Thank you wheel diameter means nothing. Tire diameter is what you need to know.

Did they measure an 86 with the trd lowering springs? If that's the case then I would imagine that would bring the numbers a lot closer to equal.

I remember a reference to Tadasan saying that he wanted the 86 lowered about an inch but others made it higher. So it was designed to be lowered some.

Not with the OEM dampers or the lack of camber adjustment.

The marketing was spot on though.

Opinions may vary

Centre of gravity and front/rear weight ratio are not the whole truth, if measured without the driver. Other factors affecting these figures are the level of fuel and the suspension spring rate.

Conducting an endless argument about a 5mm difference in the static, unloaded centre of gravity seems futile. Perhaps the time may be better spent taking the Toybaru out for a spin and appreciate the great handling afforded by its very, very low centre of gravity?

No. We must discuss driving, not actually do driving. Everyone knows better than everyone.

Want to know what has the lowest center of gravity? Benches.

Car and Driver loves to do these things, but then not say there are multiple ways to measure such things, and that doesn't include whether the vehicle was totally empty of fluids or totally full, etc. There are so many little details than can change this stuff.

Supra sucks. Shoulda bought a civic.

I can't recall another time when Toyota made unsubstantiated factual claims for any vehicle. Marketing fluff doesn't count.

Car & Driver wants to generate controversy to grab more eyeballs and sell more ads. They'll need the revenue if Toyota's legal team fires back and/or pulls advertising from Hearst publications.

Let's let this play out. Toyota will have to respond, Supra is their halo car and this attack comes prior to release in their biggest market. I predict a CYA retraction from C&D soon, they'd be insane to double down.

Hilariously put, but SO damn true!

I totally understand they couldn't start developing one from scratch due to R&D investment required, but they should've just left the poor Supra name alone.

If you can't do it right, just leave it alone. No harm in collaborating with BMW, just leave the Supra name out of it because this simply isn't one...

That's not how it works.

C&D can show their work - something Toyota hasn't done.

At absolute best/worst, Toyota will put out how they arrived at their number which might show their claim is factually accurate even if not practically. Similar to those recent Chevy ads where they claimed they were more reliable than Camry and Accord (and it turned out it was based on a limited sampling of one model year three years into ownership).

If Toyota responds with their work, C&D will happily report that as well, probably with a rebuttal. They don't need to take anything back.

And let's be honest, I didn't believe Toyota on this particular tidbit either.

First time I heard this claim I was in utter disbelief as well...and also slightly butthurt :bellyroll:

Yet. Not that Toyota is above criticism but C&D will need to justify their test methods that might have skipped a step during prep.

http://www.longacreracing.com/techni...spx?item=42586

Until both cars are tested after identical prep on the same rig, I'll trust Toyota's claim.