TOYOTA GAZOO Racing Presents World Debut of the New JDM GR 86 (Second Gen 86)!

[gymratter]

^it works just fine for me.

on another note im a little surprised at how little official press release photos there are of this car. usually there's like 100+.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by ZDan

The overall shape/proportions are the same. As for styling details, I'd say the 2nd gen's front fenders are more "classic" and neutral, vs. the 1st gen's somewhat gimmicky (as they're totally unnecessary, the fenders are already way above the front tires) fender bumps. 1st gen headlights are styled to look more aggro/angery vs. the simpler/cleaner 2nd gen lights. 1st gen has that giant mouthguard, hardly "classic"! 1st gen has fake vents up front on either side of the grill, kind of "mecha" in styling, vs. 2nd gen's *real* vents, with more organically shaped surrounds (overdone a bit IMO but not that bad). 2nd gen fender vents behind the front wheels are functional and to me are well integrated and not overdone. I hate these on most cars but they don't bother me here. Meanwhile the doodads on the sides of the 1st-gen front fenders, they serve no purpose. The spats in front of the rear wheels are another source of controversy but again, they don't bother me and fill in the (to me) awkward gap between the door and rear wheel opening (very little gap there on a proper 2-seat FR sports car), and again somewhat functional (though I can't imagine they do a whole lot...). I think the front fender vents and the rear spats work well together aesthetically.

Overall, I think both gens look great, not perfect. I give them both a solid 8/10. As far as I'm concerned, better to have some changes rather than just rehash exactly the same thing.

I hate most things, but honestly I find the new design to be cohesive, clean and maybe a bit *less* boy-racerish looking vs. my '17.

FWIW I was no fan of the BRZ's styling when it came out. Fenders too high, mouthguard, awkward-to-me rear wheel placement (too far aft). But when the '17s came out (gen 1.2?), I loved it. Who knows, 2nd gen may yet grow on some of ya, or maybe a 2.2 version in a few years...

Styling is always subjective and something that will look nice to one person, might look different to another person. I have read for example your posts about how the platform would look better if there was a 2 seater version comparing to the 2+2 seater version.

However, there should exist some basic principles independently of personal preferences. For example, a manufacturer shouldn't take the risk to change too much something that was a financial success. The shape/proportions of the new car are the same as you said, but if you take both generations side by side the exterior changes are too many. I believe it would be better if they had changed just the front bumper and maybe going to a bit wider rear fender. Then focus more on the interior, which now looks worse and of a cheaper quality comparing to 1st gen.

About the engine, I believe that it was the most wise decision. However, it is still weird to increase the engine displacement and performance and keep the same tire width front and rear. I would expect to increase the tire width squared or even going to a slight staggered setup, something that was done already 2-3 years ago to the real GR86 version.

Maybe, I am influenced by the German manufacturers who are usually more conservative between model revisions. Or to phrase it better, if they will do changes they will do on things that really matter to a street car and not on things like the fake vs "real" vents.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

About the engine, I believe that it was the most wise decision. However, it is still weird to increase the engine displacement and performance and keep the same tire width front and rear.

The car comes with PS4s now, so that's a 'bigger' tire even if the size is the same.

or even going to a slight staggered setup

NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo. Screw staggered setups. Almost every street car with a staggered setup has understeer and snaps back when the rear tires grab again. Every staggered German car I've ever had got square tires after a few months, and all of them were better for it. Better turn-in, more predictable breakaway, better transition back to grip, and overall more grip.

*there are exceptions, like cars with ridiculously rear-biased weight distribution, like a 911.

[mazeroni]

Best angle. I think the press photos make the car look a little stubby, like it has more Scion Tc portions than something that is low slung and rear-drive, which Gen 1 accomplishes better in photos.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

LOL I don't mean THAT thread. You have since redeemed yourself and no longer seem to be a rabid fanboi. I meant a nice passive aggressive themed one where we satire foolishness (including our own) without directly referencing what we are panning.

lol. I've redeemed myself have I.

Its your endless generosity that is so powerful here. Its truly humbling.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

lol. I've redeemed myself have I.

Its your endless generosity that is so powerful here. Its truly humbling.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

The car comes with PS4s now, so that's a 'bigger' tire even if the size is the same.

Yes true, but the PS4 tires have been used in our generation too. It looks that somehow manufacturer is stuck into this tire size and setup no matter what the engine output. Of course this is something that can be changed easily and go to a wider tire. I bet some people will do it on the first opportunity, but why a customer should go into that expense at first place?

