[Joe240]

Originally Posted by FlexGT85

Oh wow! News to me. No wonder I saw OG M2 on somebody's sig... I was wondering what that meant. I just assumed the base M2 would get a souped up B58 for 2020-21 and the M2 CS would get the S58. So are they keeping the S55 for M2 CS duty indefinitely?

beats me. If I had to guess, they will eventually do the B58 with MPPK for the next gen base, and then do the S55 for the M2C with the extra 10hp that the m3 and m4 have currently. This way it keeps separation from the m3 and m4 sales and they get to make a little more money off of the S55 engine. The next gen m3 and m4 are supposed to be getting the S58 that the x3m and x4m have. If I had to guess, it'll have the same or slightly bumped HP numbers though.

[supra93]

[GoneIn4Secs]

Originally Posted by FlexGT85

Love this! I want an M2 next, but this is really making me reconsider. What's surprising to me though is that they did the comparison vs. the M2 CS and not the regular M2. Why is that?

M2 has 4 useable seats, yes they are all useable by adults

[pikkagtr]

Originally Posted by GoneIn4Secs

M2 has 4 useable seats, yes they are all useable by adults

What size adults we talking about
I'm 5-9 165 and will fit behind myself but my 6-3 210 buddy will not

[OkieSnuffBox]

I'm really hoping I can justify buying a new Zupra next fall.

[supra93]

[M Coupe]

I was able to understand him!

[supra93]

https://www.topgear.com/car-news/rev...upra-vs-bmw-z4

In the first of four tests, we pit Toyota's new coupe against its Z4 sibling

Ne’er before have two cars been mentioned in the same breath more often. Supra and Z4, or ‘Zupra’ if you ask the wittier corners of the Top Gear office. We all know the story by now: Toyota wanted to revive the Supra badge but needed a partner to make it financially viable. BMW had the straight-six engine Toyota needed, wanted to keep their Z4 alive, and fancied saving a few quid themselves. So Toyota and BMW butted heads for a bit, defined the chassis, engine, gearbox and electronics that BMW were putting on the table, stuffed them in a couple of wheely bags and parted ways to go and meet their separate briefs. Bit like an automotive Ready, Steady, Cook.

But here’s the thing. This might seem like the most obvious twin test in the world – who built a better sports car from the same box of bits, Toyota or BMW? - but meaningful head to heads are supposed to compare two cars that overlap in terms of price, power and function, in the hope it offers buyers in that nook of the market some assistance. But I can’t see anyone cross-shopping between a Supra and a Z4, because despite being grown from the same seedlings, the differences are deeper than one has a roof, the other doesn’t – they’re philosophically polar opposite. This comparison then is more out of curiosity, than necessity.

Toyota could have called this car a Celica, but it didn’t, it’s a Supra, and that carries a weight of expectation that it’s built by driving enthusiasts, for driving enthusiasts. People that buy a Supra want everyone to know they know their cars, and how they accelerate, handle and sound matters. The Z4 on the other hand carries no such baggage – quite bizzarely really given it’s a sports car from a company obsessed with the art of driving fast. The Z4 is a device for looking flash, travelling swiftly and with just enough handling chops to make the most of a good road should one present itself.

Let’s start with the powertrains – because despite Toyota claiming this 335bhp 3.0-litre turbo straight-six has been tuned to their specifications it feels identical to the Z4. Smooth, cultured, brimming with muscle, but out of puff beyond 6,000rpm. It’s a superb engine by any measure and knocks most four-cylinders for six, but has the same character in both cars. Same goes for the gearbox – it’s smooth enough, but very… like the BMW’s. I would like to have seen a manual offered in the Toyota if I’m honest, it’s the one historical Supra touchpoint left unchecked.

The Z4’s design doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t move me… but the Supra does

Strangely then, the powertrain isn’t the Supra’s main event, it’s the styling. Makes sense I suppose, the one bit Toyota had total control over they went berserk with. Parked next to each other the BMW has a more middle of the road appeal, which is a nice way of saying it has a face only a mother could love, while the Supra with its angry expression and muscled rear is unashamedly in your face. Perhaps it’s the hint of 2000GT - Japan’s first proper supercar - in the long bonnet, or whispers of the last-gen A80 Supra in the front and rear, or the utter madness of that multi-layered rear end, but for some reason the Z4’s design doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t move me… but the Supra does.

