Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB - CAR Article: Subaru BRZ (2012)

- Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - CAR Article: Subaru BRZ (2012) - more on the FT-86's shy sister car (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1892)

I getcha.

Feel free to continue arguing with the subaru fanboys then, since we pretty much agree on everything. :happy0180:

What? No more? It was interesting debate...

Wait, does anyone actually believe this is 100% Subaru?

I didn't mean to get into a big debate over who did what, I was just pointing out that Masuda gives some strong credit to Subaru, and that his position is attention-worthy.

I think the translation of Tada's comments use the word design in a more common, aesthetic sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chulooz (Post 61632)

well ever since "SOA blog" on NASIOC said it was 100% subaru, i think the rumor still persists somewhat. hard to imagine anyone who still thinks that but ya never know, and that's why i presented some of those interesting facts.

the most interesting thing about all of this is how defensive subaru are about it. it seems the press believe that toyota is the leader as well, and subaru is very quick to correct that. they perhaps go too far, and end up insinuating that they did indeed develop the car all by themselves. perhaps that's where SOA blog heard the rumor to begin with! :iono:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ichitaka05 (Post 61631)

What? No more? It was interesting debate...

Well, we weren't really disagreeing on anything. We were both just arguing against a position that the other party didn't actually support. Once I realized that, it seemed pretty silly to continue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chulooz (Post 61632)

I think the translation of Tada's comments use the word design in a more common, aesthetic sense.

To my knowledge, there has been no mention of "design" in any Tada comment in this thread. The thing I posted was a very loose paraphrasing of the quote that Madfast posted on the first page.

I don't really have an opinion on this but I thought it would be helpful to put all the official quotes on the subject in one place, since it seems like most people haven't read all of them.

SOA Blog on NASIOC:

Quote:

What we've always said is that Subaru is leading the engineering on this car. We know, we've seen the drawings and they have a star cluster in the corner. http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/imag...lies/smile.gif Now, we haven't discussed where we are sourcing various parts and components and that info will all be available at debut. As for the question if are there Toyota enginers on the project - it's pretty certain that if you were developing a car with a partner, you'd have your engineers working on it too, for sure, that's why it's a joint project, but as we said, we are leading and responsible for the engineering on this car. As for very specific comments made on other forums about which specialist tuners if any we are working with, well let's just say we are surprised this is being talked about yet.... we're asking for confirmation about when we can talk about this in more detail, but for now let's confirm this remains a Subaru engine.

...

Suppliers and vendors and partners always contribute to a vehicle/component development... we took that people understood that part for granted... we don't think many people thought otherwise. By your standards a car hasn't been "100%" in-house engineered since the Model T and probably not even then. All cars are developed using specialist supplier's expertise. Almost every major component has expert companies developing the state of the art. The modern in-house engineer's job is to have a vision for his area, specify what is needed and bring the various components/experts together to make a whole that works for his/her product, while watching costs, lead times, etc.

...

Which brings us back to our original statement: Each company brings its expertise. Toyota is responsible for the design and packaging side of this project and we are responsible for engineering. As we said, the engineering drawings are ours.

Tetsuya Tada TTAC interview

Quote:

“The first year was actually quite tough. The character and processes of the two companies are quite different. In the beginning, we sat down and decided who does what. That didn’t work out very well, because of the cultural differences between the companies. When people started to become more interested in the car itself, people from both sides ended up becoming one team. In the end, it wasn’t so much Toyota doing this and Subaru doing that, but people working together with one goal.”

This interview

Quote:

Is Toyota or Subaru leading development?

If you want to see mild-mannered Subaru executives frown, feel free to mention rumours that Toyota is taking the lead in development work of the BRZ/FT-86. Masashi Uemura, Subaru's deputy general manager of corporate communications, emphatically denied that the upcoming sports cars were Toyota-led, pointing out that platform and drivetrain development, production engineering and final assembly of both cars was handled by Subaru at Subaru facilities.

To prove his point, he showed video footage of FHI boss Ikuo Mori attending a winter test session of BRZ prototypes at Subaru's Bifuka proving grounds in Hokkaido. In terms of motor show noise Subaru may well seem to be a silent partner to Toyota, but the firm insists it has played a major role in developing the BRZ/FT-86 twins.

...I think im the only person that kinda disagrees with everyone..

I mean, if i put myself in Subaru's shoes, id be pissed that all these hungry reporters, rumor mongers, and forum fanbois, that ask about the development of the car. We (me and my brother Toyota) designed the car, and we built the car together, and only brother is getting the lime light for it?

and if i put myself in Toyotas shoes, id be sad that everyone was giving me all the credit for the development when this is just simply not true. My bother Subaru gave it his all in the project.

