2020 Supra annoucement

I think the FT1 looked better than the final Supra. I think it will be a compelling option. I'm excited that there is another sports car on the market. If the price is right on the used market, I would consider it in the future.

MotorsportsGordon said:

Even more sad is that the base 4 cylinder in the supra makes about 10 less horsepower then the 86.

https://jalopnik.com/the-lowest-four-cylinder-2020-toyota-supra-gets-194-hp-1831734785

That's not being sold here. There are all sorts of other engine combinations for globally available cars sold elsewhere. That said, the 188hp engine in the Mercedes A-class does a 14.7 sec quarter mile. It has similar weight to the Supra. Compared to the 86, the a-class is faster, weighs ~800lbs more and makes less power, albeit more power under the curve.

In reply to STM317 :

This.  Also, how does it work exactly if you buy a "Toyota" from a Toyota dealer and then it has engine/tranny etc trouble and their mechanics basically have to work on a BMW?  And why would a car company want to take a chance on ruining their reliability image by letting other companies supply the drivetrain?  Doesn't Lexus have some good engines?

Engines typically are not the BMW problem, it's everything attached to and around them.

mazdeuce - Seth said:

Nick Comstock said:

 I like that it's BMW at heart. I have no interest in Toyotas. The parts BMW did is the best parts.

 

I'm the opposite. I have no interest in a BMW with a Toyota wrapper. 

I was just trolling. 

There are other more interesting things I would buy with that money but if I'd have to choose I'd pay the premium for the BMW in a BMW wrapper verses the Toyota wrapper.

It's my understanding that BMW and Toyota have a number of shared development plans.   The plans I'm aware of include thermoset and thermoplastic carbon fiber composites and power train.   These types of integrations are pretty common and used to be much more so than they are today even.  

z31maniac said:

Tony Sestito said:

I have to say, this car does nothing for me.

Part of the "coolness" of the old Supras was the fact that Toyota was building a world class GT/Sports Car with a smooth, Japanese I6 in an era where people didn't think a Japanese manufacturer could do that.

 

Toyota has been building DOHC I6s for sports cars since the 60s. 

 

Correct. I should have clarified something: I'm talking about the American market, and the Celica Supra debuted in the late 70's here. Outside of car nerds like us, did the general public even know the earlier Toyota sports cars like the 2000GT existed? The Supra made a name for itself in the tech-driven 1980's, and blossomed into the insane beast we all love in the 1990's. Along with Nissan, Mitsubishi, Honda, and even Subaru, their Sports GT cars became the darlings of car magazine tests and bench racing conversations all over.

Specifically, I remember how freaking NUTS the 90's cars were, and what a coup it was that they had something that could finally challenge, and even best, cars like the Corvette and even some of the exotics of the day.

I'll never forget the first time I saw a last-gen Supra: My older sister worked in a Toyota dealer back in 1994, and my dad was buying a used Ford F150 from the dealer. I went with him to sign all the paperwork, and in the showroom was a bright red Supra Turbo 6-speed. I was immediately smitten, and when my 12 year old self climbed into the driver's seat to check it out, it made me feel funny inside, like when you used to climb the ropes in gym class! (Thanks, Garth...)
 

I get exactly ZERO of those feels with the new one.

I feel like just offering a tuned 86 would have been the easy button here. The first supras were just an upgraded celica, so there is precedent, with a path to a new model if profitable.

Moreover, Toyota reliability, real or imagined, is something that sells cars. It boggles the mind they would mess with it, or even the perception. BMW has plenty of good connotations, but reliability is not even on the list. Why not 'bmw styling' or 'bmw suspension tuning' or something they are known positively for? People still rave about the 'lotus suspension' on the dmc as if its worth a damn, its not. I used to balk at marketing people and focus panels guiding car design, but it seems like they should have tried one here. 

Yeah, this basically looks like a slightly re-styled M coupe.  With the BMW drivetrain that's not really known for long term reliability.  Solid pass for me.

Cars like this I would rather have (for $25K less): 

- FRS/BRZ with the Supercharger/Turbo

- BMW Z4 Coupe

- BMW 135i 

- BMW 335is

In reply to NordicSaab :

Those are used, but even in new cars, you can get a new C7 vette for less than the Supra.

Nugi said:

I feel like just offering a tuned 86 would have been the easy button here. The first supras were just an upgraded celica, so there is precedent, with a path to a new model if profitable.

Moreover, Toyota reliability, real or imagined, is something that sells cars. It boggles the mind they would mess with it, or even the perception. BMW has plenty of good connotations, but reliability is not even on the list. Why not 'bmw styling' or 'bmw suspension tuning' or something they are known positively for? People still rave about the 'lotus suspension' on the dmc as if its worth a damn, its not. I used to balk at marketing people and focus panels guiding car design, but it seems like they should have tried one here. 

To offer significantly upgraded performance would be expensive. 

Updated engine, stronger transmission, differential, axles (which break on lowered cars with stock power), the upgraded brakes and suspension to handle the extra weight, the larger wheels to fit around the larger brakes..........now that the car is more expensive, that cheap interior isn't going to fly so that needs updated materials and design as well.

Sure, you can spend $5k and do a half-assed turbo kit that doesn't include an upgraded clutch, oil cooler, or any of the other things I mentioned......but that's not how OEMs make durable cars. 

