|
The Third Man posted:That's not a very fair criticism considering any offering from Rolls Royce or Bentley, which I believe this car is meant to compete with, will have similarly low power-to-weight figures. It's only 20hp or so less than a Rolls-Royce Phantom and probably lighter, so I'm guessing the performance will be 'adequate' 
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2011 10:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
so this is what the FT-86 is supposedly going to look like. The white one is the "Modelista" version while the red shows 2 differing body styles that are presumably optional. still no word on the Subaru version. Personally I think the white looks the best. (from http://www.ft86club.com/)   
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 15:42
|
|
|
One thing that should be kept in mind is that those are advertisements for custom parts. If those pictures are genuine (and they seem to be) then it's still likely to look different from the stock car.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 16:25
|
|
|
I wish the spec sheet page leaked along with those car shots. I think the stock body looks pretty handsome (minus the tail lights), and all the glowing reviews of the car have me more and more excited for it to come out. http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Search-Results/First-drives/Toyota-FT-86-coupe-2012-CAR-review-/ quote:What's the 2012 Toyota FT-86 like to drive? http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/Toyota-FT-86-first-drive/259779/ quote:First impressions: it feels light and compact, a bit like an MX-5. The driving position is low, straight and snug, with grippy front seats (and not a lot of room in the back).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 18:08
|
|
|
Mr. Pither posted:One thing that should be kept in mind is that those are advertisements for custom parts. If those pictures are genuine (and they seem to be) then it's still likely to look different from the stock car. Modellista is a tuning house. But maybe some of the stuff will be co-opted as Scion accessories. Like those vents 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 18:16
|
|
|
I've already started saving for one Though I don't know which version I'd get. I heard the Subie is supposed to pack more HP, but it's all conjecture until November 30th. Whichever one is cheapest, base model here I come!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 18:20
|
|
|
Looks nice. I wonder how well this will do against the Genesis coupe though. The styling is pretty close but the Genesis probably has more power, especially with its V6. I guess it will probably depend how they price this thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
I love that the info on the FT-86 was posted on page 86. I think the FRS concept looked hotter but this will do. If the Lancia doesn't bankrupt me this could be my next car.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
quote:Doesn’t sound much like a flat-four though – perhaps this is intentional, as the flat-four sound is such a Subaru trademark. for the FT86, vs quote:No doubt because of the direct injection, the flat-four revs far more lustily than any non-turbo Subaru, but the sound - basically that of an Evinrude outboard chasing a smallmouth bass - is typical for a Subaru flattie. for the BRZ. I hope the Subaru version really does sound like a mean flattie, and anything that makes the Toyota version less Subaru-ish is cool by me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2011 23:19
|
|
|
Isn't the boxer rumble due to unequal length headers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 00:55
|
|
|
Why are they putting prius tires on the test mules? That better not make it to production, unless they want it to be drift city.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 03:52
|
|
|
beatdown posted:Why are they putting prius tires on the test mules? That better not make it to production, unless they want it to be drift city. They were obviously talking about dimensions, and thus price, which apparently is a big deal to the mythical boy racer demographic they're chasing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 06:09
|
|
|
Thats one thing I dont get. Boyracers dont buy new cars. they buy older japanese cars that have a strong aftermarket and community for cheaper power, because they usually dont have money to buy a brand new car, and then half rear end everything as they go along modifying. its especially funny how many people are posting on that Ft86 forum asking about stud pattern and wheel fitment as if a cars worth hinges entirely on how great it can look while hard parked in their driveway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 06:19
|
|
|
