Evo Review: BRZ + GT86

[keiri]

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

I'm not so sure your Subaru BRZ factory warranty would be honored if you installed a TRD performance part

I hope I'm wrong, or maybe SPT/STi offer a similar kit because I'm leaning BRZ also, but I don't think it will work out like that.

Maybe Subaru won't warranty a TRD supercharger but I foresee SPT or STI offering the kit as well with their own branding.

It doesn't much matter to me though; I'm about 80% sold on the FR-S.

[00NissanNinja]

Nice read thanks for posting. Like others said it sounds like the opposite of what went on in the top gear review which was kind of weird. In any case regards of the badge the car is going to be a good car. And I have to say this; toyota hasn't had anything sporty or awe-inspiring in years that the majority of people can buy (LFA=almost no one is getting that), while subaru has still been churning out great performance cars. But I am happy that Toyota and Subaru are working together on the car to produce something great. I completely agree with Dave-ROR.

[Kunzite]

Originally Posted by CLTBRZ

You're right, because Subaru's engineers are completely incapable of creating a RWD vehicle, NA powered, or coming up with a name other than Impreza (even if the name is terrible) without Toyota's help... /sarcasm.

Please tell me, where did I said they are "completely incapable"? But first, they would have to come up with the idea (of making a non-AWD car)
OTOH coyote said Toyota is completely incapable of making a car as good as the 86 (twice the price, half as good).

You're misreading my posts; I have nothing against Subaru and I certainly don't hate them; I just don't believe this "we did all the important work" is accurate (even if it's a retaliation for earlier Toyota comments).
It's me who doesn't understand why the hate against Toyota. And those frictions between Subaru and Toyota saddens me...

[zigzagz94]

Originally Posted by DMDZK

People have a lot of misconceptions on how mods affect factory warranties.

In order to deny warranty repairs to your vehicle, the dealership would have to show that the aftermarket part was the cause of the factory parts failure (as outlined in the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act).

Magnuson-Moss Act only applies to the U.S. there is a whole big world outside of the rebellious colonies


And even in the states, some people don't want to go through the hassle and time of arguing with their local dealer, finding someone else to do the repairs, and then having to sue over something that should have been covered in the first place,

It should be as easy as, "Hey mate can you fix my Subaru, and oh by the way I have a Toyota performance part, installed by a Toyota dealer, on my engine that's also stamped Toyota. That's not going to be a problem right? No, great"

That's why I agree with keiri

Originally Posted by keiri

Maybe Subaru won't warranty a TRD supercharger but I foresee SPT or STI offering the kit as well with their own branding.

Maybe Subaru will allow TRD to do all of the R&D on the power adding FI kit and have STi focus on weight savings with both companies sharing the results and rebranding them in the end. SPT/STi will get a version of the supercharger kit and TRD will get the carbon fiber roof, hood, lightweight materials etc.

[jonnyozero3]

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

Magnuson-Moss Act only applies to the U.S. there is a whole big world outside of the rebellious colonies

Ha! Made me chuckle

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

Maybe Subaru will allow TRD to do all of the R&D on the power adding FI kit and have STi focus on weight savings with both companies sharing the results and rebranding them in the end. SPT/STi will get a version of the supercharger kit and TRD will get the carbon fiber roof, hood, lightweight materials etc.

Now this is an intriguing concept. One I quite like the sound of.

[keiri]

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

Magnuson-Moss Act only applies to the U.S. there is a whole big world outside of the rebellious colonies


And even in the states, some people don't want to go through the hassle and time of arguing with their local dealer, finding someone else to do the repairs, and then having to sue over something that should have been covered in the first place,

It should be as easy as, "Hey mate can you fix my Subaru, and oh by the way I have a Toyota performance part, installed by a Toyota dealer, on my engine that's also stamped Toyota. That's not going to be a problem right? No, great"

That's why I agree with keiri



Maybe Subaru will allow TRD to do all of the R&D on the power adding FI kit and have STi focus on weight savings with both companies sharing the results and rebranding them in the end. SPT/STi will get a version of the supercharger kit and TRD will get the carbon fiber roof, hood, lightweight materials etc.

Now that is something I think we could all get behind because everyone would win. Note to Toyota and Subaru: Do it. Thank you.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by coyote

It's not just Subaru. If this car was a Toyota, it would be twice as expensive and half as good. The "wonderful" LFA only supports such an assertion.

Toyota made a smart business decision and became and appliance company. No shame in that, but trying to claim credit for what they obviously didn't do is not cool.

They should have just taken the car from Subaru, said thank you and then let their marketing clout do the work. Just because you're big enough to get away with anything, doesn't mean you should.

No doubt it is very expensive, it's an almost totally bespoke car. However, What exactly is the LFA half as good as?

So many hate on that car just because they can't afford it or can't wrap their minds around it's "razon d'etre". I'm pretty sure you've not seen one in the flesh much less drive one, so I'd take the word of people who actually have, over yours. Some of the top guys in the industry seem to think it's pretty bad ass.

