Official: Toyota FT-1 Concept / First New Supra Prototype Spotted!

[Poodles]

NA Supra still has large sticky tires...which we lack.


Make it this way, stock for stock, the twins are a good second quicker in the 1/4 and about 1000lbs less than a MKIII Supra Turbo. The MKIV NA is quite a bit lighter than the MKIII and has about the same power as a MKIII Turbo (10hp down and a lot less torque), but still nice grippy tires.


Looking at power figures and weight, the twins are quite a bit quicker given equal grip.


Anyway, I'm still chuckling at people thinking this new Supra will be $40K. It'll likely be far more than that. Hell, adjusted for inflation, the old Supras are well over $50K...

[Guff]

Originally Posted by Poodles

NA Supra still has large sticky tires...which we lack.


Make it this way, stock for stock, the twins are a good second quicker in the 1/4 and about 1000lbs less than a MKIII Supra Turbo. The MKIV NA is quite a bit lighter than the MKIII and has about the same power as a MKIII Turbo (10hp down and a lot less torque), but still nice grippy tires.


Looking at power figures and weight, the twins are quite a bit quicker given equal grip.


Anyway, I'm still chuckling at people thinking this new Supra will be $40K. It'll likely be far more than that. Hell, adjusted for inflation, the old Supras are well over $50K...

Turbo Supras were $75k+ if you adjust for inflation. I have no doubt that this new car will be within a breath of 6 figures.

And trust me guys! NA Supras are slow lol.

[vh_supra26]

1993 MSRP
NA: $33,900
TT: $39,900

2016 with inflation
NA: $56,131
TT: $66,065

1994 MSRP
NA: $36,900
TT: $44,100

2016 with inflation
NA: $59,573.08
TT: $71,197.10

1995 MSRP
SE: $31,100
NA: $37,600
TT: $49,000

2016 with inflation
SE: $48,825
NA: $59,030
TT: $76,927

1996 MSRP
NA: $38,600
TT: $50,400

2016 with inflation
NA: $58,862
TT: $76,856

1997 MSRP
NA: $29,500
TT: $39,900

2016 with inflation
NA: $43,976
TT: $59,479

1998 MSRP
NA: $31,078
TT: $40,508

2016 with inflation
NA: $45,618
TT: $59,460

[vh_supra26]

Older articles, but they have hinted at a starting price.

Calty's starting point was to design a sports car with a theoretical $50,000-$60,000 price tag, Hunter said. That meant designing something wild, but not so exotic that it pushed the car into the territory that would make it a Lexus.

"We didn't want [Toyota Motor top management] to see this and think it was a $150,000 car," Hunter said. "We also did the Lexus LF-LC [concept coupe] at Calty, so we wanted a different form vocabulary for this car. Anything that looked like the LF-LC was rejected. That car was more touring oriented, while this is a pure sports car."

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014...s-at-new-supra

Nonetheless, the starting point for the FT-1 was a theoretical car with a real-world price tag between $50,000 and $60,000, said Kevin Hunter, president of the Calty Design Research studio in Newport Beach, Calif., where the car was designed.

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014...ure-sports-car

And a wild guess at price — maybe $60,000? “It’s a Toyota,” says Shen. “It ought to be affordable.”

http://www.motortrend.com/news/toyot...pt-first-look/

[Teseo]

Does it come in orange?

[funwheeldrive]

http://blog.caranddriver.com/toyota-...thing-we-know/

The Supra also will use a four-cylinder engine in the basic versions

A 4 cylinder Supra just sounds wrong to me...

[JohnJuan]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

http://blog.caranddriver.com/toyota-...thing-we-know/




A 4 cylinder Supra just sounds wrong to me...

Just call it a Celica.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

http://blog.caranddriver.com/toyota-...thing-we-know/

A 4 cylinder Supra just sounds wrong to me...

Shame they're not sourcing the B48 from BMW, stout unit, good power, 250hp/295ft-lbs from the factory in the 7 series, rumor is BMW rates at the wheels too. Lower spec versions have been tuned to 300+ hp crank est. That's almost competitive with the MK4 Supra off the showroom floor. It would also help cut production costs to share the same base powertrain. Not to mention BMW puts that thing in the Mini Cooper, it should be one of the cheapest DIT-I4's on the market.

Does Toyota have a 4-banger that comes close? Or at least isn't a dog?

