Terrible Resale Value?

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

In my opinion, out of all of Toyota's previous models ever made, the 86 makes the most sense for the ZN6.

What makes the most sense is to call it a Boxer Rear Zenith. The Toyota version doesn't need to be named after a prior model, since it's an all new car that didn't evolve from any Toyota product.

[Jegan_V]

I don't get this animosity between the two either.

Yes there is marketing behind calling our car the 86. Toyota isn't stupid, they want this car to be as successful as it can be and hearkening back to an old but loved name I think was vital for this car's success in Japan. The differences between the two are large, the old car never had a boxer engine, the new car would never be seen with a live rear axle, the parts bin engineering is more explicit in the older car, the new car only comes in one body style with no hatch option, I could go on.

The similarities though can't be forgotten. Both are inexpensive RWD coupes, both favour corners over the drag strip, both were designed to be a everyday sports car, both were designed to allow relatively easy modification, they're both very simple cars for their time, both despite their sporty nature are grounded in sensible car principles thus they're relatively economical to run, etc.

They're not the same, I don't even think Toyota goes that far. There's no question the new car derives a good amount from the old car. Toyota though decided to take this old concept and bring it to the modern day with all the modern engineering behind it that the old car could only dream of.

The only thing that's slightly off is saying the AE86 is based off a Corolla and thus can't be a sports car. If one was using this as a guideline...the new car will fail too because the new car's underpinnings are based off the Impreza. One may argue its heavily modified...but so was the AE86's and frankly most mainstream sports cars. This is all semantics though, the real deal is in the end product. If the AE86 was a Corolla in sporty clothes meaning it was merely a Corolla with a different body, then yeah you can argue against its sports car-ness. As noted it diverged from the main Corolla line since the normal AE8 Corollas went FWD.

Resale is a funny animal. For a long while the AE86 Corollas were treated very much like any Corolla, a heavily depreciating item. It wasn't popular in North America and it likely had a similar story in Japan for the early part of its life. It took racing driver Keiichi Tsuchiya using this as his personal touge car that suddenly people took notice to this unassuming but attainable car. Then comes Initial D after that, basing a story off of this real life event and now the car is a star. Suddenly a lot of unloved AE86s suddenly became desirable, first in Japan and later all over the world.

Its not even just an anime series that can do this. The Delorean DMC-12 is a great example. Here's a car that didn't do well, it was massively flawed even new. The company that made it even shut down. Imagine selling this car in 1984, you lost a ton of money, a car that didn't review well and has no support, how much do you really expect from it? Suddenly a major film that starred this car comes out in 1985 and now this worthless car turns into a object of affection. Such events can't be predicted.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by humfrz

Anyone notice any similarities ...??

COMBO BREAKER!!!

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Jegan_V

The only thing that's slightly off is saying the AE86 is based off a Corolla and thus can't be a sports car. If one was using this as a guideline...the new car will fail too because the new car's underpinnings are based off the Impreza.

False. The BRZ was not based on an Impreza. It was a new design from the ground up.

[fatoni]

there is a lot more in common between the ae86 and the gt86 than there is between cars called celica, or between cars called supra, or between cars called z, or between cars called corvette, or between cars called nsx etc.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

False. The BRZ was not based on an Impreza. It was a new design from the ground up.

The first concept (probably before the 86 platform was even a drawing) was on the Legacy platform. The Impreza wasn't even involved in that early stage much less later. There will be similarities of course because the same people designed them all but as you said that is where it ends. It is all documented for anybody that actually reads the history.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

And so has the BRZ. That is exactly my point.

If both cars have an additional heritage, then you cannot really call them RWD, 2+2, coupes. Your definition is incomplete, that's the whole point.


You can call for example a RWD, 2+2, coupe this one which was a plain conversion from a saloon car:

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

False. The BRZ was not based on an Impreza. It was a new design from the ground up.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

The first concept (probably before the 86 platform was even a drawing) was on the Legacy platform. The Impreza wasn't even involved in that early stage much less later. There will be similarities of course because the same people designed them all but as you said that is where it ends. It is all documented for anybody that actually reads the history.

There was a white and a black car. First one was a Legacy and the second was an Impreza and both were a conversion from AWD to RWD. Then they started working on the details to make the prototypes a proper sports car. Not only from a exterior point of view, but also from an engineering point of view.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

If both cars have an additional heritage, then you cannot really call them RWD, 2+2, coupes. Your definition is incomplete, that's the whole point.


You can call for example a RWD, 2+2, coupe this one which was a plain conversion from a saloon car:

Yep that is a rwd 2+2 coupe as well. Additional heritage (whatever that is even supposed to mean) does not change the fact they are rwd, seat 2 by 2 and are a coupe body style. The terms are a discripter not a class of car.

[Adam_L]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

At risk of opening Pandora's Box I will say for the pure sake of classification the new 86 is not a "sports car" either. Both the AE and the new are 2+2 coupes. The AE 86 body style was totally in line with the "sports cars" of the era the same as the new is inline with today's.

I wouldn't classify things by body style. In the mid-'80s body styles were all over the place. AE86 boxy .... but coming out of the '70's 240z / 280z have their specific type body style , then of course there is the 911 , that body style slightly changes every 5-7 years. The Supra was more on the boxy side in early/mid '80's , but by the MKIII ( 1987?) it got smoother lines, and pop up headlights ( NSX stole that ingredient)

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Adam_L

I wouldn't classify things by body style. In the mid-'80s body styles were all over the place. AE86 boxy .... but coming out of the '70's 240z / 280z have their specific type body style , then of course there is the 911 , that body style slightly changes every 5-7 years. The Supra was more on the boxy side in early/mid '80's , but by the MKIII ( 1987?) it got smoother lines, and pop up headlights ( NSX stole that ingredient)

That really should have been broke out into two total different Statements. I wasn't saying body style made the car but that they are both basicly the same set up. The body style reference was more in the line of the part where it was being said that the lines were not sports carish. There were many boxy shaped sports cars in the 80s. There were also many that looked very sleek. What I I was going for was that a certain body style does not mean sports car. Pretty much what you said really. The DSM line up is a good example of what you are saying. The first gen were pretty squared off and angular (relatively) and as they gained curves they went more from sports car to outright GT. We are on the same page I just wasn't clear.

[Adam_L]

Originally Posted by Adam_L

by the MKIII ( 1987?) it got smoother lines, and pop up headlights ( NSX stole that ingredient)

On the headlight... timeline:
1. AE86, 2. Testarossa , ... then 3. Supra MK!!! , ... then 4. NSX / 300z (similar time)

my bad. Need lights to see in the dark, wise one said.

[Adam_L]

Originally Posted by Mr.Impreza

It's like Porsche 911 for example.
In the new car market, grey, silver, black, and white are the most popular....but that doesn't actually translate down the road into the used car market.

In the used market, the demand is higher for red/yellow examples since there is so few of them so they can charge a premium for them.

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

Just give it time. Clean cars that are popular with modders usually bounce back after 10 years.

10-12 years, that would be the soonest I'd sell my FR. Even then, the buyer best not be into modding ( I can sniff them out). I'll have the mustache (not sure about the other guy).

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

What makes the most sense is to call it a Boxer Rear Zenith. The Toyota version doesn't need to be named after a prior model, since it's an all new car that didn't evolve from any Toyota product.

Hmmm, what about Front-engine, Rear-drive, Sport?

Or, FR-S for short???