Open letter to Toyota and Subaru
 

Dear Subaru/Toyota,

Looking at the vehicle strategies in the last two decades, it seems that there are two primary sales strategies for dedicated sports car platforms in the US and global markets:

The first is to offer multiple variants with multiple power ranges, all introduced within the first year and a half of the product launch. Those variants are then lightly refreshed at the halfway mark of the model run. This strategy pulls buyers into spending more, leverages a single platform across a larger buying segment, and increases public interest in all of the vehicle variants. This model has led to significant sales and profits in the following varied companies and vehicles:

- Ford (Mustang)
- GM (Camaro, Corvette)
- Porsche (911, Cayman)

The second strategy is to build a single performance specification, then offer the performance upgrade 3-4 years into the model run, when interest has died off and competition has improved. This strategy has resulted in poor sales and low profits for the following companies and vehicles:

- Honda (NSX and S2000)
- Mazda (Mazdaspeed Miata, FD RX7, RX8)

The question is: why are you pursuing the failed strategy rather than the successful one?

I assume you want to limit R&D costs on a low volume platform. Have you considered that the BRZ/FRS is low volume (and low profit) precisely because you will not give buyers an opportunity to upgrade to a higher spec factory car? This limits your profits, your press coverage, and the pool of buyers who would be interested in a more expensive (and capable) version of your car?

Please do not insist that the aftermarket provides an answer for buyers. OEM performance variants will always have higher resale value than base models with aftermarket parts on them. Resale value and warranty will usually be important to buyers at the top of the range. Significantly upgrading power, tires, and brakes on an FR-S through the aftermarket will cost over $7K, money which is essentially thrown away on resale.

I realize it is too late to change course now. Some BRZ/FRS performance upgrade will presumably come at the midpoint refresh. But I would ask you to consider a different strategy in the future.

Thanks,

Imag

So where in the letter does it specify exactly what you are looking for? It is of course implied but if I received this my response would be just as vague. Don't disagree that there should be an option with more power but if they had put it out with just a 300 horse power plant there would be a whole crowd going "too much when are you going to turn it down for us?" They spent millions on looking at what the market was lacking and this car is what they came up with. This is the very definition of a "niche" vehicle and as such it is not so much a profit maker as a brand identity benefit for the company so for the limited market it has a dozen different versions make no sense at all. I have little doubt that once it makes business sense they will offer up more options and then you will say " my letter made them do that".
I am sure there are many owners that are more then satisfied with the car as it is and as you pointed out there are loads of options for those who are not.

And do you even own one? Even though old Datsuns can be cool if that is your priority on your profile then you may be in the wrong forum.

They needed to target a lower price because once you start adding a lot of options better cars become more tempting. The higher the price the better the alternatives get(obviously).

The twins would get close to BMW money with performance options.

A lot of people who buy aftermarket parts later on think they won't at first. So if those become options at buying time a lot of people may decide they don't want those costs.

For example once you have it bought at say $28,000, all of a sudden 6 months - 1 year later $3000 doesn't seem so bad for some performance upgrades. However if you shift these costs to buying time, all of a sudden you see the big number of $31,000.

I don't think the twins really have a place in the higher price bracket, which is exactly why it's positioned where it is.

Oh and one more thing, the higher priced and better the BRZ gets the more and more Subaru is cutting off sales from it's STi.

EXACTLY !!

Expecting a mid refresh model is most likely to not happen, that would mean that Toyota and Subaru would have to go back to the drawing boards to reformulate a plan to release another engine. It was hard enough for Toyota to even get Subaru on board with this joint project.

When you bought this car you should've done your homework and know that this was an underpowered car. Ya and so are civics but why do people fix those up? When I bought the car I was expecting a car more powerful than my wife's S2000 but it turned out her's was more powerful. Do I regret buying this car? Hell no, there are a lot of things this car excels at than the S2000, one thing is, I can have room to move around! I can recline my seat. I can hold a drift way better than an S2000. I'm not cramped on a tiny car (I'm 6'0") plus if I overnight parts from japan I'm sure I can decimate her S2000!

