FT-86 may be comparable to... a Saturn Sky?

[Maxim]

This car needs to be at least as fast as a GTI or I'm not going to be interested.

The GTI is ~3000lbs, 200hp and 200tq. If this car can't keep up with ~250lbs less weight, the same horsepower, and less torque, I'd be disappointed.

Really, it all centers on the weight at this point. If it's 28xxlbs, it's going to disappoint because the non-turbo motor won't make enough torque to get it off the line quickly AND it won't handle like a super-light car.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

I never said anything about racing. If you took the AE86 and expected to be comparative on the highway to cars of its time. It falls short.

I never said it was unsuccessful. I mearly said it was an aweful car..just straight out aweful out of the box. But a fantasic platform that held a lot of soul.

for its time it was a great car. crazy power, it was only like 50 hp behind a mustang gt and it handled. im curious to hear what cars werent awful out of the box in the 80s

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by fatoni

for its time it was a great car. crazy power, it was only like 50 hp behind a mustang gt and it handled. im curious to hear what cars werent awful out of the box in the 80s

i don't think we can say the AE86 was just shy of mustang GT power at 175hp and 250ftTQ vs 120hp and 100ft of TQ. Theres a world of difference in power output there. Especially where the torque/power band lies in the RPM range.
Actually we cant call that the AE86 (corolla GT-S) had any sort of crazy power in comparison to other cars sold during its time..

I can name a few cars that were fantastic early 80s cars that had several one ups over the AE86. The Dodge Daytona, Porsche 944, Toyota Celica Supra, JDM Honda Prelude Si, VW GTI, Saab 9000 Turbo.

But even so, the AE86 was just as fun, if not funner than all of those cars despite its statistical flaws.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by Maxim

This car needs to be at least as fast as a GTI or I'm not going to be interested.

The GTI is ~3000lbs, 200hp and 200tq. If this car can't keep up with ~250lbs less weight, the same horsepower, and less torque, I'd be disappointed.

Really, it all centers on the weight at this point. If it's 28xxlbs, it's going to disappoint because the non-turbo motor won't make enough torque to get it off the line quickly AND it won't handle like a super-light car.

After reading several of your posts recently, i swear you have horse blinders on or tunnel vision or something. You need to get the whole (statistical performance = purchase) ideas that you have been spoon fed.

If you really don't know anything about this "spirit of driving" that Toyota and many other makers are trying to bring back. You could try to watch some old OPTION videos with CUP races. Or old JGTC vids. Hell...even try to watch Initial D. Even if its far fetched, it still depicts the ideals we are talking about.

Its not about this car can beat this car..or performance over performance. Its about bringing man and machine together. If you could care less about any of this, then this is not the car for you.

[GenkiElite]

For those saying ford didnt partake in the bailout you may want to do a search of "fords secret bailout". Lots of eye-opening info there.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

i don't think we can say the AE86 was just shy of mustang GT power at 175hp and 250ftTQ vs 120hp and 100ft of TQ. Theres a world of difference in power output there. Especially where the torque/power band lies in the RPM range.
Actually we cant call that the AE86 (corolla GT-S) had any sort of crazy power in comparison to other cars sold during its time..

I can name a few cars that were fantastic early 80s cars that had several one ups over the AE86. The Dodge Daytona, Porsche 944, Toyota Celica Supra, JDM Honda Prelude Si, VW GTI, Saab 9000 Turbo.

But even so, the AE86 was just as fun, if not funner than all of those cars despite its statistical flaws.

having owned a celica supra, 944 and an ae86 i guess we are going to have to disagree. and if my memory serves me correct the corolla embarrassed the mustang in auto x (although admittedly dont feel auto x weighs too much on the quality of a car) factor in what must be at least a 500 lb difference depending on sources and the value in the cars closes.

keep in mind this is a corolla

[Maxim]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

After reading several of your posts recently, i swear you have horse blinders on or tunnel vision or something. You need to get the whole (statistical performance = purchase) ideas that you have been spoon fed.

If you really don't know anything about this "spirit of driving" that Toyota and many other makers are trying to bring back. You could try to watch some old OPTION videos with CUP races. Or old JGTC vids. Hell...even try to watch Initial D. Even if its far fetched, it still depicts the ideals we are talking about.

