Please be true

[70NYD]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Some details don't make sense, either.

The article said its engine is transversely mounted. This would make sense for a mid-engine RWD, but the concept's plate says FR, JDM-speak for Front engine Rear drive, which is usually with the engine longitudinally mounted. Then they are saying they want double wish-bone rear suspension but may have to settle for a rigid axle because the parts have to be from pre-existing ones. So which Toyota compact car is RWD with a solid axle? Or would it come from a truck?

And who but Mustang owners and die-hard, old-school AE86 owners would buy a sports car with an archaic solid axle, anyways?

perhaps (and im playing devils advocate) there is no room to mount it longitudionaly, so the engine is transverse but rwd (kinda like when you have a 4wd or awd that has a transverse mount engine but without the front drive shafts) if this is the case, that will be the 1st time i heard of it actually happening

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

perhaps (and im playing devils advocate) there is no room to mount it longitudionaly, so the engine is transverse but rwd (kinda like when you have a 4wd or awd that has a transverse mount engine but without the front drive shafts) if this is the case, that will be the 1st time i heard of it actually happening

It's possible, but the article just didn't seem concrete, you know what I mean? Transverse with a solid axle in the back??? Seems like the writer was just throwing every tiny bit of info out together to make a story out of almost nothing.

The other pic of the mid-engined car makes sense though. Converting a FWD drivetrain to Mid-RWD makes perfect sense and has been done tons.

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

The Awesomeness.

I will own one some day.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Dixie Normous

I will own one some day.

Aren't all those in Puerto Rico, running 8's through the quarter and wheel-standing?

[Midship Runabout]

Not all!
But yes they put those crazy wankels in there and do amazing things... All in need is a 3s and id be happy.

[cyde01]

this car sounds more like an ae86 revival than the ft-86. if they release both in the US, the cheaper price and insurance might make it worth it even if it only makes 100hp. i mean dang, if the thing really only weighs 2000lbs u don't need a lot of power!

[MtnDrvr86]

I dont know much about the starlet and to be honest Ill be more excited about the next gen miata if mazda can get their target weight of 2200 lbs

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/04/m...next-gen-mx-5/

[70NYD]

Originally Posted by Dimman

It's possible, but the article just didn't seem concrete, you know what I mean? Transverse with a solid axle in the back??? Seems like the writer was just throwing every tiny bit of info out together to make a story out of almost nothing.

The other pic of the mid-engined car makes sense though. Converting a FWD drivetrain to Mid-RWD makes perfect sense and has been done tons.

yeah man that is exactly what it seems like to me 2
that seems like a whole load of shit, solid axle on a double a-arm suspension...??? where did the writer get that crack from cuz the weekend is coming up and it sounds like u get a pretty good trip from it... (no i dont smoke crack.. the only drugs i take are alcohol, nicotine and caffeine)
BUT that being said, i still cant find where it sais it will use a solid axle (it does say it will AVOID solid axles on the 2nd page..)
the FT-86 part sounds like a google spider bait..
i personaly like the coupe from the front, from the back looks like a hyundai tiburon
the hatch isnt bad looking either it DOES remind me a whole lot of the good old starlet GTs
COMON toyota you had 10 yrs on the side line not making any new EXCITING sports cars in the last decade (apart from the MRS ) so get your arse in gear and start popping out new sports models like Tasmanians pop out inbred children

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by 70NYD

yeah man that is exactly what it seems like to me 2
that seems like a whole load of shit, solid axle on a double a-arm suspension...??? where did the writer get that crack from cuz the weekend is coming up and it sounds like u get a pretty good trip from it... (no i dont smoke crack.. the only drugs i take are alcohol, nicotine and caffeine)
BUT that being said, i still cant find where it sais it will use a solid axle (it does say it will AVOID solid axles on the 2nd page..)
the FT-86 part sounds like a google spider bait..
i personaly like the coupe from the front, from the back looks like a hyundai tiburon
the hatch isnt bad looking either it DOES remind me a whole lot of the good old starlet GTs
COMON toyota you had 10 yrs on the side line not making any new EXCITING sports cars in the last decade (apart from the MRS ) so get your arse in gear and start popping out new sports models like Tasmanians pop out inbred children

Yeah it's the part that says they want to avoid solid axles, but then goes on to say they have to keep costs down and use existing parts. So my interpretation is that they want the double wishbones, but have access to an existing cost-conscious solid axle.

Why else would they mention avoiding a solid axle? Of course you would want to avoid a solid axle in a sports car! Toyota hasn't used one in a sports car since the original AE86, so it didn't even make sense to me that they mentioned it in the first place. So I interpret that as they are actually considering it as an option?

I don't know... Unclear article. Maybe reading too much into it...

[70NYD]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Yeah it's the part that says they want to avoid solid axles, but then goes on to say they have to keep costs down and use existing parts. So my interpretation is that they want the double wishbones, but have access to an existing cost-conscious solid axle.

Why else would they mention avoiding a solid axle? Of course you would want to avoid a solid axle in a sports car! Toyota hasn't used one in a sports car since the original AE86, so it didn't even make sense to me that they mentioned it in the first place. So I interpret that as they are actually considering it as an option?

I don't know... Unclear article. Maybe reading too much into it...

deffinately reading to much in to it.
but now that u explained it like that i c what you mean exactly. it sounds like, "we want to go ire, but we cant afford it"
i was hoping it would actually be a mid mounted engine, but going of the photoes you can c the rear seats quite clerly in there, so unless the engine is in the uber small boot, the whole transversly mounted front engine OR the FR setup is a load of shit.
man i love this site. it has taught me so much about how much crappy auto websites are out there. b4 reading these posts (not just in this thread) i would just search for someting and read the 1st few results, if they are concise then i take that the story holds some water at least. but now i see just how many specialised websites have absolutly no idea what the fuck they are on about

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Aren't all those in Puerto Rico, running 8's through the quarter and wheel-standing?

You can find a couple in Jamaica and the cayman islands too.

[CyberFormula]

I'm honestly hoping this will come out.

More news here

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...h-concept.html


-2000lb
-100hp

This is like the old AE86 ...where it weighed about 2200lb with 120-130hp...

So can we say 200lb difference may equate to 20hp?


However, the other car i'm paying attention to right now is the next generation Mazda MX-5, which is suppose to be 2200lb, and probably going to be 170hp ...just like the MX5 currently.

[Matador]

^
a) While I am enthused about this car, and really do hope it comes out, I think I am so far past a 20lb/hp P/W ratio... blech. Not for me.

b) I'll believe that the next MX-5 will weigh 2200lbs when Mazda puts it on sale.

[williamt2]

It reminds Me of a Porsche 944
God Bless, Bill Ivins