When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk CornerThe landing pad for automotive discussions, news, articles, and opinions. A place for the community to kick back and chat.
I can say for 100% certainty that you are most likely 100% wrong. What you are talking about here is all in how the transmission is programmed. Without having driven this car, you have absolutely no evidence to support your statement.
Having driven modern auto cars, I can tell you that's not how they work. This is the same trans that BMW puts in the M5, so something tells me it's not going to suck.
reminds me of this:
even if its the best torque converter auto ever created, it still kills it for me. it'll still never be as direct as a clutch.
I think its more along the lines of "we don't want to"
the 2 cars are clones with different bodywork, even the interior is almost identical... what about the car wouldn't "readily accept it"? the only thing I can think of that would need to be done is maybe a different interior panel where the shifter sticks through, otherwise everything is already being done for its BMW twin anyway. maybe a slightly different gauge cluster...?
ps.
of all people, i wouldn't have pegged you to be as one of the understanding ones about the auto only thing... why are you defending this choice so much?
Floor design/shape blah blah. I didn't design the car ,so have to assume they have reasons.
I'm not defending it so much as not hating. Times are changing and I'm not THAT stubborn. New cars are going this route so they can be driven by/appeal to more people. I get it. Whether or not I choose to buy one depends on how it drives. Not like it's the A/T put out my civic.
I don't expect this car to be a clone of the old Supra, so that may also have something to do with it.
I do appreciate tradition and traditional sports cars and would rather have one of these cars width 6spd, if I were to buy one.
Floor design/shape blah blah. I didn't design the car ,so have to assume they have reasons.
I'm not defending it so much as not hating. Times are changing and I'm not THAT stubborn. New cars are going this route so they can be driven by/appeal to more people. I get it. Whether or not I choose to buy one depends on how it drives. Not like it's the A/T put out my civic.
I don't expect this car to be a clone of the old Supra, so that may also have something to do with it.
I do appreciate tradition and traditional sports cars and would rather have one of these cars width 6spd, if I were to buy one.
agreed on all points except being ok with a torque converter.
If you want to know how it drives, just watch a European-spec Z4 M40i review. The US-market Z4 M40i has an extra 50hp over what the Supra will have, so don't consider that a fair fight. People will say "tune it!" to make it what they want - but voiding the warranty on a $50k+ car is not a smart decision. That said, I don't think you'll convince Supra sympathizers to buy a new Z4 coupe with a Toyota badge. I would be aiming at a smaller, high-revving turbocharged I6 with DCT and/or manual competitor to the Mustang and Camaro, which are both fantastic cars. Something like a 370Z with more power, refinement, and ability. Instead, I think Toyota pursued a badge engineered, focus group-developed solution to a question no one asked. Supra sympathizers don't want a Cayman or Z4 coupe. They want something that has the identity and soul of the original, and torque converters won't get you there.
i'm sure it'll be a fine car, but what exactly about it is "supra"? nameplate money grab bull****, it's a regular bmw Z4 with a toyota badge on ****
The Supra and Soarer were the same car, nobody complained. What does the Supra need to be considered worthy? Cross sharing platforms for cars is nothing new, it's been done for years. As mentioned above, BMW builds awesome cars and this one is cheaper than the BMW version. I don't understand how having BMW parts is a BAD thing. The 86 using Subaru stuff? Now THAT, I get
"It's not Toyota enough" just doesn't make sense to me.
It's interesting how polarizing this car has become, considering nobody knows much about it and none of us have driven one.
Everyone hates every new car that comes out, this is no different. Anyone ever go back and read old threads? The one for the Evo X was ****ing hilarious. Everyone whined about "It's not a real Evo" blah blah. It also seems to be doing just fine. I think a lot of the people saying negative thing about the Supra will be eating their words, much like the people that hated the GTR so much (I was one; still have my reservations, FWIW).
I understand "I'd prefer it be a manual", "I'd prefer it have a Toyota engine". I don't understand the hostility I'm seeing all over the 'net. Not saying I need to or that anything is wrong with it.. I just don't understand, unless it's a brand loyalty thing.
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone
Plastic rivers were replaced with speed nuts and bolts though.
You clearly don't have a firm grasp of how a fully electronic trans can be programmed.
I do. It has functional Aero purposes. Plastic rivers were replaced with speed nuts and bolts though.
The M5 is also a luxo-barge that hasn't offered a manual transmission in 15 years (edit: the US market E60 did have a few after people complained, and it was a decent choice). In the new M5, the automatic makes sense. Nimble GT car, not so much.