Laserface posted:its especially funny how many people are posting on that Ft86 forum asking about stud pattern and wheel fitment as if a cars worth hinges entirely on how great it can look while hard parked in their driveway. A lot of people think this way 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 06:21
|
|
|
Laserface posted:its especially funny how many people are posting on that Ft86 forum asking about stud pattern and wheel fitment as if a cars worth hinges entirely on how great it can look while hard parked in their driveway. It's a lot easier to buy aftermarket wheels when you don't run an oddball bolt pattern like 110x5. But then again would anybody expect a joint from Subaru / Toyota to run anything OTHER than 5x100? Both companies usually stick to 5x100 or 5x114.3. Edit: But yeah I'm sure it's just a bunch of guys wanting to play dress up with their cars to park them hard at the Sam's Club parking lot for the late night meetups and hot import nights (do they still have those?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 07:02
|
|
|
kimcicle posted:It's a lot easier to buy aftermarket wheels when you don't run an oddball bolt pattern like 110x5. Yes, they still do, and Im 90% sure that subaru has moved to 5x114.3 as of the last 2 STi versions, and toyota has always used that on their sports cars after the 90s. its not like I dont think it looks good (I have 18x8 and 18x9 on my 180SX) but when buying a car my decision is not based on what wheels will fit and how much stretch i will need. For whatever reason 'fit the car around the wheels' has become the mantra of the import community. I run the fattest tires I can on mine (235/40/18 and 255/35/18) because what is the loving point of a 9" wide wheel if youre putting a 7" wide tire on it? /derail theres been a leak of the interior too (photos rather than scan) which is still camo'd but has some CF inserts, stereo with aux/mp3, digital and needle speedo, and push button start (also has a blank where the ignition barrel could go, so may be a factory option?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 07:13
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:They were obviously talking about dimensions, and thus price, which apparently is a big deal to the mythical boy racer demographic they're chasing. I think this is more about the midlife-crisis-on-a-budget demographic, aka Z/Genesis Coupe/Camaro territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 07:24
|
|
|
Autism Monday posted:I think this is more about the midlife-crisis-on-a-budget demographic, aka Z/Genesis Coupe/Camaro territory. The Camaro has its obvious market. The turbo GC is probably the only car that's a natural cross-shop, and will be markedly cheaper. I find it hard to believe that Toyota is really committing to a car whose major selling point is handling and driving fun. This is nuts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 07:35
|
|
|
Laserface posted:
Are you referring to this one? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 08:06
|
|
|
I've been following the progress of the FT-86 for what seems like years now, and I'm extremely excited about it. I love that Toyota of all companies has joined with Subaru, one of my favorite auto manufacturers, to create a car that is unique, sporty, and absolutely has a place in the current market. I am very seriously thinking about getting one, and I've been a fan of the AE86 Corolla for a decade at least, even adding to my excitement. And then I think, but why? What does the FT-86 twins (triplets?) do that the S2000 doesn't? Other than being new with a nice shiny warranty and back seats, that is. I guess it's hard comparing a new car that hasn't come out yet to one that has been out of production for two years, but I think the S2k is a better comparison than the Mustang or Genesis Coupe even though it is a convertible, largely due to weight, aspiration, engine size, coming from the "other" huge Japanese automaker, etc. The S2000 weighs 2,835lbs, so yeah, it might have a couple hundred pounds on the FT if they can really keep it near 2,400lbs, but if you are really concerned about weight I guess you could rip out the convertible hardware and motors and get a lightweight top to help. But you already have one of the best (and most powerful) NA 4 cylinder engines ever made with ~40 more horsepower out of the box, mated to a 6 speed transmission in a RWD car with 50:50 distribution, capable of 700+ whp on a stock block, and with 10 years of production spent hammering out the bugs. And the best part is they can be had for what amounts to 15,000+ dollars cheaper than the supposed $28k price of the FT. I guess it can come down to the 2+2, but who honestly is going to be buying an FT-86 to haul around 4 people? I think the value in the new 86 cars is that a company that spent the last 15 years trying to crush their sporty models in favor of bland crossovers and beige sedans has put in the R&D and taken a chance to bring a true lightweight RWD car back to the market. Even though it seems Subaru might have done all the heavy lifting. But I think if I really wanted a RWD high revving 4 banger, I'd save the money and be one step ahead with the S2000.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 09:42
