RE: Behold the new Toyota Supra!

[Scootersp]

300bhp/ton said:

Centurion07 said:

J4CKO said:

Enjoyed that thanks, he is very engaging as a reviewer and the car looks pretty good, maybe a little bit overstyled but I wouldnt say no.

0-60 in 4 sec before anyone has done anything to it is pretty impressive, considering people were saying its slow compared to a GTR, the original was 0.8 seconds quicker at 3.2 to sixty and 9 tenths over a quarter mile at 11.6 vs 12.5, quicker for sure but not as much as I expected.

An original Supra did 0-60 in 3.2?!

I think J4CKO is saying the original GTR did it in 3.2 not the original Supra.

[flatso]

Sports cars are supposed to be about driver involvement and enjoyment; aking the manual transmission away literally negates at least 1/3 of the fun. Why are manufacturers so OCD about pure accelaration and lap times at the cost of driving enjoymen? I would NEVER consider a sports car without a manual gearbox. As things stand now the only performance car I would buy is a Mustang, because it still offers a manual box.

[cerb4.5lee]

flatso said:

Sports cars are supposed to be about driver involvement and enjoyment; aking the manual transmission away literally negates at least 1/3 of the fun. Why are manufacturers so OCD about pure accelaration and lap times at the cost of driving enjoymen? I would NEVER consider a sports car without a manual gearbox. As things stand now the only performance car I would buy is a Mustang, because it still offers a manual box.

I agree completely but we seem to be in the minority though. Currently there are more autos for sale than manuals for the V8 Mustang on Auto Trader. I have a manual 370Z GT Roadster(no way would I personally want an auto in that), but there are also more autos than manuals currently for sale for that.

I guess because the Supra/Mustang/370Z aren't sports cars in the true sense(too big/heavy), and they are more GT cars then punters/manufacturers feel that they suit an auto more.

[skyrover]

wow that's horrible

[CooperS]

I love the apologists in this thread.

The Supra should of been a competitor to the 911/GTR et al. Anything less people will look back to the last generation and find it lacking.

Also after watching mostly American YouTube launch videos it made me laugh how many times Toyota say these vents are functional if only you choose to chop the body work up or buy this new front fender. Or the car is really stiff if you buy the 3rd party strut brace.....

It feels Toyota have done the best they could with the budget they were given but it's heavily compromised.

I am fortunate that this could be an option however for a host of reasons I'd take a Z4.

[300bhp/ton]

Scootersp said:

300bhp/ton said:

Centurion07 said:

J4CKO said:

Enjoyed that thanks, he is very engaging as a reviewer and the car looks pretty good, maybe a little bit overstyled but I wouldnt say no.

0-60 in 4 sec before anyone has done anything to it is pretty impressive, considering people were saying its slow compared to a GTR, the original was 0.8 seconds quicker at 3.2 to sixty and 9 tenths over a quarter mile at 11.6 vs 12.5, quicker for sure but not as much as I expected.

An original Supra did 0-60 in 3.2?!

I think J4CKO is saying the original GTR did it in 3.2 not the original Supra.

Yes I agree he his. I think my post came across wrong, it should have been a +1 and a rofl @ Scootersp

My mistake

[300bhp/ton]

cerb4.5lee said:

C.A.R. said:

Doug DeMuro's video is pretty good on this.

I've just watched that and he has mirrored my exact thoughts about what I said earlier in this thread. It is sacrilege that it doesn't come with a three pedal manual, and it also used to compete with the old Skyline GTR. Whereas now it is nowhere near it and I find that a shame.

I can forgive the lack of performance in some respects because the Supra is a different kettle of fish to the GTR now. Yet I do think that Toyota have missed a trick by not offering a manual because they've not gone for outright performance with it.

As discussed early, it is a completely different price to the GTR, 2/3rds infact. So it "shouldn't" be anywhere near it!

I do agree about the manual, or lack thereof. I don't understand why it isn't an option.

I have to say I actually really like the look of the car overall. The external styling a like, it's a little awkward in a few areas but it certainly has a degree of "wow!" about it. The interior is dull but then so are most BMW and Toyota interiors. TBH it's the sort of car beyond my means to buy new, but one I would desire to own used in 'x' number of years.

