[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Most fanbois don't even realize the 2JZ was built and designed by Yamaha. I

And yes, the economy killed a bunch of those cars. I looked it up the other day, I believe, inflation adjusted a '96 Supra Turbo would be approaching $80k in today's dollars.

So in '96 for half the cost of Supra, you could buy a 310hp V8 Camaro. I realize it's not a good comparison on fit/finish/etc, but just on PPOOOWWAAAHHHH.

The only thing uglier than a mid 90's camaro is a new camaro. LOL I did like the IROC-Z. I was never a fan of the American cars, sorry. I bought my 300ZX just to beat all those Mustangs and Camaros. Even till this day, Nothing like beating up on some dude with some loud exhaust in a Mustang.I would ONLY race those cars at the Philly street races, LOL. I can only race them in my M4. They want no part of the GTR. Pussies

[supra93]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Most fanbois don't even realize the 2JZ was built and designed by Yamaha. I

And yes, the economy killed a bunch of those cars. I looked it up the other day, I believe, inflation adjusted a '96 Supra Turbo would be approaching $80k in today's dollars.

So in '96 for half the cost of Supra, you could buy a 310hp V8 Camaro. I realize it's not a good comparison on fit/finish/etc, but just on PPOOOWWAAAHHHH.

That's been highly debated, even had a thread over on Supraforums on that matter.

Right, it was a pretty expensive car, even the NA turd. I believe the Japanese NA base version was around $6.5k cheaper than the U.S. or $11.7k in todays money.

[David70]

I find the fans being upset with this car strange. They hadn't built a Supra in 25 years so not like they suddenly screwed it up. What Toyota produced isn't what the fans wanted (completely Toyota with a Toyota inline 6) but if we waited for that it would have never happened. No chance Toyota was building an engine just for this car so next option is a standard Toyota V-6, turbocharged? I prefer the engine that's in it. The gripes don't seem to be with the end product just it's pedigree.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier

I also share this memory. That's why it seems completely backwards thinking that somehow the great Supra nameplate was soiled by BMW engineering.

Look at it from a lot of Supra owner's POV. Toyota tease the world with the sleek FT1 which the design team envisioned to be built on the LC platform and even hinted at GTR and LFA level of performance. They paraded it to all the car shows and even Supra in Vegas making everyone think "this is the new Supra". So when the final product is an auto only 2 seater reskin Z4 with a hardtop roof you can see why some people are disappointed.

With that said I understand they wanted to make it affordable. If that was the case I feel that they shouldn't have cock tease us in the way that they did. The design team should have been on the same page as the engineers. Preview something that actually looks remotely close to what you intend on producing like with the FT-86. Just my 2 cent.

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

The problem with the Supra is that when it was for sale it wasn't iconic. In fact nobody even cared about it. Toyota couldn't sell them. It had a small following but never became notable until the first F&F movie so the reality is that it's iconic as a used tuner car mostly for its engine. The reality is that even if Toyota made the latest Supra, fans of the MK4 would not look on it kindly as it wouldn't have a 2JZ-GTE engine in it as that's what made that car special as the rest of the car was big, heavy, and somewhat homely compared to cars of that day such as the FD RX-7, 300ZXTT, 3000GT.

I'm not entirely sure that this narrative is true. The car was overpriced for sure, but I remember reading Car and Driver as a 12 year old when the MKIV TT came out. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds along with that styling....It was 100 percent my dream car as a child. Yes, the FD RX7 was sexier, so was the NSX but neither were THAT car to me. My best friend's dad even had a C4 Corvette, but I didn't care. It wasn't a Supra.

A few years later, I remember having a conversation with a friend, HIS friend had imported a copy of this new video game Sony had released in Japan that was supposedly coming to the U.S. called "Gran Turismo." We were both so geeked on the game primarily because while we'd driven virtual Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches in games like Test Drive, neither of us had gotten the chance to virtually drive our REAL dream car: The MKIV Supra.

None of my friends could afford the car (or even had licenses) when it came out. But it didn't start becoming legendary because of a fast and furious movie. To a lot of people my age it has ALWAYS been that car.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by David70

I find the fans being upset with this car strange. They hadn't built a Supra in 25 years so not like they suddenly screwed it up. What Toyota produced isn't what the fans wanted (completely Toyota with a Toyota inline 6) but if we waited for that it would have never happened. No chance Toyota was building an engine just for this car so next option is a standard Toyota V-6, turbocharged? I prefer the engine that's in it. The gripes don't seem to be with the end product just it's pedigree.

I think it's because they want something that is going to be reliable in the long term and isn't going to be a major headache when the warranty runs out. That is what Toyota is known for. Some are also upset because it's going to be limited too, or handicapped on what BMW decides as stated by this forums insider. Kind of lame for a halo car imo, and furthers the argument about this being a project of compromises.