Its not about this car can beat this car..or performance over performance. Its about bringing man and machine together. If you could care less about any of this, then this is not the car for you.

Don't mistake my insistance on a certain level of straight line performance for ignorance about the rest of the performance envelope.

My "minimum" for acceptable straight line performance is quite realistic for a vehicle in this price range and spec. I'm not looking for 13 second quarter miles or being able to keep up with a Mustang or Z-car. I've owned a supercharged Cobra and am quite familiar with that type of performance and yet I opted for a 200hp GTI as for my current vehicle.

In terms of competitive power in a compact sporty car, the GTI is currently near the back of the pack. The only serious competitor in that realm that is slower is the Civic Si.

The FT-86 is going to have right around 200hp. I'm ok with that...but only if it's also sufficiently lightweight. I have standards in terms of acceleration and regardless of what you say, I'm going to keep them. There's no reason why this vehicle can't meet them given the target power and weight for the project.

Sometimes it seems like people on this forum would be happier if the car had 130hp, because then the "spirit of driving" would take center stage. I call BS on that. If Toyota can't give me that level of handling feel along with acceleration in the same realm as current hot-hatches, I am not interested.

I want both. I will not make the purchase unless it has both. There's no reason that the car can't HAVE both at the given price point. At 27XXlbs and 200hp, it WILL have both, so long as they get the suspension settings right. The vehicle should function like a hardtop Miata, with a little bit better power and handling on the same "connected" level as that car.

I'm not an aggressive driver, I don't race stoplight to stoplight. However, I do drive on real roads and I enjoy being able to get up to speed so I can exercise a car's handling when the road turns twisty. I consider a high 14 second quarter mile time the minimum level of acceleration for doing that because I've experienced it and it is enough...and it is attainable given this car's goals.

Your quoted statement essentially insists that I ignore all other vehicles and purchase this one only on the merit of it's handling. I have higher standards than that. Deal.

[Maxim]

When it comes down to it, here's what I'd be happy with:

Handling and acceleration on par with a Mazda RX-8. That weighed 3000lbs and had 232hp and very low torque.

This car will have ~200hp and SHOULD weigh 250lbs less. It will also likely make better torque given the flat-4 engine. Thus, it should keep up performance wise, and if they tune the suspension well, it will handle just as beautifully, with perhaps a slightly lighter, more connected feel.

That's what I'm looking for and what I consider acceptable given the price point.

[enc0re]

I do expect the car to come in sub 7 seconds to 60. But it really doesn't need to and I won't care if it doesn't.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by Maxim

Don't mistake my insistance on a certain level of straight line performance for ignorance about the rest of the performance envelope.

My "minimum" for acceptable straight line performance is quite realistic for a vehicle in this price range and spec. I'm not looking for 13 second quarter miles or being able to keep up with a Mustang or Z-car. I've owned a supercharged Cobra and am quite familiar with that type of performance and yet I opted for a 200hp GTI as for my current vehicle.

In terms of competitive power in a compact sporty car, the GTI is currently near the back of the pack. The only serious competitor in that realm that is slower is the Civic Si.

The FT-86 is going to have right around 200hp. I'm ok with that...but only if it's also sufficiently lightweight. I have standards in terms of acceleration and regardless of what you say, I'm going to keep them. There's no reason why this vehicle can't meet them given the target power and weight for the project.

Sometimes it seems like people on this forum would be happier if the car had 130hp, because then the "spirit of driving" would take center stage. I call BS on that. If Toyota can't give me that level of handling feel along with acceleration in the same realm as current hot-hatches, I am not interested.

I want both. I will not make the purchase unless it has both. There's no reason that the car can't HAVE both at the given price point. At 27XXlbs and 200hp, it WILL have both, so long as they get the suspension settings right. The vehicle should function like a hardtop Miata, with a little bit better power and handling on the same "connected" level as that car.

I'm not an aggressive driver, I don't race stoplight to stoplight. However, I do drive on real roads and I enjoy being able to get up to speed so I can exercise a car's handling when the road turns twisty. I consider a high 14 second quarter mile time the minimum level of acceleration for doing that because I've experienced it and it is enough...and it is attainable given this car's goals.