Interesting Jalop article on some of the development division between BMW and Toyota. Also has some pics I hadn't seen elsewhere.

I want to like it. I think I might if I see one in person. Not wild about BMW power, it seems like a cop-out by Yota on engine development the same way the 86 was with Subaru, but I also get that there may not be another financial path to building those cars. When I was in high school (93-94) our local dealer had a Caribbean Blue Supra in the showroom. Anytime I would get beat down by the huge load of AP classes I was taking I'd go sit in it for a couple minutes and tell myself "THIS is why it's worth it."  I never bought one but my Mustang is kind of the realization of that dream. 

Speaking of Mustangs, It's hard to get excited about a top-shelf car with 100 fewer ponies than the base Mustang GT. I mean, I get that it's a handling car but...   

I think the new Z4 looks so much nicer than this.  Also the previous-gen Supra looks much nicer than this as well.  Actually this seems easily the worst looking of all Supra's. 

I don’t understand  why everyone is comparing it to an frs,  other than they’re both made by Toyota.  The Supra has always been a high end sports/GT car,  which is not how I’d class the frs.  If I want a Supra, an frs with the coarse Subaru  engine but with more power or other mods,  isn’t going to cut it for me. 

I’m happy they’re finally making it, and curious as to how it will compare to my old mkiv.  As far as the engine,  if they aren’t going to use one of their own,  I think the BMW is much more fitting than another Subaru engine.

I've seen a lot of hate for this car but I'm withholding final opinion until I see one in person. I'm ok with platform/engine sharing if it's done correctly and I've driven several BMW's with this engine and it's a gem. The price seems reasonable, too but again, I want to see some test drives and numbers before I make a final judgment.  

I think it looks terrible in photos but I liked it in person - even when I took a photo of it when I saw it person, reviewed the photo later that day and thought "my god thats ugly. "

I'm okay with the car existing as it is, and it's exciting that any new vehicle can exist in 2019 that isn't a 2.0L turbocharged crossover.

But man, Toyota, this is your flagship brand. That you teased for over a year. And you launched it with effin' BMW switchgear and iDrive? Does it go *blunggg* when the door is open? What does the keyfob look like? Come onnnnn.

It's one thing to look at the NUMMI cars and be like "yeah, the Pontiacs got Toyota interiors" because fine, it was a collaborative economy car. But Supra is their mack-daddy sports car with an image to uphold. And it is visibly a BMW when you sit inside.

That's lazy design.

I'm curious what the difference between the BMW and Toyota is where the BWM makes an additional 47 hp but roughly the same torque.

The entire thing, much like the new NSX, leaves me cold. Ten years of teasers does that I guess.

The0retical said:

I'm curious what the difference between the BMW and Toyota is where the BWM makes an additional 47 hp but roughly the same torque.

Toyota decided to leave the peel on the banana in order to hit their reliability targets.

red_stapler said:

The0retical said:

I'm curious what the difference between the BMW and Toyota is where the BWM makes an additional 47 hp but roughly the same torque.

Toyota decided to leave the peel on the banana in order to hit their reliability targets.

my guess is more like BMW said "you can use our chassis and powertrain but you can't be better than our car". That seems like the German kinda thing to do

I thought the MkIV Supra was a fat, bland, jellybean-shaped car. This one is the opposite, hideous by overstyling. And the whole thing is just a slap in the face of Supra fans.

I also like how the Toyota chief engineer said that all the fake vents were a simple matter of popping out the plastic insert to become functional. Except look at the inside of the hood, there's no opening for those vents, so popping out the vents would just leave a shallow indent on the hood. Or the ones on the door, no opening on the back side, and even if there was, what would it do? Cool your door latches?

Jalopnik pressed the issue and got told "In speaking with our Sr. Product Planner, there are some vents that could likely be altered for airflow, but others are probably best left as they are.” Which basically means "Our chief engineer was blowing smoke out his ass."

The only Supras I like have pop-up headlights!   That's probably just because I grew up with them..... (Dad had an 83, an 85, and a 90 Turbo)   

I always saw the MK IV in the same way I look at the GTR.   They demand respect (when modified at least) but they were always too big, too ugly, and too expensive  for me to fall in love.   We all see things differently though, so YMMV.   

In reply to NickD :

My MKII was fat too.  The Supra has always been more luxury GT than pure sports car.  BTW I’m a big time Supra fan and had an MKIV and liked it.  My only regret was going NA instead of TT.  

Personally I think the MKV is better than nothing, which is all Toyota has given us “Supra fans” since 1998.

Will there be an /M version?

edizzle89 said:

red_stapler said:

The0retical said:

I'm curious what the difference between the BMW and Toyota is where the BWM makes an additional 47 hp but roughly the same torque.

Toyota decided to leave the peel on the banana in order to hit their reliability targets.

my guess is more like BMW said "you can use our chassis and powertrain but you can't be better than our car". That seems like the German kinda thing to do

I don't know. The listed 0-60, for example, is only 1/10 of a second off the M2............which has 404hp compared to 335. It is a few hundred lbs heavier though.

I suspect Toyota left plenty on the table so the "tuner" community can point to how much can be gained with a downpipe and a tune.

Then, promptly deny any powertrain warranty.