Don't lose hope!

[Dark]

Originally Posted by kawazydude

Actually, i jus looked at the poll again. And the Mk1 has almost 3 times more votes than the MkII (23 to 8). For your convenience, here's the link: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/poll....ults&pollid=58.

But the MkI has nothing to do with this. My point is that this mule looks like the MkII (which everyone would agree on) when I wished it looked like the FRS (which has 76 votes btw).

I think Ichi means when the FT-86 II came out, not when the FR-S came out.

[ftw-86]

They are listening. They are on this board and other boards. Make our voice heard.

We want the FRS and not the MKII... actually, its more of MKTc.

[ichitaka05]

Thank you iff2 & Dark for correcting my Engrish :happy0180:
which I found
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=997&highlight=mkI+mkII
MkI (58 votes) vs MkII (78 votes)

[iff2mastamatt]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Thank you iff2 & Dark for correcting my Engrish :happy0180:
which I found
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1166
MkI (58 votes) vs MkII (78 votes)

That link isn't directing me to the right pole for some reason, maybe it's this one?

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...light=mkI+mkII

[ichitaka05]

yeah there you go. Why I had MkI vs MkII vs Mk III poll? I double checked. huh weird. Thanks for triple checking!

[kawazydude]

Originally Posted by iff2mastamatt

That link isn't directing me to the right pole for some reason, maybe it's this one?

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...light=mkI+mkII

Yeah, I had a feeling you were referring to the older poll, b/c I did remember the MkII eventually getting more votes than the MkI on a certain poll back then. But honestly, I think the older poll went that way simply b/c the MkII was newer, and even though we were actually disappointed with the MkII b/c the MkI looked far more sleek and sexy, people still said they preferred the MkII simply b/c they WANTED to like it, and it eventually GREW on them. Although that's just my opinion, I think the results of the newer poll reflect what I'm saying, since the newest poll clearly indicates that the FRS > MkI > MkII.

So yup, I'm definitely with ftw-86 when he says:

Originally Posted by ftw-86

They are listening. They are on this board and other boards. Make our voice heard.

We want the FRS and not the MKII... actually, its more of MKTc.

SEE THIS TOYOTA!

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by kawazydude

Yeah, I had a feeling you were referring to the older poll, b/c I did remember the MkII eventually getting more votes than the MkI on a certain poll back then. But honestly, I think the older poll went that way simply b/c the MkII was newer, and even though we were actually disappointed with the MkII b/c the MkI looked far more sleek and sexy, people still said they preferred the MkII simply b/c they WANTED to like it, and it eventually GREW on them. Although that's just my opinion, I think the results of the newer poll reflect what I'm saying, since the newest poll clearly indicates that the FRS > MkI > MkII.

So yup, I'm definitely with ftw-86 when he says:



SEE THIS TOYOTA!

Ichitaka has already confirmed that the FR-S IS the MKII. Others have linked and quoted likewise. The biggest difference is that the FR-S had a body kit and other custom parts. Granted it was tasteful but it was an example of a modified car not a production car. Which is why the FR-S whooped the MKII and even the MKI. The MKII is going to be closer to the production version and some people will make the road going car into their version of the FR-S. It's really that simple.

I just noticed that we have exactly the same number of people (117) in the first poll and the last poll linked. Weird !

[Dark]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

Ichitaka has already confirmed that the FR-S IS the MKII. Others have linked and quoted likewise. The biggest difference is that the FR-S had a body kit and other custom parts. Granted it was tasteful but it was an example of a modified car not a production car. Which is why the FR-S whooped the MKII and even the MKI. The MKII is going to be closer to the production version and some people will make the road going car into their version of the FR-S. It's really that simple.

I just noticed that we have exactly the same number of people (117) in the first poll and the last poll linked. Weird !

+1. I still wonder why people don't realize that FR-S is just a body kitted FT-86 II. Look at the lines and fender flare.

[kawazydude]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

Ichitaka has already confirmed that the FR-S IS the MKII. Others have linked and quoted likewise. The biggest difference is that the FR-S had a body kit and other custom parts. Granted it was tasteful but it was an example of a modified car not a production car. Which is why the FR-S whooped the MKII and even the MKI. The MKII is going to be closer to the production version and some people will make the road going car into their version of the FR-S. It's really that simple.

I just noticed that we have exactly the same number of people (117) in the first poll and the last poll linked. Weird !

I do remember some people writing about how the FRS was simply a modified MkII instead of a separate concept. But I didn't really read all those posts so there might be some things I'm missing. So that's a little forewarning to my post here.

Nonetheless, I find that hard to believe when there seem to be some fundamental differences btw the FRS and MkII that could not have been made by simply adding a body kit.

First, the roof of the FRS (if I remember correctly from another thread that compares all the specs btw the MkI, MkII, and the FRS) is a full inch shorter than the relatively high roofline of the MkII. Unless there's something I don't know about aftermarket body kits (which could very well be the case I admit), I think it would require a completely different car to make that change.

Second, the back looks completely different. The back of the MkII has a weird bulge and a part that goes in, while the back of the FRS is flat and looks more like the LFA. Moreover, the taillights are different, not just the color of them, but the proportions. These are things that can't be changed by replacing the rear bumper or rear taillights. These are two entirely different rear ends of a car.

