RE: The Toyota GT86 is more relevant than ever: TMIW
Discussion
jamoor said:
We have to remember that the car is completely custom on its own chassis etc
The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
Not really. The MR2, MGF and MX-5 don't chassis share with any other vehicles and all cost a lot less than the GT86. Even when you factor inflation into the mix. The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
300bhp/ton said:
daemon said:
You do grasp "average" right?
If i'm buying a sports car i have (and as do most people) an expectation that its going to be faster than your average diesel repmobile.
The yardstick for me in terms of average is something like an A4 2.0TDI or a 320d and using that yardstick, for me, its not quick enough (relative to price anyway).
It seems - though perhaps drawing the conclusion in a different way - a lot of people agree.
Honestly I do truly fail to see your point on this. It's a road, not a race track, really couldn't care less what else might or might not be quicker.If i'm buying a sports car i have (and as do most people) an expectation that its going to be faster than your average diesel repmobile.
The yardstick for me in terms of average is something like an A4 2.0TDI or a 320d and using that yardstick, for me, its not quick enough (relative to price anyway).
It seems - though perhaps drawing the conclusion in a different way - a lot of people agree.
Edited by daemon on Sunday 21st May 13:29
£28k in the UK is unlikely to buy you a dragster of a car unless looking at the used market. Driving is about fun.
Lets face it, there a friggin loads of 3.0 V6 diesel Disco 4's and Range Rover's about. With the 8 speed box they are all quick enough to p
s off most average sports cars, be it an MX-5, an early Elise or whatever and including diesel repmobiles such as 320d's.So based on your thought trend, a 320d is pointless too, as SUV 4x4's might harass you off roundabouts.
It's about how it drives in isolation and I've only heard good things about that, except criticism of the engine and that appears to be greatly influenced by the torque dip at. just the sort of rpm people have been lately trained to drive at. Yet not that long ago, people used to rave about an engine 'coming on cam'.
Certainly my 89 carrera has a very noticeable increase in torque (and noise) at about 4.5k up and I love it. My 4a-ge engined mr2 was dead until about 5k and the rx8 needed to be positively thrashed to the 8k red line.
Rev it people !
Gary C said:
Totally agree.
It's about how it drives in isolation and I've only heard good things about that, except criticism of the engine and that appears to be greatly influenced by the torque dip at. just the sort of rpm people have been lately trained to drive at. Yet not that long ago, people used to rave about an engine 'coming on cam'.
Certainly my 89 carrera has a very noticeable increase in torque (and noise) at about 4.5k up and I love it. My 4a-ge engined mr2 was dead until about 5k and the rx8 needed to be positively thrashed to the 8k red line.
Rev it people !
Peak power a little over 6,000 RPM.It's about how it drives in isolation and I've only heard good things about that, except criticism of the engine and that appears to be greatly influenced by the torque dip at. just the sort of rpm people have been lately trained to drive at. Yet not that long ago, people used to rave about an engine 'coming on cam'.
Certainly my 89 carrera has a very noticeable increase in torque (and noise) at about 4.5k up and I love it. My 4a-ge engined mr2 was dead until about 5k and the rx8 needed to be positively thrashed to the 8k red line.
Rev it people !
LordGrover said:
Gary C said:
Totally agree.
It's about how it drives in isolation and I've only heard good things about that, except criticism of the engine and that appears to be greatly influenced by the torque dip at. just the sort of rpm people have been lately trained to drive at. Yet not that long ago, people used to rave about an engine 'coming on cam'.
Certainly my 89 carrera has a very noticeable increase in torque (and noise) at about 4.5k up and I love it. My 4a-ge engined mr2 was dead until about 5k and the rx8 needed to be positively thrashed to the 8k red line.
Rev it people !
Peak power a little over 6,000 RPM.It's about how it drives in isolation and I've only heard good things about that, except criticism of the engine and that appears to be greatly influenced by the torque dip at. just the sort of rpm people have been lately trained to drive at. Yet not that long ago, people used to rave about an engine 'coming on cam'.
Certainly my 89 carrera has a very noticeable increase in torque (and noise) at about 4.5k up and I love it. My 4a-ge engined mr2 was dead until about 5k and the rx8 needed to be positively thrashed to the 8k red line.
Rev it people !
Actually, looking again at the torque curve, if you levelled the torque back from the trough of the dip, then it would be surprisingly similar to the Carreras, and no one can call that engine boring or un-characterful.
Flibble said:
It's interesting you say that Toyota priced themselves out of the market, but then mention Nissan, who did an even better (worse?) job of pricing themselves out of the market. There are less than 2000 370Zs on the road in the UK, if that's not a sales flop I don't know what is. Clearly more power isn't the answer or the 370Z would be outselling the GT86.
Yes absolutely. Nissan made a real balls with the 370Z in terms of pricing and support their car in the market with competitive finance deals. And not helped by the £500+ per year road tax. We looked at buying one new when they first came out and the deals were laughable. Its only recently that big discounts seem to be available and its very much a case now of too little too late.
As per somebodys further comment RE: Autoebid, its interesting that you can now get a 370Z for the same price (to within a few £) of the GT86.
To me thats the shame - that Toyota can only muster up 200PS when you can get a Nissan with 328PS.
I mean - surely even the most hardened GT86 advocates must agree that another 50BHP wouldnt go amiss?
LordGrover said:
Pricing is as much a marketing decision as anything else.
Prices in the US and Australia are a good chunk lower than UK and Europe.
