RE: Behold the new Toyota Supra!

[phharv]

They can off a cliff

[TwinExit]

smig12345 said:

Can remapped Golf Gtis do 0-60 in 4.3?

0-60 is meaningless, they are tested under controlled conditions and you need to take time to 'prep' the car for the best possible launch.

One the street, you can be doing 5 mph, 10 mph, 30-40, 70 mph etc, what the car does from there when the driver needs it to accelerate is what counts.

Edited by TwinExit on Wednesday 16th January 14:58

[st4]

smig12345 said:

Can remapped Golf Gtis do 0-60 in 4.3?

The R can and it costs a lot less.

Listen though, this is sub 50k sports car with a decent engine. It should be celebrated and bear in mind the last Supra from the 90's cost nearly 70k in todays money.

[TwinExit]

vz-r_dave said:

I dont understand why people find the need to race on the road, screams of small man 'penis' syndrome.

Supercar makers understand, so do BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Nissan, Honda, Chevrolet and Ford. That's why they make competitive high performance road cars that fit against today's climate.

Accelerating hard on the road is no different to B-road hooning and taking racing lines at your local roundabout in lo-powered 'sports cars'.

[FIREBIRDC9]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That is stunning

Baby mustang in an awesome colour.

[vz-r_dave]

TwinExit said:

vz-r_dave said:

I dont understand why people find the need to race on the road, screams of small man 'penis' syndrome.

Supercar makers understand, so do BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Nissan, Honda, Chevrolet and Ford. That's why they make competitive high performance road cars that fit against today's climate.

Accelerating hard on the road is no different to B-road hooning and taking racing lines at your local roundabout in lo-powered 'sports cars'.

Wasnt the RX8 renowned for its chassis dynamics and handling, ideal for B roads no? As for the Supra from what I hear its going to be amazingly balanced and have the power to go with it. I can understand people not liking the looks but to write it off without any official reviews or driving it is typical PH bull st.

[TwinExit]

vz-r_dave said:

Wasnt the RX8 renowned for its chassis dynamics and handling, ideal for B roads no?

You do know there are many other roads to drive on in the UK other than B roads, let alone rest of Europe/The World right??

Why you want to splash out xxx amount on a new car only to bomb down them and perform last gasp pull over against the village bushes to avoid an oncoming t1t in a BMW 1 series diesel, who ironically is hooning about in the same manner as you are.

vz-r_dave said:

As for the Supra from what I hear its going to be amazingly balanced and have the power to go with it. I can understand people not liking the looks but to write it off without any official reviews or driving it is typical PH bull st.

You can buy "balanced", moderately powered RWD cars aimed at people who want to pretend they are in a lifestyle car commercial for far less, far far less.

Paying £54,000+ for a sports car that won't be embarrassed only if you keep it on narrow cow-pat ridden B roads doesn't tie into the global hype that surrounded the Supra since the late 90s...

[Terminator X]

Damn ugly as imho the prototype was beautiful (see below)! How on earth can they get the actual car so wrong.



TX.

Edited by Terminator X on Wednesday 16th January 17:06

Edited by Terminator X on Wednesday 16th January 17:09

[Gooly]

TwinExit said:

"Actual drivers cars" ....

I've owned the S2000 and driven an RX-8 a number of times 10-15 years back, and have plenty of real world experiences of other drivers who tend to be very aggressive and exposed to higher risk to make progress in underpowered cars of 'sporty' pretensions.

There is nothing fun in having your foot planted down for several seconds, you wait and wait, 'boshing thru the gears' and find you cant get away from an automatic turbo diesel minicab.

And for your reference, the MKIV Supra weighed between 1490 KG to 1600 KG depending on market and trim/transmission - was powerful and light enough to compete with entry level supercars and fast GTs of the day.

You cannot say the same about the MKV model which will have a remapped 2013 Golf GTI up its backside...

I'm sorry that you buy and rate cars purely by your ability to race minicabs - fortunately not everyone is insecure enough to have this issue.

I know full well how much the MKIV Supra weighed - it was a great car. The MKV Supra has moved down a class relative to modern day competition - more of a Cayman rival than a 911 rival. Personally I don't see the issue with this - all it means is the Supra has stayed to a similar spec and weight and size to the old car as opposed to becoming bigger and more expensive like the 911 and the GTR.

Other cars may have become quicker, bigger and wider but our roads certainly haven't. I'm not sure how a 340bhp RWD coupe with an LSD that weighs under 1500kg is anything less than brilliant to be honest.

TwinExit said:

It was ignored only in Europe, because @ £40k it was in direct competition with the BMW M3 and various other premium marques that overlapped the segment the Supra was positioned in. I seen plenty of Western europe press reaction at the time and it was at odds with what the Japanese and the US were saying.

In otherwords, badge snobbery.

