[duder13]

Originally Posted by supra93

A little more? I think most base Cayman sell for like $60k+ once you start adding on options. Sure, Zupras currently have mark ups, but that will go away like with all other new cars. Glad you brought up the C8, so is the Cayman even relevant? Not that I'm going to buy one, but at least the base Zupra is priced like $10k under the base C8. I also would not be shocked if Toyota lowered the MSRP for the Zupra next year. There is precedence for this. In 97 Toyota did cut the price of the A80 Supra when GM rolled out the cheaper C5. Idk, time will tell.

Yeah, I guess I don't consider the $10K difference between the Supra and Cayman/C8 to be a huge hurdle, but that is the selling point of the Supra. As far as the Cayman goes, Porsches have always been about handling and feel, and I'd pick it simply because of the manual option. If Toyota brings a manual, then I think it would be more compelling for $10K less.

[Ultimateone]

552whp

[super51fan]

So many say Toyota should have used a lightened Lexus chassis with either the 2UR V8 or V35a TT V6 and 'still could have easily made money.' The RC-F Track Edition is exactly what they are describing so why aren't people flocking to buy it?
Well when Toyota makes a car like this in house, it comes out just shy of $100k and doesn't have the numbers to justify the price. Of course performance isn't everything for the RC-F but it really goes to show roughly how expensive the car that 'could have been so cheap' would have been to produce.

RC-F numbers (estimated) vs Supra numbers courtesy of Car and Driver

[duder13]

Originally Posted by super51fan

So many say Toyota should have used a lightened Lexus chassis with either the 2UR V8 or V35a TT V6 and 'still could have easily made money.' The RC-F Track Edition is exactly what they are describing so why aren't people flocking to buy it?
Well when Toyota makes a car like this in house, it comes out just shy of $100k and doesn't have the numbers to justify the price. Of course performance isn't everything for the RC-F but it really goes to show roughly how expensive the car that 'could have been so cheap' would have been to produce.

RC-F numbers (estimated) vs Supra numbers courtesy of Car and Driver

I don't know about others, but I wasn't talking about a lightened chassis. I was talking about a smaller one. Just cut down the RC-F chassis (like BMW did with the E82 vs E92,) use the TT V6, make it less luxurious, and sell it for $10K-$15K less than the $65 RC-F. Then it would be a real Supra.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by duder13

I don't know about others, but I wasn't talking about a lightened chassis. I was talking about a smaller one. Just cut down the RC-F chassis (like BMW did with the E82 vs E92,) use the TT V6, make it less luxurious, and sell it for $10K-$15K less than the $65 RC-F. Then it would be a real Supra.

How is a shortened RC chassis a smaller platform? And just like the E82, it would weigh nearly the same as the donor chassis. Which is to say more than 400 pounds heavier than where the Mk5 ended up.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by duder13

I don't know about others, but I wasn't talking about a lightened chassis. I was talking about a smaller one. Just cut down the RC-F chassis (like BMW did with the E82 vs E92,) use the TT V6, make it less luxurious, and sell it for $10K-$15K less than the $65 RC-F. Then it would be a real Supra.

A V6 would be a "real Supra?"

The fanboi, whiners would have still lost their minds over that as well.

It's really the under-35 crowd mad they didn't just re-release the A80 because "1000 hp mad tyte JDM yo!"

[duder13]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

A V6 would be a "real Supra?"

The fanboi, whiners would have still lost their minds over that as well.

It's really the under-35 crowd mad they didn't just re-release the A80 because "1000 hp mad tyte JDM yo!"

Yes. If one has to pick between a V6 car made by Toyota, and an inline-6 car made by BMW, I'd certainly say the former is more "Supra," regardless of the engine configuration. What we got was essentially a Z4 coupe with Toyota body panels.

BTW, I'm over 35 and could care less about Fast and the Furious.

[super51fan]

Originally Posted by duder13

I don't know about others, but I wasn't talking about a lightened chassis. I was talking about a smaller one. Just cut down the RC-F chassis (like BMW did with the E82 vs E92,) use the TT V6, make it less luxurious, and sell it for $10K-$15K less than the $65 RC-F. Then it would be a real Supra.

