Report: Supercharged Toyota 86 being developed by TRD!!

[PuGZoR]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

You know Toyota makes supercharges with intercoolers built into them, air to water if I'm not mistaken....

Sorry dude, pretty sure you're quite wrong here. Toyota has made air-water intercoolers before and probably still does, but I don't think they've ever been integrated into the supercharger unit itself. Integrating the intercooler into the supercharger would make the unit bigger (and less modular), and there really wouldn't be too much benefit from there as opposed to top mounting it.

On a completely different note, how funny would it be if they went back to the Ogura Clutch superchargers that they had back on the 4A and 1G engines? SC12 and SC14 I believe. They were huge, heavy clutch driven superchargers.

I think I see Tada-san's point of view. In it's base form, they want to make this car fun through corners, not necessarily in a straight line, but they want to keep it cheap too. The best way to do that is to forget about forced induction. Most cars, from factory When you've got a turbo you've got to re-engineer everything because of the additional heat that they generate in the engine bay, on top of everything that comes with extra power and fuel requirements. Sure people do this in the aftermarket, but Toyota is a pretty responsible manufacturer and need to think about reliability first (which is their claim to fame, and why their vanilla cars still do so well).

A low boost supercharger seems like a good way to go though, if they are actually considering this seriously. Only 6-9PSI would provide a bit of extra life throughout the whole rev range without sacrificing that quickness through the corners. Furthermore, they can get away with a small top-mount intercooler or leave it out completely if they really want.

I'll shake my head when I see people doing huge turbo conversions to this car, that only kick into boost around 4000-4500RPM. Completely missing the point of the car, there's plenty of other cars that would have been a better choice.

I totally get all the guys who've gone from high-HP cars and would be happy with this car staying N/A. I've had a turbo MR2, twin turbo JZS147, and a whole heap of other cars, but I had an absolute ball with a KE70 panel van. It probably had about 60hp on a cold day. If I had my time again I probably would have kept my AE86 project as N/A for simplicity.

[pastuch]

Originally Posted by Aki

I've driven the 2012 GT-R, E92 M3, new BMW 6-series... and lots of other cars that make heaps of power.

Take the E92. It accelerates great, has a great sound, love shifting at 8500 rpm (one of my favorite V-8s of all time)... but it doesn't feel urgent. Awesome car to be sure, but I feel a lot faster going 2/3 the speed in a 170-horsepower Lotus Elise.

You get used to high horsepower too. The only exception is maybe the GT-R... the launch control is insane. But say like a 300 hp Evo--after awhile 300 horsepower doesn't do that much for you. I was feeling "meh" after driving a 300-hp Mustang V-6 after awhile. You always start wanting more horsepower after getting used to it, and it never ends. I mean even after all the cars I've driven, one of the cars that stand out most to me as enjoyable is the Miata. That's why I want the Toyota 86.

I haven't driven a new GTR or M3 but so many other sports cars and I've come to the same conclusions.

I'm driving my NA Miata sideways to the ski hill tomorrow. People look at me like I'm insane. My 160 carving skis push the soft top a little but they fit in the passenger seat next to my boot bag. I'll take a photo for you all.

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by PuGZoR

Sorry dude, pretty sure you're quite wrong here. Toyota has made air-water intercoolers before and probably still does, but I don't think they've ever been integrated into the supercharger unit itself. Integrating the intercooler into the supercharger would make the unit bigger (and less modular), and there really wouldn't be too much benefit from there as opposed to top mounting it.

.... just read the part that says INTERCOOLER they have done it

http://http://www.toyotaracing.com/t...ercharger.html

EDIT: its not as good as traditional intercooling but i would gladly buy it cause i dont want to route a bunch of piping personally... plus its plug n play

[DRACHENV6]

After all the work that has gone into this car, it wold be a shame to ruin it with a turbo. This isnt an el-cheapo straight line machine and it is not the sort of track car that loses ground in the corners and relies on a huge spike of power on the straights to make up lost time.

