Toyota 86 Chief Engineer Promises Next Gen To Exceed Expectations

[hi5.0]

Originally Posted by Pre

2nd photo reminds of a little bit of Cayman. But I think it'll look better than those renders. Please let it have a turbo option. Would be internet bukake.

Was thinking along those lines when looking at the renders - looks somewhat Porsche inspired - and the tail lights could kinda sorta be akin to upside down 911 lights minus the light bar. Then again, it looks like a more mature, smoothed out take on the styling done to the Yaris GR 4. What ever the case, IMO this looks better than current models. Now it needs an engine worthy of the chassis.

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[White out]

86 looks good.

I HIGHLY doubt that the BRZ would get a TMIC and the 86 would get a FMIC. Doesn't make financial sense. . . so I'm sticking with the adage that neither is going to have boost.

[Skunkers]

I will be legitimately surprised if there is no turbo/high-performance variant of this car. There's a reasonable argument (unlikely, but reasonable) that maybe they didn't design the original car with a turbo in mind so it wasn't really feasible to add one down the line. With the second generation there's really no avoiding that enthusiasts, car magazines, even pedestrian car reviewers not from automotive rags have all been clamoring for one, in every language even.

And I say this as someone who didn't necessarily agree with them (I think something in the ballpark of 220-240hp N/A with none of the weird tune issues the current gen has would be truly outstanding). I would just be surprised not to see a turbo given all the demand. I can't imagine a second generation coming out without some kind of significant performance boost, it would seem guaranteed to wither and die on the vine (and in half the time the first car did).

I like the looks of the renders at any rate.

[Pre]

Originally Posted by Skunkers

I will be legitimately surprised if there is no turbo/high-performance variant of this car. There's a reasonable argument (unlikely, but reasonable) that maybe they didn't design the original car with a turbo in mind so it wasn't really feasible to add one down the line. With the second generation there's really no avoiding that enthusiasts, car magazines, even pedestrian car reviewers not from automotive rags have all been clamoring for one, in every language even.

And I say this as someone who didn't necessarily agree with them (I think something in the ballpark of 220-240hp N/A with none of the weird tune issues the current gen has would be truly outstanding). I would just be surprised not to see a turbo given all the demand. I can't imagine a second generation coming out without some kind of significant performance boost, it would seem guaranteed to wither and die on the vine (and in half the time the first car did).

I like the looks of the renders at any rate.

Car performance keeps moving on. So if they do indeed keep it NA....well it’s not going to be much different than the current one as it pertains to the competition.

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by Pre

Car performance keeps moving on. So if they do indeed keep it NA....well it’s not going to be much different than the current one as it pertains to the competition.

That's the point though. There isn't really any competition for light, RWD, 2+2, sporty, Japanese coupes.

[BeepBoop]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

That's the point though. There isn't really any competition for light, RWD, 2+2, sporty, Japanese coupes.

I'd argue the point of those characteristics is lost if it gets beat by average joe FWD sedans. A sports car is supposed to be about a superior performance experience, not just a certain set of driving dynamics that is hard to find. Making all those sacrifices and still ending up with a slow machine don't make no sense.

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by BeepBoop

I'd argue the point of those characteristics is lost if it gets beat by average joe FWD sedans. A sports car is supposed to be about a superior performance experience, not just a certain set of driving dynamics that is hard to find. Making all those sacrifices and still ending up with a slow machine don't make no sense.

"Superior performance"? I've outrun WRX and STI in tightly wound roads, among other cars of "superior performance". Why don't handling characteristics count as " superior performance"? If you're a horsepower fiend, you have your pick. If driving in a straight line really fast is fun for you, then great. I won't deny that it's fun. But it's not the ONLY metric of performance.

[JustyWRC]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

"Superior performance"? I've outrun WRX and STI in tightly wound roads, among other cars of "superior performance". Why don't handling characteristics count as " superior performance"? If you're a horsepower fiend, you have your pick. If driving in a straight line really fast is fun for you, then great. I won't deny that it's fun. But it's not the ONLY metric of performance.

Straight roads are for fast cars.
Curvy roads are for fast drivers.


Still a favorite.

[BeepBoop]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

"Superior performance"? I've outrun WRX and STI in tightly wound roads, among other cars of "superior performance". Why don't handling characteristics count as " superior performance"? If you're a horsepower fiend, you have your pick. If driving in a straight line really fast is fun for you, then great. I won't deny that it's fun. But it's not the ONLY metric of performance.

I've outrun mustang Gts in my wife's mazda 3 in curvy roads as well.

But let me ask you this: could you have beat your own times if YOU were the driver of the STI? I'm betting yes.

Originally Posted by JustyWRC

Straight roads are for fast cars.
Curvy roads are for fast drivers.


Still a favorite.

Ignoring the possibility of a fast driver in a fast car.
Who cares about the other drivers? It's about your car vs the potential of every other car you could have bought.

