We Ask Toyota & Subaru about James May's Claim that Toyota Gets 90% of GT 86/FR-S/BRZ

[SVTSHC]

That figure, if true, is probably relegated to UK sales. Either way if I had a BRZ or one on order I wouldn't complain .

[DaveH]

Personally I think Toyota getting large share of the production makes sense. In the end it is all about money. Look how makes the car, Subaru does, they make it in their factory not in a Toyota factory. This means for every car that rolls off the assembly line, Toyota or Subaru, they make their money. I am sure they got it all worked out so that both parties think it is a fair agreement.

[regal]

Originally Posted by Dezoris

Subaru is a glorified contractor. The entire project was dreamed up and pushed through by Toyota. After reading that Tada blog it was basically pulling teeth to get Subaru on board, so its not a shock they don't have major interest in the project.

They can be a glorified contractor, or were. I'm an engineer in the industry and interviewed at a the Subaru/Izusu plant in Indiana some 16 yers ago. I was surprised to see Honda SUV's being built on the same line as Subaru's. I was told I would have one boss from Honda, one from Subaru, and a translator boss. Needless to say for me one boss is one too many and I eventually have ended up working for the worlds greatest heavy weight motorcylce co. But I appreciate the Japanese business model. In america we are so hung up on brands and same with sports teams, but what it ultimately comes down to is team work.

And this GT86 platform is the epitome of excellent teamwork. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have down a lot of collobarative work with Toyota, Mazda, and Mercede's respectively and not really made anything as earth shattering as this.

Can you imagine if Ford had collaborated with Mazda to make a Miata "coupe' with a little more guts? Instead we got the Probe.

What if GM and Toyota looked at the MR2 and the camero in the early 90's, or Chrysler and Mercedes had made a true drivers hatchback.

Lots of colloborations but nothing as significant as this. This GT86 takes the best features of a Silvia, a Celica, a WRX, and a Miata, it has set its own class of car. I like the low end torque of the boxer engine, much better than the engine in Toyotas last sports car the MRS. But the chassis/platform, quality is a whole lot of Toyota design and manufacturing engineering.

When you design a car, good companies can take a brilliant design and make it manufactureable/repeatable by anyone building it, and it does take "toyota" manufacturing engineers on the floor working with a subaru workforce to pull that off.

So we Americans think in terms of who's beating who, while the Japanese are just fighting for excellence and teamwork. This car is the best of both companies and the brand "name" is just an emblem or die mark. Its the people who worked together that made it happen.

Would I be "happier" with a Toyota emblem or a Subaru emblem over the Scione emblem, only in terms of resale and insurance rates. They are all great companies and significantly more advanced than Hyundai.

In 15 to 20 years when groups of enthusiasts are still driving, restoring, modiving their FT-86's the Genesis owners will have long traded or scrapped their disposable cars.

[Dezoris]

Originally Posted by regal

They can be a glorified contractor, or were. I'm an engineer in the industry and interviewed at a the Subaru/Izusu plant in Indiana some 16 yers ago. I was surprised to see Honda SUV's being built on the same line as Subaru's. I was told I would have one boss from Honda, one from Subaru, and a translator boss. Needless to say for me one boss is one too many and I eventually have ended up working for the worlds greatest heavy weight motorcylce co. But I appreciate the Japanese business model. In america we are so hung up on brands and same with sports teams, but what it ultimately comes down to is team work.

And this GT86 platform is the epitome of excellent teamwork. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have down a lot of collobarative work with Toyota, Mazda, and Mercede's respectively and not really made anything as earth shattering as this.

Can you imagine if Ford had collaborated with Mazda to make a Miata "coupe' with a little more guts? Instead we got the Probe.

What if GM and Toyota looked at the MR2 and the camero in the early 90's, or Chrysler and Mercedes had made a true drivers hatchback.

Lots of colloborations but nothing as significant as this. This GT86 takes the best features of a Silvia, a Celica, a WRX, and a Miata, it has set its own class of car. I like the low end torque of the boxer engine, much better than the engine in Toyotas last sports car the MRS. But the chassis/platform, quality is a whole lot of Toyota design and manufacturing engineering.

When you design a car, good companies can take a brilliant design and make it manufactureable/repeatable by anyone building it, and it does take "toyota" manufacturing engineers on the floor working with a subaru workforce to pull that off.

So we Americans think in terms of who's beating who, while the Japanese are just fighting for excellence and teamwork. This car is the best of both companies and the brand "name" is just an emblem or die mark. Its the people who worked together that made it happen.

Would I be "happier" with a Toyota emblem or a Subaru emblem over the Scione emblem, only in terms of resale and insurance rates. They are all great companies and significantly more advanced than Hyundai.

In 15 to 20 years when groups of enthusiasts are still driving, restoring, modiving their FT-86's the Genesis owners will have long traded or scrapped their disposable cars.

I am not knocking the partnership, in fact as you said the end product works quite well and is one hell of a story. Most automotive partnerships are to fill a product lineup, the Trooper as you mentioned like most of those joint ventures were just badge swapping. Honda did not build trucks, much like Chrysler did when they did not have small sports car so it made sense to partner up.

But the entire Subaru story is really the opposite, Toyota did not have a platform, neither did Subaru. It's an odd collaboration. Toyota asked a company who does not built RWD cars to make something they never have. And it's no shock they really have no interest in it either, it's not really what their brand is about. Regardless of speculation and opinion I am glad they did, because for one I would have never owned a Subaru and had no interest in any of Toyota's products LFA aside.

But I have to disagree with the disposable nature of a car like the Genesis.
Your opinion on that is very subjective. In terms of technology the direct injected 2.0L on the Genesis has over 60 million in development. Their steel is lighter weight and more advanced, their warranty is far better. There are plenty of things you can go up and back over.

The FR-S/BRZ is going to have the same life cycle as most every other compact and will rot out just as fast as a Corolla or Imprezza. Engineering aside, the Toyota/Subaru is as cheaply made as possible while some may put it on a podium, the only thing different about it, is it does not have any competition right now in the segment.

[gymratter]

Originally Posted by Captain_Awesome_Pants

Well, during their day they weren't. That XT6 interior for instance was something straight out of science fiction. I only wish they had done something to push the edge a bit on the FRS interior instead of giving us that late 90's retread.

idk i still stand by my comment. would take a celica or supra of the same year over those two fulgy things.

[brzadrian]

bottom line the twins are the best looking scion, toyota and subaru car in production today.

[gymratter]

Originally Posted by brzadrian

bottom line the twins are the best looking scion, toyota and subaru car in production today.

agreed, thanks to toyota's design team

[wu_dot_com]

Originally Posted by Dezoris

I am not knocking the partnership, in fact as you said the end product works quite well and is one hell of a story. Most automotive partnerships are to fill a product lineup, the Trooper as you mentioned like most of those joint ventures were just badge swapping. Honda did not build trucks, much like Chrysler did when they did not have small sports car so it made sense to partner up.

But the entire Subaru story is really the opposite, Toyota did not have a platform, neither did Subaru. It's an odd collaboration. Toyota asked a company who does not built RWD cars to make something they never have. And it's no shock they really have no interest in it either, it's not really what their brand is about. Regardless of speculation and opinion I am glad they did, because for one I would have never owned a Subaru and had no interest in any of Toyota's products LFA aside.

But I have to disagree with the disposable nature of a car like the Genesis.
Your opinion on that is very subjective. In terms of technology the direct injected 2.0L on the Genesis has over 60 million in development. Their steel is lighter weight and more advanced, their warranty is far better. There are plenty of things you can go up and back over.

The FR-S/BRZ is going to have the same life cycle as most every other compact and will rot out just as fast as a Corolla or Imprezza. Engineering aside, the Toyota/Subaru is as cheaply made as possible while some may put it on a podium, the only thing different about it, is it does not have any competition right now in the segment.

Fact check, subaru have experience in building RWD in the past. matter of fact they have a few cars with FR and RR layout.

second, can you site the specifications of the steel that is used on the Genesis and how its more advance?

Last, just about every manufactures would like to make their product as cheaply as possible. There is no need to sell someone a Ferrari when all they want is a civic. So why is there an unrealistic expectation for a product that is aim to be economically priced?

[Dezoris]

Originally Posted by wu_dot_com

Fact check, subaru have experience in building RWD in the past. matter of fact they have a few cars with FR and RR layout.

second, can you site the specifications of the steel that is used on the Genesis and how its more advance?

Last, just about every manufactures would like to make their product as cheaply as possible. There is no need to sell someone a Ferrari when all they want is a civic. So why is there an unrealistic expectation for a product that is aim to be economically priced?

Cheap and sacrificing quality do not have have to go hand and hand. If many of the devout fanboys would actually get out and drive and sit in all of the vehicles from 17k-28k it would become quite apparent there are plenty of other manufacturers not sacrificing quality at that price point. That is another debate.

Please post any major models that Subaru has made that were RWD that are currently or have been in production in the past 10 years?

Hyundai is one of the few manufactures that invested in it's own steel plants and production. They developed new ways to produce the some of the lightest weight steel on the market for mass production cars.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f08c6e6-f...44feab49a.html
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/03...s-its-own.html

Hyundai is one company that’s going to great lengths to describe how it drops weight. The Korean automaker has its own steel plant, which is constantly innovating and producing new types of steel that can maintain its structural rigidity, while reducing weight.
“It’s a big part of Hyundai’s strategy” said Derek Joyce, Hyundai’s Manager of Product Public Relations. “We’re one of the few automakers who make their own steel.” Joyce talked about some of the different types of steel the Korean automaker produces, and how they differ in strength. “We apply our different types of steel to different parts of our cars to reduce overall weight,” he said.


Looking at the company’s upcoming seven-passenger 2013 Santa Fe (seen on the right) Hyundai makes sure to point out that it features the lowest curb weight against its primary rivals, besting them by as much as 461 lbs.
“Our high-strength steel allows us to have the same rigidity and safety characteristics, but without the higher weight,” said Joyce, addressing concerns about lower weight bodies resulting in flimsy frames.

[wu_dot_com]

Originally Posted by Dezoris

Cheap and sacrificing quality do not have have to go hand and hand. If many of the devout fanboys would actually get out and drive and sit in all of the vehicles from 17k-28k it would become quite apparent there are plenty of other manufacturers not sacrificing quality at that price point. That is another debate.

Please post any major models that Subaru has made that were RWD that are currently or have been in production in the past 10 years?

Hyundai is one of the few manufactures that invested in it's own steel plants and production. They developed new ways to produce the some of the lightest weight steel on the market for mass production cars.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f08c6e6-f...44feab49a.html
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/03...s-its-own.html

very good points you've made there.

here is another perspective. i am interpreting your statement of cheap as a referencing to reduce quality. with this being said, i think its overly harsh to expect a first year production car to achieve many of those tried and true manufacturing processes.

take Honda accord 2008 for example. the accord is a tired and true model, yet during the 2008 redesign, the rear brake suffers a design flaw which caused a recall. in addition, the steering column rack bearing suffers cracks from improper installation during assembly. moreover, the V6 accord (25-28K) suffers poor breaking performance because it will bottom out every time when you step on the peddle. would you consider this as poor quality? i would think so especially on a Honda Accord. but the reality is, 2008 MY is their first MY of that redesign. thus many of the manufacturing kinks haven’t have sufficient time to be worked out. those issues as describe above went away in the subsequent MYs. the point im trying to make is, the GT86 / BRZ is the first MY of this model. there are bound to have problems which are expected to be work out in the subsequent model years.

now for the trim being cheap, personally i have the BRZ limited so i should only speak for what i know. i think the factory HID, seat warmer and touch screen display offering which is standard for this price range to be adequate. in comparison, a MY2013 Honda accord coupe top of the line V6 EXL with navy will run about 30K MSRP. a similar comparison for Nissan Altima coupe would yield the same 30K MSRP with the equivalent functions. on the other hand, for those of you who have the BRZ premium or the FRS may feel cheat can always opt for aftermarket add on.

though Subaru have not produce any FR in recent time until this car. the basic chassis design and stress distribution resemblance between an AWD vs RWD car is more similar than say an FWD vs RWD. Therefor there are plenty of transferable skillsets that can be utilized. so the argument that Subaru have no interest in building a RWD car because the haven’t build it in a while hinting they lack the engineering know how is invalid. Personally, i think the initial Subaru push back for the FT86 concept is due to the uncertainty of market readiness for this product idea and its associated risk. So when the proof of concept prototype was build and tested, Subaru realized the market potential and decided to enter the share risk project with Toyota. A similar situation would be a person walks into a bank with ideas jog down on a napkin and wants to get a loan, vs a person walks into a bank with full business plan.

Last, from the article, hyundai’s vertical integration of the steel mill is a product of raw supply paradigm shift. Raw steel prices have been on the increase for the past decades due to increase demands from those emerging nations. In order for any manufacture to secure decent supply quantity and price, all the manufactures must enter in their order typically 2-3 years in advance. Securing a steady supply of raw steel would benefit Hyundai in this case because since they are one single company, they have the flexibility to rapidly adjust car production rate without the fear of losing long term agreement with its steel supplier. Moreover, the hot sheet metal stamping is nothing new or ground breaking. Also, the article is dated 2011, while in 2012 the news broke where Hyundai heavily inflated their MPG numbers. Which then beg the questions as pointed out in those articles that the new steel helps MPG figures or does it.

Also, even with the current lineup, one of the biggest gripes about Hyundai’s car is the lack of rigidity of their chassis. This in itself begs the question of “if Hyundai is using super HIGH strength steel, then why does the chassis still flex so much?” on the other hand, the GT86 also uses high strength steel, part of it shows in the increase weight for a car this size. Yet the benefit of this high strength steel shows its benefit during cornering as witness by pros and armatures.

Sometime words and gimmicks invented by PR just don’t support by solid engineering.
I think Hyundai offers tremendous values for their product, and I think a major reason for this is because Hyundai made many fantastic business growth decisions to reflect current market environments.
However I won’t be so quick in casting the fate of GT86/FRS/BRZ yet because we have barely made it through 1st year of production.

[Ricepuddin]

These discussions are getting a little old. Who cares who did what STFU and enjoy the car ( not directed at the OP)

[FLYFISHR]

I don't know how I stumble on this thread but I thought I would add my two cents worth. My Subaru salesman said the production split was for 80/20 and that contract would come up again for negations for the 2015 model year. And as far as the Toyota/Subaru thing... it reminds me of the Right TWIX®. vs the Left TWIX® Factory commercials. go to http://www.twix.com/ and watch the tv ad if you have never seen it.

[Jegan_V]

Finding the actual breakdown will probably remain unknown until the car ceases production. As for there being more Toyotas than Subarus, yes this is the case. As to why, its very likely down to scale, Toyota is a much larger automaker and has a way bigger dealer network than Subaru does. Allocating more cars to Toyota as a result makes more sense. Currently for North America based on sales its roughly a 2:1 ratio between FR-S and BRZ.

[FLYFISHR]

I would not have thought that there would be only twice as many FRS's as there are BRZ's. Looking at all the threads on this site I would have guessed there was double as many Scions.