In order to preserve throttle response and feel, I think supercharger is the way, but that is just hoping.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by old greg

I can say for an absolute fact that an Eaton M24 weighs 11.5 lbs. It might be a little small for our purposes though.

Thanks old greg. If so, even with intercooler and other things else, it will not weight close to 100lbs.
Just get a lightweight battery to counter the added weight, it would help a bit.

[phenoyz]

Originally Posted by PuGZoR

Sorry dude, pretty sure you're quite wrong here. Toyota has made air-water intercoolers before and probably still does, but I don't think they've ever been integrated into the supercharger unit itself. Integrating the intercooler into the supercharger would make the unit bigger (and less modular), and there really wouldn't be too much benefit from there as opposed to top mounting it.

On a completely different note, how funny would it be if they went back to the Ogura Clutch superchargers that they had back on the 4A and 1G engines? SC12 and SC14 I believe. They were huge, heavy clutch driven superchargers.

I think I see Tada-san's point of view. In it's base form, they want to make this car fun through corners, not necessarily in a straight line, but they want to keep it cheap too. The best way to do that is to forget about forced induction. Most cars, from factory When you've got a turbo you've got to re-engineer everything because of the additional heat that they generate in the engine bay, on top of everything that comes with extra power and fuel requirements. Sure people do this in the aftermarket, but Toyota is a pretty responsible manufacturer and need to think about reliability first (which is their claim to fame, and why their vanilla cars still do so well).

A low boost supercharger seems like a good way to go though, if they are actually considering this seriously. Only 6-9PSI would provide a bit of extra life throughout the whole rev range without sacrificing that quickness through the corners. Furthermore, they can get away with a small top-mount intercooler or leave it out completely if they really want.

I'll shake my head when I see people doing huge turbo conversions to this car, that only kick into boost around 4000-4500RPM. Completely missing the point of the car, there's plenty of other cars that would have been a better choice.

I totally get all the guys who've gone from high-HP cars and would be happy with this car staying N/A. I've had a turbo MR2, twin turbo JZS147, and a whole heap of other cars, but I had an absolute ball with a KE70 panel van. It probably had about 60hp on a cold day. If I had my time again I probably would have kept my AE86 project as N/A for simplicity.

very informative...your the second guy that said this point on
you seem to know what your saying..anyway if you were to choose
what would you get?
adding a little boost would not be bad right? so it be toyota?

i plan to use this as DD and track

[DRACHENV6]

I dont know about subaru's plan's with a turbo but I think in terms of full control, a SC is the way to go. Predictable, linear power is what I want. I just see the SC as being more useful in driving situations that require more maneuvering like autocross(where the fun is at for me) and a turbo relying on longer periods of applied throttle to spool (straightaways).

[Jordo!]

YES!

With a nice new intercooled roots blower expect a gain of about 40% to 50%, so that takes 197 bhp to about 275 - 295 bhp (with room to grow given a smaller pulley and tune!).

Even with a nice a2w IC we're looking at about 75 - 100 more lbs to the car, which is nothing in light of a gain of 80+ hp.

Thank you Tada-san, thank you!!!!!

Now insert "take my money" pic

[JohnnyR]

Why exactly would this car lose it's "quickness" through a corner via FI again? It's weight isn't going to change significantly first off, the chassis can obviously handle the power gain, and they can throw a little wider/stickier tire on there to put the power down as it already has a solid diff in the rear. 50-100lbs is not much of an issue considering how much of a gain you would get throughout the range. 50-100lbs more onto the stock N/A motor is a heavy penalty, but the power this car would gain would instantly offset that by a margin.

I love how people "think" that by adding more power is going to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car. Or, just make it less fun. That's flat out wrong. The chassis was designed for handling from the get go, and that's what matters most. Adding power here is icing on the cake. Powering out of turns, getting up to ideal track speeds faster/sooner on straights, all pluses.

[Jordo!]

