Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB
Page 33 of 36 « First 2329303132 33 343536
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   New Mazda RX Vision concept (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97304)

Andrew025 10-17-2017 03:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993094)
Doesn't mean I can't want it.
Oh I know, I would want one too.

You could always import a Cappuccino or Beat though
\_(ツ)_/

WolfpackS2k 10-17-2017 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2992987)
Oh, the line for affordable is $60k now?

Strike the NSX+GTR from your list, they cost more than a 911 back in the day as well as today. The 370Z is at least a wash, screw your subjective opinion on styling. I'll begrudgingly only mention cars under ~$60k, current base price of the Corvette and in line with car prices you mention from ~1993 or so (that also means less research for me to have to do to check prices on old cars)

Abarth: new
Alfa Romeo 4C: new No Manual Option
Alfa Romeo Giulia: new
BMW M2: wash v. e36 M3 (+200 lbs +120 hp seems like an OK trade to me)
Z3->Z4/Z5: wash Overweight, No Manual Option
Fiesta ST: new
Hyundai Genesis: new Dreadful Handling, Out of Production
Jaguar F-Type: new Overweight
Mini Cooper S/JCW: new
Porsche Cayman: new (968 too expensive)
Porsche Boxster: wash
GTI/Golf R: probably a wash on fun, definitely better cars today

So by my count, not taking any cheats like the BRZ+86 = 2 and counting the stuff that's a wash like Mustang and Boxster as a point for both. As well as not including the NSX & GTR for being too expensive and the Escort Cosworth for being produced in such incredibly small numbers (~7k total) and not even in this country:
Current: 21
Old: 21

When you consider that three of your choices were from a now defunct Mitsubishi, and we got the Europeans picking up the slack from the Japanese I think we're doing ok.

:thumbsup:

What I find interesting making this list is the only thing really missing is those Corvette priced Japanese cars and the MR2. We still have hopped up econo-box AWD cars like the Evo/Escort and they're arguably better today, convertibles like the Z3 and Boxster that competed head on with the S2000 in the 90's are still in production as well as the MX-5, sporty FWD cars like the Celica/Integra/GTI are still made, affordable RWD like the 240sx with Mustang/Camaro/86, and European Corvette competitors from BMW, Porsche, and now Alfa and Jaguar, maybe the new Audi TT deserves to be on the list too, idk.

I mean I can understand criticizing modern standards for making cars heavy, less polluting, and less niche as well as towards Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi for dropping the ball. But I don't think we're any worse off today than we were 25 years ago.
Sporty FWD cars like the Celica/Integra/GTI are NOT still made today. The GTI isn't available as a 2 door anymore. You can try to say the Civic Si is similar but it's not available as a hatchback.

It's a great time to be alive if you love powerful overweight fat RWD coupes like the Camaro and Mustang, but if you want affordable RWD lightweight and a fixed roof you've got one option - FT86. Sure the pony cars handle well now, but one weekend on the track with one of those will shred a $1500-2000 set of tires.

strat61caster 10-17-2017 04:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k (Post 2993125)
Sporty FWD cars like the Celica/Integra/GTI are NOT still made today. The GTI isn't available as a 2 door anymore. You can try to say the Civic Si is similar but it's not available as a hatchback.
Bullshit, Mini, Abarth, GTI, Focus/Fiesta and the Civic Si/R are all sporty FWD cars that are a hoot to drive. And I'd take any of them over a '90's Celica or GTI any day. All of a sudden how the trunk opens matters? lol ok exclude the Civic Si I'm counting 6 FWD cars I'd buy vs. the Integra. As far as I'm concerned except for torque vectoring bullshit modern hot FWD cars blow away what was available 25 years go.

I didn't realize 4 doors = not good
Should we take the Evo, WRX, GTI, and Focus RS off the list then?

Quote:
It's a great time to be alive if you love powerful overweight fat RWD coupes like the Camaro and Mustang, but if you want affordable RWD lightweight and a fixed roof you've got one option - FT86. Sure the pony cars handle well now, but one weekend on the track with one of those will shred a $1500-2000 set of tires.
There was precisely one option in the 1990's as well: the 240sx
In the 2000's there was precisely one option: RX-8
In the 2010's it's the 86

I'm not saying everything is perfect or it can't be better, I'm saying it's not worse now than it was back then, take off the rose colored glasses.