Personally I don't love it, but I also don't hate it and I'm glad something like this even exist in the day and age of crossover dominance. However in it's present form it just isn't appealing to me.

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by Moflow

I'm not entirely sure that this narrative is true. The car was overpriced for sure, but I remember reading Car and Driver as a 12 year old when the MKIV TT came out. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds along with that styling....It was 100 percent my dream car as a child. Yes, the FD RX7 was sexier, so was the NSX but neither were THAT car to me. My best friend's dad even had a C4 Corvette, but I didn't care. It wasn't a Supra.

A few years later, I remember having a conversation with a friend, HIS friend had imported a copy of this new video game Sony had released in Japan that was supposedly coming to the U.S. called "Gran Turismo." We were both so geeked on the game primarily because while we'd driven virtual Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches in games like Test Drive, neither of us had gotten the chance to virtually drive our REAL dream car: The MKIV Supra.

None of my friends could afford the car (or even had licenses) when it came out. But it didn't start becoming legendary because of a fast and furious movie. To a lot of people my age it has ALWAYS been that car.

Spot on!!!! The FF movie was what,2001? Car was a Unicorn before that junk came out. It has just grown even more since then. Hence they are 80-100 K used. LOL What's your E-46 worth? :thump: I mention E-46 since many peeps say that is the best for this platform. I love the Supra and all the M cars. Just not sure in 18-20 years you will see any M cars going for double what they sold for. Especially for their bullet proof engines. We won't even go there

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by supra93

Look at it from a lot of Supra owner's POV. Toyota tease the world with the sleek FT1 which the design team envisioned to be built on the LC platform and even hinted at GTR and LFA level of performance. They paraded it to all the car shows and even Supra in Vegas making everyone think "this is the new Supra". So when the final product is an auto only 2 seater reskin Z4 with a hardtop roof you can see why some people are disappointed.

With that said I understand they wanted to make it affordable. If that was the case I feel that they shouldn't have cock tease us in the way that they did. The design team should have been on the same page as the engineers. Preview something that actually looks remotely close to what you intend on producing like with the FT-86. Just my 2 cent.

That's why I said before it was such a let down! I was totally on board to order one as soon as I was able to. All the early talk was some super bad ass GTR-ish type tuner car. Then that fugly thing came out and never once, thought of selling my GTR. Either I pumped it up in my head or just was so hoping for something that I had to have. OH Well

[fiveohwblow]

Reading this thread I feel like I’m the outlier. I love it. Best heart that’s been recently mass produced IMO and on items as subjective as aesthetic taste I think it’s gorgeous.

[evil-G-nius]

They should have made their own body and stuffed the V8 from the ISF in there...that would have been a better progression for the name IMO

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by supra93

I think it's because they want something that is going to be reliable in the long term and isn't going to be a major headache when the warranty runs out. That is what Toyota is known for. Some are also upset because it's going to be limited too, or handicapped on what BMW decides as stated by this forums insider. Kind of lame for a halo car imo, and furthers the argument about this being a project of compromises.

Personally I don't love it, but I also don't hate it and I'm glad something like this even exist in the day and age of crossover dominance. However in it's present form it just isn't appealing to me.

EVERY project is a compromise.

Originally Posted by evil-G-nius

They should have made their own body and stuffed the V8 from the ISF in there...that would have been a better progression for the name IMO

They already make that car, it's the Lexus RC F. And it starts at $15k more than the I6 Supra.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

EVERY project is a compromise.

To certain levels yes, but it's even worst when its denied XZY because of the automaker involved.

[brad850csi]

Would the Toyota V6 angered people more than the BMW I6?

https://www.supramkv.com/threads/sho...he-ls500.1546/

[David70]

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...a-supra-turbo/

1993 Toyota Supra Turbo - as tested price of $42,500 (base price: $40,250)

Inflation adjusted $42,500 to today - $76,935 --- they would have considered a number of changes at that price but then everyone would have again complained about the high price, like the original.

People like to look back at something and only remember the good things, then we forget that sales were slow because of the price. This car with a Toyota engine and interior wouldn't sell at $76k and Toyota wouldn't have built it.

[supra93]

All this talk about "what if..." and "it should have been..." is getting tiresome. Whether you love it, hate it or somewhere in-between, it's here and it is what it is. So let's just forward.

[Tacoma]

Originally Posted by David70

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...a-supra-turbo/

1993 Toyota Supra Turbo - as tested price of $42,500 (base price: $40,250)

Inflation adjusted $42,500 to today - $76,935 --- they would have considered a number of changes at that price but then everyone would have again complained about the high price, like the original.

People like to look back at something and only remember the good things, then we forget that sales were slow because of the price. This car with a Toyota engine and interior wouldn't sell at $76k and Toyota wouldn't have built it.