The Supra’s interior cleaves opinion down the middle. Half are grateful that the glut of BMW hardware on show means better quality than any other Toyota on sale, the other half physically wounded that Toyota didn’t take the time or money to disguise it more carefully. I’m more interested to discover that not only has BMW given Toyota swathes of switches and screens… it appears to have given them the old ones they had lying around. The Z4’s interior feels a generation on. Sneaky. On closer inspection they are running the same screen, knobs and dials, but BMW has taken the time to dress them up in more brushed aluminium and several acres of knurling – visual confirmation of where BMW thinks its customer’s priorities lie.

In terms of the handling, the Supra’s just so sure-footed, broad-shouldered, stable on the road… and plenty of other clichés if I can think of them. Basically a really good balance between refinement and accuracy - yes, it’s happy doing third-gear drifts on a track, but really this an excellent road car at heart. It’s realistically rapid. The steering isn’t loaded with feel like an Alpine, but it’s precise enough and the body shell is actually stiffer than the LFA, so Toyota isn’t messing about here. It’s not the most agile or exciting car in a class that contains greats like the Cayman and Alpine, but it’s an accomplished all-rounder nonetheless.

What’s fascinating is how BMW can take the same building blocks and produce something so devoid of fun. When God was handing out sense of humours, the Z4 slept through its alarm. It’s a softer set-up, so it glides over bumps where the Supra shimmies, but besides having a generous amount of power under your right foot, there’s no one component that grabs you by the scruff and asks you to do anything other than sit back and cruise. And for a sportscar wearing a BMW badge, that’s a crying shame. I’ll pay the extra few grand and take a Supra, thanks.

[SakhirM4]

Originally Posted by supra93

https://www.topgear.com/car-news/rev...upra-vs-bmw-z4

"The Z4’s design doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t move me… but the Supra does"

The author should have made this the title and we could have then skipped a comparison test where the conclusion was drawn before the test.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

"The Z4’s design doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t move me… but the Supra does"

The author should have made this the title and we could have then skipped a comparison test where the conclusion was drawn before the test.

Style is largely what sells cars. The Z4 is a boring, generic design that without the buck teeth, could be anything. The Zupra is certainly unique, and likely to get a lot more attention. Seems like fair criticism to me.

[SakhirM4]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Style is largely what sells cars. The Z4 is a boring, generic design that without the buck teeth, could be anything. The Zupra is certainly unique, and likely to get a lot more attention. Seems like fair criticism to me.

That's your opinion and you are very welcome to it. But it also misses the point of my post.

[Joe240]

Being G29 z4 owner, I think this review is highly biased. Not to mention that they contradicted themsleves within the same article.

"despite Toyota claiming this 335bhp 3.0-litre turbo straight-six has been tuned to their specifications it feels identical to the Z4"

Just to go on to say:

"BMW can take the same building blocks and produce something so devoid of fun."

Maybe it's the fact he's driving a EU model with the same output, but I think there's quite a lot of bias here.

I get it, the Supra is a great car at a fraction of the Z4's cost. They were designed for different segments entirely and as such SHOULD perform differently. However, if put into sport or sport+, the z4 is every bit as bumpy as the supra (specially with the 19s that are standard here in the US).

Going back to the targeted market segments, the exterior designs were chosen for their respective segments. A $50k JDM street tuner will have matchbox styling because it's what the younger demographic is attracted to. A $70k lux driver will have midlife crisis styling that screams "I can still be cool!" because very few people under the age of 35 will be able to afford the Z4, so why target that market? Yes, style sells cars because it creates lust. What people forget is that styling can always be changed in the aftermarket which is what Tetsuya Tada even said during an interview. What keeps people coming back for more is the driving dynamics which the cars have in common.

As I mentioned before, the supra is a fantastic car for the money. But I think that if actually compared on a track instead of this biased side by side review, people would realize how similar the cars are. If any of you actually end up buying the Supra, live in the South East and would like to do a side by side comparison on a track, let me know and I will be happy to meet and even swap cars on the track. I'm geniunely interested to see how the Supra drives.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

That's your opinion and you are very welcome to it. But it also misses the point of my post.

So reviews should not have opinions? Are you a big fan of Consumer Reports? I'm not following your intent here.

[WestRace]

I may be in the minority but I think the Z4 looks much better - classy but understated. That rear end shot looks kind of cute ... something I might do :-). The Supra looks a bit too wild for its own good. Well actually it looks like a proper Japanese sport car. I guess they couldn't help it over there.

[SakhirM4]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

So reviews should not have opinions? Are you a big fan of Consumer Reports? I'm not following your intent here.

