Future reliability like other Toyotas?

[alone1i]

Heya, I am currently driving 1993 Toyota MR2 with 210000KM. No rust, no mechanical issue, no problem at all. 26 years old car, driving daily, still running like a champ.
What you guys believe, the twin can be same as like those 90's other toyotas?

[Impureclient]

I'd be looking more at other older Subarus for future reliability.

[Tcoat]

You have a 26 year old car with hardly any kilometers on it. It is not indicative of the normal life expectancy of a MR2 or any other Toyota. For every one that is still "running like a champ" there are several hundred that were worn out and turned into soup cans decades ago. If you get an 86/BRZ and put less that 10,000KMS a year on it while maintaining and storing it properly there is no reason to expect it not to last just as well.
If you actually drive the thing then yes, it will wear out. My car is driven over 50,000KMs a year and at this point has 40,000 more KMs than you 26 year old car. It has been totally reliable and other than wear expected for that distance is standing up well. I would however expect it will be a pile of dust in another 22 years. Durability will vary depending upon usage.

[Summerwolf]

No, I would compare it to the reliability of Subarus. Since the car is mostly a Subaru.

[FujiwaraTofu86]

It is technically, mostly a Subaru. And built with Subaru part-bin

[joro2]

Despite the Subaru DNA I would assume Toyota took extra steps to ensure Toyota levels of long term reliability?

[Nevermore]

Originally Posted by joro2

Despite the Subaru DNA I would assume Toyota took extra steps to ensure Toyota levels of long term reliability?

Ultimately the engine is from Subaru. I think Toyota did the fuel system, but the engine is all Subaru, and arguably the main thing that has to last a long time to be considered reliable.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by joro2

Despite the Subaru DNA I would assume Toyota took extra steps to ensure Toyota levels of long term reliability?

No.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by joro2

Despite the Subaru DNA I would assume Toyota took extra steps to ensure Toyota levels of long term reliability?

I don't understand this line of thinking....

Subaru parts bin and Subaru built and all of a sudden because Toyota was involved in some way its going to be Toyota reliable?

It was the same thing with the Supra....Toyota somehow got involved with reengineering the existing BMW parts bin stuff that is used and somehow it'll become Toyota reliable instead of BMW hit or miss?

Toyota did not re-engineer their partners components and made them more reliable...…

The Subaru BRZ/86 is Subaru reliable (which in itself is pretty reliable)
And the Supra is BMW reliable (which I think for the current generation of product is pretty reliable)

[NARFALICIOUS]

Originally Posted by alone1i

Heya, I am currently driving 1993 Toyota MR2 with 210000KM. No rust, no mechanical issue, no problem at all. 26 years old car, driving daily, still running like a champ.
What you guys believe, the twin can be same as like those 90's other toyotas?

Some 90s Toyotas were reliable, not all.

Originally Posted by FujiwaraTofu86

It is technically, mostly a Subaru. And built with Subaru part-bin

The Diff is Toyota, the Fuel injection is Toyota, the head unit (for FRS/86) is a Toyota

The sheet metal and other metals are probably the same supplier(s) that provides metal to many Japanese manufacturers.
Toyota owns part of Subaru.

The engine is high comp N/A, made first for this platform before they started using it in other applications. So no real history longer than 7 years to go by. You can't simply lump this engine design into the same reliability as other Subaru engine designs. 1-because Toyota had a hand in it (much more than the MKV). 2-because One engine family is not inherently as reliable as a totally different engine family. Toyota example: 7M vs 2JZ.

Transmission - so far reliable. People have only been killing transmissions from higher hp than it can handle.

What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?

[FujiwaraTofu86]

Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS

Some 90s Toyotas were reliable, not all.



The Diff is Toyota, the Fuel injection is Toyota, the head unit (for FRS/86) is a Toyota

The sheet metal and other metals are probably the same supplier(s) that provides metal to many Japanese manufacturers.
Toyota owns part of Subaru.

The engine is high comp N/A, made first for this platform before they started using it in other applications. So no real history longer than 7 years to go by. You can't simply lump this engine design into the same reliability as other Subaru engine designs. 1-because Toyota had a hand in it (much more than the MKV). 2-because One engine family is not inherently as reliable as a totally different engine family. Toyota example: 7M vs 2JZ.

Transmission - so far reliable. People have only been killing transmissions from higher hp than it can handle.

What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?

So 15% of the car is from Toyota.

Not saying that the car is not reliable. what I am saying is that it is technically a Subaru, so people can't be expecting Camry-like reliability. And almost every 86 owner does not drive them like Camry drivers. The harder you drive the car, the more wear, and tear.

I had 15 BRZ and it was incredibly reliable. but Do I expect reliability like a Camry? absolutely not, I did a couple of track-days, autocross and regularly drive the car harder than regular-normal-commuter-camry-driver

[Pedro13]

Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS

Some 90s Toyotas were reliable, not all.


What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?

I think it is a misconception regarding what "reliability" means: Some people evaluates the reliability based in how much negligent has been taking care of the car, using and abusing it without the minimal care, not even check the oil once in a while... well, if this is the case, guess what? the older the car, the "most reliable" will be...Why? because the functionality is way less complex, i.e. I have a 2001 Corolla for a winter beater and even is a beater, I keep it well maintain, so the cars works great, but another factor is that ONLY have 2 ECU's: the Air Bag & Engine ECU. Of course was originally well designed meaning that if you provide the normal care, the car will be ok. That is why hard to compare old vs. new cars... The more the "electronic nannies" & gadgets have, the more the chances to fail and as T-Coat mention: the more the use, the more the wear.