Sort of a do anything sports car. And while the auto might be pleasant for a daily drive. I'd rather a 6 speed manual in there.

[cerb4.5lee]

300bhp/ton said:

cerb4.5lee said:

C.A.R. said:

Doug DeMuro's video is pretty good on this.

I've just watched that and he has mirrored my exact thoughts about what I said earlier in this thread. It is sacrilege that it doesn't come with a three pedal manual, and it also used to compete with the old Skyline GTR. Whereas now it is nowhere near it and I find that a shame.

I can forgive the lack of performance in some respects because the Supra is a different kettle of fish to the GTR now. Yet I do think that Toyota have missed a trick by not offering a manual because they've not gone for outright performance with it.

As discussed early, it is a completely different price to the GTR, 2/3rds infact. So it "shouldn't" be anywhere near it!

I do agree about the manual, or lack thereof. I don't understand why it isn't an option.

I have to say I actually really like the look of the car overall. The external styling a like, it's a little awkward in a few areas but it certainly has a degree of "wow!" about it. The interior is dull but then so are most BMW and Toyota interiors. TBH it's the sort of car beyond my means to buy new, but one I would desire to own used in 'x' number of years.

Sort of a do anything sports car. And while the auto might be pleasant for a daily drive. I'd rather a 6 speed manual in there.

I agree regards the current price difference between the two, but they used to compete on a similar playing field price/performance wise...so why not now as well for me?

I'm looking forward to seeing one in the metal and at first I wasn't sure about the styling, but after watching a few videos I do think that it is a striking shape overall. The interior I'm not so sure about but I am familiar with Bmw's bland interiors in fairness.

[300bhp/ton]

cerb4.5lee said:

I agree regards the current price difference between the two, but they used to compete on a similar playing field price/performance wise...so why not now as well for me?

I'm not sure how similar they were priced in the past. I suspect the GTR has been moved up market, while the Supra has remained much more where it was. Do you know prices?

Also, the Supra was, at least in MK3/4 guise appears to be squarely intended for the US market. And likely pitched at the top of the pony car range and Corvette market. The 2JZ-GTE even somewhat mimics the power delivery of a large displacement V8, a design decision I'm sure Toyota made on purpose, given their intended market.

Looking here:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15142755/toy...

1993 $36k for a non turbo Supra and $40k for the turbo model.

Potential buyers could probably opt for a Mustang Cobra, or limited edition Trans Am for slightly less money. Or a Corvette, the Vette starting at about $35k.


Today the Vette is just over $60k and a V8 Camaro around $48k. The new Supra still seems pitched at the same price bracket and market. The Skyline was never sold in the USA, so hard to gauge, but the GTR is $100k car over there today. Arguably a bigger gap than the UK pricing for the two models.

[cerb4.5lee]

300bhp/ton said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I agree regards the current price difference between the two, but they used to compete on a similar playing field price/performance wise...so why not now as well for me?

I'm not sure how similar they were priced in the past. I suspect the GTR has been moved up market, while the Supra has remained much more where it was. Do you know prices?

Thinking about it now I've been comparing the Supra to the R34 GTR wrongly. The 300ZX was its natural rival and the R34 GTR wasn't out until 1999 I think, my mistake.

[300bhp/ton]

cerb4.5lee said:

Thinking about it now I've been comparing the Supra to the R34 GTR wrongly. The 300ZX was its natural rival and the R34 GTR wasn't out until 1999 I think, my mistake.

I think of the Jap line up; RX-7, 300ZX, 3000 GTO/Dodge Stealth would seem the closest comparisons.

[cerb4.5lee]

300bhp/ton said:

cerb4.5lee said:

Thinking about it now I've been comparing the Supra to the R34 GTR wrongly. The 300ZX was its natural rival and the R34 GTR wasn't out until 1999 I think, my mistake.

I think of the Jap line up; RX-7, 300ZX, 3000 GTO/Dodge Stealth would seem the closest comparisons.