|
|
|
One thing you may be forgetting about the 2+2 arrangement its that in some markets, a 2-seater is far more expensive to insure than a 4-seater, even if the +2 is a token padded shelf.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 10:13
|
|
|
Don't forget the RX-8, although I think its days are numbered. It's a nice Japanese RWD coupe with decent power and excellent handling. It definitely seems like a competitor to the FT-86.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 10:16
|
|
|
Billy Zane posted:Are you referring to this one? Thats the one. BoostCreep posted:S2000 Nothing Honda has done has ever made me go 'hey, I could drive that' but then again almost all their cars are front wheel drive, sub 2.0L and Naturally aspirated. The only car I will own that has powered front wheels will also have to have powered rear wheels. FWD is just not fun to me at all. In the case of the S2K, I dont like convertibles. I am not a big fan of the looks either. Cakefool posted:One thing you may be forgetting about the 2+2 arrangement its that in some markets, a 2-seater is far more expensive to insure than a 4-seater, even if the +2 is a token padded shelf. I always thought it was 2 doors + 4 seats = higher insurance (maybe because in the case of emergency exit, its harder for people to get out of the rear?) . I mean, 2 seaters probably get hit just because there isnt a whole lot of 2 seater cars that arent dedicated sports cars.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 10:30
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:One thing you may be forgetting about the 2+2 arrangement its that in some markets, a 2-seater is far more expensive to insure than a 4-seater, even if the +2 is a token padded shelf. Totally true. However, I think the savings in buying a gently used S2k over a brand new FT-86 to the tune of $10,000 or so would help offset that expense. mod sassinator posted:Don't forget the RX-8, although I think its days are numbered. Completely forgot the RX-8, thanks. I haven't done any research on used prices, but I am sure it's pretty close to the S2k as well. Also I think its days are already up? http://www.autoweek.com/article/20110822/CARNEWS/110829973 Laserface posted:In the case of the S2K, I dont like convertibles. I am not a big fan of the looks either. Looks are certainly subjective, but the OEM hard top is actually quite nice to get around the convertible part. You don't HAVE to take it off.  I've also never been a huge fan of Hondas over the years, but I did own an S2000 for a little while, and after having two Evos ('03 and '06), an '09 STI, Legacy GT Spec.B, S14 240sx, and numerous other cars, the S2000 is the one I really miss the most. The way it screamed up to 8000rpm and would happily cruise along at 6k rpm just gave it so much character. I bet if you drove one it might change your mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 10:48
|
|
|
It's rear end ugly with the hard top though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 10:53
|
|
|
My head sticks out above the windshield of a s2k. Maybe not on a BRZ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 12:00
|
|
|
Oh how I wish the FT-86/BRZ could be sold at a reasonable price here. Instead, it's probably going to cost a million billion bucks. If they even decide to bring it here I just want a reasonably-sized, reasonably-priced RWD 4-seater with a fun little revvy engine. Is that really too much to ask for?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 13:19
|
|
|
Laserface posted:I always thought it was 2 doors + 4 seats = higher insurance (maybe because in the case of emergency exit, its harder for people to get out of the rear?) . I mean, 2 seaters probably get hit just because there isnt a whole lot of 2 seater cars that arent dedicated sports cars. Nah, 2-seater = high risk sportscar, thats pretty much it. People who buy 2 seaters are a high risk as a rule, so the cars become high risk by association. This is also why so many cars have the stupid +2 shelf when they shouldn't have bothered.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 13:47
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Oh how I wish the FT-86/BRZ could be sold at a reasonable price here. Instead, it's probably going to cost a million billion bucks. If they even decide to bring it here where are you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
Laserface posted:where are you? Denmark. The cheapest 1.8 Miata is ~$70K.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 14:59
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Denmark. The cheapest 1.8 Miata is ~$70K. You mean the cheapest MX5  .