This car has potential and Scion and Subaru have released different trims maybe not for power just accessories. If this was solely a car that Toyota produced I'm sure we'd see a nice powerful engine, just look at the 2JZ or the 3SGTE. Toyota has there way of making an Engine fast and fuel efficient, but they can't give all their secrets away to another car company on the other hand Subaru has their ways too. The legendary boxer engine with Turbo's and AWD.

Basically two companies have to agree with redesigning an engine for more power something less likely to happen as Subaru wasn't a big fan of this project.

Toyota also hints saying all aftermarket trd parts can fit previous models doesn't that kinda hint off something?

So you take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have..... 86/BRZ

I forgot to mention both car companies have invested their R&D else ware Subaru has their STI while Toyota has their Lexus line. AH HAH! Which makes sense, you want power It'll cost ya! :wink:

At the end of the day, Toyota and Subaru make most of their profit from their bread & butter range ie the Corollas, the Imprezas.

I think 86 might even just a one-off collaboration.

Don't know about you all, but to be brutally honest I don't think the twins missed their intended mark. Could they be better? Well yes, but do I want to pay Porsche prices? Er well no.


Here in the land down under a base Boxter costs three times the cost of a base 86 GT. I actually like the idea of a project car. A car that, even if it will likely be a daily driver, to simply be a starting point to modify and make my own.


I do understand where you are coming from. I appreciate that you care enough to post your concern, but any which way you cut the cheese, improving the platform will simply price the car out of the market.


Truth be told I'm still amazed that something like the twins can exist in today's world market with all the baggage that comes with crash safety and fuel economy.


As for a mid life update I'd simply swap the diff ratio, improve their header design and tune that power dip the hell out of the picture. But that's just me :)

Give me a little more mid-range torque and fix the reliability/noise issues, and I will be a happy customer.

Exactly. Especially in today's world of corporate sellouts you gotta give it to Toyoda San for initially envisioned and brave enough to take this huge risk to bring back the fun in Toyota.

Especially in Japanese culture you know that it would take balls to have this huge gamble for something way out of the blue and so out of the norm. This is a culture where pride is still very highly valued, you're talking about losing face and being forced to resign if this gamble didn't pay off man.
I wish I could be in that board room when he told the execs he wanted a car like this. They'd probably thinking what sake he drank last night lol.

And I'm sure they're smart enough to figure out that this project wouldn't bring as much money as their cash cows corollas but they still did it anyway. Maybe to bring Toyota name up a notch or it might be just nostalgia and trying to show that Toyota still cared about the niches or whatever other reasons they had in mind but I'm glad as hell they brought this to life or else I'd probably drive some snoozebox today.

So yeah, despite the nitty gritty criticism, you gotta hand it to Toyota and Subaru for being bold enough to come up with Toyota 86 and no matter what people say, it did shook up the automotive industry.

Now I'm just waiting to see if Nissan or Honda had the balls to do the same.

What reliability/noise issues?
You want reliability issues, buy a VW.

Horse shit.. Find another excuse..

I was an early adopter of the twins, and I love it! But to tell the truth I'm inpatient to the mid life update, maybe is just me but almost every update make the car "uglier" then mine will have more value/appeal "on the long run" and I intend to keep beating the living crap of my car every day for the next couple of years.
:happyanim:

I looked high & low for a car which gave the fun/involvement of my Elise on the back roads & was practical enough to be an only car at a push. The Twin is the only car that got close, in fact it’s good enough to give the current Elise CR a run for it’s money on the driving experience alone, I’d imagine the same can be said for the S! Pause for a second and realise what I just said… for the driving experience on UK back roads the BRZ/GT86 is one of the best cars you can buy, period!

I really don’t get why people say the Twin is under powered if they’re not tracking the car competitively. It’s more than capable of reaching triple figures on a back road. The only thing is you can’t be lazy with the car, you have to work with it. This is one of the reasons it’s so good as a back road drivers car. Sure it doesn’t have great low end torque for relaxed GT style progress down a back road but that’s hardly in this cars remit. Also making the car torque heavy at the bottom end of the rev range will only dilute it's fun factor (this is a very bad thing, see above).