Has The Affordable RWD Sports Coupe Become A Money Loser?
 

<article below> Hopefully this is just an issue in North America. The largest pickup truck or SUV one can afford rules here in S. Carolina. I blame it on pop culture and how 2 out of 3 new country songs are about a pickup. The songs sound like commercials and they all pretty much sound the same. Anyway...

Car is a status symbol and HP would be a problem for too many guys here in N. America that want a TRDemon out of the box without needing a garage at home. 2/3 of owners would have no idea and/or no funds to mod their brand new car. Under the Scion badge, about 1/3 of owners are probably still being supported by parents. The trend here, unfortunately, is ________ (fill in the blank vehicle) with the greatest horsepower I can afford/finance out of the box.

Once most buyers realize many family sedans can blow their doors off, they start looking at other cars. These guys didn't grow up with MGs and do not understand the point of a car like the GT86, HP-wise. They grew up with Mustang and Camaro, and drooled over cars like the last Supra and RX-7 because they were beautiful and powerful, but too expensive. Honestly, Mustang, and it's many incarnations, is the formula to beat. Given time, I think the GT86 could evolve into that car for Toyota.

I'm glad I got my FR-S when I did and that I got it brand new. Years down the road this car will hold a certain value and will always be in demand with a certain group of people, just like the Supra.

"Built by passion, not committee", may end with "killed off by committee". Whatever happens, I'm glad they made the car and I'm glad I got mine!

Article:
http://carbuzz.com/news/2015/4/5/Has...Loser-7726276/

definitely a money loser. sports cars are luxuries. either you do not have a family yet, or have space/resources for an extra car. they are not going to sell a lot of them. so you have to have a high profit margin per car. well, the sub $30k segment is extremely competitive, and very low profit margin. low sales number + low profit margin = money loser

unfortunately

Subaru is not losing a penny.

One of the luxuries of being the most profitable conglomerates in the world is you can afford to lose money on a niche vehicle. Long term the car should break even. Won't happen in the first couple of years but the car will have to break even or die.

For me, no it's not. I've never had the inclination to buy into the whole Mustang/Camaro/muscle thing.

At 60 years old, I bought the FR-S for fun, not as any type of investment. Just want fun. And the FR-S delivers every single time I climb in. I love it.

We all know that RWD sports cars are a market niche - nothing new there. We also know that within that category there are the "blaze in a straight line" muscle cars, and "rip up the turns" machines for two different types of drivers. So I am never settled when they get tossed in the same bin, as in this article.

So IMO, there will always be a low-volume market for this niche, not every manufacturer will want to play in that space, and the "muscle" type will outsell the "nimble/handling" type. What's new here to report?

RX8 Beautiful? Subjective. Powerful? Not so much.

You can blame that in large part on Ford and the Mustang market. Mustang buyers are never satisfied. They want a cheap, fast muscle car but get butt-hurt when something can outmaneuver them in turns. So Ford has been trying to make a track car out of the newer models. As a result, the Mustang has a perpetual identity crisis, and still the buyers are never really satisfied and end up shitting on everything else to justify their mistake.

Even so, the line gets blurred with this kind of strategy, and many automotive writers are too stupid to understand the difference between a fast car and a driver's car. They in turn feed into the public's lack of understanding.

The funny thing is that I've gotten more attention from Mustang drivers than anything else. I had a driver of a brand new Mustang approach me at a gas station and ask me about the car, whether I liked it, was it fast, etc. Then he just stood there, staring at it with a sort of sad look on his face. He was still staring at it when I said goodbye and left. It was as if he realized at that very moment that he had bought the wrong car.

I don't care what other peoples' taste or preference in cars is like.
I am just happy that the GT86 was available when I was looking for a new car.
Everytime some sales rep pulls a fast one on me with his / her Passat/A4 Avant/3 Series touring or a family van driver needs to show me how fast his vessel really is, I just think "Sir/Ma'am, at the end of the day, you are still driving the boring car" and am happy about my decision.

And the "Is it fast?" question is one of the dumbest things to ask ever.

The whole horsepower debate reminds me of when I raced downhill mountain bikes. People would look at my $6k rig and ask "how many gears does it have?" as if that was the measure of a good bike. When I'd inevitably say 8, they would laugh and sputter some stupid comment about how their bike has 21 speeds.

yeah, or the megapixel debate with cameras.

Change FR-S to BRZ and my story is almost the same, although, I'm a few years younger.

I never even considered cars like the Mustang, Camaro, 370z etc.. While I never really considered a roadster, I've been thinking about test driving a Miata as a possible future car. Wish Mazda made it into a coupe.

I love it when people use "honestly" or "I'm not gunna lie", etc...

like dude what are you not being honest with us in your sentiments before and after or what? :) :lol:

I don't know about anyone else I only know why I bought it. The moment somebody released a relatively affordable, light weight, RWD sports car, I knew I really wanted one. There may be some truth that the youth buyers will be eager for more power, that's their preference. Give me 300-400 hp when I was 16-17 years old I'd probably abuse it. Fast forward to today, and driving has been a critical component of my employment now.