Go back to the 80's and yes, a plethora of affordable lightweight RWD coupes from the FB/FC RX-7 to the mk2/3 Supra, AE86, the mk1 300zx, etc. but independent rear suspension is pretty nifty along with steel unibodies that aren't tin cans if you actually want to drive your car hard.

Edit: have your golden age and nostalgia, I can't take that away from you. What bothers me is the whole "Oh woe is us things were BETTER back in the 90's"

No

They weren't.

You can like the cars more, sure, I like some of them too, I'd love to own a well setup Civic/Integra or RX-7, those are near the top of my list and I would own them if I had time and money and space. But the idea that what's out now is garbage is stupid.

funwheeldrive 10-17-2017 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993156)
What bothers me is the whole "Oh woe is us things were BETTER back in the 90's"

No

They weren't.


It really just comes down to what 'Better' means to the individual. Sure, newer cars have better laptimes and performance figures. To some people that is a priority. Other people prefer simple cars that are a little more basic and easy to work on. Nowadays even economy cars come loaded with blindspot detectors, backup cameras, touchscreen infotainment, etc.

New cars will never be stupid simple like they were in the 90s, just like 90s cars will never be stupid simple like they were in the 60s. Long story short, I think a lot of us are stuck in the past like you already implied in your post.

I think people hold an attraction to 90s cars still because they were mostly free of the electrical gremlins of the 80s, more reliable/economical than 60-70s cars (on average), but were still relatively raw compared to most cars made today. The exterior design of 90s cars was also top notch and manufactures didn't care about what happened to stupid pedestrians back then.

krayzie 10-17-2017 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993156)
Edit: have your golden age and nostalgia, I can't take that away from you. What bothers me is the whole "Oh woe is us things were BETTER back in the 90's"

No

They weren't.
I can name a few things they were generally better at back in the 90's than now; visibility, driving position and steering feel.

Did you drive a fresh one when they were new back in the 90's? I sure did.

One thing I'm impressed with modern technology tho is tires.

strat61caster 10-17-2017 06:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by krayzie (Post 2993220)
I can name a few things they were generally better at back in the 90's than now; visibility, driving position and steering feel.

Did you drive a fresh one when they were new back in the 90's? I sure did.
Visibility: tradeoff for safety, fair criticism, definitely better in the 90's (had a '91 Nissan D21 as my first car, was like cruising in a greenhouse, wish I still had it)

I grew up in the 90's, I didn't get to appreciate the full array of what's on offer. What cars do you think are worth mentioning in regards to seating position and steering feel? The cars I grew up in and experience in retrospect were unremarkable at best and as bad as the worst offenders today at the worst.

The gems are few and far between in any era.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funwheeldrive (Post 2993218)
Nowadays even economy cars come loaded with blindspot detectors, backup cameras, touchscreen infotainment, etc.

New cars will never be stupid simple like they were in the 90s, just like 90s cars will never be stupid simple like they were in the 60s.
Go check out a base model Yaris, here are some of the features not available on a base model car in 2017:

Remote door locks
Power adjust sideview mirrors
Telescoping steering wheel
Cruise control
Rear disc brakes
https://www.toyota.com/configurator/...8/series/yaris

It was a trip getting into a rental car and then having to roll down the windows to adjust the mirrors. From what I hear power windows were only recently made standard.

My FR-S is pretty damn simple, not a single piece of tech aside from the stereo (Bluetooth and HD radio) that wasn't available in 1996. It's why I bought it, I love that simplicity so much so I put my money where my mouth is.

There's a difference between "I don't like cars today, I like the 90's" and "cars today are shit, the 90's were better" I won't argue the former, but I will argue the latter.

I would rather a 2017 GTI over a 1997 GTI or an FR-S over a 240SX.

krayzie 10-17-2017 07:41 PM
Does S13 count?