The Supra and Soarer were the same car, nobody complained. What does the Supra need to be considered worthy? Cross sharing platforms for cars is nothing new, it's been done for years. As mentioned above, BMW builds awesome cars and this one is cheaper than the BMW version. I don't understand how having BMW parts is a BAD thing. The 86 using Subaru stuff? Now THAT, I get
"It's not Toyota enough" just doesn't make sense to me.
It's interesting how polarizing this car has become, considering nobody knows much about it and none of us have driven one.
Everyone hates every new car that comes out, this is no different. Anyone ever go back and read old threads? The one for the Evo X was ****ing hilarious. Everyone whined about "It's not a real Evo" blah blah. It also seems to be doing just fine. I think a lot of the people saying negative thing about the Supra will be eating their words, much like the people that hated the GTR so much (I was one; still have my reservations, FWIW).
I understand "I'd prefer it be a manual", "I'd prefer it have a Toyota engine". I don't understand the hostility I'm seeing all over the 'net. Not saying I need to or that anything is wrong with it.. I just don't understand, unless it's a brand loyalty thing.
:P
"not supra/toyota enough" - for starters, i'd say toyota make their own car, not a re-badged bmw z4? it's 100% a bmw, with re-badging. not hating on bmw by any means, I'm sure it's a fine car.
Its not even that it's not Toyota enough. I mean for it to be really Toyota enough in this day-and-age it has to be super beige and boring. What a car named the Supra really needs to be is Supra enough. The original Supras got a strong cult following because it was a sports car and it had a jewel of an engine. It was a big boat for its time, it was easily out-handled by most of its competitors, but it had a monster engine, transmission (6speed), and drivetrain that no one else could touch. That is a Supra. That is the cult following. Why the hell are they chasing Caymans with the Supra name? The Supra's chassis wasn't ever a super light and delicately refined thing. It was able to handle a lot of power though, which it doesn't sound like the new one is setup to do. I am much less upset with it when I keep replacing the "Supra" name in all the prints with "Celica". They should've just released it with the turbo 4, much lower price, hopefully still manual, and called it the Celica. And maybe released a limited edition Celica Supra I6 turbo later on to properly remember the Supra name.
If they wanted to do a true Supra, they should've based it off the BMW 4 series at least, developed an evolution of the 2AR-FE (its an amazing engine btw) into an I6 turbo, and just left the rest of the car as mainly 440i/M4 parts bin. If the engine was amazing no one would care that in stock form the handling was nothing special, and the aftermarket would quickly fill in that gap (exactly like the original Supras). As is...why would you buy this car over a BMW M2? Its outperformed in its stated mission in every way by the M2 except maybe marginally on price for the cheapest MkV.
And yes no one has test-driven or at least written about driving it yet. Its probably pretty good, but I'd be surprised if its actually M2 good let alone Cayman good. But that doesn't make up for Toyota completely missing the point of what "Supra" means to people.
I think some of our expectations are unreasonable and extremely subjective.
The OG Supra wasn't all that. It was overweight and underpowered. It DID almost pull 1g cornering. What does this one do?
This car seems very similar to the old one ,in this regard.
Am I reading right that "It's junk" because it may or may not have the potential of the MK's HP rating?
Anyway, our opinions all differ. I'm trying to understand all the dislike. I see where you are all coming from, but I still don't get it.
Meh. I look forefor to hopefully trying one out. I'm extremely curious
I think some of our expectations are unreasonable and extremely subjective.
The OG Supra wasn't all that. It was overweight and underpowered. It DID almost pull 1g cornering. What does this one do?
This car seems very similar to the old one ,in this regard.
Am I reading right that "It's junk" because it may or may not have the potential of the MK's HP rating?
Anyway, our opinions all differ. I'm trying to understand all the dislike. I see where you are all coming from, but I still don't get it.
Meh. I look forefor to hopefully trying one out. I'm extremely curious
on the one hand I agree, on the other hand if you're gonna bring back the Supra name, at least attempt to do it some justice.
about the OG Supra, sure its underpowered by today's standards, but compare it to the cars of its time. It's power rating at 320hp, while not the highest out of its competitors was still in the top half. On top of that it was actually under rated rather than over rated like most of its contemporaries. And it still won most of the performance tests against most of its contemporaries. the only cars that could give it a run for its money were the late 90's viper and the C5 vette, also late 90's. but if you look at its introduction, 1993... the Supra was more or less the best all around car. sure there were some that were faster straight line and others that handled better, but none that did both as well as the Supra. and that 1.0g you mentioned, keep in mind that was on 90's tire tech and in 90's tire sizes. I mean I have about the same tire footprint on my miata as a stock Supra had. and just to keep beating a dead horse, you can get a manual transmission.
Jan 15, 2019, 04:16 PM