I've had the opportunity to drive many many different models of cars. I now see the folly of cars built to a spec sheet. Yes the Mustang GT is very enjoyable especially if you can legally push it...the problem is I actually can't legally use the best bits of that car. If there was some road with no speed limits, the Mustang suddenly makes a good deal of sense. I don't have that, I instead drive in a city full of super slow, boring drivers resulting in much traffic. I decided that excess power to the degree of over 200 doesn't make a lot of sense anymore. Yet there are still some roads left here were there are some nice corners the only caveat...speed limits...it left me thinking what can I drive that maximizes that aspect of driving fun? The answer is a RWD light weight car. I had to say no to the Miata and S2000 because I do need to carry more than 1 person. Then this car shows up, I made sure my parents were ok with the rear seat comfort, I was more than satisfied with the car's performance...and now I've owned this car for 1 year with no regrets.

Well, I for one usually lie all the time.

So if I preface a statement with "I'm not gonna lie" or "Honestly" then you'd better listen up because I'm about to tell you something truthful. Or at least a half-truth. Ah, **** it, I'm not gonna lie...

Honestly, I'm lying right now in this post.

The FR-S spoiled me for every other car that's not like it. I was expecting the FR-S to be a decent car and boy was I wrong. I have driven 350Z's,G35's,335i's,328i's,Gencoupe's, and other big coupes and all of them feel horrible in comparison to the FR-S. They all felt like family sedan coupes with good power and hardly any feel to the driver. And if power is the only thing it mainly got going for them then I am not going to be impressed by any of these machines. The only upgrade to a FR-S might be a Cayman S but I still prefer the FR-S styling on that one.

Because most people does not like the idea of light weight, low hp, rwd coupe.

Good point. :) I intended to say the last RX7.

100% agree :burnrubber:

I let my brother-in-law drive my FR-S for the first time today. Honestly, I'm not going to lie ...he was VERY impressed. He has a Mustang and said I would hate his MT compared to how smooth the clutch/MT is in the FR-S.

So, the article was dealing with RWD sports coupe being a money loser. What do you all think would make the car profitable without ruining the car? In short, what would keep a car like the 86 alive with a long history like the 4Runner and Corolla? I think the car is nearly perfect and just needs more time ...and it needs to have Toyota/GT86 badges instead of Scion. :)

All this debate over the twins and other more powerful cars. Seriously, honestly, not going to lie (that's for you KOA) :respekt:... The BEST world is having BOTH. I love the agility of the twins, but I also like all out horsepower. No need to bash one or the other.

Make the suspension softer and supple, make it a hatchback, make the car roomier in the rear so a 6'+ person fits in comfort, add lots of sound deadening just because, and give it 350+hp and people will flock to it like crazy and it would be VERY profitable. Of course that's going against what the car is about and I would not buy one then... :bonk:

RWD Sports coupes have always been money-losers (notwithstanding a couple generations of the Mustang/Camaro) in this country...the pattern always plays out the same...wash, rinse, repeat

Year 1: Hype, waiting lists, and great sales
Year 2: Car still selling well
Year 3: Noticeable dive in sales (Sometimes car is refreshed here or in Year 4*): Slight uptick in sales after refresh*
Years 5/6/sometimes 7: Cars sit on lots unless loads of incentives are offered

Afterwards = Model terminated (RX8/S2000)/ renamed /retooled (Eclipse/AWD version) or on hiatus for many years (300ZX to 350z)

That's interesting, because even with a Kartboy shifter & Pentosin in my FR-S trans, my '90 mustang GT's T5 transmission shifts smoother. Of course it has an aftermarket shifter & synthetic ATF in it, but still...

Not gonna' lie, the first-gen will be the one to have. They will be unable to resist "improving" all it's best qualities right into the shitcan. Not Tada's fault people are idiots.

Hater's gonna hate. Potatoes gonna potate.

oh fuck yeah lol

So if rear wheel drive small light weight low power sports cars are not profitable then Mazda (read Miata) should be going out of business any day now.

The Miata is not even close to being Mazda's breadwinner...now if Mazda's entire line-up consisted of RWD coupes, that would be another story.

Mazda is mostly comprised of FWD sedans and cuvs, and has been for some time.

You know what? FK getting there fast or in luxury.

I have what I wanted, what I like, and not what they prefer, what makes it 'shiny' or what pleases the status quo. I wanted a small car, compact, be able to fit least 3 people including the driver ok for 1-2hr trips, back seats to flip down, RWD, 200hp-260hp, 4 banger, 30+ mpg in highway, car thats not fully sport but looks good, 6 spd, TOYOTA, and it so happens this caught my eye, especially after owning a AE86. Others wan't their Civic, pshhhh go get em boys.

I'll ride in my own style, you can ride in yours.

Mods? Not a big fan of mods and the ones I like are simple exterior mods.

If I wanted to please everyone and mod, I'd get a corvette or a mustang, but then I'd be one of them and not myself. I've got more compliments on my car than hate remarks...frankly, the hate came from jealousy imo.


https://briansrapier.files.wordpress...8/09/pedro.jpg


p.s. anyone agree this looks ugly?

http://cdn.carbuzz.com/images2/47000...200/476276.jpg

Sure but I doubt they would be selling the Miata for this many years if it didn't make a profit. Name recognition helps sustain it. The same business model that supports Camaros and Mustangs.

