An inconvenient Truth
 

This post has nothing to do with that absolute waste of time "movie" which was designed to create a platform for politicians to try and win votes. :bonk:

It's just the perfect thread title for an issue that I haven't seen much discussion on.

I hear about the "spirit" of the car, and all the idol worship of the original AE-86 (which I have not driven), and I think that's good. It means y'all are enthusiasts.

However...this car is not going to be that car. It's not going to feel like that car. It's not going to sound like that car. It's not going to HANDLE like that car. It simply isn't going to do any of these things, because every single piece of the car is different technologically and the process for mass production of vehicles, and the materials used in them, has changed dramatically since the AE-86.

It's going to weigh many hundreds of pounds more, it's going to have different suspension geometry, different tires sizes, different levels of outward vision, more power, different weight distribution, and it's going to be a modern car. It's going to feel totally different. This is a fact.

So, with so many people so enthused about the original car and the feel and spirit of it...how are you going to evaluate this one? How will you decide if it's "got it" ? The car is just going to be so completely different that I don't really know what "metric" people will use to compare it.

This thread was not meant to incite a riot or anger anybody...it's just a good topic for discussion since the issue is closely related to why most of you guys are interested in the vehicle in the first place.

So....discuss!

Finally something new to discuss.

I'm not stuck on the heritage. Really if I wanted it to be "that" car I would probably just find one somewhere and make it a project car.

The FR for me is a step down from the 350Z in terms of raw power but most importantly price. I want a cheaper fun RWD car. I've had great experiences with Toyota products in the past and have tried to purchase a Subie a few times but ended up with a Jeep and 2 350Zs instead. I've always been partial to coupes and am not a huge fan of FWD when it comes to cars, so that narrows the field down pretty well.

Unless this thing is a complete dog it will probably be my next purchase. If there's something I just can't live with I'll keep shopping. Looks pretty good so far though.

A non-political point of clarification: An Inconvenient Truth was based on a presentation given by an academic (former politician) based on their views/interpretations of theories and evidence regarding the impact humans have on the environment. The movie was not conceived until the one politician who was involved in it had stepped out of the political ring....not that any of this has anything to do with the actual topic at hand, but it irks me enough to want to correct the false spin.

I don't think that believing that ToMoCo is trying to capture "the spirit" of the AE-86 means someone actually thinks the FR-S will have any of the same dynamics....I, for one, hope it does not. I want a sharper, more precise, more comfortable, and technically superior modern interpretation of the car that is the inspiration.

Just because FoMoCo used the late 60s Mustang as inspiration for the S-197 does not mean they wanted it to handle the same. Same goes for the Miata/S2000 and the British roadsters that inspired them.

The movie was a sham and a clearly political. The science in it wasn't even sound. Even the greenies agree the movie was designed to hype people up. The point was to freak people out and thereby decrease the popularity of the opposing party who's policies minimized or ignored the issue. As we've seen, the scientific evidence behind it doesn't really hold up. The email scandal involving researchers made that quite clear. I mean, they were talking amongst themselves about how they felt about twisting facts or coming to invalid conclusions...lol. Oops! (if you wish to further discuss this just drop me a PM...this topic will single handedly derail the thread if we let it)



As for the actual subject....the handling of this car seems to be the sticking point for most people, and I just don't know what they expect...because it's not going to handle anything like the old one. What metric do we measure a subjective feeling by?

It is hard to do, but the auto-journalists do this all the time, applying numbers and ratings to subjective criteria. They use the highly tuned "butt-dyno" and the "seat-o-the-pants-accelerometer" to decide which car they like the essence of more.

I know. I usually don't agree with their findings though. I've test driven MANY cars. I didn't come to the same conclusions as any of the major rags very often.

Go test drive a Mazda Miata. Modern car, modern production methods. Still lightweight and great 'spirit.' I just don't want a convertible.