The way i see it....Subaru says they built 100% of the car, fact...Toyota also built 100% of the car, fact.

At first, my thought about a joint venture was each company had a percentage of the work. But after interviews with Tada, I don't see the line between the separate companies anymore. To me its one big company called Toyobaru building a single car 100% = 200% from both companies. 100%+100%=100%

If my department was (drivetrain) and we had design and build the transmission, comprised of both subaru and toyota engineers working together, and of course we should go with the best connections we can. If Aisin offers the best cost + quality over the competitiors to have it mass produced id sign the contract. And same thing could be said if it was another company. Regardless if I was the head at Subaru or the head at Toyota. The connections obviously makes the decisions easier.

So i dont see it as..."This is all subaru car"..or "all toyota car"..or "percentage of this car was built by this company"....

To me Tada is not just a lead, hes not bigger or smaller than the next guy. Hes just part of the system that ultimately is responsible for the development of the FT86/BRZ until the two cars make their world debut in show rooms. Everyone is responsible for everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WingsofWar (Post 61655)

At first, my thought about a joint venture was each company had a percentage of the work. But after interviews with Tada, I don't see the line between the separate companies anymore. To me its one big company called Toyobaru building a single car 100% = 200% from both companies. 100%+100%=100%

:word:

I don't see why it matters which company did what. They both put some engineers on this project, and the end result is this car. Who cares which company was signing the paychecks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chulooz (Post 61632)

I think the translation of Tada's comments use the word design in a more common, aesthetic sense.

:sigh:
both ichi and i understand all of the comments without translation so don't pretend like you know what you're talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly (Post 61656)

:word:

I don't see why it matters which company did what. They both put some engineers on this project, and the end result is this car. Who cares which company was signing the paychecks.

I think people make a big deal because in the end most are looking for a Toyota-esque (as in from their glory days) sports car, not a subaru esque (awd, understeery) sports car.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyde01 (Post 61658)

:sigh:
both ichi and i understand all of the comments without translation so don't pretend like you know what you're talking about.

hahaha i realize there are some people on the interwebz that can read Japanese.

But I guess the quote was loosely based on the main idea so he might not have even used the exact word, I was just going off idea of another member. Neither of us had ill intentions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by old greg (Post 61593)

Madfast,
Did you actually read the second half of my post? I'm not in any way suggesting that Subaru did all the work. As I said in my last post, that paper pusher at Subaru is an asshat. Tada-san himself, the guy who actually oversaw the engineers from Toyota and Subaru who designed this car, the guy that half the people on this site regard as the next best thing to Jesus, was quoted (in the snippet that you posted in this very thread) as saying that it was one team that designed this car. Not a team from Toyota and a team from Subaru, but one team of people from both companies.

As for the transmission, firstly, Aisin =\= Toyota. Toyota owns 30% of Aisin. Aisin is its own company with its own engineers, its own factories and its own bean counters. The Aisin transmission in the Honda S2000 is no more a Toyota product than the Denso ECU in my WRX.

Honda had never used an Aisin transmission before putting the AZ6 in the S2000. Mazda had never used an Aisin transmission before putting the AZ6 in the RX8. The fact that no Subaru has had an Aisin transmission before the BRZ does actually suggest Toyota involvement, I agree, but it doesn't prove anything. That's my only beef with your argument. I'm not questioning your conclusion, only the logic you used to reach it.

Yes Aisin = Toyota. As does Denso = Toyota, Daihatsu = Toyota. And now Subaru = Toyota.

It is not about a minority percentage owner. (American interpretation of that number.) It is about a significant, senior, prestigious and successful company deciding to place its faith in your growth, to the point of sharing a significant amount of financial risk to ensure your combined long-term success (Japanese interpretation of that number). The Daihatsu ownership started as nothing but a semi-unofficial agreement to work together. You will see Toyota increase its interest in Subaru gradually over the next few years.

My ex's new father-in-law is a retired Toyota senior exec, her husband is a senior sales manager for Denso. Denso and Toyota are as family as her husband and father-in-law. Independent, but still family. And much to her chagrin, her husband will still obey his father's wishes on important issues.

Same with the companies. Notice how Subaru's story has gradually changed from vaguely true 'We proposed a RWD coupe' to the more accurate 'We proposed a series of projects, and Toyota selected the RWD coupe.'