Should the Toyota Supra have been based on an M4

Should the Toyota Supra have been based on an M4

Author
Discussion

thebestlittlecivicintheworld

Original Poster:

55 posts

53 months

Sunday 1st December 2019
quotequote all
Rather than a Z4?


Deerfoot

4,902 posts

184 months

Monday 2nd December 2019
quotequote all
No.

cerb4.5lee

30,585 posts

180 months

Monday 2nd December 2019
quotequote all
In many ways it could be a good idea because it could be a 2 plus 2, and the M4's chassis is a better starting point than the Z4's chassis for me.

Brads67

3,199 posts

98 months

Monday 2nd December 2019
quotequote all
Saw one in the works carpark last week.
It was utterly tiny ! Looked for all the world like an MX5 with the retractable hardtop and some swoopy bits.

Very un Supra

Turn7

23,608 posts

221 months

Monday 2nd December 2019
quotequote all
Maybe the 2er would suit better ?

I caught a brief glimpse of one the other day, and its not a looker......

And thats before you get inside and see how little Toyota bothered....

liner33

10,690 posts

202 months

Wednesday 4th December 2019
quotequote all
If it was based on the M4 it would retail at £75k+ and they would sell even less

V10leptoquark

5,180 posts

217 months

Monday 9th December 2019
quotequote all
liner33 said:
If it was based on the M4 it would retail at £75k+ and they would sell even less
Not sure it would HAVE to be up in that price bracket.
The reason for using shared platforms is to radically reduce costs of R&D and also costs of production.

The new Supra could have been many things to have been a proper evolution to the MkIV, but for whatever reason, Toyota decided to mess it up with the strange effort that they've made with the Z4 platform.

M4 platform would have been MUCH better IMO.


liner33

10,690 posts

202 months

Monday 9th December 2019
quotequote all
V10leptoquark said:
Not sure it would HAVE to be up in that price bracket.
The reason for using shared platforms is to radically reduce costs of R&D and also costs of production.

The new Supra could have been many things to have been a proper evolution to the MkIV, but for whatever reason, Toyota decided to mess it up with the strange effort that they've made with the Z4 platform.

M4 platform would have been MUCH better IMO.
Why exactly do you say that ? The MK5 is a significant upgrade over the MK4 in pretty much every way imo

Plus the M4 is c£20k more than the Z4 isnt it so based on that the Supra would need to be at least £20k more to cover the cost of the parts

V10leptoquark

5,180 posts

217 months

Monday 9th December 2019
quotequote all
liner33 said:
Why exactly do you say that ? The MK5 is a significant upgrade over the MK4 in pretty much every way imo

Plus the M4 is c£20k more than the Z4 isnt it so based on that the Supra would need to be at least £20k more to cover the cost of the parts
Well I guess "upgrade" is a subjective matter.
Of course I'm not going to knock your opinion, because your's is just as valid as mine, but many view that as Toyota re-designed the MkV as a "pure sports car" (their words) and not as a "sports GT" it is seen as a "downgrade" on what the MkIV was.

The MkIV was a great GT car, and with very mild tuning became a great sports GT. A great driver's car that involved the driver via a 6-speed manual gearbox and a mechanical rear LSD, along with a cabin that wrapped around like a cockpit. Slick GT shape on a chassis that could pull more lateral 'g' force than many supercars of the day. On launch was aimed at the 911 Turbo market.

The MkV by contrast is aimed more at the Cayman and Z4 market, whilst not offering a manual box packaged up on a Z4 chassis that looks like the back end has been kicked heavily up the ar$e wink

I work with a guy who is very much in to his MkIV Supras and I've also become a fan of them - being the only car outside of the NSX-R (Gen1 version) that I would like to own from Japan.
He mentions that many of his fellow Supra MkIV club members have mixed feelings for the MkV - with it being a 'marmite' type of car.

I am just left thinking that if it were a proper evolution of the MkIV then the word 'marmite' should not even be thought of, more so that the car would be aiming at the M4, 911 market rather than the 'lower' model ranges (subjective of course).

IMO Toyota was promising the world the FT-01, but released a b4stardized Z4 hardtop to the market once the bean-counters had taken all the fun out of the project.


Edited by V10leptoquark on Monday 9th December 15:38

liner33

10,690 posts

202 months

Monday 9th December 2019
quotequote all
Some had a 6 speed box others had a basic auto remember

I think a modified mk4 can be a wonderful thing but I do think that for many there is a case of rose tinted spectacles going on.

I think the mk5 will be the tuner car to own in a few years there are already some 1000hp ones being built and standard the b58 is an awesome engine with fantastic engineering. I've got no axe to grind as neither the mk4 or mk5 really float my boat but I appreciate them both . I've only driven the mk4 a stock UK auto and a single turbo modified one and my over riding memory is how small they are inside with a tiny boot

I do think the mk5 is far too expensive though and I get the point about no manual offered but the zf8 is a better gear box than the manual imo

rich861

62 posts

155 months

Thursday 2nd January 2020
quotequote all
liner33 said:
Some had a 6 speed box others had a basic auto remember

I think a modified mk4 can be a wonderful thing but I do think that for many there is a case of rose tinted spectacles going on.

I think the mk5 will be the tuner car to own in a few years there are already some 1000hp ones being built and standard the b58 is an awesome engine with fantastic engineering. I've got no axe to grind as neither the mk4 or mk5 really float my boat but I appreciate them both . I've only driven the mk4 a stock UK auto and a single turbo modified one and my over riding memory is how small they are inside with a tiny boot

I do think the mk5 is far too expensive though and I get the point about no manual offered but the zf8 is a better gear box than the manual imo
At the risk of sounding pretentious (and going off topic) - when you're driving a car hard, heel and toe feels good. Blipping the throttle and matching the revs yourself whilst modulating the brakes, it's not the most difficult thing to do but it's very rewarding. That's near enough the only reason I prefer a manual. For me, it's a massive part of the driving experience and an auto box just takes it all away for faster gear changes, but what's the point? You save a bit of time in between gear changes but are you having more fun?

I'm sure the box is relatively good for what it is, but in my opinion a Mk5 Supra would have been a good car for a 6 speed manual. Some cars I think suit paddles more, normally more powerful ones such as GTR's or Ferrari's.