Toyobaru FT-86 Concept Pics

Raze wrote: The front/quarter/rear shots are all flattering but the side on shot is disturbing. The car is FUGLY when viewed from the side. The rear is far too tall, the cockpit is bubbly to say the least, yet the front end is nice and sleek? it's like a G35 sedan smacked into a Ferrari, half hatchback with a pretty nose, nobody's making a proper rear anymore. Sad.

Agreed. I think the earlier GTR-ish "fastback" concepts actually looked better than this. You can see this is based on a WRX chassis.

That said if it's RWD, manual and under 2500lbs I'd look at it. It'll probably be in the high-2000s/low-3000s though

I'm happy to see anything '86 coming back to market but I am really not a Subaru fan. The howling Toyota inline 4 is the third greatest aspect of the original car besides being rwd and most importantly being a lightweight. I think Toyota is messing with their own trifecta here. As it's all ready been pointed out that Toyota is one of the few major car manufacturers that is still able to build a lightweight sportscar like they did with the MR2 but I hope they can still do it one more time here. Even if it's with some Subaru farting around under the hood.

dj wrote: The howling Toyota inline 4 is the third greatest aspect of the original car besides being rwd and most importantly being a lightweight.

You mean the one that was a knockoff of a Ford Cosworth motor?

And I disagree about the aural pleasure of the 16v 4A-GE. (However, the 20v with ITBs is one of the greatest sounding motors ever.)

Well, overall I like the design. It's a taut & clean shape. Fairly original while carrying through the basic approach to the old '86. Admittedly, I do have a minor issue with the front "body canards" or whatever those slanted body lines are called on the front fenders. Maybe it's just me, but I'll have to decide on those when I see it in person.

Lets just hope that they will make the price/power/weight competitive. Everytime I hear an update one or the other has gotten "worse". Imho, it doesn't need to be ideal in all three to be successful. You know the old saying - pick two. Hell, even if it had an advantage in one area (please let it be weight, pretty please) it should have a chance against the G35/370Z/Genesis/Mustang crowd.

I don't blame you guys for being pessimistic though. I think we've all been disappointed for so long we don't expect the product to deliver on the promise. Ford and Nissan have seemed to figured out the semi-affordable sports coupe thing though, so hopefully Toyoda San can take note.

My yardstick is the 3.7L Mustang. It shouldn't be all too hard to match the applied performance (0-60, 1/4 mile, slalom speed, etc) of that car while beating it on price.

And if not, well, I like Mustangs, so I won't be all that disappointed to drive home in one.

Matt B wrote: I don't blame you guys for being pessimistic though. I think we've all been disappointed for so long we don't expect the product to deliver on the promise.

Exactly. I trust no one these days, especially not the Beige-mobile makers over at Toyota.

I don't like the fact that it is being produced on its own. They should start by making the Corolla fun again and build off of that if you want to talk about staying true to that nameplate.

ReverendDexter wrote:

dj wrote: The howling Toyota inline 4 is the third greatest aspect of the original car besides being rwd and most importantly being a lightweight.

You mean the one that was a knockoff of a Ford Cosworth motor? And I disagree about the aural pleasure of the 16v 4A-GE. (However, the 20v with ITBs is one of the greatest sounding motors ever.)

knockoff... nope... improved the basic design... yep... its what the Japs did back then and the 4AGE was perfect proof that you could have an economical twincam. So is it a knock off... if it was it wouldn't have held up as well as it has... just think of all the idiots who work on their 4AGEs... now imagine the same idiots keeping a BDA running........

As with most anything else... opinions are like Hondas... everone has one... and in my case I beg to disagree with your opinion... the 4AGE does not need 20V to sing... I've built a few models now and they have an "aural" melody beyond any other production 4 banger I've ever heard....

In reply to oldeskewltoy:

Agree with this. I wish my Miata sounded as good as a 16V 4A-GE.

ReverendDexter wrote: My yardstick is the 3.7L Mustang. It shouldn't be all too hard to match the applied performance (0-60, 1/4 mile, slalom speed, etc) of that car while beating it on price. And if not, well, I *like* Mustangs, so I won't be all that disappointed to drive home in one.

This. 1:11 power:weight and under $25k

oldeskewltoy wrote: the 4AGE does not need 20V to sing...

No, just ITBs

Mind you, my opinion is colored by the nature of 4A-GE owners that I have most experience with: drifters. Maybe a non-ITB 16v sounds great when it's put through a proper exhaust (or long-tube headers, which are illegal here).

R&T's website seems to think it'll be: $24k
170ish HP
2800lbs

Sounds reasonable to me.

So the same HP and more weight than a current Miata? Oh and their article said 180hp.

If that's true, then I'm no longer interested.

And I'd think most other guys that would actually go buy one, like myself, (not everyone here who whines about new cars, but refuses to go buy one) will no longer be interested.

I want a performance vehicle, not a car that looks like a performance vehicle, while being slower to 60 than a V6 camry.

In reply to scardeal:

If that's accurate, I don't see it faring well at all. The people who will buy this car aren't swayed by the Toyota nameplate - they'll go put up with the couple hundred extra pounds of the Genesis Coupe to get a turbo car for less money.

Aside from the fact there is absolutely no reason to not just drop the WRX motor in the car.

If a base WRX with 265hp and AWD is $25k, there is no reason, the WRX motor in this car WITHOUT all the AWD crap couldn't be $25k.

That car, 2800lbs 265hp turbo 4, $25k? They wouldn't be able to keep them on the lot. If this was the car being built, I would seriously go to the local Toyota dealer TODAY and put down a $1k deposit.

But instead they develop a new engine that barely bests the horsepower of a 1987 325is?

I know I shouldn't have this reaction, but I was really excited for this car, only to be let down.

Just like the Genesis, 1 series, etc.......

ReverendDexter wrote:

oldeskewltoy wrote: the 4AGE does not need 20V to sing...

No, just ITBs Mind you, my opinion is colored by the nature of 4A-GE owners that I have most experience with: drifters. Maybe a non-ITB 16v sounds great when it's put through a proper exhaust (or long-tube headers, which are illegal here).

http://s79.photobucket.com/albums/j143/oldeskewltoy/ae71/?action=view&current=tailpipeview.mp4

a short clip

z31maniac wrote: So the same HP and more weight than a current Miata? Oh and their article said 180hp. If that's true, then I'm no longer interested. And I'd think most other guys that would actually go buy one, like myself, (not everyone here who whines about new cars, but refuses to go buy one) will no longer be interested. I want a performance vehicle, not a car that looks like a performance vehicle, while being slower to 60 than a V6 camry.

Well... it's not being made to compete with the Miata...

There's more to it than power obviously... i can't imagine this thing handling worse than a Camry.

But at the core, i agree with you 100%. But if it stays below $25k, i'll still test drive one. I don't write off a car because of specs unless the price is outrageous. Might be a "more than the sum of its parts" car. I doubt it, though.

I'm still baffled by the whole "lets develop a brand new engine that makes less hp, than all these other engines we already make."

I did just fire off an email to Toyota to tell them what I thought was wrong with the car.

But seriously, if they were putting the 265hp WRX motor in the car or something similar, I would go force the local Toyota dealer to start a waiting list with me at the top.

I didn't think the engine was a brand new design... I thought it was just a modification of the current EJ series already used in the Impreza/WRX/STi.

Yeah, it's an existing subie engine after a fashion.

Of course, i'd rather see this car with one of Toyota's stronger V6s... (2grfse would be a MONSTER in this car if they could keep it around 3000lbs.)

So ignoring the fact this RWD, how is this not competing with Scion tC?

This is what it says in the R&T article and what I've read a bunch of other places.

"A new 2.0-liter boxer 4-cylinder engine will be standard for both Toyota and Subaru variants."

http://www.roadandtrack.com/auto-shows/geneva/toyota-ft-86-ii-concept

z31maniac wrote: This is what it says in the R&T article and what I've read a bunch of other places. "A new 2.0-liter boxer 4-cylinder engine will be standard for both Toyota and Subaru variants." http://www.roadandtrack.com/auto-shows/geneva/toyota-ft-86-ii-concept

I bet "new" means an EJ20 with slighty higher compression, different cams, and set up for RWD.

oldeskewltoy wrote: all this hype......... I'm not trading in my 170hp rwd Toyota for that POS

Hah hah, I don't blame you!

z31maniac wrote: This is what it says in the R&T article and what I've read a bunch of other places. "A new 2.0-liter boxer 4-cylinder engine will be standard for both Toyota and Subaru variants." http://www.roadandtrack.com/auto-shows/geneva/toyota-ft-86-ii-concept

I trust R&T on this sort of info about as far as I can speak Swahili; that is, not in the berkleying least.

And I don't understand the push to make this car faster. The niche that needs a fill is small, 2+2 hardtop RWD 4-cylinder. There's plenty of RWD V6 and V8 cars on the market already.