This is exactly what I am saying, no offense but who are you to know how much it would cost to produce? You have no idea how much it costs to the V35a in the car over the 2ur. And the car doesn't have the economies of scale that the RC300/RC350 shares parts with.

The RC is already a shortened chassis of the IS/ISC/GS and it didn't weigh any less than any of them. Even then, that doesn't make it this car handle how it does now and instead it will feel just like a luxury car. And you still wouldn't have a decent gearbox or an inline 6.

BTW I wasn't referring to you at all, its common copy and paste logic all over the internet.

[duder13]

Originally Posted by super51fan

This is exactly what I am saying, no offense but who are you to know how much it would cost to produce? You have no idea how much it costs to the V35a in the car over the 2ur. And the car doesn't have the economies of scale that the RC300/RC350 shares parts with.

The RC is already a shortened chassis of the IS/ISC/GS and it didn't weigh any less than any of them. Even then, that doesn't make it this car handle how it does now and instead it will feel just like a luxury car. And you still wouldn't have a decent gearbox or an inline 6.

BTW I wasn't referring to you at all, its common copy and paste logic all over the internet.

You're right, I don't know what the cost is, but I run a company, and my dad was a bean counter for GM, so I also might have an idea of what not to do.

This car has become very polarizing. By essentially re-skinning a BMW in order to save money, rather than creating a true Supra successor, Toyota may have turned off enough potential Supra buyers that the car won't be successful, anyways. I guess we'll see.

I'm 42 years old, I loved the RX-7/Supra/NSX as a teen, my last several cars have been 2 seat or 2+2 sports cars, and the Supra is within my price range, yet I'm still not interested at all.

Toyota apparently polled potential buyers and found out that the inline-6 was important in designing a new Supra, which it certainly is, but how many of us thought that would mean it would be a 2-seat BMW without a manual option?? I know that Toyota has been mentioning a possible manual transmission lately, so maybe that will help, at least.

[super51fan]

Originally Posted by duder13

You're right, I don't know what the cost is, but I run a company, and my dad was a bean counter for GM, so I also might have an idea of what not to do.

This car has become very polarizing. By essentially re-skinning a BMW in order to save money, rather than creating a true Supra successor, Toyota may have turned off enough potential Supra buyers that the car won't be successful, anyways. I guess we'll see.

I'm 42 years old, I loved the RX-7/Supra/NSX as a teen, my last several cars have been 2 seat or 2+2 sports cars, and the Supra is within my price range, yet I'm still not interested at all.

Toyota apparently polled potential buyers and found out that the inline-6 was important in designing a new Supra, which it certainly is, but how many of us thought that would mean it would be a 2-seat BMW without a manual option?? I know that Toyota has been mentioning a possible manual transmission lately, so maybe that will help, at least.

I am not questioning your marketing sense, I am questioning your knowledge of Toyota production costs. You say it would be $50K-$55k for a car with a shortened lightened less luxury Lexus chassis with a V35a and unique interior and exterior. But that just described the the $95K RC F track edition without even factoring the costs of a unique interior and exterior and cost differential of the V35a over the 2ur. What makes the car $40K cheaper out of no where?

They may have turned people off but they also brought in new perspective buyers. Yeah they definitely should have tried to replicate their 90s sales flop for the sake of bragging rights by celica owners at car meets. If it doesn't sell well, that just means it lives up to its predecessor.

The manual transmission part isn't a big deal today for everyone especially at a time when the corvette and 3 series wont have them either.

[ShocknAwe]

Folks talk about weight all the time. It's difficult to build a sub 3k car with all the electric creature comforts most have become accustomed to and the safety kit that is mandated in modern highway safety times.also keep in mind that US vs EU have different regs.

I've seen some evidence that the US parts are heavier, despite the US having weaker rules. That's another discussion.

There's a push for 0-60 times and huge HP, necessitating longer and heavier cars to out the power down. Another discussion...

Then the manuals are fading away without development of the tech. Where is my rev matching manual? Why don't we have ultra smooth and fast clutches and gear levers? There was talk about adapting some of the clutch and gear transfer tech from the DCT to help speed up MT shifting and work, saw some progress in articles and then it never went anywhere. Manuals haven't gotten much if any love in the last 15y as opposed to massive advancement in auto. Self fulfilling prophecy.

