Toyota FT-86 Price Poll

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I was replying to OldSkool saying the engine would be a weak engine if it started at 18.5k. And a miata doesn't start at 30k unless you live in one of those other countries.

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/conf...ip=0&zip=30044

\

No, the currently planned engine output of 200hp does not make this car slow. Its not even underpowered at that weight/power ratio.

You know what an SR-5 AE86 is and how it differs from the GT-S? At sub $20k the car would literally come with a slug of a motor, not even 1% engineered for performance, would have a softer cheaper suspension, drum rear brakes, etc. Basically all looks and no umph.

Damn kids.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I was replying to OldSkool saying the engine would be a weak engine if it started at 18.5k. And a miata doesn't start at 30k unless you live in one of those other countries.

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/conf...ip=0&zip=30044

Miata GT (hard top) base price is just lil below $30k... either way, 167hp car for $23.1k~$28.5k... idk

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

\

No, the currently planned engine output of 200hp does not make this car slow. Its not even underpowered at that weight/power ratio.

You know what an SR-5 AE86 is and how it differs from the GT-S? At sub $20k the car would literally come with a slug of a motor, not even 1% engineered for performance, would have a softer cheaper suspension, drum rear brakes, etc. Basically all looks and no umph.

Damn kids.

We all have different ideas of a really good power/weight ratio and for me it has to be 12lbs/1hp or lighter. I prefer between 10-12 lbs/hp not a supercar fighting 5-9 lbs/hp. Another thing that I consider is torque to weight ratio as that is a even better measure for a daily driver IMHO. My rsx is 20lbs/1tq as my car weighs 2800 lbs with 140 tq and I can barely feel it too. I have a feeling the FT might put out the same torque to weight ratio as my rsx.

[Midship Runabout]

^its said to have 100lbs less and 60ft/lbs more than your acura. Why are you bitchin?

(Not 100% fact)

[aliphian]

Originally Posted by Dixie Normous

^its said to have 100lbs less and 60ft/lbs more than your acura. Why are you bitchin?

(Not 100% fact)

I don't see them getting 200 lb/ft out of it, especially if they are going to try to increase the rev limit. That would be freakin sweet though.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Dixie Normous

^its said to have 100lbs less and 60ft/lbs more than your acura. Why are you bitchin?

(Not 100% fact)

Why is it that you always assume I am bitching? And your assumptions seems way off IMHO. There is no way a 2.0 liter N/A engine is going to make 200 lb-ft without F/I.

And what is up with how defensive you guys get?

[RRnold]

Originally Posted by 1GoZoom

I didn't factor in the rising costs associated with the disaster. From the looks of thigns, Toyota, Fuji, Honda, and isuzu are all going to have to rebuild their plants as this radiation leak will encompass them. Japanese cars are going to skyrocket in price like they did in the 90s, which sadly led to the end of the JDM sports car market for a time. Let's hope the same doesn't happen again. the yen/dollar exchange rate is looking terrible.

When/what car skyrocketed in the 90's?!?! I remember sticker on a new Supra TT was in the upper 40K! All the flagships were twin turbo; Z, 3000GT, Supra; thats why they were more expensive.

It was the tougher emission laws in the mid 90's (ultra low emmission/low emission/zero emission) that put an end to the JDM super cars.

Found this on another forum

"The first calculator from the Bureau of Labor Statistics states that $37,000 had the same buying power in 1994 as $55k has in 2011.

So a 1994 MKIV Supra with a base price of $37,000 would cost around $55K in today's dollars.


Actually I think the 37K base price from your original link was "estimated price". Here's a window sticker for a '95 TT version -- A whopping 48.7K"

[aliphian]

According to the same calculator, that particular car would cost over $76k today!

*edit*

Also according to that calculator, the 1993 240sx base model coupe would cost $23k today.

[RRnold]

Originally Posted by aliphian

According to the same calculator, that particular car would cost over $76k today!

Yup, GTR territory. The Supra's fate has also been sealed thanks to Fast and the Furious.

[aliphian]

Also, according to that calculator, a 1991 Celica ST Sport Coupe would cost under $22k today! Let's hope Toyota uses that calculator. LOL

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

There is no way a 2.0 liter N/A engine is going to make 200 lb-ft without F/I.

I believe it is very possible. Boxers have a tendency to be have a little more torque compared to inlines. And on top of that throw on (hopefully) toyota/yamaha heads with variable valve timing on both cams, direct injection, and a compression ratio that demands 91 octane. I believe it would be close. But that's just my theory.

[Niche79]

Id like to see levels from starter with cloth and lower powered engine starting at 21k, and for the high end engine with full leather and bells and whistles to top out at 30k. Keep up with the Genesis and they will get loads of sales and it brings a wide group of car lovers in no matter if you can only afford 20k or up to 30k.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by Midship Runabout

I believe it is very possible. Boxers have a tendency to be have a little more torque compared to inlines. And on top of that throw on (hopefully) toyota/yamaha heads with variable valve timing on both cams, direct injection, and a compression ratio that demands 91 octane. I believe it would be close. But that's just my theory.

That is a very important detail too. Many of the guys here are comparing the new FB to engines that use premium grade. Is there a possibility that it could be regular? I'd guess yes. Heck it could be designed for 85 octane! That would be better IMHO in that it would leave more room for turbocharging . But would make it worse for N/A. Plus with the price of premium, I'd wager a bet on regular being far more popular especially at this price point.

[NESW20]

in my area, premium is only 20 center more per gallon than regular. it should be fairly easy to expect 30+ mpg on the highway, so running premium is no problem. i could just about run 100 octane at $8/gallon and come out ahead compared to DDing my truck, ha.