Another clarification I like to express is that the key in a reliable vehicle comes from the design of the parts/components, so when was said "What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?" I said both, because in both cases the design came from Japan, so has to follow the Japan specs. Don't matter where is made has to follow the "TMS" (Toyota Manufacturing System).Two of the more recognized "reliable" cars from Toyota The Camry and Corolla, are made in North America.


But in summary, my bet is that our "Toyobarus" will be reliable enough, as long as we take care of them, because are well designed.

[OwlDance]

I'd look less at Subaru vs Toyota measures and moreso of the fundamental design and the end product of that design. Arguing over who made what has always boiled down to juvenile semantic BS.

It's a boxer engine placed on a sports car that's naturally aspirated and RWD on a lightweight platform manufactured by Subaru, designed by both Toyota and Subaru. In general for the rest of the car, there's a parts list on this forum that shows like half the components being made by Toyota as well, but I can't seem to find that right now.

Based on the long term anecdotes of owners, the FA20s are miles better than the old EJs. However they generate a lot of heat, have had reported oil pressure weaknesses Within 1000 RPM of OEM redline. As stock they appear to have be slightly less able to be wrung out freely without concern than some other vehicles. Being a sports car however, subjects them to a lot of stresses that most other cars won't face. However for most to have lasted as long as they have now, alongside numerous FI applications suggests a generally feasible engine for both performance and regular usage. Throwing a rod appears to be the Achilles heel as a result of a weakness at a reduced oil pressure near redline combined with oil temps under sustained high RPM driving without adequate cooling measures.

It's worth noting that the FA20 design more or less made Subaru abandon the EJs in their lineup (to my knowledge) except for the STI.

Both transmission types are fairly reliable and similar in capacity for performance. The MT is a one off design strictly for this car, and appears to be less capable of holding additional power, but can be fixed? with the aftermarket. Both are currently lasting the duration of this car under stock to NA modded circumstances.

Pretty much everything else about the car has had no major, repeated points of failure. And that the manufacturing process has not resulted in any consistent issues as well.

My personal conclusion is that everything about the car will last as long as any old, well maintained car except for the engine which is slightly more fickle due to its inherent mechanical design. However, the issues discussed above only affect a small minority of drivers and are easily remedied with aftermarket oil cooling and or care of the engine.

[NARFALICIOUS]

Originally Posted by FujiwaraTofu86

Not saying that the car is not reliable. what I am saying is that it is technically a Subaru, so people can't be expecting Camry-like reliability. And almost every 86 owner does not drive them like Camry drivers. The harder you drive the car, the more wear, and tear.

I had 15 BRZ and it was incredibly reliable. but Do I expect reliability like a Camry? absolutely not, I did a couple of track-days, autocross and regularly drive the car harder than regular-normal-commuter-camry-driver

Do you mean the Camry's with oil consumption and sticky dashboards? I hope not too.

So 15% of the car is from Toyota.

parts are just parts. The FA20 square bore/stroke high comp DI N/A was made for this car first, was it not? The car designed and engineered as a joint effort and assembled in a Subaru plant. The design & engineering is more important than the part itself as design & engineering dictate how a part will be manufactured

Originally Posted by Pedro13

Another clarification I like to express is that the key in a reliable vehicle comes from the design of the parts/components, so when was said "What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?" I said both, because in both cases the design came from Japan, so has to follow the Japan specs. Don't matter where is made has to follow the "TMS" (Toyota Manufacturing System).Two of the more recognized "reliable" cars from Toyota The Camry and Corolla, are made in North America.


But in summary, my bet is that our "Toyobarus" will be reliable enough, as long as we take care of them, because are well designed.

I agree with you, design of the vehicle & components is the most important part of this and the twins have proven to be reliable so far. A lot of people are well above 100K miles as we speak with well running engines.

btw the Corolla is made both in Japan & US for this generation.


But you have to consider at least 4 scenarios and all in-between.
Great design--Great quality manufacturing (TPS Toyota Production System at it's best)
Great design--Poor quality manufacturing
Poor design--Great quality manufacturing
Poor design--Poor quality manufacturing

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles...0m/0bu/023000c

Originally Posted by OwlDance

Based on the long term anecdotes of owners, the FA20s are miles better than the old EJs. However they generate a lot of heat, have had reported oil pressure weaknesses Within 1000 RPM of OEM redline. As stock they appear to have be slightly less able to be wrung out freely without concern than some other vehicles. Being a sports car however, subjects them to a lot of stresses that most other cars won't face. However for most to have lasted as long as they have now, alongside numerous FI applications suggests a generally feasible engine for both performance and regular usage. Throwing a rod appears to be the Achilles heel as a result of a weakness at a reduced oil pressure near redline combined with oil temps under sustained high RPM driving without adequate cooling measures.

It's worth noting that the FA20 design more or less made Subaru abandon the EJs in their lineup (to my knowledge) except for the STI.

Both transmission types are fairly reliable and similar in capacity for performance. The MT is a one off design strictly for this car, and appears to be less capable of holding additional power, but can be fixed? with the aftermarket. Both are currently lasting the duration of this car under stock to NA modded circumstances.

Great points. Engine & trans, arguably the most important parts were more or less began with this platform and while they have their issues, from what I've gathered, have been reliable to date.