I think its more like a new car from Toyota that uses the AE86 as inspiration. Lightweight, modest power, balanced and (hopefully) practical for a 2-door coupe/hatch. I always like to say this car isn't going to be a true successor because a true successor would basically be a rear-drive 2-door 2012 Corolla. I think its going to be more focused than that.

I don't believe we can quantify "spirit" in this sense. Regardless of the mechanics involved.

From my understanding and own experience, the "spirit" that was lost to us for almost 10-20 years revolves around the idea that you can connect physical and emotional self down a long windy road in a vehicle. In the perspective of a Japanese auto maker, down a mountain path or across a long stretch of highway. Having too much technology within our current vehicles that makes driving more easier to us disconnects us from the road. Items like ABS, traction control, auto downshift, auto/manumatic transmissions, Electronic suspension..ect..

The AE86 did have that spirit, even if it was a relatively stupid car. The rx7 did have that spirit even if its rotary was a horrible engine. The Supra did have that spirit even if was a beefy chassis. The Mustang, the corvette, the 240z, the silvia, the E30 BMW, the golf I felt all that that same spirit but moved us in different ways. The cars we drive today vs the cars we drove in the 80s and 90s perform vastly different, not in just technology and design. Yet in a way that that same feeling we got driving down a road has become to comfortable and more about tangle and quantifiable performance.

In the direction and inspiration of the AE86 to the FT86, i believe the spirit relies on using the least amount of car to get the best amount of driving pleasure. Which is why 200hp and a lightweight RWD chassis is simple, and uncomplicated and doesn't require a whole lot to get back that similar or simulated feeling.

If we focus on mechanics, i believe we begin to become disappointed in the FT86. I know i would. Because then the direction would shift into building a car that was like the AE86. Where we might as well just ask Toyota the revive the old AE86 chassis and put it into production for a 2012 release. This isn't spirit....this is mimicing a cars performance.

i can't really reply to this thread unless i drive the ft myself and can compare it to an ae86 directly. but to all those here who've driven an ae86, here's a thought: given what we do know about the ft, what are your expectations concerning how the ft will handle compared to the ae?

i have driven an ae in the parking lot but haven't spent enough time with it to really have a good feel for how it drives. but given what we know about the ft it should be a rather different experience. the extra power to push you through a corner should make a world of difference. and having IRS should improve grip in the rear significantly, although i guess there is a certain appeal to having a solid rear axle for old school drift guys.

I'm gonna measure the "spirit" of the car based on the way it makes me feel.

If I can wake up in the early morning for work and be excited about it because I have a 40 minute drive ahead of me (on empty winding back roads) in my boxer powered FR coupe, then Toyota/Subaru has nailed the spirit thing right on the head. I think this is the best way I can put it.


Second best way: If I'm more upset about a shifter bushing being loose than a scratch on one of the bumpers, then the spirit is there. I've spent too much time in my driving career maintaining the "beauty" of my cars to the point where I'd get so upset about minor blemishes or rock chips. I don't want to worry about that with this car. This car needs to be a machine, not a driveway queen.

All of the teenage girls buying this car will be disappointed if there is too much spirit! How can they text and drive then?

POLITICALDISCUSSIONAVERTED! :w00t:

NB or NC? Or even NA?

Do not underestimate teenage girls!:eyebulge: :bellyroll: I can text and drive stick. Now texting, driving stick, drink/eating, and applying makeup? I'm never going to try that :bellyroll:.

I don't think you quite grasp the meaning of "spirit" then.

Spirit isn't defined by numerical specs, whether it uses double-wishbone, multi-link or mac struts. Or power output. A car doesn't all of a sudden have "spirit" when it weights under 2600 lbs. Nor does it have spirit by virtue of being fast.

Spirit is defined by the focus of the car. With the AE86, that spirit is it being lightweight, FR, and emphasizing balanced dynamics over brute power. Those are all abstractions, not solid numerical values. In 2011, "light weight" means a car around 2800 lbs and under. Those numerical interpretations of the abstract principles change over time, but not the principle itself.