To be fair, that $42K Supra had 335 HP and 365 ft-lb torque and 0-60 in 4.6s, excellent for 1993. To compare, a 1994 Porsche 911 Turbo 3.6 had 355 HP and 384 ft-lb,, 0-60 in 4.0s, and cost $110K. That's Porsche Turbo like performance numbers at less than 1/2 the price.

In today's numbers, the 2021 911 Turbo is now 2.2s to 60, so using the same 2021 vs. 1993 ratio, that'd be equivalent to 0-60 in 2.5s for a 2021 Supra which would be an amazing deal for $76K even if it's "only" a Toyota. A 2021 911 Turbo is $220K today.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Tacoma

To be fair, that $42K Supra had 335 HP and 365 ft-lb torque and 0-60 in 4.6s, excellent for 1993. To compare, a 1994 Porsche 911 Turbo 3.6 had 355 HP and 384 ft-lb,, 0-60 in 4.0s, and cost $110K. That's Porsche Turbo like performance numbers at less than 1/2 the price.

In today's numbers, the 2021 911 Turbo is now 2.2s to 60, so using the same 2021 vs. 1993 ratio, that'd be equivalent to 0-60 in 2.5s for a 2021 Supra which would be an amazing deal for $76K even if it's "only" a Toyota. A 2021 911 Turbo is $220K today.

Yes it would have been great and it's also completely unrealistic to think the $76k complete TOYOTA Supra would have had near 911 Turbo performance. Then we would have been back to hoping someday to get another Supra.

The new one also goes 0-60 in 3.7 seconds, no way it is getting anywhere close to 911 turbo territory without going mid engine (zero chance at $76k) or AWD, then of course no one wants a Supra to be AWD (with AWD comes a lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car).

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by Moflow

I'm not entirely sure that this narrative is true. The car was overpriced for sure, but I remember reading Car and Driver as a 12 year old when the MKIV TT came out. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds along with that styling....It was 100 percent my dream car as a child. Yes, the FD RX7 was sexier, so was the NSX but neither were THAT car to me. My best friend's dad even had a C4 Corvette, but I didn't care. It wasn't a Supra.

A few years later, I remember having a conversation with a friend, HIS friend had imported a copy of this new video game Sony had released in Japan that was supposedly coming to the U.S. called "Gran Turismo." We were both so geeked on the game primarily because while we'd driven virtual Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches in games like Test Drive, neither of us had gotten the chance to virtually drive our REAL dream car: The MKIV Supra.

None of my friends could afford the car (or even had licenses) when it came out. But it didn't start becoming legendary because of a fast and furious movie. To a lot of people my age it has ALWAYS been that car.

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

YES!!! I love the shitty sales on GTR's. The less I see, the better. To me, thats a fabulous thing. Who wants a car where you see one every 3 minutes. Mustang, Camaros, Srt this and that. People can talk shit on the GTR all they want. When it came out in 2009, it changed the game. 80 Grand for a car that was whipping up on supercars. It made all others up there game. Finally 11 years later, BMW has an AWD/Turbo car with some decent power. LOL. All these years later and this new M car will be close to the performance of my 2010 GTR when it was just some bolt on parts. Also, If you don't think a GTR is Iconic, not sure what Model car you would. R32,R33 and R34's. In my opinion, it's been Iconic for a long time

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by David70

Yes it would have been great and it's also completely unrealistic to think the $76k complete TOYOTA Supra would have had near 911 Turbo performance. Then we would have been back to hoping someday to get another Supra.

The new one also goes 0-60 in 3.7 seconds, no way it is getting anywhere close to 911 turbo territory without going mid engine (zero chance at $76k) or AWD, then of course no one wants a Supra to be AWD (with AWD comes a lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car).

I disagree with your statement on the AWD. I would never buy that shit ass Supra, but I want all my cars to be AWD. Not sure what your saying about A lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car?

[supra93]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

I generally agree with this statement, but you make it sound like its the car's fault. As I have explained, the market condition for the U.S. at the time was not favorable to Japanese sports car in general. The RX7, 300zx, and Supra all did much better in their home market vs overseas.

We can see this with the 300zx. It had a MSRP of $29,100-$33,800 in 1990 and ballooned to $41,089-$44,879 for its last year in 96.

1996- 2.929
1995- 4.176
1994- 4.836
1993- 9.801
1992- 9.628
1991- 14.903
1990- 22.095

Base MSRP
1994- $36,489 (+$10,473 for inflation)
1993- $30,555

[chris719]

Sports cars are not a daily driver for most people, and the middle class can't afford a brand new sports car as a 3rd car. Thus, the majority of people buying these hot new cars are well-off and end up buying the Porsche because it's pretty much always better.

I think there is room in the market for cheap sports cars (MX5) and expensive sports cars, and not a lot in the middle.