[Kostamojen]

Originally Posted by JustyWRC

Straight roads are for fast cars.
Curvy roads are for fast tires.

Fixed.

[chanomatik]

If the straight line fast car sucks at handling a corner, no driver mod can fix that. An STI will not keep speed at a tight corner the same as a Miata or Twin. I've been that same driver of all of them and it's just about what the car itself can and can't do, in stock form. Even then, sometimes the chassis itself is limited.

[Kostamojen]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

An STI will not keep speed at a tight corner the same as a Miata or Twin.

Having been in both a BRZ and STI on the track, I 100% disagree with this statement.

[Pre]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

That's the point though. There isn't really any competition for light, RWD, 2+2, sporty, Japanese coupes.

There isn’t really any competition for their sedan with ironing board either, which is why it’s been the same relic for decades now, more or less, and lost so much ground to other performance cars. So while you may look at it in those parameters, many/most of the rest of us look at RWD offerings much more broadly. That’s great that it’s the only one. I’d argue the Miata is the closest. But either way, how do I say this, I never bought the 86 neither did a whole F ton of enthusiasts. Didn’t get any of my money and likely won’t unless something changes. It’s in the same league as Booby not listening to their customers and offering at least a Levorg, Hatch WRX, or Hatch STi. Owners, would be owners, journalists, you-boob hacks, all calling for the DIT. It’s kind of laughable that booby offers NA Outback and Legacy’s, and yet offer DIT In the upper trims. But with the 86, that’s sacrilege for some reason. A Mustang’s performance gets compared against the STi and vice versa. Same goes for the 86 dude.

The argument remains me of this:
Brian: Lady, you want seven bucks for a used Kenny Loggins record? I'll give you five.
Woman: Uh-uh. He autographed it himself...
Brian: Okay, I'll give you four.

[quentinberg007]

Originally Posted by BeepBoop

I'd argue the point of those characteristics is lost if it gets beat by average joe FWD sedans. A sports car is supposed to be about a superior performance experience, not just a certain set of driving dynamics that is hard to find. Making all those sacrifices and still ending up with a slow machine don't make no sense.

Average Joe FWD sedans are not outrunning the twins. The average Joe FWD sedan is between 160 and 200hp. The average FWD sedan is between 3000 and 3400lbs. Just because a turbo 4 or V6 is available in several FWD sedans, the average one doesn’t have it. In fact, the split is more like 15:1 between the small engine and the big one. So, chances are your fragile ego won’t be bruised by the Camry at the light next to you.

Some of you people should seek mental help. You don’t allow yourself to just ****ing like something. It has to be the best deal or put down better lap times for the money or be a little bit faster than your similarly unwell peer. Guess what? Someone else is always going to be a better driver or have more money to buy a better car than you. Afterall you are clearly here arguing about $30k sports coupes instead of getting paid to drive 911 GT3 Cup cars.

Why can’t people just like a car that is fun to drive? I have a slow daily driver and I like a lot of older cars that are not as fast as modern cars. I still find joy in driving them because they are engaging and have charm. My FR-S was a ton of fun to just drive. Popping off that perfect heel toe downshift to be in the right gear coming out of a corner. Hustling through some mountain roads. It was FUN. It was the most joy I could buy new for $25k that still fit some basic requirements (2+2).

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by Kostamojen

Having been in both a BRZ and STI on the track, I 100% disagree with this statement.

Your Type RA? I had a 2005 STI.

[Kostamojen]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

Your Type RA? I had a 2005 STI.

Yes the Type-RA, which really isn't much different from a regular 2015+ STI.

I had the same tires on both on the track, maybe the BRZ is faster on initial turn in on hairpins, but after that the STI pulls through and out of a corner faster. I had a 2015 STI blow past me on the track while in the BRZ as well so I saw it first hand.

You can make a BRZ as fast as an STI on a track, but you will be spending A LOT of money to do so.

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by Kostamojen

Yes the Type-RA, which really isn't much different from a regular 2015+ STI.

I had the same tires on both on the track, maybe the BRZ is faster on initial turn in on hairpins, but after that the STI pulls through and out of a corner faster. I had a 2015 STI blow past me on the track while in the BRZ as well so I saw it first hand.

You can make a BRZ as fast as an STI on a track, but you will be spending A LOT of money to do so.

I appreciate your feedback. I have zero track experience. Mine is just spirited driving through Alaskan mountains and such. I haven't driven a VA STI. I'm sure it handles worlds better than my GD STI. All BRZ vs WRX/STI drives were GV/GR models, including my little brothers STI Limited sedan.

[dj_mace]

I don't have the same level of car experience as many of you, but I know my most enjoyable cars have been an 83 GLC hatch and a 2.5RS, largely because they were basically tin cans and small (the manual helps too!). I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy driving a Ferrari Dino too, and certainly not because it's such a fast car...