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMLERTjtI3Q"]MENCLUB AUTO€”€…ƒƒ‚€Œ›ž€€‘Nissan 200 SX(1990) & Nissan S13 Silvia(1991) - YouTube[/ame]


How about EF Civic?

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcvltUAxAKA"]Honda EF8 X EF9 “…交Ÿ‚ - YouTube[/ame]


But this is the one to die for stock.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkeoDy3JcLs"]MENCLUB AUTO€”€—**œŽ‹96€‘Honda Integra Type R - YouTube[/ame]


Trust me new for new I'll go for any one of these above than a BRZ, but of course that's impossible. The very reason the 86/BRZ exists in the first place is because we can no longer reproduce these gems in OG form. If that doesn't say something about how 80's/90's Japanese cars were seemingly better I don't know what does (notice no RX7/GTR/NSX/GTO/Fairlady Z/Supra here).

Irace86.2.0 10-17-2017 07:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guff (Post 2989205)
Holy hell...

NOBODY CARES

RX-7 related stuff only from here forward. :paddle:
Guff must be busy. Quoted from the FT1 thread with the necessary edit.

strat61caster 10-17-2017 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by krayzie (Post 2993277)
If that doesn't say something about how 80's/90's Japanese cars were seemingly better I don't know what does (notice no RX7/GTR/NSX/GTO/Fairlady Z/Supra here).
I think you've proven my point precisely, thanks!

I hope the RX-? is more like the seating position and steering feel of the ND MX-5 than the Mazda3. Just like how great cars such as the 1997 NSX I drove a few months ago had high quality ergonomics like their other sporty cars and not like say the 1996 Accord I drove a few years back which was shitty and reminded me of the 1993 Corolla I owned since then.

Edit: Ooh I forgot to mention the crappy seating positions and steering feel from the 2013 Corolla vs. my 2013 FR-S or the similarly crap 2016 Yaris. But the steering feel and seating position is so good in one car it's a total mystery as to how it can be bad in another car?!?!?!?

Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993231)
The gems are few and far between in any era.

gymratter 10-17-2017 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993094)
it isn't even a car
well than how can they bring something here when it isnt even a car? :P

new2subaru 10-17-2017 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew025 (Post 2993047)
They would sell like shit in America.
You may be right, but I'd take one for a test drive :burnrubber:

krayzie 10-17-2017 09:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by strat61caster (Post 2993303)
Just like how great cars such as the 1997 NSX I drove a few months ago had high quality ergonomics like their other sporty cars and not like say the 1996 Accord I drove a few years back which was shitty and reminded me of the 1993 Corolla I owned since then.
You see that 1997 NSX was designed in the 80's when most of their line-up had a similar driving position and forward visibility. The 1996 Accord was the first one that started to sit high and nobody liked that, same with the EK Civic. That kind of crap started to infect the rest of their line-up since, and later on with the move from Double Wishbones to Macpherson Struts was the last draw for me.

And Toyota will always be Toyota. I appreciate their efforts with the twins but yes it's not quite there. :D

Not sure how Mazda can bring this back in this form factor.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtsQ4N9Ca8w"]MENCLUB AUTO－*œ‡’ˆ‘š„ƒˆ---Mazda RX-7(FD3S) - YouTube[/ame]


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvQVAlzfn1o"]雨宮RX-7介紹及試駕感受 - YouTube[/ame]

reni 10-17-2017 10:52 PM
The overall point is that there was a large mainstream consumer preference for sporty, agile cars in the 1970s - 1990s. In the 1990s the SUV trend started, and today even regular sedans don't sell anymore, let alone sports cars.

20-30 years ago, even a something like a base civic would have a light, tossable, fun feel to it that today only a very few enthusiast cars have.

But the market has changed. Now everyone thinks that any car that isn't rasied up like driving on stilts is unsafe or undesirable. Obviously it's not going to be as good for enthusiasts when that's the demand that auto makers have to meet.

strat61caster 10-18-2017 01:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by reni (Post 2993356)
20-30 years ago, even a something like a base civic would have a light, tossable, fun feel to it that today only a very few enthusiast cars have.
I had fun chucking that rental yaris around.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 AM.
Page 33 of 36 « First 2329303132 33 343536
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.