[gatorfast]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Folks talk about weight all the time. It's difficult to build a sub 3k car with all the electric creature comforts most have become accustomed to and the safety kit that is mandated in modern highway safety times.also keep in mind that US vs EU have different regs.

I've seen some evidence that the US parts are heavier, despite the US having weaker rules. That's another discussion.

There's a push for 0-60 times and huge HP, necessitating longer and heavier cars to out the power down. Another discussion...

Then the manuals are fading away without development of the tech. Where is my rev matching manual? Why don't we have ultra smooth and fast clutches and gear levers? There was talk about adapting some of the clutch and gear transfer tech from the DCT to help speed up MT shifting and work, saw some progress in articles and then it never went anywhere. Manuals haven't gotten much if any love in the last 15y as opposed to massive advancement in auto. Self fulfilling prophecy.

Huh? Many manual transmissions do have rev matching now (my f80 m3 for example) and how can you make a manual clutch or shift lever faster? The whole point of it is that you, the human, control the shift and determine how fast it will be.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

Huh? Many manual transmissions do have rev matching now (my f80 m3 for example) and how can you make a manual clutch or shift lever faster? The whole point of it is that you, the human, control the shift and determine how fast it will be.

Proper chassis and transmission mounted linkages are faster than what BMW typically uses for example. My best experience with this is Honda, BMW 6MT are quite slow without really working at rowing.

Better tuned hydraulics make clutch actuation faster.

Perhaps quicker, more precise and closer is better wording.

Dealer didn't have a manual when I was there, does the F80 MT prep cogs and match gear speeds between shifts? If truly so I concede and tip my hat to that at least.

[heavyD^2]

People really need to get over the fact that Toyota didn't make this car. Toyota has not beat around the bush here as they have fully admitted the reason they partnered with BMW to make this car is because the Toyota of today could not build this car and maintain an affordable price point.

[gatorfast]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Proper chassis and transmission mounted linkages are faster than what BMW typically uses for example. My best experience with this is Honda, BMW 6MT are quite slow without really working at rowing.

Better tuned hydraulics make clutch actuation faster.

Perhaps quicker, more precise and closer is better wording.

Dealer didn't have a manual when I was there, does the F80 MT prep cogs and match gear speeds between shifts? If truly so I concede and tip my hat to that at least.

Yes you can simply select the lower gear and the car will automatically blip the throttle to perfectly match the revs. No need to heal toe or rev match downshift, just clutch in move the shift lever and clutch out.

This can be disabled though by select sport+ throttle mapping which will disable the auto rev match.

[Red Bread]

It's really not that hard to drive a manual well. I don't want any aids, or the need to have to disable them. Of course I say that and I do sort of like Hill Hold.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

Yes you can simply select the lower gear and the car will automatically blip the throttle to perfectly match the revs. No need to heal toe or rev match downshift, just clutch in move the shift lever and clutch out.

This can be disabled though by select sport+ throttle mapping which will disable the auto rev match.

Glad it can be disabled as I think I'd miss doing the heel-toe work myself. That said, pity that folks aren't driving manuals as that's an easy introduction. Downshifting and hill starts in first we're the hardest for me when I learned.

[supra93]

https://www.goauto.com.au/future-mod...-03/79834.html

TOYOTA Motor Corporation’s chief product specialist for the all-new A90-series Supra, Tetsuya Tada, has confirmed that fans of the reborn sportscar only have to wait less than 12 months until its first revision is revealed, with many more to follow in subsequent years.

Speaking to GoAuto this week at the A90 Supra national media launch at Phillip Island, Victoria, Mr Tada said that all aspects of the sportscar are eligible to be tweaked as part of annual upgrades that will take place across its lifecycle, the first of which will be unveiled around mid-2020.

“Not just the power. Suspension, body, (too),” he said. “Every year we will update. Otherwise, sportscar people just get bored.

“We’ve started already on development for the upgrade next year.”

Mr Tada was quick to add that he did not believe the new Supra had any shortcomings in its current form, which need to be addressed. Instead, the yearly updates will focus on creating different versions of the sportscar for particular purposes.

“The current Supra is a base model, but sportscars should have a different direction, like a track side people maybe want,” he said.

“There’s so many different directions. To respond to every single direction, I would actually like to introduce (something). But, of course, (it costs) more money (to develop).”