Third, the length of the FRS and the MkII are different. The FRS is couple inches longer than the MkII.

In short, the FRS has a lower roofline, is longer, and has a flat back. That to me sounds like a completely different car with completely different lines.

Again, there might be something I'm missing here b/c clearly I didn't read all the posts about how the FRS is simply a modified version of the MkII. But as of now, I don't think it is. The FRS is a completely separate concept that just has a few aftermarket parts from Five Axis.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the mule is a mix of the FRS and the MkII. I say this b/c the mule seems to have the FRS' flat back instead of the MkII's bulgy back. But the reason why I still say the mule looks more like the MkII than the FRS is b/c the roofline seems higher than the FRS, and the overall lines just reminded me of the MkII more than the FRS.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by kawazydude

I do remember some people writing about how the FRS was simply a modified MkII instead of a separate concept. But I didn't really read all those posts so there might be some things I'm missing. So that's a little forewarning to my post here.

Nonetheless, I find that hard to believe when there seem to be some fundamental differences btw the FRS and MkII that could not have been made by simply adding a body kit.

First, the roof of the FRS (if I remember correctly from another thread that compares all the specs btw the MkI, MkII, and the FRS) is a full inch shorter than the relatively high roofline of the MkII. Unless there's something I don't know about aftermarket body kits (which could very well be the case I admit), I think it would require a completely different car to make that change.

Second, the back looks completely different. The back of the MkII has a weird bulge and a part that goes in, while the back of the FRS is flat and looks more like the LFA. Moreover, the taillights are different, not just the color of them, but the proportions. These are things that can't be changed by replacing the rear bumper or rear taillights. These are two entirely different rear ends of a car.

Third, the length of the FRS and the MkII are different. The FRS is couple inches longer than the MkII.

In short, the FRS has a lower roofline, is longer, and has a flat back. That to me sounds like a completely different car with completely different lines.

Again, there might be something I'm missing here b/c clearly I didn't read all the posts about how the FRS is simply a modified version of the MkII. But as of now, I don't think it is. The FRS is a completely separate concept that just has a few aftermarket parts from Five Axis.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the mule is a mix of the FRS and the MkII. I say this b/c the mule seems to have the FRS' flat back instead of the MkII's bulgy back. But the reason why I still say the mule looks more like the MkII than the FRS is b/c the roofline seems higher than the FRS, and the overall lines just reminded me of the MkII more than the FRS.

First you should look at those posts before you make yourself look foolish.

Second the answer is yes. All of that can be accomplished by a body kit, suspension, etc. There was a link to 5axis posted that had some more info about the FR-S concept.

Although the back may look different but unless you have already measured the angle, I would bet it was just a viewpoint difference .

[Dark]

Originally Posted by kawazydude

I do remember some people writing about how the FRS was simply a modified MkII instead of a separate concept. But I didn't really read all those posts so there might be some things I'm missing. So that's a little forewarning to my post here.

Nonetheless, I find that hard to believe when there seem to be some fundamental differences btw the FRS and MkII that could not have been made by simply adding a body kit.

First, the roof of the FRS (if I remember correctly from another thread that compares all the specs btw the MkI, MkII, and the FRS) is a full inch shorter than the relatively high roofline of the MkII. Unless there's something I don't know about aftermarket body kits (which could very well be the case I admit), I think it would require a completely different car to make that change.

Second, the back looks completely different. The back of the MkII has a weird bulge and a part that goes in, while the back of the FRS is flat and looks more like the LFA. Moreover, the taillights are different, not just the color of them, but the proportions. These are things that can't be changed by replacing the rear bumper or rear taillights. These are two entirely different rear ends of a car.

Third, the length of the FRS and the MkII are different. The FRS is couple inches longer than the MkII.

In short, the FRS has a lower roofline, is longer, and has a flat back. That to me sounds like a completely different car with completely different lines.

Again, there might be something I'm missing here b/c clearly I didn't read all the posts about how the FRS is simply a modified version of the MkII. But as of now, I don't think it is. The FRS is a completely separate concept that just has a few aftermarket parts from Five Axis.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the mule is a mix of the FRS and the MkII. I say this b/c the mule seems to have the FRS' flat back instead of the MkII's bulgy back. But the reason why I still say the mule looks more like the MkII than the FRS is b/c the roofline seems higher than the FRS, and the overall lines just reminded me of the MkII more than the FRS.

Then what do you think about Veilside RX-7 FD and stock RX-7 FD? They have different dimensions, are they different cars? Not necessary.

[kawazydude]

I'm all for hoping that you guys are right, since I'm sure many would love to make the MkII look exactly like the FRS. But of course, it still sucks that it won't come stock looking like the FRS, but we'd have to put in the extra work. Wish Toyota would just give us the FRS.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by kawazydude

I'm all for hoping that you guys are right, since I'm sure many would love to make the MkII look exactly like the FRS. But of course, it still sucks that it won't come stock looking like the FRS, but we'd have to put in the extra work. Wish Toyota would just give us the FRS.

LOL... what are you complaining about? There will be plenty of aftermarket kits, just spend a little to make the car look better to your eyes. It wouldn't be too hard.

[ichitaka05]

^& maybe it'll come out as TRD ver instead of SCION. lol