So before there was a BRZ, what was the equivalent?

[go2brz]

You twist things around and use no logic. You are so full of emptyness that it makes me smile.

I defend your attacks at a little company that does every bit the job that your overbloated conglomerate does with all their money and sales, and you turn it into me saying how something is god's gift to the automobile industry.

You seem to have no real world experience in racing or competitive auto sports or you would not be going on and on about how good Toyota's are when you have nothing to stand on but repeated defenses of cars that have NO competitive success. That is the bottom line, and your crap is just crap. I tried to be nice and reach some common ground at least a bit. You keep spewing the same stuff with nothing to back you up in the real world.

Now leave me alone and I will be glad to do the same.

[Turbowned]

Now I'm just as pissed at Toyota for not building much in the way of sports cars in the past decade, but anyone trying to claim that Toyota "doesn't know how" to build a sports car or that their sports cars "aren't sporty enough" can go pound sand. Seriously. The proof is there that they can and they have.

It is not profitable to waste energy building a sports car for a few thousand units per year, when you can build millions of normal, boring, sedate commuter cars that the masses will buy. That is why Toyota has not built a proper sports car in years. It is only because Akio Toyoda stepped in as President and acknowledged that there were no enthusiast offerings in the line-up that changes were made. Since then we have gotten the Lexus IS-F and the F-Sport model line, the LF-A (call it what you like but it's exotic, fast and people lust after it, bottom line), and finally the 86/FR-S. Now they have plans for two more sport models, likely a new Supra and MR2.

Toyota has been involved in nearly every major racing series in the past 40 years, and currently competes in numerous racing series including the 24hrs of Le Mans (next year they will prove a true threat to Audi), 24hrs of Nurburgring (which all of the Toyota/Lexus entries won their classes), NASCAR (I don't watch that $#!t) and Japan Super GT (that's right, a V8 race Prius motherf#%ker!). There should be no question that they know how to build race cars. So what if they didn't win Formula 1? Are you fielding a Formula 1 team right now? I didn't think so. Just to be able to compete in Formula 1 is a serious accomplishment. There are only what, 4 types of engines powering F1 right now? Mercedes Ferrari, Renault and Cosworth. Many carmakers have come and gone. To discount them by saying that they didn't win is ignorant to say the least.

Yeah, I'm a Toyota Fanboy. I'm also a Subaru fanboy. Also a Mazda Fanboy. And a Nissan Fanboy. And an Audi fanboy. And a BMW fanboy. And a Ferrari fanboy. And a Porsche fanboy. The list goes on...

Bottom line: Toyota can and has built a sports car. Subaru can and has built a sports car. The Toyota 86 and the Subaru BRZ are proof and enthusiasts worldwide are grateful for this.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by chulooz

The past is the past... the sad thing is Japan's largest brand has had its head up its arse in the performance segment for over a decade. Rude for a brand to desert its enthusiasts like that, all they can cling onto are used cars.

lol at the skidpad = handling logic and strawman arguments.

tell me you see the irony there? also its probably worth mentioning that for cars of the same vintage, that gap is huge. its the difference between the lfa and a mazda3. if you want to make arguments as to how the svx outhandles the supra or the mazda3 outhandles the lfa id be glad to hear them.

[chulooz]

Originally Posted by fatoni

tell me you see the irony there? also its probably worth mentioning that for cars of the same vintage, that gap is huge. its the difference between the lfa and a mazda3. if you want to make arguments as to how the svx outhandles the supra or the mazda3 outhandles the lfa id be glad to hear them.

Dont go around telling me what arguments to make impreza > supra in handling

If you think good skidpad = good handling just say so.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by chulooz

Dont go around telling me what arguments to make impreza > supra in handling

If you think good skidpad = good handling just say so.

im not telling what to do at all. just out of curiosity, are you comparing a 20 year old supra design with a 2 year old wrx or are you talking cars of the same year? stock v stock or modded? thats a pretty big claim to make with no support. i dont think we should be objectively comparing cars with decades between them.

i dont think good skidpad reults equal good handling but i dont think bad skidpad times equal good handling either. i find it hard to believe that the sti handles well considering cars like the less powerful cobalt ss or the v6 mustang (with a ridiculous speed governor) will go around VIR faster

[chulooz]

GC8 vs MKIV, its no contest. Lets say '94?

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by chulooz

GC8 vs MKIV, its no contest. Lets say '94?

i guess that is my favorite wrx. i still dont know what you mean when you say handling though. dont you think its a bit ridiculous to talk down at me for only providing skidpad numbers to show that the supra is a better sports car than the svx (i still dont know why we switched to the wrx) and then provide literally zero evidence to support your claim? there are obviously road conditions and speeds that can cater to the subaru but i believe can provide better handling for a broader spectrum of speeds you see on a typical road course.

[chulooz]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i guess that is my favorite wrx. i still dont know what you mean when you say handling though. dont you think its a bit ridiculous to talk down at me for only providing skidpad numbers to show that the supra is a better sports car than the svx (i still dont know why we switched to the wrx) and then provide literally zero evidence to support your claim? there are obviously road conditions and speeds that can cater to the subaru but i believe can provide better handling for a broader spectrum of speeds you see on a typical road course.

No insult intended. I dont support saying Subaru > Toyota performance cars, for their history is unforgettable (That other guy is nuts discrediting the MR2 so quickly, not to mention the real 86.). But as of the last decade or so they have been lacking while a number of native rivals created a bit more attention from enthusiast; Subaru, Mazda, Mitsubishi among them.

As for the comparisons, sorry no figures. I wasnt being too serious, but subaru's WRX is closer to the BRZ's handling characteristics than the Supra.

The SVX was a special car in a weird Subaru kind of way, not entirely a dedicated performer as it was unique GT: It has a glass canopy, flat 6, and 4wd. (The damn thing only came in automatic because they didnt have a tranny to reliably hold that power )

[go2brz]

This is one of the sources I was thinking of when I wrote what I said about who designed this car:

Which brings us to the whole notion of this Subaru/Toyota partnership. How did this happen? Well, it's difficult to get the entire story from either side, but this is what we've managed to piece together:
By the middle of last decade, Fuji Heavy Industries, Subaru's parent company, was no longer associated with General Motors. (You remember that association; it produced the Subaru WRX-based Saab 9-2. So you can see why the association ended.) Through some combination of national pride, Japanese government prodding, and goodwill, Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) began a relationship with Fuji Heavy Industries (FHI) after Fuji's divorce from GM. At about the same time, Toyoda family patriarch Akio Toyoda, who is now president, asked, "where is the passion in our lineup? I want to build a sports car." TMC established a sports car planning division, which quickly decided on a brief for the new car. Its styling would be inspired by the Toyota 2000GT supercar of the 1960s, its engine would follow in the footsteps of the flat-two-cylinder engine in the diminutive Toyota 800 (a.k.a. Yotahachi), and it would be conceived in the spirit of the famous mid-1980s Toyota Corolla GT-S, known to aficionadoes by its internal Toyota code name, AE86. (In Toyota nomenclature, the A referred to the 4AGEV engine, the E to the Corolla model line, and the 86 was a sequential number. "86," or "Hachi-Roku" in Japanese, has taken on legendary status among Toyota fans; hence the use of the two digits in non-USA models and even on a little fender badge on the FR-S.)
The project progressed for about a year, but Subaru rejected the first proposal. Here's where things get murky, but it's fairly apparent that Subaru was having a hard time stomaching the thought of a rear-wheel-drive car, since their entire brand identity is predicated on all-wheel drive. Subaru walked away from the table and the entire project was in limbo for about half a year. Subaru finally decided to make a prototype car with a very low center of gravity, which eliminated the possibility of all-wheel drive. That prototype both surprised and amazed Toyota, which enthusiastically supported its development. The joint project proceeded in late 2007 and now, four years later, we see the fruits of the two companies' work. Styling is by Toyota, development and manufacturing are by FHI, and each company, obviously, will be in charge of marketing and sales for their respective products.


Read more: http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...#ixzz2EaWMVMMZ

There is also an article that I saw 8 months or so ago from Autoweek that has a quote from the Toyota boss where he mentions his lack of confidence in his company's culture at the moment to manufacture this car by themselves. Possibly simply because he knew a front engine rear drive car needed a flat boxer engine to enable the car being balanced with a super low center of gravity (I don't know what was in his mind when he stated it). But that would have been too expensive to make the car successully priced if they tried to build one from scratch. (I cannot seem to find it online now, but will keep looking and post it if I do find it). But it seems apparent what I said about "this" car is quite true. I have read just about everything in print or online that has been written on this car, and nowhere does Toyota claim to have had any input in the development of this chassis platform and engine. If someone has seen such a thing in print or online, then please post it here and prove me wrong, just don't attack me personally.

My original intention was not to bash Toyota or their past cars, but just to state what I had read and what seemed to be the facts based on reported articles, not my opinion so much. (I contributed to the argument, unnecessarily though by getting upset at the response I received and reacting when I should have let it go). I have no problem with Toyota, and I think the first generation MR2 was a very nice little sports car, based on the design idea of a Lancia Montecarlo or Fiat X1/9, but much more reliable. The 2nd generation has many written accounts of scary, twitchy handling though (as many early mid-engine cars had, like the Lancia with it's off balance braking). Not sure that the AE86 was a real sports car as it is a Corrolla, but it was definitely a great street car that was lot's of fun to drive. And as I have said, this car would not have been possible without the efforts of both companies. Subaru could never produce this car on it's own as they would never sell enough of them to make it financially viable due to the costs of developing new platforms in today's auto industry climate.

[Surok]

Before the brz/86 the small light 2+2 Japanese coupe was the Silvia ,. From 1988 to 2002 the Nissan Silvia was rwd thrills with either NA or turbo engines.. Closest match to the brz? S15 Silvia autech for sure

[go2brz]

Here is an interesting article with a head to head 70's Datsun 240Z to Scion FR-S comparison:

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...13_scion_fr_s/