I really don't care what other cars are capable of, or whether some guy wants to beat me in his Camry at a stoplight. I want to enjoy MY car and my level of driving skill on the street. Speed and HP, even great handling, are so common these days it seems pointless to keep up. What is rare is that 'tin can' car driving experience in an affordable fun car, and that's what I like about the 86/BRZ. I love the 90s cheapness, the low hood, simplicity. Wishful thinking at this point I guess, but give me more of these cars, please.

[Pre]

Originally Posted by quentinberg007

Average Joe FWD sedans are not outrunning the twins. The average Joe FWD sedan is between 160 and 200hp. The average FWD sedan is between 3000 and 3400lbs. Just because a turbo 4 or V6 is available in several FWD sedans, the average one doesn’t have it. In fact, the split is more like 15:1 between the small engine and the big one. So, chances are your fragile ego won’t be bruised by the Camry at the light next to you.

Some of you people should seek mental help. You don’t allow yourself to just ****ing like something. It has to be the best deal or put down better lap times for the money or be a little bit faster than your similarly unwell peer. Guess what? Someone else is always going to be a better driver or have more money to buy a better car than you. Afterall you are clearly here arguing about $30k sports coupes instead of getting paid to drive 911 GT3 Cup cars.

Why can’t people just like a car that is fun to drive? I have a slow daily driver and I like a lot of older cars that are not as fast as modern cars. I still find joy in driving them because they are engaging and have charm. My FR-S was a ton of fun to just drive. Popping off that perfect heel toe downshift to be in the right gear coming out of a corner. Hustling through some mountain roads. It was FUN. It was the most joy I could buy new for $25k that still fit some basic requirements (2+2).

We agree with you. Give it some more power and get rid of the ridiculous dip in the powerband, and right there with you. It can be slower than a Camry to me. No prob, but damn man for what it cost, and what it is, it shouldn’t be getting “eclipsed” by a minivan.

[chanomatik]

Minivans are no joke though.

[bugatti0628]

my concern is that the turbo, intercooler, and all the tubing will add weight and mess with the COG and weight distribution. they would have to make modifications to the hood to accept a top mount intercooler, they would also have to have bigger brakes and make adjustments to the suspension. doing all of that will also increase the price, and if the FA24 does well, and the new 86 sells well, there is a chance they may consider adding a turbo and make the necessary changes

[JustyWRC]

Originally Posted by Kostamojen

Fixed.

That's why it did soo well on Prius tires?!?!

Originally Posted by dj_mace

I don't have the same level of car experience as many of you, but I know my most enjoyable cars have been an 83 GLC hatch and a 2.5RS, largely because they were basically tin cans and small (the manual helps too!). I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy driving a Ferrari Dino too, and certainly not because it's such a fast car...

I really don't care what other cars are capable of, or whether some guy wants to beat me in his Camry at a stoplight. I want to enjoy MY car and my level of driving skill on the street. Speed and HP, even great handling, are so common these days it seems pointless to keep up. What is rare is that 'tin can' car driving experience in an affordable fun car, and that's what I like about the 86/BRZ. I love the 90s cheapness, the low hood, simplicity. Wishful thinking at this point I guess, but give me more of these cars, please.

I'd be hard pressed to tell you which I liked better.....my STis/WRX or my 68hp Justy 4WD. I guess it would come down to what you asked me to do with it. While in Japan(my Justy there was 58hp), I had a friend that we would "chase" each other through the back roads. I guess you could compare it to rally racing now that I think about it. Who could get to the other end faster. We didn't care our cars had 2 digit HP numbers. We were having a blast. Would more power had been more fun? Probably; but, why is that necessary all the time?

Originally Posted by chanomatik

Minivans are no joke though.

The Top Gear America episode where they pitted minivans against 90s police cars was entertaining. About the only episode I liked cause I couldn't link it to a carbon copy of the original series. Though, I may have missed that episode. I haven't seen but maybe 60% or the original series.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

"Superior performance"? I've outrun WRX and STI in tightly wound roads, among other cars of "superior performance". Why don't handling characteristics count as " superior performance"? If you're a horsepower fiend, you have your pick. If driving in a straight line really fast is fun for you, then great. I won't deny that it's fun. But it's not the ONLY metric of performance.

Exactly.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Kostamojen

Yes the Type-RA, which really isn't much different from a regular 2015+ STI.



I had the same tires on both on the track, maybe the BRZ is faster on initial turn in on hairpins, but after that the STI pulls through and out of a corner faster. I had a 2015 STI blow past me on the track while in the BRZ as well so I saw it first hand.



You can make a BRZ as fast as an STI on a track, but you will be spending A LOT of money to do so.

Different thing a race track comparing to a tightly wound road. In the race track you compensate the smaller corner speeds with higher straight speeds. No need to make a BRZ like a STI. Two different cars.

[oichan]

The hell.. where***8217;s the car already. They***8217;re suppose to blow me away in excitement, right?