Exactly.Prices in the US and Australia are a good chunk lower than UK and Europe.
Thats why it bemuses me that there is so much "defence" by some on the price point of the GT86 in our market - most likely driven by Toyota UK preferring to sell Auris and Aygos to little old ladies.
300bhp/ton said:
jamoor said:
We have to remember that the car is completely custom on its own chassis etc
The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
Not really. The MR2, MGF and MX-5 don't chassis share with any other vehicles and all cost a lot less than the GT86. Even when you factor inflation into the mix. The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
Gary C said:
More like a smidge under 7k looking at the plots from cosworth.
Actually, looking again at the torque curve, if you levelled the torque back from the trough of the dip, then it would be surprisingly similar to the Carreras, and no one can call that engine boring or un-characterful.
A quick peek at my dyno plot (it's a few pages back) suggests mine has peak torque at around 6500 rpm and peak power at around 6850 rpm. Similar to the Cosworth plots. You really do need to get it right up to the limiter for best performance.Actually, looking again at the torque curve, if you levelled the torque back from the trough of the dip, then it would be surprisingly similar to the Carreras, and no one can call that engine boring or un-characterful.
daemon said:
Yes absolutely. Nissan made a real balls with the 370Z in terms of pricing and support their car in the market with competitive finance deals. And not helped by the £500+ per year road tax. We looked at buying one new when they first came out and the deals were laughable.
Its only recently that big discounts seem to be available and its very much a case now of too little too late.
As per somebodys further comment RE: Autoebid, its interesting that you can now get a 370Z for the same price (to within a few £) of the GT86.
To me thats the shame - that Toyota can only muster up 200PS when you can get a Nissan with 328PS.
I mean - surely even the most hardened GT86 advocates must agree that another 50BHP wouldnt go amiss?
Absolutely 50 bhp would be nice, but it would depend on the tradeoff. I wouldn't take 50 bhp if it mean going turbo in the standard car for instance, or if it mean a significant weight increase. Realistically you'd be looking at a bigger engine, which could potentially bump running costs a lot (like the 370Z).Its only recently that big discounts seem to be available and its very much a case now of too little too late.
As per somebodys further comment RE: Autoebid, its interesting that you can now get a 370Z for the same price (to within a few £) of the GT86.
To me thats the shame - that Toyota can only muster up 200PS when you can get a Nissan with 328PS.
I mean - surely even the most hardened GT86 advocates must agree that another 50BHP wouldnt go amiss?
In the event that I decide I need more power, I'd probably go for a supercharger.
Flibble said:
They're both too heavy (1500kg+)
The 370Z is 1466KG, and the GT86 is lightweight, as opposed to the 370Z being "too heavy".Its also worth noting that on pretty much any track where data is available for both cars the 370Z is considerably faster round them.
We ran one for a couple of years and whilst i'd never describe it as "nimble" it was still seriously quick along cross country driving routes.
300bhp/ton said:
jamoor said:
We have to remember that the car is completely custom on its own chassis etc
The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
Not really. The MR2, MGF and MX-5 don't chassis share with any other vehicles and all cost a lot less than the GT86. Even when you factor inflation into the mix. The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
Flibble said:
Absolutely 50 bhp would be nice, but it would depend on the tradeoff. I wouldn't take 50 bhp if it mean going turbo in the standard car for instance, or if it mean a significant weight increase. Realistically you'd be looking at a bigger engine, which could potentially bump running costs a lot (like the 370Z).
In the event that I decide I need more power, I'd probably go for a supercharger.
Yes, a supercharger seems to be the answer. Its not like Toyota dont have form for it, so its a shame they dont do an "official" variant with it, or offer it as a manufacturer backed dealer upgrade.In the event that I decide I need more power, I'd probably go for a supercharger.
jamoor said:
We have to remember that the car is completely custom on its own chassis etc
The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
The price tag is set by Toyota UK. Its as cheap as chips in some other markets.The 140i can have it's development costs recuperated from the countless 116ds etc.
The gt86 has no such thing. Which goes someway to explaining the pric rag
otolith said:
Depends whether the process of doing that turns it into the kind of car the 370Z is.
worth quoting this.daemon said:
I mean - surely even the most hardened GT86 advocates must agree that another 50BHP wouldnt go amiss?
I wouldn't say no though, but it's not essential to enjoying the car. ideally i'd avoid emissions regs and have a 250 na engine, but you can't in 2017. Obviously headers and maps get you close but that's a conversation about mods or standard.
If i had to change one thing it would be the engine noise and character, this clearly is a weak point. Torque is not a problem for me as i know how to drive and if i'm on a thrash i'm well above the torque dip. The noise is better above 4k too.
The Z is a different car entirely, glad it exists but it's different. The 140i or M2 are different too, possibly complementary in some peoples garages. Weight and the location of that weight is important.
I think another thing people are missing on this thread is price aside, the car is designed from the ground up to be modified by its owners.
https://youtu.be/_apBpbUbf9g?t=7s
I suspect that's why it's a bit underpowered as they expect owners to turbocharge it (if they want) or change to bigger wheels etc.
The basics such as low centre of gravity cannot be added by aftermarket modifications.
https://youtu.be/_apBpbUbf9g?t=7s
I suspect that's why it's a bit underpowered as they expect owners to turbocharge it (if they want) or change to bigger wheels etc.
The basics such as low centre of gravity cannot be added by aftermarket modifications.
Edited by jamoor on Tuesday 23 May 14:19
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff