FT86 as a 2-seat sports car

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

Then you have the same issue as a miata, can't fit a set of track tires in it.

OK, fine.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

Then you have the same issue as a miata, can't fit a set of track tires in it.

Tow a tire trailer.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

It proves a Miata can yes. Thought I made that part clear.

Nothing is really stopping them from cutting out the jumper seats and sliding the cabin n rear together more. These modular platforms are all about modularity.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Tow a tire trailer.

I was actually going to start doing that with my car but now I am going to tow it.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

BRZ, FR-S, 86, GR86, "right in the name"?

A 2-seat version need not eliminate the 2+2 anyway...

There is more than the US names. And GR is not confirmed as even real yet.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

There is more than the US names. And GR is not confirmed as even real yet.

In any case, irrelevant as far as this thread :P

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

In any case, irrelevant as far as this thread :P

In that case this thread is irrelevant since they are not going to make a two seat version anyway.

They are not going to make a GT and sport car version of the same low volume vehicle.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

In that case this thread is irrelevant since they are not going to make a two seat version anyway.

They are not going to make a GT and sport car version of the same low volume vehicle.

Yeah, this is all hypothetical.

What ZDan and I want is a modern, inexpensive and Japanese version of a TVR coupe—a 2400lb Mini-Viper.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Yeah, this is all hypothetical.

What ZDan and I want is a modern, inexpensive and Japanese version of a TVR coupe—a 2400lb Mini-Viper.

I know. I said this in my opening statement.
My whole (and very simple point) was that it is not as easy as them just cutting out a section and moving parts forward even if modular. They have to still meet standards whether you want or think they don't.
As usual the discussion centers around the hypothetical reasons they could or should do something while ignoring the reasons that couldn't.
There is a reason that all the cars you keep showing are either really old or very expensive.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

In that case this thread is irrelevant since they are not going to make a two seat version anyway.

If thread is irrelevant to ya, what are you even doing here?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

If thread is irrelevant to ya, what are you even doing here?

I am here to present a counterpoint. That is how discussions work.
You were the one that threw irrelevant out.
The thought that it is currently a GT car and what you want is an actual sports car would seem that terminology is indeed relevant.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I know. I said this in my opening statement.
My whole (and very simple point) was that it is not as easy as them just cutting out a section and moving parts forward even if modular. They have to still meet standards whether you want or think they don't.

There's no reason moving the back of the car forward into the space where the back seats were would be particularly difficult to get to meet crash standards. And they have an army of engineers to make sure of it. Yes, it would take some modicum of effort and investment, but nothing extreme. Worth it to meet some very small demand? Maybe not.

As usual the discussion centers around the hypothetical reasons they could or should do something while ignoring the reasons that couldn't.
There is a reason that all the cars you keep showing are either really old or very expensive.

And that reason is not that such a car is *impossible*, or even difficult. It could be done, quite easily. But obviously no automaker thinks it's worth it. One of 'em should give it a go, though, IMO...

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I don't want a convertible, and the RF Miata is not for me either as it doesn't offer any greater utility, and adds weight up high, and $$$. The others are much heavier cars, not interested in a luxury sedan transmogrified into a "sports" car.

Compromises were made, and 2+2 was the chosen layout for broader appeal. I'm glad we have the car as it is. I'd just prefer a smaller, lighter-weight, better-balanced, shorter-wheelbase 2-seat version.

Originally Posted by ZDan

There's no reason moving the back of the car forward into the space where the back seats were would be particularly difficult to get to meet crash standards. And they have an army of engineers to make sure of it. Yes, it would take some modicum of effort and investment, but nothing extreme. Worth it to meet some very small demand? Maybe not.


And that reason is not that such a car is *impossible*, or even difficult. It could be done, quite easily. But obviously no automaker thinks it's worth it. One of 'em should give it a go, though, IMO...

All the arguments you used against the Mita could very well end up applying to the comprimises needed to shorten the 86.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

All the arguments you used against the Mita could very well end up applying to the comprimises needed to shorten the 86.

Shortening the 86 would not lead to convertible top wind noise issues and would still offer greater and more usable cargo space vs. Miata.

Every car is a compromise of course. 2+2 offers more utility for sure. I wouldn't mind giving up some of that for better weight distribution, lighter weight, shorter wheelbase.