I absolutely agree with everything you said with the exception of this. The fabled Supra and FD35 were not that powerful. They have been placed on a pedestal that they only partly deserve due to street lore and movies like The Fast and Furious. They, along with the 300ZX TT and some other Japanese cars were obscenely expensive for their time. Because they followed the automotive performance stifled late 70s and 80s were 455 cubic inch motors produced 175HP they were considered high performance. Compare them stock for stock with today's cars and they pale in comparison. True their cast iron blocks will hold a ton of boost but they were also very overweight (excepting RX-& which had horrible reliability issues).

The sports car market has always been limited in the US. These cars are not expected to sell like Camrys. They are image cars for the companies that produce them and prove that driving excitment is not dead within that company. That image bleeds over into the other models that are more mundane. That is why Mazda continues to build the MX-5. Toyota is widely viewed as a company that produces dringing appliances for the masses. They needed a car like the 86, GT86, FR-S to infuse some excitement into their brand. If you look back at the pre-release News Releases from the company they did not expect the FT86 to be a huge seller. The MX-5 is not a huge seller, the Z cars are not huge sellers yet those cars are still being produced as Halo cars and image cars. Every car company that wants to stay relevant and have any appeal for younger (or even older) enthusiastic drivers needs a car like this.

To add to this^^^
When guys like us think Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, etc we tend to think of the top of the line, high horse powered, race speced machines. These are not the bulk of those cars that are made by a long shot. The vast majority of such cars are the bottom of the line, looks like the performance model and are bought by somebody that just wants the looks and will never, ever, ever even drive that version at half of it's capacity much less want more from them. These are the versions that the companies make money on. Ya, the performance models cost more but they also have a much lower margin than the low end versions since they cost a whole lot more to produce.
When you look at something like the Mustang Shelby GT you are probably looking at 1% or less of the production and if Ford was relying on them for profit then they would be in serious trouble. What they are relying on is that people see them and think "ooooh Mustangs are cool" and then run out and buy the much cheaper but more profitable base.

Honestly, I'm not going to lie... ya i went there, all this talk is making me want to go drive my car and brush off the next 6 hours of meetings at work :)

Me too. I adore porsche cars, but can't reasonably afford one (and a 80k mile 10yr old one isn't a wise decision for 25k compared to a FR-S with 0 miles and a warranty when I bought it)

I have almost zero interest in anything in between my car and a cayman/boxster at this point. So i'l drive it until I can afford one of those.

The affordable lightweight RWD sports car market is not very popular in the US. Cars like the Miata, S2000, MR-S/MR2, and RX8 never sold very well and only one of those four is still being produced today. Companies like Toyota and Subaru realize this. That's why Toyota set a modest sales target of 20k FR-S's in the US for 2013. People keep trying to pin the FR-S/BRZ as sales failures, but I would guess their sales are roughly inline with corporate expectations. Make no mistake - the Twins were never going to out-sell Mustangs and Camaros in the US, and it would be foolish to have expected them to.

The typical American hears the term "affordable RWD sports car" and envisions a pony car -- a coupe that (1) looks good, (2) out-accelerates a V6 Camry, and (3) costs under $30k. The Mustang and Camaro hit all of those marks perfectly. The Mustang and Camaro both sell significant volumes in the US. Americans don't care if the Camaro and Mustang are bigger and heavier than a Camry, as long as they look sporty, go fast and grip well.

I'd say affordable RWD sports coupes (inclusive of pony cars) are nowhere near being money losers. But affordable RWD sports cars (in the spirit of lightweight British roadsters) probably are.

mate just some friendly advice you do know multi-quote is possible ya?

click on the quote " " tags around each post and then quote the last msg to start it off :thumbup:

Another thing to consider with the FRS and BRZ, the ability to build brand loyalty and a customer base. You have a target audience in their late 20s and early 30s who love sports cars. Five or 10 years down the road when they go looking for that family sedan where are they going to look? They going to first go look at a subaru or a toyota. Then another 10 years down the road maybe they go look at a Lexus or get back into buying sports cars.

The data on pony cars would be little easier to find I imagine since the Mustang has been around forever. It would interesting to see how many young mustang owners go on to buy a Ford SUV or Sedan later in life.

Post count contest!
First to 10,000 wins!!!!

A lot of car manufacturers use RWD sports cars as "halo cars", so even if the 86 sales decline, they may still attract people to stop and take a look, and then see a more practical car for their use.

I live on both sides of this debate since I have pretty much both cars in question, an FR-S and a Mustang. They're two different cars that should never be compared to each other, not that I could pick between the two and say which is better cause there are obvious things one can do better than the other but that shouldn't take away from either of them. They're both fun cars to have. When I have a craving for a cammed out car I hop in the Mustang and when I want to row some gears and enjoy some 60mph spiraling offramps, I get that fix in the FR-S. They're both driver cars, just for different drivers.