Originally Posted by JohnnyR

Why exactly would this car lose it's "quickness" through a corner via FI again? It's weight isn't going to change significantly first off, the chassis can obviously handle the power gain, and they can throw a little wider/stickier tire on there to put the power down as it already has a solid diff in the rear. 50-100lbs is not much of an issue considering how much of a gain you would get throughout the range. 50-100lbs more onto the stock N/A motor is a heavy penalty, but the power this car would gain would instantly offset that by a margin.

I love how people "think" that by adding more power is going to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car. Or, just make it less fun. That's flat out wrong. The chassis was designed for handling from the get go, and that's what matters most. Adding power here is icing on the cake. Powering out of turns, getting up to ideal track speeds faster/sooner on straights, all pluses.

The reality is, virtually every non cone dodger on here would be chomping at the bit for the first FI kit... why anyone on here leaves "power" off of the "sports car requirement" list is mind blowing.

Anyway, this is huge news -- HUGE!

[NB86]

+1 for factory sc

[CyberFormula]

Originally Posted by JohnnyR

Why exactly would this car lose it's "quickness" through a corner via FI again? It's weight isn't going to change significantly first off, the chassis can obviously handle the power gain, and they can throw a little wider/stickier tire on there to put the power down as it already has a solid diff in the rear. 50-100lbs is not much of an issue considering how much of a gain you would get throughout the range. 50-100lbs more onto the stock N/A motor is a heavy penalty, but the power this car would gain would instantly offset that by a margin.

I love how people "think" that by adding more power is going to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car. Or, just make it less fun. That's flat out wrong. The chassis was designed for handling from the get go, and that's what matters most. Adding power here is icing on the cake. Powering out of turns, getting up to ideal track speeds faster/sooner on straights, all pluses.

Solid diff in the rear my asssssss.

In addition, adding the RIGHT amount of power, that is matched to the right type of suspension SETTING and brakes, and chamber angles, tires, etc. is not going to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car.

"adding more power" IS goin to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car.

[Snaps]

Originally Posted by JohnnyR

Why exactly would this car lose it's "quickness" through a corner via FI again? It's weight isn't going to change significantly first off, the chassis can obviously handle the power gain, and they can throw a little wider/stickier tire on there to put the power down as it already has a solid diff in the rear. 50-100lbs is not much of an issue considering how much of a gain you would get throughout the range. 50-100lbs more onto the stock N/A motor is a heavy penalty, but the power this car would gain would instantly offset that by a margin.

I love how people "think" that by adding more power is going to disrupt the handling capabilities of the car. Or, just make it less fun. That's flat out wrong. The chassis was designed for handling from the get go, and that's what matters most. Adding power here is icing on the cake. Powering out of turns, getting up to ideal track speeds faster/sooner on straights, all pluses.

It's not about the fact that the car would be slightly slower through the corners... It's about that you wouldn't be using the car to it's fullest.

Take this as an example:
Driving a Mazda MX-5/Miata @ 95% of it's ability, vs. driving a Supra at 40% of it's ability (or whatever to match the actual performance of the Miata @ 95%).

While you might be covering the same amount of track/road in the same time, in either car. You would be having a lot more fun in the MX-5, and you'd feel like a much better driver... Because you're almost using the full potential of the car. Driving a Supra @ 40% of it's abilities wouldn't be as fun as chucking a small, "underpowered" car like the MX-5 to almost it's full ability, coming out of corners at full throttle compared to half throttle, etc.

I think this is what everyone is meaning when they say it's going to reduce the fun factor of this car. By adding a SC, you raise the power, meaning you go faster, you're more likely to make a mistake, and you're more likely to do more damage when you do... Introducing these "responsibilities" kind of ruins the fun factor of the car, because you're always thinking of what happens when things go wrong. Whereas chucking a small car with low power is much safer, so you can allow yourself to puch it further, and have more fun doing it.

[subatoy]

I would LOVE to hear how toyota is planning on safely boosting a
12.5:1 ratio.
unless they are planning on adjusting the ratio by changing pistons and heads I don't think this will happen. it would make the SC a very expensive kit.