My opinion and the intent of my comment was that the writer was very biased at the outset and that it determined the outcome of his comparison.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

My opinion and the intent of my comment was that the writer was very biased at the outset and that if determined the outcome of his comparison.

Fair enough. I also read enough to make me think he considered the dynamics and the perils of soft bushings and lazy standard settings. Having happily sold our F30, that sort of thing sounded all too familiar and I hope the Zupra has shed some of BMW's recent softness, which at least this one review seems to support.

I tend to tune out stylistic opinions in articles as I tend to prefer cars that others find ugly. I don't really care if others like it. Although I do like reading about fake vents and non effective aero bits, as it's sometimes hard to tell from photos.

[supra93]

For those that bother to click one the link, both cars do have EU plates.

[Joe240]

Originally Posted by supra93

For those that bother to click one the link, both cars do have EU plates.

Precisely. Coming from an xDrive m240i with the same power number as the Supra, to this Z4 with 50 extra horses, I can tell the difference. Not to mention my 2er definitely wasn’t stock. The Z4 in US spec guise has plenty of personality from my experience. It’s mostly the urge to step out the back when floored, but it’s definitely there and handles corners quite well compared to the xDrive 2er.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

In NY: Personalized plate ZUPRA is spoken for, but ZUPR4 is still available. 😁

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

"The Z4’s design doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t move me… but the Supra does"

The author should have made this the title and we could have then skipped a comparison test where the conclusion was drawn before the test.

Why does his opinion on the exterior styling discredit the rest of the comparo. Have you not read other comparisons where an author like one styling vs the other?

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

My opinion and the intent of my comment was that the writer was very biased at the outset and that it determined the outcome of his comparison.

So him disliking the Z4 styling made him think the Supra was more stable and sure footed on the road, while the Z4 felt soft? Not following the logic here.

[supra93]

https://www.topgear.com/car-news/rev...porsche-cayman

Part 2 of 4 sees Supra take on one of the very best

Something unusual happened on the launch of the Toyota Supra in Spain a few weeks back. Tetsuya Tada, the Supra’s chief engineer, openly expressed his admiration for Porsche. This doesn’t happen. Representatives from one company scrupulously avoid talking about another’s product, let alone praise it. Yet here was Tada-san saying he admired Porsche’s attention to detail, citing an instance where he knows they made a minute adjustment to the brake software, and openly saying he was disappointed Porsche had moved away from the flat six to the turbo four, but that the Cayman was still the only rival that mattered, the car they had benchmarked.

He was pricking the balloon. Until he mentioned it, the Cayman was the tensioned elephant in the room. Of course it was. The Cayman is the default answer to every “I want a proper sports car” question (at least it was until they threw out the flat six and replaced it with a turbo four). Did he believe, I asked him, that he had built a better sports car than the Cayman? The usual pragmatic answers: it’s nice to be considered alongside it, it’s a shame they’ve lost the six cylinder, we have done our best. But behind it, a quiet confidence.

Now we find out if it was misplaced. Here we have the top Cayman, the GTS. It’s not the most direct rival – that’ll be the £53,030, 345bhp Cayman S – instead this is the ultimate: £59,866, 360bhp version, complete with an alphabeti-spaghetti of acronyms: PASM adaptive dampers, PTV torque vectoring, DFI, VTG, PSM (not the same as PASM), PCM, PVTS Plus. You get the picture. All the letters have been thrown at the GTS, plus 10mm lower springs, dynamic transmission mounts, a driving mode dial and Sport Chrono with launch control. You’d imagine that would be it for options. But no, as tested this is a £76,000 car. Ouch.

The £54,000 Supra Pro’s paint costs £620. That’s it. No other options, but it gets heated and cooled seats, rear camera, wireless charging and a kick-arse JBL sound system. It’s not lacking for stuff. It gives away power to the Cayman, but fights back with vastly more torque – 369lb ft plays 310. But then it has an extra 120kg to get moving compared to the 1,375kg Porsche.

Enough stats – they tell so little of this story. We’re at Llandow, a small track in South Wales. I doubt very much whether the average Supra owner will ever take their car on track, but they should because the Supra likes tracks. The rear end is well supported, so it doesn’t sag, squat or squirm when you’re hard on the power out of tight corners. And the rear works harmoniously with the precise, confidence-inspiring front. It’s not the last word in steering feel, but you know where you are with it because the chassis communicates. It’s biddable, rarely understeers, readily oversteers, but after a few laps the brakes start to go and you realise the gearbox and engine aren’t the sharpest. It’s what you might call an ‘old-school entertainer’, i.e. you sit a long way back, closer physically and mechanically to the rear axle than the front, in a car that likes it best when it’s pitched into a corner then driven through on the throttle.