The only thing I can find is the 8AR, DI Turbo they use mostly in Lexus...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_AR_engine#8AR-FTS

Slower 0-60 than an 86...

http://www.caranddriver.com/lexus/is

Edit: From the truth about cars.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...ly-goes-turbo/

On paper, 241 horsepower sent through an 8-speed automatic to the rear wheels and pitted against 3,583 pounds of curb weight shouldn’t be much slower than the 240 horsepower, 3,370 pound BMW 328i. Unfortunately, we don’t drive cars on paper. In the real world, the IS 200t is a full 1.1 seconds slower to 60. We lose the first 7/10ths before either car hits 30 miles per hour. This is due to a few factors.

The effective first gear ratio of 14.8:1 in the IS 200t is essentially the same as the 14.4:1 in the 328i, but BMW’s 2-liter turbo produces maximum torque across a rev range 30-percent broader than the Lexus turbo mill, and ZF’s eight-speed has a lower second gear. Between 30 and 60 mph, the BMW gains an additional 4/10ths on the Lexus thanks to the broader powerband and the fact that BMW’s small engine likely puts out more than 240 ponies.

While the IS 200t’s acceleration is a notable improvement over the IS 250, it’s a very conservative improvement. These numbers also mean that the 200t more directly competes with the 180 horsepower BMW 320i, which accomplished the same task 3/10ths of a second slower than the Lexus yet withdraws four-thousand fewer dollars from your bank account.

Fuel economy is another area where paper and reality are at odds. According to the EPA, the 2016 IS 200t scores two miles per gallon better than the 2015 IS 250 on the combined cycle. In my tests, though, the two were essentially the same. The 2014 IS 250 beat the EPA score by two miles per gallon while the IS 200t fell just shy of the 26 mpg total.

[funwheeldrive]

^^^doesn't the ecoboost make over 300HP? I can't imagine that the supra will be much lighter than the mustang.

Hell, even the 4 cylinder camaro runs high 13s with decent tires.

I'm starting to get less excited about the supra. A NA i6 should have been standard in the base model. I'll pass on the automatic only hybrid model.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

^^^doesn't the ecoboost make over 300HP? I can't imagine that the supra will be much lighter than the mustang.

Hell, even the 4 cylinder camaro runs high 13s with decent tires.

I'm starting to get less excited about the supra. A NA i6 should have been standard in the base model. I'll pass on the automatic only hybrid model.

Well yeah, lots of 4 bangers can make 300+

None of them have been manufactured by Toyota for mass production is my point.

[RichardsFRS]

Dead Toyota please build this car and price it at 150k that I can not afford. Thank you for you're attention

[why?]

Originally Posted by RichardsFRS

Dead Toyota please build this car and price it at 150k that I can not afford. Thank you for you're attention

even at $70k it will not be affordable. If it is as good as the last one built to modern standards, it will not be affordable, just like the last one. The reason they are now appreciating in price is because so few were made.

[guybo]

IMHO the car community has to let go the idea of a 4 banger being slow and a 6 cylinder being middling and the V8 being the end all be all of performance.

- a modern turbo 4 puts out like a V6 when tuned right. With modern materials it's possible to shed weight, and with modern tech in the engine bay you can get a very high output 4 banger. 350 BHP is not impossible on a production turbo 4 and in a car that's around 3000 lbs, that's a high performance car. A twin turbo 6 has output like a V8. People are just stuck on this notion that V8 is the only performance engine. That's very 10 years ago. Turbos and [unfortunately] Hybrids are here to stay.

- lightness and efficiency are where modern performance is coming from. A turbo 4 is a better engine than a V6 for this reason alone. A 6 cyl TT is lighter and more efficient than a V8. Sure there's more moving parts and points of failure, but modern bits and bobs and computer management (the same people who complain about drive-by-wire are stuck on V8's) make a modern turbo engine very reliable PLUS there's a lot more tuning options!

I'd love to see this car hit the market with a high boost (I want 40 psi!) boxer 4 banger and a H6 TT.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by guybo

A 6 cyl TT is lighter and more efficient than a V8.

I'd love to see this car hit the market with a high boost (I want 40 psi!) boxer 4 banger and a H6 TT.

Turbo components weigh a lot. Most modern V8's aren't heavy. There is a lot of bias and misinformation on this board concerning this topic. Hell, even the RX-7 13B is known to weigh the same or slightly more than the V8's people replace them with.


This car is what I have been planning to replace the BRZ, if it comes with hybrid, an H6 TT or a boxer 4 (LOL)....basically anything besides the V6 TT that is being rumored... I'm so far out it isn't funny and will wind up with another corvette.

Originally Posted by guybo

(the same people who complain about drive-by-wire are stuck on V8's)

Most modern V8's have had DBW for the same amount of time any other car has....