Chris Harris Twitter:
"LFA just gets better and better. @****ieMeaden was right, it's better than a GTO.

Chris [Harris] and Sharif [Forged Performance] agree on many things, including that the Lexus LFA is the best OEM driving experience of any production car in existence.

No need to try and pull it down, and it's absolutely retarded to say "Toyota couldn't do "x".

[coyote]

I have no interest in the LFA, just as I have no interest in the Veyron. Show me a car that through clever engineering is more than its price tag or the sum of its parts and I'm impressed. Open cheque book engineering might wow the school kids, but it's not really innovative in the true sense of the word.

Such cars are the Elise, Cayman, MX5 and here we have something called the XR6T that beat their competitors through out thinking (rather than just outspending) them and they are interesting. Even things like the Gallardo or GTR punch above their weight. I'd not really call the GTR clever though.

Had Toyota been able to deliver the LFA as a profitable vehicle that they could have sold at a competitive price to Ferraris and Lambos, then I would have agreed that it was an achievement.

It is however, a pointless exercise in unimaginative largess. A corporate wank. And yes, it does demonstrate that they have no longer have any idea how to deliver anything but appliances.

[Stigmaru]

The Subaru article wasn't too bad of a review as the Top Gear one. I believe Subaru only did what they did due to their perception of the weather at the time. Wouldn't want any accidents or liability issues when their reports are crashing cars in the rain. Evo did a very neutral review and said they believe the car is great but wouldn't make any conclusions due to not having enough time on it.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by coyote

I have no interest in the LFA, just as I have no interest in the Veyron. Show me a car that through clever engineering is more than its price tag or the sum of its parts and I'm impressed. Open cheque book engineering might wow the school kids, but it's not really innovative in the true sense of the word.

Such cars are the Elise, Cayman, MX5 and here we have something called the XR6T that beat their competitors through out thinking (rather than just outspending) them and they are interesting. Even things like the Gallardo or GTR punch above their weight. I'd not really call the GTR clever though.

Had Toyota been able to deliver the LFA as a profitable vehicle that they could have sold at a competitive price to Ferraris and Lambos, then I would have agreed that it was an achievement.

It is however, a pointless exercise in unimaginative largess. A corporate wank. And yes, it does demonstrate that they have no longer have any idea how to deliver anything but appliances.

Well written and I completely agree with you. One reason why the AS1 is such a cool car delivering great COG, road feel, balance at an affordable price. Might not be fast in a straight line, but you will have a smile in the twisties and at the track.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

No need to try and pull it down, and it's absolutely retarded to say "Toyota couldn't do "x".

Disagree. Even Tada disagrees with your assertion:

"We could not have built the car if we'd followed normal Toyota procedure.".

Sounds clear cut to me from even Tada's viewpoint.



http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3157

[Kunzite]

Fail. Even the few words, out of context quote doesn't say "we are incompetents, no matter what we do we can't build such a car".
Let's re-word a little bit Tada-san's quote:
"We could have build this car if we didn't follow normal Toyota procedure".
Which actually means:
"Build by passion, not by committee". And they did exactly that.

Originally Posted by coyote

Had Toyota been able to deliver the LFA as a profitable vehicle that they could have sold at a competitive price to Ferraris and Lambos, then I would have agreed that it was an achievement.

Nobody would be able to deliver a LFA as a profitable vehicle while selling it at a competitive price to Ferraris and Lambos. IMO.
Maybe, if they would use steel and aluminium instead of carbon fibre (alongside other modifications). But then, it wouldn't be a LFA.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by Kunzite

Fail. Even the few words, out of context quote doesn't say "we are incompetents, no matter what we do we can't build such a car".
Let's re-word a little bit Tada-san's quote:
"We could have build this car if we didn't follow normal Toyota procedure".
Which actually means:
"Build by passion, not by committee". And they did exactly that.


Nobody would be able to deliver a LFA as a profitable vehicle while selling it at a competitive price to Ferraris and Lambos. IMO.
Maybe, if they would use steel and aluminium instead of carbon fibre (alongside other modifications). But then, it wouldn't be a LFA.

Toyota couldn't do the job themselves, even Tada and Toyoda knew that. So they had to go out and ask Subaru to help them. When Subaru backed out of the project a few years into it guess what. The project died. Toyota didn't continue on their own like a company would if they truly could. They sat there realizing they couldn't do anything. Not until Subaru came back to the table did things continue. Tada's quote is true. Don't be butt hurt.

[Kunzite]

I've already proven to you how that quote should be read, and Tada-san himself explain what he meant; it's pointless tough, if you refuse to see that - and if you insist Tada-san would proudly declare their incompetence

Further reading (yes, I know, it's an old link):
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...hief-engineer/

The inconvenient truth is that, while both companies are perfectly able to make such a car, we wouldn't have this 86/BRZ without Toyota and Subaru working together.