Official: Toyota FT-1 Concept / First New Supra Prototype Spotted!

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by Summerwolf

...

The continued lack of cogent and coherent logic is just too much to waste my time with. Please continue whatever you are up to over at the corvetteforum. thanks.

You should go back and reread who exactly brought what cars into this thread. The power of self deception and revisionism can be a strong one.

We know what you want already, a Camaro that looks like a Supra. I think you can move on now if you have nothing topical to add to the actual thread.

[vh_supra26]

Toyota engineers have been spotted at the Nurburgring testing a Porsche 911 GT3 RS, potentially getting down some benchmarks in the development of its upcoming Supra revival.

An image has appeared on renowned Nurburgring enthusiast website BridgeToGantry, spotting the Porsche apparently owned by and/or under the control of Toyota. It was seen during a scheduled industry testing day.

It seems engineers could be using the previous-gen 997 GT3 RS at the ‘Ring to gain some valuable data in relation to cornering abilities and performance. We’re sure we don’t have to tell you, the GT3 is a very serious, stripped out race car for the road. Although the new Toyota Supra isn’t likely to be as serious as the GT3, Toyota could be benchmarking to understand the limits.

Engineers were also seen testing the last, fourth-gen Supra on the Nurburgring, possibly to make sure the new model rekindles some of the original spirit. Back then, the Supra came with a now-legendary ‘2JZ’ 3.0-litre twin-turbo inline six engine.

For the new model rumours suggest Toyota could adopt one of BMW’s TwinPower turbo four- or six-cylinder engines, while pairing in some kind of electric hybrid assist system using its own expertise.

Last week we heard news that Toyota had registered a trademark for “Supra” in Europe, following an earlier registration of the name in the USA back in 2014. It seems logical Toyota will apply the legendary name to the new sports car.

BMW, as part of an agreed co-development deal signed in 2012, is also engineering a vehicle alongside the Supra and will introduce a separate model based on the same foundations. There’s talk of it being its new sports convertible, replacing the Z4. The name ‘Z5’ has been thrown around but nothing is official just yet.

http://performancedrive.com.au/toyota-1511/

[OldSkoolToys]

Oh, benchmarking the GT3??? Rekindling the "affordable Porsche" nickname indeed. Though i suspect my anticipated price range is a little low now.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by abraxis

The continued lack of cogent and coherent logic is just too much to waste my time with. Please continue whatever you are up to over at the corvetteforum. thanks.

You should go back and reread who exactly brought what cars into this thread. The power of self deception and revisionism can be a strong one.

We know what you want already, a Camaro that looks like a Supra. I think you can move on now if you have nothing topical to add to the actual thread.

You obviously cannot have a smart conversation. I never said I wanted a Camaro, have no idea where you got that from. None of your posts have contributed to this thread in any manner, and I bid you good day.

Ps. Nice thesaurus usage

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Has anybody seen any OFFICIAL updates on the concept? All I can find from Toyota is 2 year old press releases and a bunch of pics in their Concept section on the web page. Debating weight may be all fine and dandy since if it just remains a concept it's production weight will be zero.

BMW will make a Z4 successor, Toyota DID dump money into it.

This one I'm banking something comes out. Maybe it doesn't have a Toyota badge on it, but a new RWD roadster/coupe with a straight 6 will hit the streets in the next year or two, I guarantee it.

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

The mk4 was classified as a sports car

From Car and Driver in 1993

The Supra used to be a sporty touring coupe, an Oriental counterpart to, say, the Thunderbird SC. Now it is targeted at buy*ers—admittedly precious few of them—who loiter in Nissan showrooms next to the 300ZXs. After our one-day drive (on a racetrack only), we wonder whether the new Supra faces an identity crisis. It is fast, but it is not a pure sports car like the RX-7. And it offers neither the styling, the luxury, nor the prestige of the 300ZX.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...trumented-test

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

BMW will make a Z4 successor, Toyota DID dump money into it.