The JZA80 was a very capable platform, massive success in GT racing and the so-called pre-pubescent fast and furious fans who ditched their V8 muscle platforms who then go on to run Supras that run 8-9-10 second 1/4 mile times.

I completely agree with this, and I think the new one will be the same within its class

TwinExit said:

The MKIV had fully independent double wishbone type suspension, front and rear. With firm damping in comparison to the BMW M cars and the 911s of the day. And more more sporty than the old BMW semi-trailing arm smoker barges you have in your portfolio of fail...

Please get your facts straight.

Again, well aware of the MKIV's suspension setup - my comment was mainly down to the fact that the ride height meant it wasnt a great looking car in standard form and benefitted from coilovers and wheels, just like the new one will. BMW don't have the best suspension design, particularly the 90s stuff which I like - hence why I never recommended that Toyota should take lessons from the E34 and E36. You seem to be easily upset by things - perhaps you should consider talking to someone about it.

Fact is Toyota have created a lovely sports coupe which has a three litre turbo inline six, sending power to the rear wheels, in a car that weighs under 1500kg. It's faster and lighter than the old model and will likely handle better. It's not horrendously oversized for UK roads like some modern sports cars are, and it's priced competitively with the Cayman. It's a shame and a cop-out to use MacPherson struts as opposed to the double wishbone of old, and I do hope it gets a manual box at some point but I really don't see how someone can not be excited over the prospect of a 340bhp RWD coupe...

It's ironic that you criticise people for judging cars by how fun they are down B-roads while dismissing it for the inability to smoke your local Uber driver at the lights. Different strokes for different folks...

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 16th January 18:08

[Don Colione]

Terminator X said:

Damn ugly as imho the prototype was beautiful (see below)! How on earth can they get the actual car so wrong.



TX.

Edited by Terminator X on Wednesday 16th January 17:06

Edited by Terminator X on Wednesday 16th January 17:09

Please stop posting pictures if you are going to judge the car, its out already.


Did you actually see any video of the FT-1 concept? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF2cfzJKbUY

I personally never liked the exterior (the spoiler makes it look better), but thought the interior was hot on the FT-1...


If Toyota made that exact same replica.. then the whiners would be out here en masse screaming that they let our expectations down by producing a car with an "outdated" design, because they took too long to put it into production.


So far, I have seen many reviews and videos of this car, and the only ones complaining about the looks are the "keyboard warriors". From all that I have taken in thus far; those who have seen the car in real life have said that it is stunning. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sirDs1-nLXc

I think it looks kind of like a mini 'viper', in some ways, and it dates most car designs now; making them look slab sided, oversized, and bloated....

[Trevor555]

Don Colione said:

So far, I have seen many reviews and videos of this car, and the only ones complaining about the looks are the "keyboard warriors".

What a very odd thing to write.

[anonymous-user]

I had a mkiii Turbo for a number of years, loved that car.

I never moved on to a mkiv, but it was that car that brought the Supra from a Grand Tourer onto the supercar stage. A car that could rival many German and Italian performance vehicles with Japanese attention to detail (i.e considering the weight of bolts and screws) and reliability.

It is a crazy move by Toyota (who I have always said lost the plot in the mid 1990's) to have it's halo, top of the range performance model being based on a Z4 and being powered by a BMW engine. Reusing the legendary Supra name is even more confusing.

I know cars are very expensive to design, develop and produce, but this approach doesn't make sense to me. Surely Toyota could have built a new car from scratch worthy of the Supra name? What does it say about Toyota as a company when you sit in their flagship model and it is very obviously a BMW? It's not a nice looking car either

[Centurion07]

Don Colione said:

Please stop posting pictures if you are going to judge the car, its out already.


Did you actually see any video of the FT-1 concept? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF2cfzJKbUY

I personally never liked the exterior (the spoiler makes it look better), but thought the interior was hot on the FT-1...


If Toyota made that exact same replica.. then the whiners would be out here en masse screaming that they let our expectations down by producing a car with an "outdated" design, because they took too long to put it into production.


So far, I have seen many reviews and videos of this car, and the only ones complaining about the looks are the "keyboard warriors". From all that I have taken in thus far; those who have seen the car in real life have said that it is stunning. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sirDs1-nLXc

I think it looks kind of like a mini 'viper', in some ways, and it dates most car designs now; making them look slab sided, oversized, and bloated....

What a load of bobbins!

There's no two ways about it; the concept is a far, far better looking car than what has actually been produced. I've not seen one person say the opposite, regardless of whether they've seen the car in the flesh or not, so how you can make the assertion that people would be complaining about an "outdated design because it took so long" is beyond me.

The concept looks like a mini-viper, the actual production model more like a Z4.

Expectations are only let down when you get something other than what you thought you were going to get.

[Olivera]

I don't get this FT1 concept talk. That was displayed about 5 years ago, followed by 4 years of teasers, prototype cars and show cars of a Supra that very closely resembles what was actually delivered.