The Porsche is mid-engined. You knew that already but it’s worth repeating, because the car’s whole pivot point and balance is different. Pitch this one in hard and you’ll be lucky not to spin. There’s less roll, you seem to sit lower, closer to the nose of the car which enhances the sensations and immediacy, and the Cayman is more adjustable through a long corner. There’s a bit more to the experience, you have to dig a bit deeper, spend a bit longer with it. Want accessible fun and a yee-ha powerslide? Have the Supra. Want a car that takes more unearthing, a comet with a longer tail? That’s the Porsche.

We head into the hills after Llandow and I’m in the Porsche. Chiefly because on my 120 mile drive to the circuit that morning, the Supra’s refinement and comfort had impressed me and I want to see how the Cayman compares. There’s more road noise – a surprising amount of intrusion in fact – but the suspension is compliant, the steering undistracted. Yes, the manual gearbox keeps you busier, but after no more than a few minutes it becomes part of the routine, as simple to integrate into the driving as a glance in the mirror, and far more satisfying.

I’m sorry, but I still can’t forgive Porsche this four cylinder

What I love about the Cayman is just using it. There’s an oily precision to every control, where everything operates so harmoniously that you’re not sure where gearbox ends and clutch begins, where suspension ends and steering begins. This sense of oneness, of mechanical completeness, sets the Cayman apart. It’s tactile and engaging at any speed, and on the busy valley roads south of the Brecon Beacons it’s a content companion.

But then we climb and the engines are put to work and, I’m sorry, but I still can’t forgive Porsche this four cylinder. It sounds thrummy and coarse, a square peg to the Cayman’s round hole mechanical make-up. I switch back to the Supra. It plays a hearty, lusty tune. Better definitely, but I still have issues with it because that noise, right at the heart of the car, is pure BMW. And it sounds wrong somehow.

As with the Cayman I try to ignore it, even though it plays a much richer tune. Will it bother owners? Only if they a) currently drive a six cylinder BMW or b) have intimate knowledge of the old Supra’s 2JZ engine. The floating voter, the buyer who just wants a good, swift coupe and doesn’t care about the background, is going to enjoy the Supra. Are there many of them out there, though? The early adopters want this car because of its heritage. But by sharing the project with BMW and using so many BMW parts, Toyota has comprehensively undermined that.

Once again, it’s a smooth car to operate. It’s best in Sport mode which sharpens the throttle for pulling away, and with torque peaking at only 1,600rpm, it’s effortlessly rapid. The Cayman has to work harder for its speed – not that it’s any slower. I timed both to 100mph in 9.6secs, the Toyota quicker off the mark (0.4secs faster to 60mph at 4.0secs), the Porsche quicker north of that. Both fast cars with more than enough speed to whip past slower traffic. Not much to separate them on economy, either. We got 27.4mpg from the Cayman, with the Supra recording 26.8mpg.

If the Supra had a Toyota interior we’d be giving it a shoeing. Instead it’s easy to get on with and nicely made from quality materials. An interior that’s commensurate with its cost. It’s a more practical car than the Cayman too – one big, hatchback-accessed boot instead of a smaller one at either end.

There are no jarring edges to the Supra experience – Toyota has rounded them off. It does very little wrong indeed: it’s better to drive than the Z4 on which it’s based, it’s fast, punchy and if you like the long bonnet, short tail layout - so the nose swivels in to corners a long way ahead and you’re following behind, sat atop the rear axle like a charioteer - you’ll love the Supra. It’s good-looking, it chomps through distance happily, you know it won’t miss a beat and I reckon it’ll be even easier than the Porsche to live with.

As a daily sports car that makes it pretty compelling. I wouldn’t have a go at you at all, if, having weighed them up, you came down Supra-side. But we really care about driving, don’t we? Not just handling, but mechanical interaction, and it’s that nuance and depth, the long-term satisfaction of owning such a beautifully honed car, the engineering expertise (excuse the engine) that shines through every time you start moving in it, that gives the Cayman the edge.

[alex2364]

The problem with Cayman GTS vs Supra is that a similar spec Cayman GTS will be $100k compared to loaded $55k Supra. I could buy almost 2 Supras for 1 Cayman GTS.