This one I'm banking something comes out. Maybe it doesn't have a Toyota badge on it, but a new RWD roadster/coupe with a straight 6 will hit the streets in the next year or two, I guarantee it.
[/url]

I know right? Total vaporware...

http://www.carscoops.com/2016/08/toy...return-on.html

"Ever since Toyota re-trademarked the name, it has seemed probable we would see it revived and now thanks to Toyota's global chief designer, Tetsuya Tada, we're confident it's happening.

While speaking with Car Advice, Tada said “I love the Supra and I love the Supra name. It's historically important to Toyota. We're pushing for the name Supra for the new car we are developing with BMW." "

[Guff]

Originally Posted by abraxis

Do you have confirmation on this? The Z5 and Supra were supposedly looking to expand use of BMW's CFRP from the i3 and i8.



http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...bon-fiber-cars

That was one of the reasons for the Collaboration/MoU between the two companies.

No confirmation, but this is according to a (secondhand) Toyota source. Could be totally wrong as it's really early in development, but who knows.

Chances of them doing a monocoque and hitting a 80k price point don't seem likely though. i8 is 140k iirc and that's far less car than the Supra needs to be.

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by Guff

No confirmation, but this is according to a (secondhand) Toyota source. Could be totally wrong as it's really early in development, but who knows.

Chances of them doing a monocoque and hitting a 80k price point don't seem likely though. i8 is 140k iirc and that's far less car than the Supra needs to be.

i3 is $40k though, fingers crossed.

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

BMW will make a Z4 successor, Toyota DID dump money into it.

This one I'm banking something comes out. Maybe it doesn't have a Toyota badge on it, but a new RWD roadster/coupe with a straight 6 will hit the streets in the next year or two, I guarantee it.





From Car and Driver in 1993


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...trumented-test

No where in that quote you posted does C&D outright say the Supra is NOT a sports car. They pose more of an open ended question; one for ponder and thought.

If you were to take all the reasons (aside from the butter-smooth powerhouse of an engine, which both classifications can have) they were questioning if it were a sports car or GT, and apply it to the twins, then you'd basically be saying C&D would call the FR-S/BRZ a GT, which is completely silly. A 2+2 coupe with practical cargo space and a suspension that passes the daily driver check mark.

Compared to the MK3 and other actual GT's, the MK4's cabin is 'noisy', and the ride is harsh. The amenities, while not econobox spartan, just aren't there, because Toyota was purposefully trying to shave weight on that car and make it a more pronounced and focused sports car. The first example that comes to mind are the seats. They are great factory buckets, but are outclassed in terms of comfort by a wide margin by what was offered in the MK3.

You want a MK4 Supra GT? Look no further than the SC300/400 (Same platform: the main reason the mk4 was as heavy as it was). That was a GT.

A 2+2 designation does not make a car a GT.

[Guff]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

No where in that quote you posted does C&D outright say the Supra is NOT a sports car. They pose more of an open ended question; one for ponder and thought.

If you were to take all the reasons (aside from the butter-smooth powerhouse of an engine, which both classifications can have) they were questioning if it were a sports car or GT, and apply it to the twins, then you'd basically be saying C&D would call the FR-S/BRZ a GT, which is completely silly. A 2+2 coupe with practical cargo space and a suspension that passes the daily driver check mark.

Compared to the MK3 and other actual GT's, the MK4's cabin is 'noisy', and the ride is harsh. The amenities, while not econobox spartan, just aren't there, because Toyota was purposefully trying to shave weight on that car and make it a more pronounced and focused sports car. The first example that comes to mind are the seats. They are great factory buckets, but are outclassed in terms of comfort by a wide margin by what was offered in the MK3.

You want a MK4 Supra GT? Look no further than the SC300/400 (Same platform: the main reason the mk4 was as heavy as it was). That was a GT.

