Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Toyota's 86 sports-car (discuss)

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by hornet, Jul 10, 2012.

  1. So this device brings back to the table what us old geezers miss, rear-wheel-drive, but adds chaff-cutter sound with a Subaru flat engine. Why couldn't Toyota, one of the world's biggest companies, have built their own high-performance normally-aspirated engine, like the Honda S2000?

    {Disclaimer; this is just discussion; I couldn't afford a down payment on car's ashtray :LOL:}



    http://www.toyota.com.au/86
     
     Top
  2. Yeh I don't get it! I've seen a couple in the city driving around they look pretty cheap and nasty
     
     Top
  3. #3 dweezle, Jul 10, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 24, 2015
    The whole point of this car is finally a return to the affordable rear wheel drive sports car that only Mazda has hung onto.

    This car is $33k drive away.

    The s2000 f20 engine, while being awesome, made the car cost $70k.

    Slightly different markets here.

    I am just sooo happy that the other makers seem to be taking notice and we should see a few more affordable, great handling, rev happy, rear drive sports Cars!!


    ToyotaGT86_12.


    2
     
     Top
  4. The commercial on tv certainly makes you want it. Haven't seen one in the flesh though.
     
     Top
  5. its a long drawn bow back to the AE86 of the mid 80's.

    Unsure what RRP was on the 'sprinter' back then, but i doubt this new car will inspire a manga cartoon series and the ensuing popularity it has maintained for near 30 years now...
     
     Top
  6. This car is part of my grand motorcycling plan.

    step 1 -- buy a commuter/leaner bike (complete)
    step 2 -- sell the commodore wagon (complete)
    step 3 -- discover life is inconvenient with only one car and two kids (pending)
    step 4 -- buy cheap sports car second hand (expected completion 2020)

    I was thinking about an AE86 when I got the wagon in 2004 -- they were $10K for anything registered and a lot more for ones with work done (like oil being changed, or tread on the tires).

    The MX5 has had this class to itself and is gutless. I think the FT86 has 195HP while the MX5 has only ~130. They are both under the LAMS limits of 150 kw/T ;)
     
     Top
  7. How much was the rear wheel drive sr20 turbo 6 speed Nissan S15 when it came out ?
     
     Top
  8. The subaru motor is an interesting choice for sure, but a clean sheet motor would blow the budget. Does toyota even have a performance 1.6-2 l motor in its line up any more to swap in? Packaging wise, does anyone other than subaru have a 2l motor and gearbox that can easily be mounted north-south?
     
     Top
  9. I 'get it', having owned the first Toyota MR2; 120hp and 995kg (later ~180hp and 1040kg and a hojillion torques, thanks to a supercharger and huge boost pulley). Not the fastest car in the world, but it's so involving that you can't help but have a great time when going around corners.

    On paper the 86 is unremarkable. I think it's more the intent which excites me:
    The boxer engine was used to push the C/G way way way down. Allegedly it's the third lowest on the market today, behind the Ferrari 360 and the Lexus LFA. Toyota added direct injection and other tech to the boxer engine to improve its economy and response, as boxers historically haven't been great for specific power output or efficiency.

    Lowest hip height in a Toyota since forever.

    Nearly 50/50 weight distribution.

    Naturally aspirated for super-sharp throttle response, rather than a laggy turbo or a less-laggy-but-still-not-sharp supercharger.

    Torsen LSD is standard fitment.

    RWD instead of AWD because RWD is a hell of a lot more fun than AWD.

    What's got me intrigued is that single-minded focus on making it a visceral driving toy. On the OEM tyres its lateral grip is so-so (0.86g or so?), its acceleration is so-so (~7 to 7.5 seconds to 100kph), etc. But it's 1228kg which means the power-to-weight ratio is actually not too shabby, and it's single-mindedly made to be FUN: Low weight, low centre of gravity, sharp throttle response and "enough" power in a RWD platform. And cheap.

    I test drive one this weekend. Curious to see how it compares to the visceral fun of my MR2. Its logical competitor would likely be the MX5, which is another low-weight, low-power fun sportscar. The MX5 has no roof; the 86 has a boot and is a lot cheaper.
     
     Top
  10. Toyota could have built a new engine but I think they were concerned that they doesn't have a recent pedigree for building sports (road) engines - at least not ones that have garnered a cult following.

    Toyota have gone to great lengths to justify (invent) a genetic inheritance from the 2000GT and yet that car had it's engine designed and built by Yamaha. Nobody cared back then. Also, Subaru would not have been seen (by the market) to contribute much to the project without the boxer.

    It's a 30K sportcar, with all that entails, and the world is a better place for it.
    Mazda seriously needs to lift it's game - nearly $50K for an MX5 is looking ridiculous.
     