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo. Screw staggered setups. Almost every street car with a staggered setup has understeer and snaps back when the rear tires grab again. Every staggered German car I've ever had got square tires after a few months, and all of them were better for it. Better turn-in, more predictable breakaway, better transition back to grip, and overall more grip.

*there are exceptions, like cars with ridiculously rear-biased weight distribution, like a 911.

Maybe your experience with staggered setups on German cars, is because Germans will set up more understeer for keeping the car safer for the ordinary driver.

I believe that a squared setup is better for the race track, but for a street car there are reasons going to a slight staggered setup. Not something massive. Maybe in the range of 215/45R17 front and 235/45R17 rear which was used already in the old 86GR car in Japan. About the suspension changes, they played already on how to modify the settings and I don't believe that the old 86GR had issues with understeer. In fact all Japanese reviews I could find, they were saying that it was a more grown up setup. I think the obsession to keep using a squared setup is more a preference of Subaru, because all their other cars are AWD and they are used on this setup. The other main reason should be cost related, which was not the case for the 86GR car and it was more expensive.

[Transport3r]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Yes true, but the PS4 tires have been used in our generation too. It looks that somehow manufacturer is stuck into this tire size and setup no matter what the engine output. Of course this is something that can be changed easily and go to a wider tire. I bet some people will do it on the first opportunity, but why a customer should go into that expense at first place?



Maybe your experience with staggered setups on German cars, is because Germans will set up more understeer for keeping the car safer for the ordinary driver.

I believe that a squared setup is better for the race track, but for a street car there are reasons going to a slight staggered setup. Not something massive. Maybe in the range of 215/45R17 front and 235/45R17 rear which was used already in the old 86GR car in Japan. About the suspension changes, they played already on how to modify the settings and I don't believe that the old 86GR had issues with understeer. In fact all Japanese reviews I could find, they were saying that it was a more grown up setup. I think the obsession to keep using a squared setup is more a preference of Subaru, because all their other cars are AWD and they are used on this setup. The other main reason should be cost related, which was not the case for the 86GR car and it was more expensive.

Why not do 235s all around then? The only reason I can see for staggered tires on an FR is if you need more rear grip and you can’t fit that tire up front.

[Lantanafrs2]

I keep checking this thread hoping for additional info

[Bobharp]

I am just incredibly happy that there is another generation.

I want to applaud Subaru & Toyota on sticking to their 'well balanced' guns.

In this age of SUVs and BEVs a lot of bad could of happened.

I'm calling you out Ford and that Mustang Mach E.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Bobharp

I am just incredibly happy that there is another generation.

I want to applaud Subaru & Toyota on sticking to their 'well balanced' guns.

In this age of SUVs and BEVs a lot of bad could of happened.

I'm calling you out Ford and that Mustang Mach E.

Yea I remember all the doom and gloom about how people 'in the know' on the forum went on about how the 2nd gen will be heavier and softer and how Subaru was developing it alone and the car has lost its edge.

FFW and we get a car that weighs the same, with a more powerful NA engine that revs as high (if not 100rpm more), stiffer chassis, but otherwise sticks to the same formula as the old car.

[Quentin]

Originally Posted by Bobharp

I am just incredibly happy that there is another generation.

I want to applaud Subaru & Toyota on sticking to their 'well balanced' guns.

In this age of SUVs and BEVs a lot of bad could of happened.

I'm calling you out Ford and that Mustang Mach E.

Agreed. I was figuring this gen would make a big change that ruined some of the charm, but it looks fantastic and it appears to focus on fun and being a drivers car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Transport3r

Why not do 235s all around then? The only reason I can see for staggered tires on an FR is if you need more rear grip and you can’t fit that tire up front.

A 235 all around setup will induce an even higher cost for the factory and the customer (initial cost and maintenance cost), will add even more weight and will reduce also a bit the turn-in performance (steering sensitivity). People are usually thinking incorrectly that a bigger rear tire means always less grip on the front tires which is a myth. Grip is not only relevant with the tires, but also relevant with the suspension geometry setup and the percentage of weight transferred front to rear while cornering. Overall, it looks that for rear wheel drive cars and for a certain level of power performance, a staggered setup to be more optimal for the street. The main reason to go squared is for racing, because the bigger the width the better the overall tire temperature stability. However, how many really need this? How many will make more than 5-10 laps per session? Most of them will never go to a track and many of them will not reach this required level of performance from their tires. So, the majority of people will just throw away their money on bigger front tires which are not absolutely needed.

[Sport-Tech]

Fatter front tires will also reduce steering feel, all else being equal. That feel is one of the twins' great strengths, and should not be sacrificed for marginal gains in grip.