Report: Toyota 86 / FR-S Sedan still coming (with 100mm longer wheelbase)

[daiheadjai]

I had forgotten the Katayama connection - remembered reading about the IS300 in SCC way back when - learned to drive manual just to try the IS300 M/T.

Still stare when I see IS300s roll by.

[OrangeJuleas]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

I don't know why you think a 4 door car is a niche market. I think it must be opposite day. 2 door cars are a niche market and sports cars are a niche market and thusly, a 2-door sports car is a very niche market. The expansion to 4-doors just makes this car "less-niche". Also, there is an insignificant amount of investment (big picture) to modify an existing platform to add something as a simple as a drop-top or 4 doors.

You associate "sedan" with Camry, with comfort, with luxury but that's you're own fault. That's your perception, but it's not the definition of the term.

It may be my perception, but my perception is not far from the truth (and so, it appears, neither is yours):

Google Image search for Convertible (there is even an BRZ in the top searches):



Image search for Sedan (I do see many Audis and BMWs):



Image search for Roadster (pretty much sport cars:


For anyone wondering what we're discussing, it's whether Toyota should go this direction:




Or this direction:

[uncivilised]

This looks hot

[boxer 2.5]

That looks great! But it would look fantastic if the roof were lower in the front and stayed at less of a slope in the rear. The way it is now it looks like an Outback with a front end swap.

[regal]

First these are not lightweight coupes and the sedan will not be light weight. The BMW 2000 sedan weighed about 2200 lbs soaking wet. Heck my '85 Jetta sedan was 2300 lbs.

Our cars are far from light weight. You want lightweight buy an MRS or Elise.

Now make them heavier add 2 doors and this is an extremely non-competitive underpowered sedan for the price. I don't see anyone forking over $25k for a sedan this under powered.

Toyota would have to add a turbo or a completely different engine , no way around it.

[P@ul]

Originally Posted by OrangeJuleas

I don't need to see The Homer to know that it shouldn't have been created.

This is blasphemy, you take that BACK! http://www.homercar.com/

[ame]http://youtu.be/qM5HMMXNCoc[/ame]

[P@ul]

I don't understand the epic amount of butt hurt on the topic. This could be the modern interpretation of a Datsun 510. I hope it's more upright, so it has the classic 3 box sedan ala 70s 510/2002/escort design and a practical back seat.

[regal]

Originally Posted by P@ul

I don't understand the epic amount of butt hurt on the topic. This could be the modern interpretation of a Datsun 510. I hope it's more upright, so it has the classic 3 box sedan ala 70s 510/2002/escort design and a practical back seat.

That's the idea. and the Datsun 510 was sort of a knock off or in similar vein as the BMW 2ks at the time which lead to the E30 BMWs.


I for one hope it works because it will mean lower parts cost and insurance for our cars.

But the FA20 just won't be competitive in the sedan market, surely Toyota sees this and it means a better engine on the pipeline.

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by regal

First these are not lightweight coupes and the sedan will not be light weight. The BMW 2000 sedan weighed about 2200 lbs soaking wet. Heck my '85 Jetta sedan was 2300 lbs.

Our cars are far from light weight. You want lightweight buy an MRS or Elise.

Now make them heavier add 2 doors and this is an extremely non-competitive underpowered sedan for the price. I don't see anyone forking over $25k for a sedan this under powered.

Toyota would have to add a turbo or a completely different engine , no way around it.

Given modern regulations for safety, these are pretty lightweight. None of the cars you mentioned would meet modern safety or emissions regulations, so they aren't really relevant for comparison with a car that's on sale now.

As for underpowered? The BMW 2000 you mentioned had 100hp in base trim, and 130hp with the more powerful engine. Even if the sedan 86 (assuming it exists, for the sake of argument) weighed 3k pounds, it would have a significantly better power to weight ratio than even the higher powered version of the BMW 2000. The Jetta you mentioned is a lot worse. I'm not saying that more power would be a bad thing, but a 200hp, 3k pound car is not underpowered (it's also a better power to weight ratio than a BMW 320i, and a base Audi A4, again assuming that 3k pound figure, and I wouldn't describe either of those cars as underpowered).

[thill]

Originally Posted by regal

That's the idea. and the Datsun 510 was sort of a knock off or in similar vein as the BMW 2ks at the time which lead to the E30 BMWs.


I for one hope it works because it will mean lower parts cost and insurance for our cars.

But the FA20 just won't be competitive in the sedan market, surely Toyota sees this and it means a better engine on the pipeline.

Sports sedan? No. But the FA20 turbo used in the Forester should get the job done. 250hp and 258ft lbs of torque, and I am sure they can get more out of it if they wanted to.

They could also move towards a dual clutch style transmission for performance improvement as well.

[AsianStyle]

Originally Posted by regal

First these are not lightweight coupes and the sedan will not be light weight. The BMW 2000 sedan weighed about 2200 lbs soaking wet. Heck my '85 Jetta sedan was 2300 lbs.

Our cars are far from light weight. You want lightweight buy an MRS or Elise.

Now make them heavier add 2 doors and this is an extremely non-competitive underpowered sedan for the price. I don't see anyone forking over $25k for a sedan this under powered.

Toyota would have to add a turbo or a completely different engine , no way around it.

Haha, say the car is not light weight and then give examples of cars from the 80s. Yes, this car is not light weight in regards to cars from the past, but with new safety regulations especially in the US what do you expect? Even the carbon tube Alfa 4C is gaining 500lbs in the US market due to safety regulations (~2200lbs + 500lbs = 2700lbs). BTW what is the weight of a modern 3-series BMW?

I agree with you that the engine is lack luster and is probably the biggest issue with the current car. This will be more apparent in a car that will weight slightly more, but the concept of having a light weight rwd sedan is something I am all for.

[thill]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Given modern regulations for safety, these are pretty lightweight. None of the cars you mentioned would meet modern safety or emissions regulations, so they aren't really relevant for comparison with a car that's on sale now.

As for underpowered? The BMW 2000 you mentioned had 100hp in base trim, and 130hp with the more powerful engine. Even if the sedan 86 (assuming it exists, for the sake of argument) weighed 3k pounds, it would have a significantly better power to weight ratio than even the higher powered version of the BMW 2000. The Jetta you mentioned is a lot worse.

Yes, if you don't care about safety and are focused on weight reduction I suppose you could rip out airbags, delete the backseat, etc and get the weight down on our cars.

[regal]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Given modern regulations for safety, these are pretty lightweight. None of the cars you mentioned would meet modern safety or emissions regulations, so they aren't really relevant for comparison with a car that's on sale now.

As for underpowered? The BMW 2000 you mentioned had 100hp in base trim, and 130hp with the more powerful engine. Even if the sedan 86 (assuming it exists, for the sake of argument) weighed 3k pounds, it would have a significantly better power to weight ratio than even the higher powered version of the BMW 2000. The Jetta you mentioned is a lot worse.

Its 2013, the sedan market is competitive today.

Originally Posted by thill

Sports sedan? No. But the FA20 turbo used in the Forester should get the job done. 250hp and 258ft lbs of torque, and I am sure they can get more out of it if they wanted to.
.

I hope this is the direction they take.

[OrangeJuleas]

Originally Posted by boxer 2.5

That looks great! But it would look fantastic if the roof were lower in the front and stayed at less of a slope in the rear. The way it is now it looks like an Outback with a front end swap.

Actually, it looks kind of like my 1st gen Mazda 3 Hatch. Still I like the way it looks.

Originally Posted by regal

I hope this is the direction they take.

Me too, @regal. Me too.