Your quoted statement essentially insists that I ignore all other vehicles and purchase this one only on the merit of it's handling. I have higher standards than that. Deal.

I dunno what it is about your posts, to me you sound like an ass. When I am reading it, i have the voice of angry postal worker narrating it.

Anywho, your post also kinda made my point more clear, even if and it does have the performance level that would make you happy it doesnt seem the car for you. Your still missing the point. Sure you have your higher standards of a car and whatnot at a price point, but your still focused on just the machine.

What if it did have 130hp, and all those fast cars just past you up on the highway. What if it was the SLOWEST sports car ever made in the last decade. That would only take away from from the car, but still retain this spirit we are talking about. Especially..the spirit of the AE86 which was competitive at 120hp/100ftlb against cars more powerful and just as light in the racing sector.

Again IMO you sound like you have horse blinders on.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by GenkiElite

For those saying ford didnt partake in the bailout you may want to do a search of "fords secret bailout". Lots of eye-opening info there.

Got anything from a respectable news source? At this point everything is based off speculation/assumptions/article written by Detroit Free Press auto reporter Justin Hyde.

[bigbcraig]

Justin Hyde is a pretty good source, a lot of the Jalopnik team is now used regularly on CNN and other networks. He doesn't really work for DFP.

A lot of companies, including foreign ones who have factories / development facilities in the US, got bailout money. Its just that GM and Chrysler's bailouts were significantly larger than the others and got the mainstream media attention.

[bigbcraig]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

What if it did have 130hp, and all those fast cars just past you up on the highway. What if it was the SLOWEST sports car ever made in the last decade. That would only take away from from the car, but still retain this spirit we are talking about. Especially..the spirit of the AE86 which was competitive at 120hp/100ftlb against cars more powerful and just as light in the racing sector.

Again IMO you sound like you have horse blinders on.

I guess I'll jump in here, even though I know there are a lot of people who will never understand.

Its not that we don't want power. Its not that at all.

We don't want people to buy this car because they think its fast. We don't want asshats who take their cars out on the highway to race. We don't want to guzzle fuel jsut to have a good time. And we don't want to need an FIA circuit to have some fun exploring the limits of the car.

Most cars, even 'sporty' cars, nowadays are loaded down with heavy shit, and to compensate have huge engines, and to compensate have a heavy chassis, and to compensate have huge tires. They're expensive, numb, and its much harder, not to mention more dangerous, to have fun even driving them at 8/tenths.

We aren't really speed freaks but driving enthusiasts. There's something nigh spiritual in really exploring a car's limits and squeezing out the last ounces of performance and speed available in every corner, that modern cars have made much harder.

If the FT-86 was light, cheap, and simple and had 600hp with good throttle response, we'd love it. But power is way down on our list of priorities:
-We want it to be fun: communicative, and precise
-This requires it to be light and simple
-We want it to be cheap to run
-This requires it to be light and simple
-We want it to be something that doesn't attract douchebags who want to race down the highway or stoplight to stoplight (The STI, for example, is awful with this. About half of STI owners are serious enthuiasts, about half wanna be fassst and loud brahhhh)
-This requires it to be simple, even spartan, and have a pretty low power
output.

I hope this clears the fog a little for you. We don't dislike straight-line speed, but we really don't want it to be about that.
If it is, we'll go back to our corner trying to make old cars run and dreaming about building SuperSevens and such. While you think we're being awesome, bro!!!!1, we'll be enjoying driving in ways you don't understand.

Just in case I sound old fashioned or against younger schools of thought, I'm 20.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

After reading several of your posts recently, i swear you have horse blinders on or tunnel vision or something. You need to get the whole (statistical performance = purchase) ideas that you have been spoon fed.

If you really don't know anything about this "spirit of driving" that Toyota and many other makers are trying to bring back. You could try to watch some old OPTION videos with CUP races. Or old JGTC vids. Hell...even try to watch Initial D. Even if its far fetched, it still depicts the ideals we are talking about.

Its not about this car can beat this car..or performance over performance. Its about bringing man and machine together. If you could care less about any of this, then this is not the car for you.

Can't believe I missed this post.