If they made this Supra almost exactly like the previous Supra, people would complain. If they change stuff up that didn't follow the 90's Supra to a bunch of detail, other people would complain. In the end, complainers gonna complain. Even if they did make it what they wanted it to, people would complain about the price or something else dumb and not buy it anyways. The target audience won't be the people crying about all the details, because if they did even get it all right, they wouldn't buy it anyways unless Toyota sold the new car for used car money range.

Change is good(to a certain extent cough cough new evo suv). A lot of people are afraid of change and that' why you see certain age groups only listening to certain songs, watch certain shows, not really keeping up with technology, . They're just stubborn and want to keep everything the same. What you're looking for in a car already exists, so just go buy that if you really wanted it. Shoot in 10 years, electric cars are going to wreck gas cars in almost every way. I always thought why songs/artists change their songs up a lot of style when they create new albums and stuff when they were so good how they were. Then I heard Hootie and the blow fish and holy crap, all their songs sounds exactly the same and after 3 songs, it got pretty damn old and I couldn't differentiate the songs at all.

Anywho I'm done with my rant, I'll head over to the subie forums. Their discussions about the Supra isn't just a bash fest and is somewhat more technical.

 

lol. is pointing out the marketing bull**** "complaining?"

anyone here going nuts with excitement about the Z4? since, you know.. it's the same car

 

I don't have excitement for either car. If toyota didn't work with BMW, they probably never would've attempted to make it in the first place. I could care less if they share same parts of another car. if it drives like a masterpiece then they did their job. When people start driving it and if it doesn't drive/handle well, then RIP, Toyota has failed. I hope it does well and can stand its own ground. If it flops, well then we probably won't get any sort of iteration of the Supra in our lifetime.

 

Sums it up nicely.

That would have been nice to see: a bit more of a Bad ***. But maybe it is and we don't know it. I'm excited to see.

 

i'm referring to the internet buzz. why no buzz on the z4, which is the same car?

only for the supra name. who cares if toyota "brought back" the supra if its going to be the same as another car? i don't care if they never would have attempted it if it's going to be the same as another car.

if mitsu "brought back" the evo by working with subaru and rebadging the STI as an "evo," it's as good as not bringing back the car/doing anything for the evo brand/legacy. would people be saying, at least they revived the evo name? no, it'd be why did they even bother if it's the same as something else, just rebadged

btw if anyone wants a 2008-2013 era supra, just buy a 335i and slap a toyota badge on it

 

[QUOTE=CaptainSquirts;11856999]Shoot in 10 years, electric cars are going to wreck gas cars in almost every way.

Maybe. To have any range a big battery is needed. A big battery takes a very long time to charge at home - it may be impossible during hot or cold weather. Where does highway revenue come from? What about the stress electric cars put on the electric grid?

My guess is the government will mandate fast chargers only and make them into tax collection machines just like gas pumps. Now, the pocketbook incentive is gone.

 

True. I wish Mitsubishi would bring back a throwback edition of the CT9A for order only. It would need to come with the SE package, JDM rear, 5 speed manual, larger turbo, stronger transfercase, LED headlights, electronic UK HAVC with bluetooth navi, and heated Recaro's. Not a bad way to modernize a car and keep it fast.

 

I believe there probably would be some emission issues. Isn't that one of the main reasons why the 4b11 came into existence? I think...

 

It's possible. I have seen new cars with the same emissions equipment as the evo 8/9. Evap Canister, EGR, Cat, PCV, closed from valve cover to intake etc. The rest should be in the fuel map and cell count of the cat. I'm not sure why they felt the need to create the 4B11 do be honest. It did very well though!

 

Everybody would complain that it was outdated lol

It's not new and (to some) doesn't look as nice. And costs more

 

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...ylinder-supra/

86 killah! hahah

z
E
R
E
p

 

if they used bmw's turbo 4 WITH A MANUAL transmission... that'd be pretty awesome...

 

Oh, that would be fun. Especially in this smaller car. Of course, it wouldn't sound as nice (I assume, for now) and would REALLY be like an FRS/BRZ, then

 

The 4b11 was certainly a move for emissions, as well as better performance. Rear mounted turbo puts the cat closer to the turbo outlet, means the cat lights off faster. The cylinder head (stock) has very small exhaust ports, which run higher EGT's than the 4g, again, to light the cat faster. Stock for stock the 4b11 head outflows the 4g head. Dual MIVEC is used as EGR and/or simply letting the air flow through the cylinder instead of staying in the cylinder, again for emissions. Obviously it can also be used for performance gain. The all aluminum construction is lighter. The 4b11 comes with a much better factory intake manifold.

The biggest thing you're missing is probably the position of the cat relative the turbo outlet/exhaust ports. Since ~2005-2008, OEM's have been getting the cat as close to the exhaust outlet of the engine as possible. Look at even the first VW 2.0T's, the cat is literally 4" past the turbine wheel...lol

 

My Civic's cat is pretty much part of the exh manifold.
not turbo..but same concept.