They were an era of cars that I really lusted after too. I wouldn't have said no to any of them. I remember around 20 years ago measuring the garage I had at the time to see if a 300ZX would fit...sadly it didn't and I ended up with a 200SX instead.

I still love Nissan though and I recently picked up a 370Z GT Roadster and it does fit in the garage but it is a very tight fit width wise. I do appreciate a bit of old school and I can't believe that the 370Z is still soldiering on(new sales wise)...just!

[cib24]

300bhp/ton said:

I think of the Jap line up; RX-7, 300ZX, 3000 GTO/Dodge Stealth would seem the closest comparisons.

The RX-7 doesn't really fit the mould of those cars as it's more in line with the capabilities and sportiness of the NSX and Evo. The other cars you mention are closer to a GT by comparison.

[flatso]

cerb4.5lee said:

flatso said:

Sports cars are supposed to be about driver involvement and enjoyment; aking the manual transmission away literally negates at least 1/3 of the fun. Why are manufacturers so OCD about pure accelaration and lap times at the cost of driving enjoymen? I would NEVER consider a sports car without a manual gearbox. As things stand now the only performance car I would buy is a Mustang, because it still offers a manual box.

I agree completely but we seem to be in the minority though. Currently there are more autos for sale than manuals for the V8 Mustang on Auto Trader. I have a manual 370Z GT Roadster(no way would I personally want an auto in that), but there are also more autos than manuals currently for sale for that.

I guess because the Supra/Mustang/370Z aren't sports cars in the true sense(too big/heavy), and they are more GT cars then punters/manufacturers feel that they suit an auto more.

Hehe, the owners of the manual ones are not selling them, the autoboxes get boring.
Nobody asked anybody what they want, its just shoved down our throats. The same story as radio and TV programming, nobody asks anybody if they want all the rubbish being jammed on us. They want us all in small econoboxes, which coincidentally are the only ones still offred with slushboxes.

[300bhp/ton]

cib24 said:

The RX-7 doesn't really fit the mould of those cars as it's more in line with the capabilities and sportiness of the NSX and Evo. The other cars you mention are closer to a GT by comparison.

Evo. No not at all. 4wd family car. Not a sports car at all. The NSX was significantly more money. 2 or 3 times the cost of an RX-7, maybe even more.

[300bhp/ton]

cerb4.5lee said:

They were an era of cars that I really lusted after too. I wouldn't have said no to any of them. I remember around 20 years ago measuring the garage I had at the time to see if a 300ZX would fit...sadly it didn't and I ended up with a 200SX instead.

I still love Nissan though and I recently picked up a 370Z GT Roadster and it does fit in the garage but it is a very tight fit width wise. I do appreciate a bit of old school and I can't believe that the 370Z is still soldiering on(new sales wise)...just!

Very much the same here. Had an S13 also. But Camaro not 370z today. But very much like the Nissan.

https://youtu.be/TlF9Uz6hhIY

[cerb4.5lee]

300bhp/ton said:

cerb4.5lee said:

They were an era of cars that I really lusted after too. I wouldn't have said no to any of them. I remember around 20 years ago measuring the garage I had at the time to see if a 300ZX would fit...sadly it didn't and I ended up with a 200SX instead.

I still love Nissan though and I recently picked up a 370Z GT Roadster and it does fit in the garage but it is a very tight fit width wise. I do appreciate a bit of old school and I can't believe that the 370Z is still soldiering on(new sales wise)...just!

Very much the same here. Had an S13 also. But Camaro not 370z today. But very much like the Nissan.

https://youtu.be/TlF9Uz6hhIY

Really enjoyed watching that thanks.

[cib24]

300bhp/ton said:

Evo. No not at all. 4wd family car. Not a sports car at all. The NSX was significantly more money. 2 or 3 times the cost of an RX-7, maybe even more.

I'm not looking at it from a cost perspective. I'm looking at it from a capabilities perspective. The NSX, RX-7 and Evo out of the box were dynamically in a higher tier than the GTR, Supra and STI.

The Best Motoring videos on YouTube demonstrate this quite obviously.