So before there was a BRZ, what was the equivalent?

[PMok]

I saw a Porsche 914 today and thought, that could be a spiritual predecessor of sorts. Yeah I know it's mid engined and not that great looking, but it's sporty, low cost and even had a flat-4.

[Justin.b]

I met a guy once driving a 914 that he had put a Subaru 3.0 H6 into.

-Justin

[2013GTRNate]

Originally Posted by Justin.b

A lot of good Japanese cars have had European targets.

Datsun 510 / BMW 2002
Datsun Z / E-Type Jag
Nissan GTR / Porsche 911 Turbo

I don't think I'd consider any of the Japanese cars the equivalent of their European targets.

-Justin

I would take my 2013 Nissan GT-R over a Porsche 911 Turbo any day… I would also love either of the two "Datson 510 or BMW 2002"…

-Nate

[ScionRacer]

I had an 88 Conquest TSI and I would say its the closest thing to the BRZ/FRS.The handling,weight and even the acceleration factor

[Justin.b]

Originally Posted by ScionRacer

I had an 88 Conquest TSI and I would say its the closest thing to the BRZ/FRS.The handling,weight and even the acceleration factor

The conquest/starion was like a spaceship from its time and was quite expensive. 1988 Starion was $17k, when an Iroc Z (hey... it's what was available at the time) stickered at $13,500.

That said, I freakin LOVE those cars. It's on my must own list.

-Justin

[go2brz]

But Toyota deserves credit for coming up with the idea, dragging (a very reluctant) Subaru into it, bankrolling, planning, and designing most of it, and providing the D4-S. From autoguide:

Bull.... If so then why did Toyota not just do this themselves. They have as many resources as any car company in the WORLD. Yet they dragged Subaru into making the car for them?...LMAO! The fact is that Toyota needed Subaru because every effort that Toyota has made in the last two decades to build a real sports car has failed, and failed at the true design of the car. They can sell any shit they put their mind to, but they have not been able to make a true sports car at any price. (The LFA is an overpriced joke). This is not meant to belittle Toyota, It is a company highly capable of making a finely engineered car, that is well built, reliable and usually boring. I used to laugh at the people who tried to autocross the last Celica, not at them, but the car. The MR2 was lowered to the least common demoninator because Toyota wanted to sell cars more than they wanted to get it right. Funny thing. They still did not sell that many.

You have the right to call this car a Toyota is you want. But that does not mean you have facts, reason or history behind you. Subaru produces cars based on purity of purpose and sells to a niche market yet keeps on chugging along with bigger sales increase each year. Toyota builds cars based on mass sales numbers as they try once again to become the manufacturer of most cars in the world each year. Personally, I will take Subaru every time.

The FRS is a re-badged Subaru and besides the styling and engine management technology their input was minimal. As I said (and it is in public print), the Chairman of Toyota said that he and NO FAITH that Toyota could produce such a car based on their culture and past history. Hell they even failed miserably at Formula One. At least Subaru was a real force in the World Rally Championship for over a decade and they make Toyota look like a non-particpant in SCCA events, both on track or autocrossing. Look it up.

[go2brz]

Now, Datsun was a company that was interested in racing! They did what Toyota could never manage (or get approved by the board), as they built some real sports cars for the masses. Even their old 510 sedan was an SCCA winner. As Nissan they have not done as well, but the underpowered 240SX was still a better pure handling car than Toyota have ever built in mass production. (At least in America). And then you have the GTR? So I can only ask?, What (besides autoguide) makes you think that Toyota had the ability to make this car on thier own? Yet (you and your questionable source of autoguide (the mecca of sports car evaluation) ) believe that Toyota had to "drag" Subaru into making a car that Toyota had no ability to make on thier own (or they would have). The truth is that Toyota asked Subaru to come up with such a design. They came up with one early and Toyota was clamoring for them to make it. Subaru said No. It was not good enough for them. So they went to a true Skunk Works car that was shrouded in secrecy throughout the design process, and when they produced the the prototype design, before Toyota knew many details, and presented it to them, Toyota "begged" Subaru to build this car. At that point Subaru said yes, let's do it, because it was an uncompromised desgin of a real affordable sports car that they believed was good enough for them. Yes, they needed Toyota to want the car because the only affordable way to build it was to do it in economies of scale that could make the list price acceptable and give the car the ability to sell in the numbers needed to keep it in production longer than two-three years. (IE: 100,000 plus units worldwide). But Toyota was "dependendent" on Subaru, not vice versa. Anyone who believes otherwise is a Toyota zombie......

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by go2brz

Bull.... If so then why did Toyota not just do this themselves. They have as many resources as any car company in the WORLD. Yet they dragged Subaru into making the car for them?...LMAO! The fact is that Toyota needed Subaru because every effort that Toyota has made in the last two decades to build a real sports car has failed, and failed at the true design of the car. They can sell any shit they put their mind to, but they have not been able to make a true sports car at any price. (The LFA is an overpriced joke). This is not meant to belittle Toyota, It is a company highly capable of making a finely engineered car, that is well built, reliable and usually boring. I used to laugh at the people who tried to autocross the last Celica, not at them, but the car. The MR2 was lowered to the least common demoninator because Toyota wanted to sell cars more than they wanted to get it right. Funny thing. They still did not sell that many.

You have the right to call this car a Toyota is you want. But that does not mean you have facts, reason or history behind you. Subaru produces cars based on purity of purpose and sells to a niche market yet keeps on chugging along with bigger sales increase each year. Toyota builds cars based on mass sales numbers as they try once again to become the manufacturer of most cars in the world each year. Personally, I will take Subaru every time.

The FRS is a re-badged Subaru and besides the styling and engine management technology their input was minimal. As I said (and it is in public print), the Chairman of Toyota said that he and NO FAITH that Toyota could produce such a car based on their culture and past history. Hell they even failed miserably at Formula One. At least Subaru was a real force in the World Rally Championship for over a decade and they make Toyota look like a non-particpant in SCCA events, both on track or autocrossing. Look it up.

Originally Posted by go2brz

Now, Datsun was a company that was interested in racing! They did what Toyota could never manage (or get approved by the board), as they built some real sports cars for the masses. Even their old 510 sedan was an SCCA winner. As Nissan they have not done as well, but the underpowered 240SX was still a better pure handling car than Toyota have ever built in mass production. (At least in America). And then you have the GTR? So I can only ask?, What (besides autoguide) makes you think that Toyota had the ability to make this car on thier own? Yet (you and your questionable source of autoguide (the mecca of sports car evaluation) ) believe that Toyota had to "drag" Subaru into making a car that Toyota had no ability to make on thier own (or they would have). The truth is that Toyota asked Subaru to come up with such a design. They came up with one early and Toyota was clamoring for them to make it. Subaru said No. It was not good enough for them. So they went to a true Skunk Works car that was shrouded in secrecy throughout the design process, and when they produced the the prototype design, before Toyota knew many details, and presented it to them, Toyota "begged" Subaru to build this car. At that point Subaru said yes, let's do it, because it was an uncompromised desgin of a real affordable sports car that they believed was good enough for them. Yes, they needed Toyota to want the car because the only affordable way to build it was to do it in economies of scale that could make the list price acceptable and give the car the ability to sell in the numbers needed to keep it in production longer than two-three years. (IE: 100,000 plus units worldwide). But Toyota was "dependendent" on Subaru, not vice versa. Anyone who believes otherwise is a Toyota zombie......

you are a contradicting, misinformed fanboy. in the same post you manage to criticize toyota for not selling many mr2s and then immediately praise subaru for having a niche market? this is subarus first sports car, dont fool yourself. you would be naive to think that toyotas downfall in f1 is a shame compared to the relatively small success of subaru in wrc and do i have to mention that toyota was a "force" in wrc too? in fact, they have more champoinships than subaru. toyota is one of only a handful of companies to actually make their own f1 cars. they have made more sports cars than subaru and nissan combined. calling a stock 240sx a pure handling car is a total joke and to say its better than anything toyota has ever built is ignorant. toyota owns a huge chunk of subaru and having two parts bins to pull from to keep costs down was a win win. its as simple as that.

i cant help but feel like you have never driven, let alone heard of the: supra, celica, mr2, gt2000, sports800, altezza, isf, corolla, chaser, soarer, starlet or any of the other stuff they are doing or have done. or any of thier successes in races like the rolex sports car series, f1 wrc, basically every endurance race, grand prix, jgtc etc.

dont get me wrong, i like what subaru has done as far as the philosophy of the company but compared to toyota there is no history to look back on.

[chulooz]

Originally Posted by fatoni

you are a contradicting, misinformed fanboy. toyota owns a huge chunk of subaru and having two parts bins to pull from to keep costs down was a win win. its as simple as that.

16% of fuji heavy industry shares doesnt mean as much as you think, the parts bin is over 90% subaru.

You have to give credit to subaru for helping toyota out of its 'boring' slump of cars; both brands went back and forth in the early stages of conception. Toyota's history is unmatched within the japanese realm, but as of the last decade they have been lacking.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by chulooz

16% of fuji heavy industry shares doesnt mean as much as you think, the parts bin is over 90% subaru.

You have to give credit to subaru for helping toyota out of its 'boring' slump of cars; both brands went back and forth in the early stages of conception. Toyota's history is unmatched within the japanese realm, but as of the last decade they have been lacking.

im not trying to take anything away from subaru. the two companies were both absolutely necessary in my guess. i just dont know if using something from someones parts bin makes the car more subaru than toyota. you put a group of people in a room and hammer out a car. some of them were toyota employees and others from subaru. the car isnt good because of its parts. its good because of the way they were put utilized.

[70NYD]

Originally Posted by Deslock

There are a plethora of threads in the vs forum. Two of the more interesting ones:

• vs E30 M3 http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2757
• vs RX8 http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2239

The E30 M3 is close, but it was 2-3 times the price of the average car while even the BRZ Limited is cheaper than the price of the average car.

The 240 is another one that comes to mind, but it was much slower, and its shifter and dynamics were mediocre.

The Miata and S2k are two-seat roadsters.

The RX8 is quite similar:
RWD, awesome driving dynamics, balanced, excellent chassis, tight short throw, naturally aspirated, responsive throttle, not much low-end, high revver (also not an I or V engine), reasonably priced, 4 seats, Japanese

Some RX8 differences:
~180-290 pounds heavier (depending on trims compared), longer wheelbase, suicide doors, more space for rear passengers, less space for cargo, abysmal MPG, no pistons, revs to 9500, consumes oil, no spare, a bit quicker acceleration, a bit pricier (adjusted for for inflation)

HA!
I just reread most of the vs rx8 thread! I can't believe how on the money some of those posts were from over a year ago!!
And to update with my rx8, still going strong
Fuel consumption, still high haha, I still don't care

[a.beck]

Easy.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by Justin.b

A lot of good Japanese cars have had European targets.

Datsun 510 / BMW 2002
Datsun Z / E-Type Jag
Nissan GTR / Porsche 911 Turbo

I don't think I'd consider any of the Japanese cars the equivalent of their European targets.

-Justin

Having only driven a couple of those, I don't have an opinion, but the Japanese cars undercut the others in price. The GTR is significantly cheaper than the 911 Turbo (even after the GTR's price increases since its introduction). From googling, a Datsun 510 was $1900 vs $5500 for the BMW 2002. And bringing it back to the topic, the BRZ is half the price of the Cayman (while having a lower expected cost of ownership and being more practical and efficient).

Originally Posted by 70NYD

HA!
I just reread most of the vs rx8 thread! I can't believe how on the money some of those posts were from over a year ago!!
And to update with my rx8, still going strong
Fuel consumption, still high haha, I still don't care

I always smile when i see an RX8 (or RX7) on the road. Such a great platform.

Originally Posted by go2brz

Yet they dragged Subaru into making the car for them?...LMAO!

Yes. AFAIK, this isn't in dispute.

Originally Posted by go2brz

The fact is that Toyota needed Subaru

Yep.

Originally Posted by go2brz

You have the right to call this car a Toyota is you want.

That's a curious comment since in the very post that you responded to, I wrote: "I'm a Subaru guy, and as they did the engineering and manufacturing, I tend to think of the car as (more-or-less) two parts Subaru, one part Toyota."

Originally Posted by go2brz

Personally, I will take Subaru every time.

I'll take the car that's more fun to drive every time.

[70NYD]

Originally Posted by Deslock

Having only driven a couple of those, I don't have an opinion, but the Japanese cars undercut the others in price. The GTR is significantly cheaper than the 911 Turbo (even after the GTR's price increases since its introduction). From googling, a Datsun 510 was $1900 vs $5500 for the BMW 2002. And bringing it back to the topic, the BRZ is half the price of the Cayman (while having a lower expected cost of ownership and being more practical and efficient).



I always smile when i see an RX8 (or RX7) on the road. Such a great platform.




Yes. AFAIK, this isn't in dispute.

Yep.

That's a curious comment since in the very post that you responded to, I wrote: "I'm a Subaru guy, and as they did the engineering and manufacturing, I tend to think of the car as (more-or-less) two parts Subaru, one part Toyota."

I'll take the car that's more fun to drive every time.

For what it's worth, rx7 is probably a better car overall, a classic if you will (ESP the FD IMO) but interior wise, the design and fit and finish, the part you as a driver and owner see when your using the car, the 8 is leaps and bounds better, but that's my opinion, and the reason I got the 8 over 7. Factory turbo would be nice (let's just forget the fuel consumption for a second, its still a 13B :p ) but I will SC my MSP at one point. That's the plan anyway, new work on my car starts in a few months, I have a plan for it, nothing outrageous, but subtle stuff. It's the deposit I was going to use for the 86.
Don't get me wrong, my hart still melts when I see the 86, I love the idea of the car, that's why I'm still here, hoping and waiting, but for now it's not for me, it still doesn't offer more than my 8 does, styling aside as that's subjectional, so financially I wouldn't be better off selling the 8
But I'm sitting here, waiting for news I know it isn't too far off just biding my time and making plans that one day will come to pass :p