Originally Posted by slimfit (Post 3477363)

Yeah, but didn’t they take a MASSIVE loss and zero profit bringing that to the public. They’re probably still shook from that and never want a repeat. Granted it’s a better bet bringing smaller affordable sports cars than one off super cars.

Originally Posted by timurrrr (Post 3477313)

Did I forget to to use a <sarcasm> tag?

Originally Posted by Lelandjt (Post 3477352)

Yeah, I figured it's hopeless. For the sea level dwellers saying this car isn't about straight line speed or someone who needs more power is not the right buyer for this car, ask yourself: Would you buy this if it had 160hp at the crank? Cuz that's what it has where I live at 9,600ft. Just not enough for a 3000lb sports car in 2022.
I'll consider the Supra (kinda heavy) if I can get a body kit that massively changes the looks, but I could never drive it stock. I've never seen a body kit that tones down a car's appearance so I don't know if that exists. Also lacking cargo area.
Z (kinda heavy) is a potential alternative but I wish it had the cargo area the twins have with their seats folded.
I'm gonna hold out hope that the e-conversion garage can figure out a way to build a twin the way I'd want for under $60k.

There's just no other chassis/body style like the twins so it's a shame they're only offered with one engine. With all the cars available on the market how is there no light, small 2+2 with a pass through trunk and turbo?

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo (Post 3477380)

VW made way more of a loss on each Veyron, but they didn’t back down from making interesting cars. They made 500 LFAs vs 450 Veyrons. It’s rumored that Toyota lost 500.000 usd on each lfa, VW lost 6.24 million per Veyron. So Toyota lost 250 million, VW lost 2.8 Billion. VW still makes the Chiron now, and a host of crazy sports and super cars accross their brands.

It makes Toyota look limp wristed in comparison, especially since VW had been hot on their heels as #2.

Originally Posted by Lelandjt (Post 3477352)

With all the cars available on the market how is there no light, small 2+2 with a pass through trunk and turbo?

Originally Posted by Lelandjt (Post 3477352)

Yeah, I figured it's hopeless. For the sea level dwellers saying this car isn't about straight line speed or someone who needs more power is not the right buyer for this car, ask yourself: Would you buy this if it had 160hp at the crank? Cuz that's what it has where I live at 9,600ft. Just not enough for a 3000lb sports car in 2022.

Originally Posted by LanceLane174 (Post 3477421)

2 words. Stock holders.

If you continue to lose money but continue a project then they will fire you. This project probobly breaks even when you include Subaru. If you add turbo then you will lose money and steal customers from the Supra and WRX. It makes no sense and will never happen.

It's a tired argument. Asked and answered by both companies. Move on.

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo (Post 3477461)

Got it. VW must not have stockholders.

Originally Posted by weederr33 (Post 3477457)

I didn't know altitude made the car heavier too

Originally Posted by PulsarBeeerz (Post 3477459)

Why is no one making a car just-for-me!

Oh it would be 60K nvm.

Originally Posted by alphasaur (Post 3477415)

If you're willing to do an e-conversion, why not just spend the 5k on something like a JRSC which is a pretty easy install all things considered?

Originally Posted by Lelandjt (Post 3477477)

I'm just surprised there isn't a bigger market for a car just like the twins but with more power. I guess most of these buyers must be content with no rear seats at all / less cargo capacity and a bit more weight because if you eliminate those gripes there are plenty of options.

In fact, I think we can all agree ("we" includes Subaru & Toyota) that there is a plenty big enough market for more powerful twins and the only reason they aren't made is to avoid stepping on the toes of other models they make.