A 2+2 designation does not make a car a GT.

Definitely agree, but just wanna say, Supra ride quality is actually fantastic. Very comfortable, well damped, smoother than most would expect. I would definitely say better than a MK3.

Buttt, I still agree the SC was the real GT, and the Supra was the sports car which was still very GT-capable, but still focused on the sports car side of things.

Also, unrelated to @OldSkoolToys (btw, it's really great to see you posting again. Mad respect for a real OG) but I saw a caradvice.co.au/motoring,co.au sourced article posted earlier and I just want to say, Please don't believe anything those sites post. They will fabricate entirely false stories for clicks and have done it time and time again. The quote from Tada San is very old (and perhaps misquoted) and mostly irrelevant now, as the landscape has changed hugely from when he first mentioned the Supra, as has Toyota's relationship to BMW. Also, Tada San will be overseeing this project and other sports car projects, but that does NOT mean he is going to be the chief engineer. Just something to keep in mind.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

A 2+2 designation does not make a car a GT.

I disagree on that point and as such don't consider the 86 a true sports car either, so cheers on that second paragraph.

To me the definition a sports car is a small car built for nimble handling. The mk4 Supra w/ turbos clocked in at >3,200 lbs and is nearly a foot longer than the 86, and 2 feet longer than the latest Miata.

@Guff your fanboi is showing

You guys can call it what you want, and I'm not trying to shit on the car. I just wouldn't classify something that weighs more than a German luxury sedan as a 'sports car'.

Edit;

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

A 2+2 coupe with practical cargo space and a suspension that passes the daily driver check mark.

I don't know why I missed that quote, that's precisely what I would classify a GT as.

[Guff]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I disagree on that point and as such don't consider the 86 a true sports car either, so cheers on that second paragraph.

To me the definition a sports car is a small car built for nimble handling. The mk4 Supra w/ turbos clocked in at >3,200 lbs and is nearly a foot longer than the 86, and 2 feet longer than the latest Miata.

@Guff your fanboi is showing

You guys can call it what you want, and I'm not trying to shit on the car. I just wouldn't classify something that weighs more than a German luxury sedan as a 'sports car'.

Edit;



I don't know why I missed that quote, that's precisely what I would classify a GT as.

I'm a blatant fanboi and proud of it.

I will say though, having driven many Supras in many sporting events, it does fantastic on road courses, drag racing, and yes, even autocross.

If that's not a sports car, I'm not sure what is. Regardless though, we're all just being pedantic at this point. It doesn't matter what it's classified as, it just has to be good!

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Guff

I'm a blatant fanboi and proud of it.

I will say though, having driven many Supras in many sporting events, it does fantastic on road courses, drag racing, and yes, even autocross.

If that's not a sports car, I'm not sure what is. Regardless though, we're all just being pedantic at this point. It doesn't matter what it's classified as, it just has to be good!

Lots of 'non-sports cars' are great at and tons of fun at motorsports events. For instance at the last big autocross I went to I got beaten by a '67 Chevelle.

This is my favorite drift video:

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf5lLMCWWYc"]Black Smoke Racing Best of 2011 - YouTube[/ame]




You're right, pedantry for pedantry's sake. Fun cars are fun, doesn't matter if it's a truck or a trike.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Guff

I'm a blatant fanboi and proud of it.

I will say though, having driven many Supras in many sporting events, it does fantastic on road courses, drag racing, and yes, even autocross.

If that's not a sports car, I'm not sure what is. Regardless though, we're all just being pedantic at this point. It doesn't matter what it's classified as, it just has to be good!

Thinking back I am pretty sure I have never even SEEN a Supra much less drove one.


Many sports cars are not used for sports and many cars used for sports are not sports cars.
It is an unwinnable debate as to what constitutes a "sports car" that has raged on for about 80 years. Especially when technology changes so fast and what was a "sports car" once is left out a few years later because the baseline criteria changed.