.
Megan Steyr is under the contract from BMW, as most OEMs use factory facilities provided by companies like Megan to do the hands on building of their cars. But, BMW is the OEM of this generation of Z4/Supra. Again just like Sony sensors are mostly made by the factories belong to some other companies. kambites said:
Do they come on the same tyres?
Suspension calibration can make a surprising amount of difference to traction from a stand-still, too. And of course calibration differences can make that ZF gearbox behave completely differently in different cars, although BMW are usually as good as anyone at getting it right.
As said, in the video it was also quicker from a rolling start, so tyre traction not an issue, neither was gearbox calibration because, I think, they started locked in the same gear.Suspension calibration can make a surprising amount of difference to traction from a stand-still, too. And of course calibration differences can make that ZF gearbox behave completely differently in different cars, although BMW are usually as good as anyone at getting it right.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 23 July 14:50
Oily76 said:
E65Ross said:
nuttywobbler said:
Sounds like an old wives tale to me. I'd wager that Toyota had absolutely no input whatsoever into the engine. Perhaps we could find a more definitive source, or a parts list of the Supra engine vs another version of the B58.
What is interesting is that in drag races between the Supra and the Z4 the Supra is noticeably quicker from both standing and rolling starts. kambites said:
craigjm said:
Where did you read that? Please quote your source
Can't remember exactly where; it was a TV (YouTube maybe?) documentary which included interviews with some of the key people from both companies. One part which stuck with me was that BMW apparently shipped Toyota an engine which Toyota stripped down and destructively tested, which ended up with Toyota going back to BMW with a whole load of parts (I think it mostly simple things like bolts and bearings, rather than major components) which they demanded be upgraded to meet their engineering requirements. Obviously it's thoroughly a BMW design, but it's not quite just a question of Toyota accepting an off-the-shelf BMW engine. I can't remember the exact details, it must be the best part of six months ago that I happened upon it, but Toyota were very clear that they didn't consider the existing B58 to be good enough.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 23 July 14:32
Modern cars just lose out on the thrill of driving. It removes the driver from any sense of feel. Having the throttle and steering wheel wired in to an ECU takes away the feel of the car, having synthetic feedback given to you never feels right. I tracked a BMW M4 and hated it. Actually hated it. So any new car that comes out with PR bulls
t like "It is a driver's car to the core" is just a turn off as it is not true.
Perhaps I am just an old man living in the past, at age 26, but I feel like cars are on a downward spiral that will never pick up again. Partly because of rules and regulations they have to meet, but also because the "petrolheads" buying new cars wan't a comfortable commuter car on lease that shows off status, rather than a car to drive.
Rant over. I'll stick with my 90s car until the government bans them. Then I'll become an urban outlaw, in a crew of petrol powered monstrosities to fight the Prius uprising. Our stand will be legendary, songs and movies will tell of how the few fought the masses
t like "It is a driver's car to the core" is just a turn off as it is not true.Perhaps I am just an old man living in the past, at age 26, but I feel like cars are on a downward spiral that will never pick up again. Partly because of rules and regulations they have to meet, but also because the "petrolheads" buying new cars wan't a comfortable commuter car on lease that shows off status, rather than a car to drive.
Rant over. I'll stick with my 90s car until the government bans them. Then I'll become an urban outlaw, in a crew of petrol powered monstrosities to fight the Prius uprising. Our stand will be legendary, songs and movies will tell of how the few fought the masses
captain_tripping said:
Modern cars just lose out on the thrill of driving. It removes the driver from any sense of feel. Having the throttle and steering wheel wired in to an ECU takes away the feel of the car, having synthetic feedback given to you never feels right.
You say that like it's a new thing, but the roll the driver plays in driving and the feedback they receive through the controls has been falling ever since the motorcar has existed. For example a car with automated (vacuum driven) timing advance is "less involving" to drive than a car where you have to control the timing manually. Everyone has their own idea about when the optimum balance between driver involvement and convenience was (and indeed for some people we haven't reached it yet), but lets not pretend the shift from one to the other is a remotely new thing. 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff