Can it be too sporty?

[SUB-FT86]

If they ever made a Supra for 45k+ it would have to be a M3 fighter in every single way. That means Lexus quality interior, a super or turbocharged V8, a programable suspension with different settings and similar features in that class. Otherwise it would fail at 45k+.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

If they ever made a Supra for 45k+ it would have to be a M3 fighter in every single way. That means Lexus quality interior, a super or turbocharged V8, a programable suspension with different settings and similar features in that class. Otherwise it would fail at 45k+.

Smdh

[Shadowsong6]

I just thought about something... if they bring the supra back... what will it compete with? the LF-A and GT-R are similar in performance.... so if they gun for the GT-R, they have stepped on their own toes...

Would the new supra gun for the American Big 3? I don't know, but I can't imagine so.

[cyde01]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

"Correct, a larger majority don't drive at all when it snows. But that reflects on the driver's choice. It has very little to do with the car's capabilities so I'm not sure why you even mention it.

lol i wasn't dissing on the s2k's capabilities. i was a very proud owner of a 05 ap2. however, lots of drivers choose not to drive the s2k in the snow because lots of drivers don't have the skill to drive RWD in snow. i don't care what anyone says, snap oversteer+snow= huge problem.

[oneday]

Originally Posted by cyde01

lol i wasn't dissing on the s2k's capabilities. i was a very proud owner of a 05 ap2. however, lots of drivers choose not to drive the s2k in the snow because lots of drivers don't have the skill to drive RWD in snow. i don't care what anyone says, snap oversteer+snow= huge problem.

I thought part of the AP2 package was an improvement on the AP1's snap oversteer problem?

[oneday]

Originally Posted by Shadowsong6

I just thought about something... if they bring the supra back... what will it compete with? the LF-A and GT-R are similar in performance.... so if they gun for the GT-R, they have stepped on their own toes...

First of all, with the LF-A now claiming a 7:14 on Nordschleife vs the GT-R's 7:24 the LF-A and GT-R are not competitors in performance or price. Secondly, how would a <$100K car (the Supra would have to be a $60k-80K car in my estimation) scavenge sales from a $400K super car?

The Supra would need to compete with the Corvette, 911, & Evora, just to name a few.

[kuruma]

I'm just gonna throw my 2c in here.
The ridiculousness of some of these topics amaze me. What the hell do you mean can a sports car be too sporty? no it cant. That's what it is, a sports car. If its too low, too small, or *insert another complaint here* then its not the type of car you are looking for and buy your standard grocery getter corrolla.
I think, and I dont know if I speak for the rest of you guys, that most of us here care about light weight, handling, and overall fun (plus what it looks like). Not how easy it will be to get my grandma into it or go offroading with it.

[Random_Art]

Originally Posted by oneday

First of all, with the LF-A now claiming a 7:14 on Nordschleife vs the GT-R's 7:24 the LF-A and GT-R are not competitors in performance or price. Secondly, how would a <$100K car (the Supra would have to be a $60k-80K car in my estimation) scavenge sales from a $400K super car?

The Supra would need to compete with the Corvette, 911, & Evora, just to name a few.

part of what made the supra legendary was the block. Cast iron that could handle insane amounts of boost. If all the fanboys can't dump 20+ pounds of boost into it, would it really be as successful?

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

lowered cars are ONLY faster on baby's butt smooth tracks. On a real road, you want to have enough suspension travel to prevent the suspension from hitting the bump stops. If you lower a car in a regular macpherson strut setup, you are losing suspension travel. That means you'll be in the bump stops more often which is bad for handling. The only way to make a car very low to the ground without losing suspension travel is to go with coilovers or inverted struts, and those would be too expensive for this car. A well tuned suspension can be sporty without being overly stiff. It's all about how the springs and dampers are tuned.

That's a generalization. You can keep stroke with different top hats, or just run shortened stroke dampers, which avoids the bumpstop issue as well.

Now poorly lowered cars will handle worse in most situations without a doubt.

Of course, all of my adjustable height coilovers have been around .75-1" lower than stock, I'm not a "drop is 2.5" person..

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

Completely legitimate concerns Madfast. I have concerns about bottoming out here, cargo usage, practicality etc etc. I see Miatas and RX-8s locally but we have all kinds of nasty roads and debris especially after storms. Heck we've bottomed out minivans in our driveway .

I think a lot of this is general sports car stuff. But worse case you might need to raise your suspension a wee bit. According to Ichitaka that would help the camber issue with Macstruts too. Plus it means you can drive sportscar through "God's country."

Owning a car that's low from the factory (S2000, ITR, etc) just means you take a different approach to how you drive the car in certain situations, speed bumps, driveways, etc. You just go slow. I've never bottomed out my cars being careful.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by ToyotaObsession

I just went out and measured my front bumper and it's got 8 inches of Clearance with some suspension bits hanging about an inch below that. So effective clearance of 7 inches or so. Pretty much on par with the tC at 6.3.

You can't judge based on looks. It's an inch lower than a standard 2WD, and it's got a body kit. It does have a lot of clearance between the tires and wheel wells. But that has nothing to do with clearance under it.

Actually I've put them together in several posts like this one. It's inevitable. If (HUGE if there) Toyota ever makes a new generation of Supras, it will be a Scion. There is absolutely no reason for them to make a Toyota here. Naturally of course everywhere else it will be a Toyota. But in the states. Why have a standalone $40K+ Sports car in your lineup? When you can just as easily place in under a brand with other Sports Cars. Same goes for anything else Toyota releases. You can not like it all you want but that doesn't change anything.

Can you think of an actual reason other than appeasing fan boys that they would release a Supra under the Toyota nameplate? Don't give me that tired line "Well it's too expensive to be a Scion nobody will pay $40K+ for a Scion." Because that's .

The FT-86 is already creeping up from low 20's to mid 20's. Hope to see a TRD edition? Easy upper 20's if not low 30's. Suddenly the jump to the 40's isn't that much. Throw in something in the middle there like an MR2 replacement, boom low,mid, and high.

So seriously, other than just not liking Scion. Why wouldn't they release it as Scion?

A tC is not a low sporty car anyways, so I'm not sure it matters.

I'd hope this car is 5" or less min ground clearance.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Andy

No it cannot be too sporty!

Give me minimal interior, 2 racing seats (though make them decently wide, I play Rugby and football, yes your american football, not soccer so I'm not a skinny arsed lightweight!).
LSD Wohoo!
No air-con
ABSOLUTELY NO SUN ROOF!
no radio/speakers the engine noise should be good enough

And I see this car as the replacement for the AE86, So Toyota (Scion whatever) now need to make a new Celica GF-Four (All Track?) a new MR2, and a new Supra.... and they need to be SPORTS CARS!

It'll have 4 fairly standard seats I'm sure.

Personally I need audio (ipod connectivity) and aircon. I live in Florida where it's too f'ing hot all the time (well 9-10 months out of the year) for no AC, and audio for roadtrips = required.

Completely agree on no sunroof (HATE them, plus they take up space I might need for my helmet) and LSD being a requirement

[Shadowsong6]

Originally Posted by oneday

First of all, with the LF-A now claiming a 7:14 on Nordschleife vs the GT-R's 7:24 the LF-A and GT-R are not competitors in performance or price. Secondly, how would a <$100K car (the Supra would have to be a $60k-80K car in my estimation) scavenge sales from a $400K super car?

The Supra would need to compete with the Corvette, 911, & Evora, just to name a few.

Ah, I didn't know that. I don't really keep up with all of this ring business, so I guess the LF-A is faster, as it damn well should be for the price difference.
But it could scavenge sales the same way the GT-R did from the 911 when it was first brought back, a 75k car vs. a 100k+ car. It offers close to the same performance, for less money. Although I suppose this point is moot if the GT-R is that far below the LF-A

[cyde01]

Originally Posted by oneday

I thought part of the AP2 package was an improvement on the AP1's snap oversteer problem?

yeah but it doesn't eliminate it completely. still much better than the ap1 though.