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 15:01
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Denmark. The cheapest 1.8 Miata is ~$70K. hahaha what. and i thought australia was bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 15:04
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:One thing you may be forgetting about the 2+2 arrangement its that in some markets, a 2-seater is far more expensive to insure than a 4-seater, even if the +2 is a token padded shelf. The FT-86 isn't going to be driven by soccer dads, it's going to be driven, in large part, by aggressive drivers through a wide range of demographics. If it lives up to the hype, it's going to be relatively costly to insure, no matter if it has 2 seats or 4. KozmoNaut posted:Denmark. The cheapest 1.8 Miata is ~$70K.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 15:11
|
|
|
BoostCreep posted:And then I think, but why? What does the FT-86 twins (triplets?) do that the S2000 doesn't? Other than being new with a nice shiny warranty and back seats, that is. There's your answer. You like the S2k and RX-8. Those aren't being made any more. We should be glad any company is willing to take a shot at a car that can even compare to those. Frankly, I don't think the market is there for a car like that anymore, which is evidenced by the S2k and RX-8 departing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 15:23
|
|
|
Autism Monday posted:I think this is more about the midlife-crisis-on-a-budget demographic, aka Z/Genesis Coupe/Camaro territory. I was thinking more quarter-life-crisis-on-a-budget demographic. Edit: I was under the impression that this car will be able to seat normal sized people as opposed to the miata where you have to be a tiny midget baby just to see out of the windshield. I think the FR-S is going to have space in the back for objects bigget than a shoebox, that's the appeal. A fun to drive car that you can actually do other things with besides go fast. Rabble fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Oct 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 16:59
|
|
|
grover posted:Ouch! That's almost singapore-bad. Any way you could buy it in another country and drive it home without the massive mark-up? Well, sure. But it won't have any plates on it and you won't be able to drive it on public roads It's not the car as such that's ridiculously expensive, it's the registration. The car by itself is around $23K, the rest is taxes and registration fees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
BoostCreep posted:The S2000 weighs 2,835lbs, so yeah, it might have a couple hundred pounds on the FT if they can really keep it near 2,400lbs, but if you are really concerned about weight I guess you could rip out the convertible hardware and motors and get a lightweight top to help. But you already have one of the best (and most powerful) NA 4 cylinder engines ever made with ~40 more horsepower out of the box, mated to a 6 speed transmission in a RWD car with 50:50 distribution, capable of 700+ whp on a stock block, and with 10 years of production spent hammering out the bugs. And the best part is they can be had for what amounts to 15,000+ dollars cheaper than the supposed $28k price of the FT. I guess it can come down to the 2+2, but who honestly is going to be buying an FT-86 to haul around 4 people? The S2k retailed for almost $10k more new than the FT. I know it was designed 10 years ago and it's a convertible, but somehow I doubt that, even as a coupe, Toyota of all people will have somehow dropped weight on a slightly larger car with a similarly sized engine. I think the chances of the FT weighing significantly less than the S2k are quite slim. I mean look at this commparison: quote:FT86: Also, according to some random dude on the internet, the FT is much smaller than the Genesis Coupe, and comparing the two on anything other than price is difficult: 
OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Oct 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Also, according to some random dude on the internet, the FT is much smaller than the Genesis Coupe, and comparing the two on anything other than price is difficult: Depends on who GC buyers are. It's the cheapest (and not by much) advertised RWD sports coupe. Maybe they don't care about the size. Maybe they'd much rather have superb handling. Somehow I doubt the last point, especially since the GC isn't a bad drive itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
just FYI coupes tend to be lighter than convertibles, although less advantage vs ground-up designs like the S2000. depends on HSS content and stuff like that too, there have been a lot of materials advances since the S2000 came out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2011 02:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Cakefool posted:Nah, 2-seater = high risk sportscar, thats pretty much it. People who buy 2 seaters are a high risk as a rule, so the cars become high risk by association. This is also why so many cars have the stupid +2 shelf when they shouldn't have bothered. Finally. some sort of explanation for those loving seats. I still have almost no explanation for the people who actually expect you to sit in them. 'Let's take my car. It four seats - you can fold up in the back.' *has a Peugeot 308 Convertible* 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2011 03:27
|
|