The fact it doesn't look like the FT-1 concept is ancient news.

[Don Colione]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

From a business perspective... what point is it for Toyota to outlay the huge development cost for a new engine, chassis, transmission, and interior? To satisfy this ungrateful public, who will negatively judge whatever they put out anyway? The enthusiasts (who buy cars) they would satisfy will not turn the profit they need to recoup the immense development cost and get 'paid'.


The new Supra looks to perform well with 0-60 at 4.1 seconds, and is "drifty"... The structural rigidity appears to be second to none....
Would a fully in house Toyota be any much better of a performer?
Again for the cost, and effort outlay/profit ratio?


The exterior looks reasonably good.. The interior could be more "Toyota", but are they going to make it in Japan and ship it over to Austria?


Finally, nobody complains when Aston Martin uses Mercedes Benz engines and interiors, and charges much more for similar performance. Toyota (Le Mans winner, creator of the original Supra, LFA, LC500, etc...) allied with BMW (the greatest sport saloon maker ever, and motorsport legend) to jointly co-develop a sports car plarform, which from initial impressions could be really fast, responsive, dynamic, and fun to drive. BMW didn't just say "here have this new Supra, on us..."


Expectations are just that (you shouldn't have them in life, you will be disappointed less), this is the reality and its not so bad, to me...


The real "BMW" is the Z4 ... which to me does not look as good, interior not as appealing in design (guages and theme), dynamically inferior (less rigid), slower, and wayy more expensive .... I ask myself why?

[vsonix]

I don't hate it, but I also feel a bit catfished after all that build up....



There is a certain GT2000 vibe to it but the styling's a bit fussy (like many other Japanese and Korean cars seem to be at the moment). As has been said previously, I think aftermarket wheels and body kits might be the order of the day.

Edited by vsonix on Thursday 17th January 01:14

[Trevor555]

Don Colione said:

From a business perspective... what point is it for Toyota to outlay the huge development cost for a new engine, chassis, transmission, and interior? To satisfy this ungrateful public, who will negatively judge whatever they put out anyway?

I'm interested to know where all your negative thinking of us "public" has come from.

I've owned plenty of lovely cars and I've been grateful for all of them.

[Trevor555]

Olivera said:

I don't get this FT1 concept talk. That was displayed about 5 years ago, followed by 4 years of teasers, prototype cars and show cars of a Supra that very closely resembles what was actually delivered.

The fact it doesn't look like the FT-1 concept is ancient news.

November 2016




Not just the looks.

The words also.

"The legend returns"

"Japans 911"

"400bhp"

I've been waiting two years for this car, expected it to be far more expensive, and more hardcore.

Edited by Trevor555 on Thursday 17th January 03:18

[Don Colione]

Trevor555 said:

I'm interested to know where all your negative thinking of us "public" has come from.

If the "shoe" fits, and all that....

As I stated in a previous post... the "keyboard warriors/designers" who have no idea what it really entails to develop and test a mass production automobile to pass certain regulations & hit performance targets; let alone those who are judging automobiles very harshly without: seeing them in video/real life first, test driving, or owning them long term.

It's cool to have a negative opinion based on an initial reaction, but give it some time, and experience before getting triggered and "writing it off", "canceling orders", "being disappointed because it didn't meet some fantastical 'expectation' of conceptual perfection or otherwise" ... etc. To those whom it may concern, for all cars and brands.

Everything is subjective so I don't criticize if someone doesn't like something, but some of the negative comments and speculation here and on other sites are just ignorantly hilarious at times because they are not based on actual experience.... I do it too (speculate and judge negatively). However, I at least try to check out something first before writing it off completely; because no car is perfect. I also try to keep negative and speculative comments to a minimum, unless speaking from experience, because I could be wrong in my shallow assessment.

If I "like" something I just say so, without experience (because who cares); which could also be proven wrong in 'reality'.

Trevor555 said:

I've owned plenty of lovely cars and I've been grateful for all of them.

Then what other insecurity made you feel it necessary to respond to that part of my post?

[Oz83]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Chamon_Lee said:

fernando the frog said:

you vs the guy she tells you not to worry about

lol such a MASSIVE difference

You can imagine the Toyota boss handing over a Z4 without any body panels and saying "there you go boys, add some panels that make it look like that old supra concept in the corner".

Which is essentially what it is isn't it?

What strikes me is that the proportions of the Z4 are just way too compromised relative to the concept. I think bigger wheels and lower suspension will help (as shown earlier in the thread) but the short wheelbase and long overhangs are impossible to overcome. There are certain elements of the design, such as the split lines and full height rear lights/grilles that actually make the car look taller too.

They might have been better starting with a longer chassis such as the 6 series, giving it a load more power, and charging £90k+ for it.

You don't see Honda remaking the legendary NSX as a £50k car. I really think the new Supra should have been a halo model for Toyota.