More confirmation from Toyota on next gen 86

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

It's what happens when the first gen is so kick-ass.

Sorta like Mazda did with the Miata.

It did exactly what it was intended to do when it first came out, then they spent almost 30 years messing with it -


humfrz

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by humfrz

Sorta like Mazda did with the Miata.

It did exactly what it was intended to do when it first came out, then they spent almost 30 years messing with it -


humfrz

Well, many(most?) Miataphiles say that Mazda has finally produced a better(best?) Miata in 2019. Does anyone think Toyota will keep after it like tenacious little Mazda did?

IMO a 2014 Scion FR-S is about as good as it gets for a modern Toyota sports car.

[86MLR]

I think the MX5 NA8 Clubman was the most pure, the NB SP the best overall.

I'm personally not sold on the look of the ND, picky yes, but I likes ta look.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

If they were going to use an I4 they would have done that in the first place.

There is noting wrong with the boxer oil delivery system. The problem is with the act of gluing the engine together. Nobody with a post 13 has had any oil delivery issues.

Upping the displacement runs into the emissions and fuel issues that everybody like to ignore so much. No doubt both Toyota and Sbuaru would like to keep their fleet carbon credits for the vehicles they make money on.

They haven’t improved on the oil pressure issues at all. They may have improved the packing issues but that’s it.

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Things come up when the car is in use. That does not mean they deliberately left those things wrong in the first place just to meet a schedule.

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

But they changed the engine wiring harness after the first year. And the valve stem length. And the window switches (smaller indexing). And the tail light gaskets. And the radio. And the kneepads. And that's just the stuff I can remember off the top of my head.

Don't forget the TSBs like the ECU calibration to not fry the DI seals.

They absolutely leave stuff on the table because it needs to be done Monday before OOB. That's why revisions are a thing in engineering. If it meets requirements it releases on the deadline.

I do agree that it's likely that a second gen will gain weight, but it might not. Guess I'm still optimistic about the possibilities. With this being an emotional car I expect the team to try harder that on let's say, the next Camry. But they again at enthusiasts we tend to skew things in favor of what we want to see.

Things with cars don't purposely get "left on the table" unless your talking about intentional performance hold backs. You simply cannot account for every single use case scenario in a lab or in vehicle testing, in this case the taillights and the DI Seal update was because of an factory and engine manufacturer issue. There are so many sectors and engineering teams involved in a car that there is no way to perfect it on a release. I can't think of one car that didn't have TSBs or a factory recommended fix at some point that I have owned. The FA20 has had tons of updates that you haven't even mentioned in it's first 3-4 years before it even got that fancy red intake manifold. It's simply how development works.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

They did not leave a bunch of things on the table because they had to finish that Friday. Is there always room for tweaks? Sure but cars are not designed on a "Ummm close enough" basis.

I think you would be surprised by what is sent to production with those exact words.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Spuds

I think you would be surprised by what is sent to production with those exact words.

Yes I would. At least in the automotive world where it takes 2 years and about 50 people to test and approve a 5 micron (0.000039 inch) change in a rotor coating thickness. As I said a required specification is required. You do get to change that goal because you ran out of time.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

I think it's very plausible financially and potentially lightweight.

I remember Tada told Road and Track in late 2012 they can cut up to 100kg out of the chassis without exotic materials. That leaves 220lbs extra for a mild hybrid system.

Honda made the CR-Z on the Fit platform. The 2nd gen fit at it's lightest weighs 2496lbs, the CRZ 2657.
161lbs difference. That buys you 14hp and 58lb-ft of Torque. 20hp and 70lb-ft for the more powerful battery introduced in 2012 (I used 2012 curb weights).

Keep in mind this is with 10 year old battery tech. The current fit hybrid adds even less weight. And the CRZ sold for 23k in today's money.

All in all with batteries getting more powerful and cheaper to produce I think it's very plausible to get an FA20 + flywheel mounted motor powered 86 that weighs more or less the same (perhaps even a bit less) as the current car, but with more weight over the rear end, and crucially for a similar price as the current car. And it meshes well with Subarus E-boxer plans.

The CR-Z is not a RWD sports coupe though.

And Toyota sorta already did that: Prius C is probably the closest comparable (or a Yaris Hybrid). But that thing isn't designed for driver enjoyment.

[TommyW]

If we get a Gen2 it can't be much faster or much more expensive as the Supra is coming in in the 50's for the base model

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by TommyW

If we get a Gen2 it can't be much faster or much more expensive as the Supra is coming in in the 50's for the base model

See. Somebody get's it!
There will not be some supercar 86/BRZ made for cheap. It needs to maintain it's entry level position below the Supra not try to match or even exceed it as many seem to expect.
To stay in that position you can safely rule out much higher HP (i.e. turbo), lighter weight, complex hybrid systems, and pretty much everything else people keep says "can" be done. Yes all those things could be done but they would remove the car from the segment that it was intended to fill.
The Miata (why do so many seem to refuse to use that name?) went through very minor changes for each of it's "new" gens for decades. They were pretty happy with what they had and saw no reason for massive change each gen. As @Ultramaroon said before it is pretty hard to move the car up when they did such a good job in the first place.
The alternative is to go the way of the Celica or Eclipse where really great cars just got dumbed down and worse with each successive generation. This happened because they decided to go away from the original intent of the car and attract a larger buyer segment. Is this really how we want to see this model develop?

[TommyW]

It goes back to the "If you want more power just get a different car" school of thought. These are momentum cars and require a driving style much different that high HP cars, especially on tight tracks and autocross. In these situations the momentum cars can be just as fast if not faster. I was in an event yesterday and that was the outcome. If you enjoy big tracks or stoplight racing and big speed then you need to look elsewhere. The 86 has its place and buyers need to understand and respect that. Adding FI isn't hard so there's that....

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by TommyW

It goes back to the "If you want more power just get a different car" school of thought. These are momentum cars and require a driving style much different that high HP cars, especially on tight tracks and autocross. In these situations the momentum cars can be just as fast if not faster. I was in an event yesterday and that was the outcome. If you enjoy big tracks or stoplight racing and big speed then you need to look elsewhere. The 86 has its place and buyers need to understand and respect that. Adding FI isn't hard so there's that....

They sent the car specs out to the aftermarket well before it was even released so that they could address the power wants for the masses. They made a big deal about doing that. The car was always intended to be a base for those that wanted to mod so to expect changes that will fit the desire of a relatively small group of the buyers is not in the cards.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Yes I would. At least in the automotive world where it takes 2 years and about 50 people to test and approve a 5 micron (0.000039 inch) change in a rotor coating thickness. As I said a required specification is required. You do get to change that goal because you ran out of time.

Absolute measures are pointless in this particular discussion. Why was this coating ever approved at the original thickness anyway when it's clearly better (in some way) at the new thickness? An incremental improvement indicates that the original product was good enough for then, but not for now.

Also, a vehicle design has many more degrees of freedom than a brake rotor coating design has. Far more uncertainty in the design/trade space leads to changes in the specification as the design evolves.

[James H]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

They sent the car specs out to the aftermarket well before it was even released so that they could address the power wants for the masses. They made a big deal about doing that. The car was always intended to be a base for those that wanted to mod so to expect changes that will fit the desire of a relatively small group of the buyers is not in the cards.

Now that the Supra is out, it sets the limit on how much power the next gen 86 will get. Unfortunately the 86 has become a second tier sports car in the Toyota lineup, we are in the Cayman-911 scenario that Porsche buyers experienced. They will purposely keep the performance of the cars in line with where they sit in the corporate product ladder.