Mr Tada clarified that these upgrades will not necessarily need to be developed in conjunction with BMW, which typically gives its models similar updates once during a lifecycle.

“(There are) many ways to do it,” he said. “Maybe we might ask for some support from BMW.”

Asked if that support might come in the form of a different inline six-cylinder engine, such as BMW’s twin-turbocharged S58 unit that motivates the recently launched 375kW/600Nm M Competition versions of the X3 and X4 mid-size SUVs, Mr Tada said that is a possibility, adding that it could fit in the Supra’s engine bay.

His view is at odds with that of BMW M GmbH chairman of the board of management Markus Flasch, who told Australian journalists, including GoAuto, in May that a higher-performing version of the Supra’s Z4 cousin with the S58 unit was not being pursued due to the significant re-engineering that would be required to fit it.

Either way, Mr Tada said the potential introduction of the S58 engine or a manual transmission “will maybe be delayed” until later in the Supra’s lifecycle.

“You can’t do everything at the same time. You have to prioritise,” he said.

When asked why a manual version of the A90 Supra is not available yet, given the mechanically related BMW Z4 is available with a six-speed unit, Mr Tada said it is a case of maintaining demand after three-pedal enthusiasts sample the sportscar’s automatic transmission (AT).

“The biggest reason why we didn’t actually produce a manual is that I would like the customer to firstly feel the new-generation automatic transmission,” he said.

“At the moment, the customer’s saying manual before even trying, but if they drive the AT, then I’d like to talk to them after. The technology, the performance is greater ... and with software updates, it will improve more.

“The higher priority goes to the customer’s demands. If we are still receiving a lot of requests after they try new-generation AT, we’ll think about it.”

Mr Tada used Chevrolet’s Corvette as an example, pointing out that manual variants of its C7 series only accounted for 10 to 15 per cent of sales, with the US brand also deciding to move to an automatic-only line-up for the recently revealed C8 model.

However, an ode to the aero-top A80 Supra is unlikely with the A90, with Mr Tada telling journalists it is “technically” possible – given its twin under the skin, BMW’s Z4, is a soft-top convertible – but not currently planned.

Australian deliveries of the A90 Supra start this month, priced from $84,900 plus on-road costs and motivated by BMW’s B58 single-turbo engine tuned to produce 250kW of power and 500Nm of torque in this application.

[cleanE90]

I was a bit sour on the new Supra, but I think it’ll open up the tuning platform for newer cars again. It’s nice to see that it’s so easily modifiable.

[clee1982]

That would be a new strategy if they really go down the update car every year route (updates you can see)

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by duder13

Yes. If one has to pick between a V6 car made by Toyota, and an inline-6 car made by BMW, I'd certainly say the former is more "Supra," regardless of the engine configuration. What we got was essentially a Z4 coupe with Toyota body panels.

BTW, I'm over 35 and could care less about Fast and the Furious.

That's why I said the "under-35 crowd" are the ones complaining.

It's not like it's the first time manufacturers have used another engine or had developing it.

Yamaha and the SHO V6, Porsche and the Harley VROD, Lotus using Toyota engines, etc, etc.

[duder13]

Originally Posted by super51fan

I am not questioning your marketing sense, I am questioning your knowledge of Toyota production costs. You say it would be $50K-$55k for a car with a shortened lightened less luxury Lexus chassis with a V35a and unique interior and exterior. But that just described the the $95K RC F track edition without even factoring the costs of a unique interior and exterior and cost differential of the V35a over the 2ur. What makes the car $40K cheaper out of no where?

They may have turned people off but they also brought in new perspective buyers. Yeah they definitely should have tried to replicate their 90s sales flop for the sake of bragging rights by celica owners at car meets. If it doesn't sell well, that just means it lives up to its predecessor.

The manual transmission part isn't a big deal today for everyone especially at a time when the corvette and 3 series wont have them either.

I don't understand why you keeping bringing up the RC-F Track edition. It's more expensive because of "adding lightness" through things like carbon fiber and lighter components. I'm just talking about lopping half a foot off the RC-F chassis, like BMW has done in the past, and those cars ended up being cheaper than the larger cars. Plus, specialty cars like the Track Edition usually have considerable profit margins compared to regular versions.