Subaru is different. It states in the article how Subaru doesn't want to expand any further. It wants to keep it's "niche" appeal.

I doubt they'll abandon what makes the twins so great, a cheap, reliable, simplistic, lightweight FR with "just enough" horsepower so it can be wrung out even on main roads.

The twins aren't geared towards the masses, and I don't think Subaru wants it to be.

There was a day not too long ago when there was a distinct difference between the quality of Japanese built and NA built cars. And as you said, it was mostly through much greater processes and attention to them that the Japanese had used for a long time. It is only in the last 15 years or so that the NA manufacturers are starting to catch on and use some of the process management tools that the Japanese have used for half a century that we are seeing a huge upswing in the quality of the vehicles made here. The "get 'em on the road now quality be damned" mentality I recall from my early years in the industry has been gone for a while now.
Once the NA companies started embracing such systems as Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma, etc there was a marked increase in quality and productivity. Anybody want to guess where all those systems originated?

That may all be true, but we know which ones are considered iconic and which ones are barely considered at all.

What about the Z family?? Z31 300zx to the Z32 300zx to the 350Z to the 370Z??

Edit: didnt read the whole thread lol

Subaru and Toyota are both for profit companies. If they can make more by "upgrading" the cars they will. If anybody thinks that Subaru will just stay where it is now to fill a niche market then we can kiss them goodbye. The super car manufactures can get away with that business model but a company based upon low cost, mass produced cars must grow or die.

Didn't sigma come from Ancient Greece?

That all said, there are still crap design decisions made in a lot of cars, all to hit a price point. Modern BMWs often have crap trim pieces. The second gen CTS was plastic fantastic in build quality. I test drove a 3-year-old CTS-V with the NA Vette engine. It was about to fall apart. I'm amazed no engine parts fell out as it rattled down the road.

So it's a complex story.

>400,000 sold, Porsche performance at half the price and twice the reliability:
http://static.cargurus.com/images/si...019679046.jpeg

Generation 3/4:
http://www.integradc2.com/wp-content...-type-r-21.jpg

I really wish I could defeat the internet hype train on the Mk4 Supra but I'll admit failure on that one. But damn do I love how the Mk2 looks.
https://carjunkies.files.wordpress.c...7/dscf0607.jpg

Oh no doubt at all! The bad decisions are not always just to hit price points (although many are) though. Cars are designed and made by people and people are known to screw up sometimes. If no other people catch it then some shoddy stuff hits the market.

But hasn't Mazda used the Miata (MX-5) to fill a niche market? http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Mhd602lf99...3+To+2011.jpeg
I'd say, with their latest offering, that the Miata has stayed true to it's roots, even after 25 years. From here:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-T6iAa7a_ol...art%2B2014.jpg
we can see that the twins still sell significantly more than the Miata, though less compared to how well the Miata sold 10+ years ago.

I believe there is still hope.

I agree.

But the original 240Z is one glaring example of not getting better with future models.

One car does not mean they are focused on filling a niche market. You do know they make many other models right? (JK not mean sarcasm).
Where are their other niche market cars now? What happened to them before they faded out?
Subaru may be able to keep the BRZ alive by hanging onto Toyota's coat tails but if they are counting on it to keep them moving forward they need to increase the sales not just maintain them. To do that they have to appeal to a larger market share.

The old RX-7 is a fun car, but it just doesn't get the love. Why is that?

Not much love for the first or second-gen Integra. Why is that?

Not much love for any gen of Supra but gen 4. Again, why?

Looks are possibly the biggest reason. All the early gens of those cars look... old. Including your favorite Supra. The MkIVPoopra, FD, 300ZX, and DC4 all have hot, modern-looking bodies.

IMO Refresh of current chassis happens in 2017 for Europe and Asia and in 2018 as a 2019 model for North America.

Roughly the same time (2018-2019 global launch) the S-FR is introduced.

The all new 86 chassis we wont see until 4 years after that. Where it gains power but no weight due to Electric Supercharging and improved materials. It will have more GT like road manners (improved damping, more sound insulation, upgraded interior HVAC/Entertainment electronics). This will raise the base price to ~$31k. A N/A model will also be offered at $28k

Source, also my ass.

Didn't they have fish oil in their shocks? My dad had a 280Z. I guess I'm like him because I have an FR-S, pretty much a perfect spiritual successor.