     Top
  11. Amusingly, Yamaha also did the head work for this new Toyobaru boxer engine - Yamaha did the heads for the 4AGE, 3SGE, etc, so there's a long long heritage there. :)

    It's mostly the visuals inherited from the 2000GT, and the cheap-accessible-RWD-fun of principle from the AE86 Corolla GTS.

    My understanding is that much of the chassis development was Subaru rather than Toyota. I imagine Soobie's a bit frustrated by the media's focus on the Toyota-ness of the Toyobaru joint-venture.
     
     Top
  12. Wasn't there a separate subaru version planned? IIRC Subaru stated they were going exclusively AWD across their range a few years ago, so a light RWD sports car doesn't really fit in their lineup.
     
     Top
  13. Subaru is releasing their own version called the "Subaru BRZ", yes. It's available in the USA right now but they're delaying their release here. Aside from some aesthetic changes to interior and exterior the only mechanical change is different spring and dampening rates. I agree that it's an illogical car for them as they've always shouted very loudly that Performance = Turbo + AWD, for every car in their lineup.
     
     Top
  14. They agreed to separate the release dates so as not to trip over each other. Toyota need to generate some sport credentials much more than Subaru, so they get first bite. Expect reviews to praise the Suby for better handling as a payoff.

    Eventually, Subaru will up-spec the BRZ (and increase price), while Toyota holds the low ground, and keeps the top of the market clear for the new Supra.
     
     Top
  15. My boss has one of these on order! She's trading in her suzuki for it and she's paying about $11k for it I think. I'm keen as to go for a ride in it... Looks very very good.
     
     Top
  16. I think it's a great thing to bring to the market, and hope it's a success.
    Oddly, I feel that one of the biggest impediments to people liking it will be it's branding as a sports car - which makes people compare it to things like STis and Supras etc. I really think it starts making a lot more sense if people are comparing it to hatches - you can either have a transport appliance (corolla et al) or something a bit more fun to drive that serves the same purpose. An economical little run about with room for the occasional back seat passenger. In that light, how can it not be fun?

    As a comparison, I've been looking at porsche 944 S2s and 968s for a daily driver. (We have the family 4wd for outings, I have the SV1000S and a roofless little racecar, but need <want> something to drive for work and to pick the kids up occasionally.)

    Compared to the 944 S2, the 86 is
    10mm taller
    40mm wider
    50mm shorter
    80 kilos lighter
    has 11 Hp less (50 less torques though)

    That's a pretty flattering comparison for the 86, compared to what is still one of the best handling and fun to drive sports cars ever built - and an excellent platform for a tarmac rally / club racing vehicle.

    And both cost approximately $30k.

    So, in my search for am affordable, fun to drive 2+2, the best I could find was a 20 YO porsche - until the owner of a 944 S2 suggested I drive an 86. That suggests to me that Toyota have identified a nice niche, and hopefully done a good job of filling it.

    Another aspect to consider is that while people are bagging the 86 for being underpowered, it's 147 kWs are actually two more than the origional WRXs 145 kW.... and in a lighter body. And I seem to remember the WRX going OK. And it is axiomatic that a NA engine is more fun to drive than a turbo.

    Se7en
     
     Top
  17. From what I can tell, it's the car I'd be least-likely to call a ripoff for sale in the country right now. Still more than it should be, but at least it doesn't make me angry to look at the price. The upspecced unit with the satnav and all the goodies would be the way to go.

    If I were going to buy a new car and had $40k to spend on one, that'd probably be the one I'd want*




    *Since VW are dickheads and won't offer a 2door Golf with the powerplant and features I want.
     
     Top
  18. I'd consider 50k for an SS to be similar or better considering the dynamics of their chassis package has been shouted from the rooftops for the last few years.

    Idk about the 86. To me, rev-happy is just another word for gutless at any normal throttle application and a drinking problem at anything above that. I reckon a supercharger would be mandatory to get any power in the lowish to mid rev-range.

    A friend of mind wrote up a review of it.

     
     Top
  19. Little light(ish) cars are not about light to light dragging, they come into their own in the twisties. Where with a close ratio box, there is no reason to be lowish in the rev range at all. Any forced induction just leads to muted throttle response, which is just what you don't want mid corner.

    Going fast uses lots of fuel - no way around it. My NA 1600 uses around 50 litres per 100 kms on track. I don't think there's anyway to avoid it - small but high revving, forced induction, boat anchor. They all burn a lot of fuel to go fast.
    (One of my mates used to joke that when I put twin DCOE 45s on my spider, I'd also installed a little italian who threw buckets of fuel down the intake on each cycle).

    While on bikes we are used to dawdling around corners then gassing it, having a light car and maintaining high speed throught the corners is also a fast way to cover distance.

    Se7en
     
     Top
  20. [-([-([-(
     
     Top