Jaskillz

To me its definitely a disappointment. Body looks alright but nothing special. On top of that, for Toyota to use a BMW engine in a "Supra" is Sacrilegious. It should have use a version of the V8 in the RCF or have the engineers design a new exclusive inline Turbo 6 cylinder as a Homage to the MKIV.

Just my 1 cent.

WestSideBilly

iTrader: (1)

335 HP in a car that's the same weight as the MkIV is... probably going to disappoint a lot of people.

Slushbox only will disappoint everyone that actually would want an expensive Toyota.

jayevo23

Here is another link about the specs for the upcoming Supra:
https://blog.caranddriver.com/indust...pecifications/

stevolee

iTrader: (2)

I was waiting on more info on the new Supra, but it looks like Toyota wimped out a little here. I can understand if they're trying to make the Supra more affordable to the public, but still...I think the only way Toyota can maybe save itself a little here is to make the new Supra super MOD-friendly (or as friendly as possible) and bullet proof. If the tuning possibilities are even half of the MKIV...that MOD-bug will surely bite and be somewhat of a saving grace for the new Supra...

jayevo23

The major concern I have is that they'll only offer it as a auto. Hopefully we'll get a manual option as well for the enthusiast

JimmyGSR

MKIV always struck me as a beautiful car.... This thing makes me wanna throw up in my mouth a little. Maybe it'll look better without the crazy wrap but so far its a no go for me.

I hope I'm wrong but I see this as another boring semi autonomous GTR with a Toyota badge attached. But again I really hope I'm wrong. It would be nice to see manufacturers bring some new life into the enthusiast community but I'm not holding my breath with this one.

WarmMilk

iTrader: (1)

yeah so turbo... they make good power with bolt-on's and tune...

that 17" wheel thing must be a mistake... I mean those aren't 17's in the spy shots... the 225/255 tire width is familiar from the IS350, which had double wishbone front suspension, so there's hope (really grasping at straws here ). it also put power down very well out of corners (I had one for a while, but sold pretty quick cause the auto thing got boring)

me too... this article doesn't say anything about trans options. I'd be surprised if it was auto only, its bmw counterpart has always had the manual options, and they're lifting the drivetrain out of there... hopefully toyota is smart enough not to make a mistake like that

WestSideBilly

iTrader: (1)

I would just assume you're getting a BMW chassis. The Z4 is *probably* getting a 6MT, which means either Toyota will also offer one, or one could be fairly easily retrofitted. The Z4 is *probably* getting the B58 I6 from the 340i/440i, reasonable to assume this is the engine that Toyota will use - and that one or both may offer the S58 uprated version at some time. Suspension will probably be the hybrid struts on the front, and a multi link rear, like basically every other BMW is.

And no, 17" wheels will not be standard, even though that's plenty big. I'm sure 19" clown car wheels will be standard and 20" will be optional.

WarmMilk

iTrader: (1)

whats a hybrid strut?

unfortunately you're prolly right about the shared bmw strut platform... but hey, one can hope...

WestSideBilly

iTrader: (1)

Even though it uses a strut, it's not a conventional McPherson strut setup; Rather than a single lower control arm there are two links. BMW calls it at a double pivot joint strut, I think; I couldn't think of the right term while I was typing that out last night ( )

It's better than a conventional McPherson, without giving up most of the benefits of the McPherson (compact packaging, notably).

WarmMilk

iTrader: (1)

does it gain camber under compression?

WestSideBilly

iTrader: (1)

I think the point is to reduce the camber change as the kingpin moves up. It would still gain (negative) camber as it travels, but less than a conventional macpherson.

Should also cut down on the scrub radius which makes tuning the steering a bit easier.

WarmMilk

iTrader: (1)

but you want negative camber gain... thats generally the problem with macpherson strut, that it doesn't gain camber. I mean its great for rally cars that have a foot of suspension travel, but its bad (well relatively speaking) for handling on paved roads on cars with normal amount of suspension travel...

WestSideBilly

iTrader: (1)

Right. An "ideal" suspension that was say -1.0° at rest would compress to something like -2.5°; a macpherson that was -1.0° might actually compress to -0.2°, while the two link struts might go from -1.0° to -0.7°. So it's less bad, rather than more good.

I realize my words above probably make that about as clear as mud.

WarmMilk

iTrader: (1)

oh ok, I understood your previous post as the opposite of what you said here