[82mm 4g63]

Originally Posted by Maxim

Disagreed on that, at least for the RX.

The RX should remain a 370z competitor. The vette has been steadily gaining in price and will further gain on the C7.

A 3 rotor, or a 1.6L would bump horsepower up to the 300+ level even without turbos. If the RX-7/9 actually happens (I have my doubts), a return to a 2 door and sub 3000lb weight along with either the 1.6L or a turbo would have me buying that car in an instant. I love rotaries. I'd have an RX-8 but the power is so low and there's no real aftermarket for it since it sells so poorly, especially the 2009+ S2 chassis, and intake/exhaust/porting has almost no effect on power because the Renesis is already in such a high state of tune.

You disagree abouth the rx8 or next rx7? I'm hoping the next gen Sup/RX fit snugly between the Vette and MustangGT/CamaroSS. Id love to see some special TRD Supra/Mazdaspeed RX7 that compete with the GTRs and Z06s. Id be pretty disapointed if the new RX was as fast as the 370z which int much of an improvemen over the last generation RX/supra. Id settle for nothing slower that current 5.0GTs/SS's.

Originally Posted by Maxim

Neither of which anybody should be willing to pay ANY extra money for, since there are no exotic materials being used to make the car. RWD is not a bonus feature, it's a drivetrain layout, and the car is tiny. It damn well better be light.



The Si is literally the bottom of the barrel, performance wise. The low cost performance car segment has become insanely competitive. If ANYBODY can think of a reason why this car should have Si performance, and not MS3 or GTI performance, they should speak up. Those vehicles are offered at a similar price.



Who said anything about a 2.5L turbo? A 2.5L N/A or a 2.0L turbo would be preferable. And the turbo piping and hardware to support the torque would not add much weight at all. It's 2xx ft/lbs of torque are not that much.

Additionally, it would certainly not get worse gas mileage. A turbo engine gets non-turbo mileage as long as you stay out of the boost. I AVERAGE 27.9 mpg in the city in my GTI - and most of that is in the city. If anything, it would get better gas mileage, as you wouldn't need to rev the snot out of it just to pass somebody.

The RX-8 was a failure. Offering a car that's only marginally lighter, has less power, and less usable space will also be a failure. Base price on an RX-8 is sitting right at ~26k and if you can actually FIND one on a dealer's lot you can walk away with it for more like 22-23k. Do you really think this car is going to cost much less than that?

I see absolutely no reason why a higher performance target should not be met for the same price. I would view this vehicle as a rip-off if it offered Si level performance for Si level money, because I view the Si as a rip off.

If the car is offered and is extremely competitive with other cheap performance cars, of course it will sell better than if it's among the slowest. That's a given.

People need to stop viewing RWD+Light as something that should cost extra. Neither are. This car is going to be a scion and it will not have a premium interior - it should AT LEAST be able to match a GTI in performance for the money.

Agreed. You're designing a small car, a bi-product of being small SHOULD be less weight. Shouldn't charge more for that. Now if they ever released a hardcore lightweight version, like the Evo MR, I could justify a small premium.

Originally Posted by Maxim

The simple fact remains: It is ludicrous to sell this vehicle at prices where it will get killed in performance. RX-8 redux. So, it should either be priced even lower, or it should perform on par with other similarly priced performance cars. If Toyota can't make that happen, then believe me....it will definitely be their problem.

Agreed again.