New sports car from Toyota

[Darron65]

Information is spotty so far. This "subscriber preview" is all I have.

[Darron65]

Okay I copied this from Autoline.

Toyota has sports cars on the brain. At the Management Briefing Seminars, an annual automotive conference, Akio Toyoda, confirmed that Toyota is developing an affordable sports car, aimed at attracting Gen-Y buyers. It sort of sounds like Toyota’s answer to the Mazda Miata. Interestingly, this is a joint project that Toyota is doing with Subaru. At the other end of the spectrum, Toyota is developing the Lexus LFA, that sounds like Toyota’s answer to the Nissan GTR. Clearly Toyota is out to change its image of an automaker that builds high-quality cars that are boring to drive.

[Kestrel]

...It sort of sounds like Toyota’s answer to the Mazda Miata...

Wasn't there once this car company that tried to out Miata the Miata with their own moderately powered, moderately priced two-seat convertible? I think that car was called something like an "MR2"? And didn't they cancel production some years back?

I'm all for another sports car, but Toyota has tried this already...

[sammm]

[Radio-Active]

Wasn't there once this car company that tried to out Miata the Miata with their own moderately powered, moderately priced two-seat convertible? I think that car was called something like an "MR2"? And didn't they cancel production some years back?

I'm all for another sports car, but Toyota has tried this already...

The MR2 came out in 1984. The same year as the Pontiac Fiero. Both were copies of the original 1974 Fiat X-1/9.

[wrx74]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=125558

[Darron65]

Yup, looks like that's the story.

[Dudley Dawson]

Wasn't there once this car company that tried to out Miata the Miata with their own moderately powered, moderately priced two-seat convertible? I think that car was called something like an "MR2"? And didn't they cancel production some years back?

I'm all for another sports car, but Toyota has tried this already...

The MR-2 spyder wasn't really much competition for the Miata. It was stuck with an inferior, strut-based suspension on all four corners. Much like a ... never mind.

That new Toyota thing looks like it'll definitely have a strut front end, so no thanks. Guess they're not so serious about making their cars not suck after all.

[Radio-Active]

The MR-2 spyder wasn't really much competition for the Miata. It was stuck with an inferior, strut-based suspension on all four corners. Much like a ... never mind.

Oh come on and say it.

FIAT

I owned FIAT. It was the worst car I have ever owned.

[gabkwong]

The MR-2 spyder wasn't really much competition for the Miata. It was stuck with an inferior, strut-based suspension on all four corners. Much like a ... never mind.

That new Toyota thing looks like it'll definitely have a strut front end, so no thanks. Guess they're not so serious about making their cars not suck after all.

It is more than likely a FWD w a AWD option!

[Kestrel]

Honda already makes one of those. It's called a Honda Civic Si Coupe. I'm very underwhelmed by this "news"...

[Radio-Active]

Toyota already make on called a Scion TC.

[Titus]

Honda already makes one of those. It's called a Honda Civic Si Coupe. I'm very underwhelmed by this "news"...

Toyota already make on called a Scion TC.

Those aren't RWD. This Toyobaru is supposed to be a RWD coupe for under 20k.

[Dudley Dawson]

It is more than likely a FWD w a AWD option!

Oh, so it has bad suspension and it's heavy.

[altiain]

That new Toyota thing looks like it'll definitely have a strut front end, so no thanks. Guess they're not so serious about making their cars not suck after all.

Porsche and BMW seem to have done ok with struts, not to mention Mitsubishi and Subaru.

[Dudley Dawson]

Porsche and BMW seem to have done ok with struts, not to mention Mitsubishi and Subaru.

Maybe in your opinion.

Fact is, struts just don't work as well as a properly designed double-wishbone setup. They are geometrically incapable of performing as well as double wishbone designs. Even if the BMWs and Porsches I've driven in the past weren't ill-handling piles of crap (and they were, especially the overweight, understeering BMWs), they'd perform better with a decent suspension architecture.

The only benefits of the MacPherson strut design are lower (manufacturing) cost and less space required horizontally under the hood, two issues that should never be of concern for cars that cost upwards of $40,000 and use longitudinally mounted inline sixes or rear-mounted engines. There's just no good reason for Porsche and BMW to use them. In every other respect, strut suspension is disadvantageous. Therefore, I have absolutely zero regard for companies such as Porsche and BMW. They charge premium prices for econobox engineering. Anyone who doesn't see it that way is just in awe of a label.

[CosmosMpower]

Porsche and BMW seem to have done ok with struts, not to mention Mitsubishi and Subaru.

True but generally not without camber plates dialed in about -3+ degrees on the front. I know that's the case with BMW's and seems like the popular setup for STi/Evo also otherwise it's just push push push. With the proper setup I don't see any disadvantage in the suspension design though, they can be VERY fast. It's stupid to write off a car just because it's Mcstrut from the factory.

[Dudley Dawson]

Oh, sure, dial in 3 or more degrees of negative camber to make up for the inadequacy of the suspension design, and you'll corner much better. And then you can enjoy twitchy straight-line behavior and replacing your front tires as often as you change your oil.

Personally, I'd rather just buy a car with suspension that isn't garbage in the first place.

[Radio-Active]

Maybe in your opinion.

Fact is, struts just don't work as well as a properly designed double-wishbone setup. They are geometrically incapable of performing as well as double wishbone designs. Even if the BMWs and Porsches I've driven in the past weren't ill-handling piles of crap (and they were, especially the overweight, understeering BMWs), they'd perform better with a decent suspension architecture.

Maybe in your opinion.

I have had to do a lot fewer alignments on all of the cars I have owned with mac pherson strut suspensions. Even though the Fiat I owned must have been half british when it came to the electrical components, I never faulted the suspension. It handled better than any other car short of the Miata that I have ever owned and the suspension did'nt beat you up like the sport suspension on my Miata.

But as we all say opinions are like we all got one.

[altiain]

Oh, sure, dial in 3 or more degrees of negative camber to make up for the inadequacy of the suspension design, and you'll corner much better. And then you can enjoy twitchy straight-line behavior and replacing your front tires as often as you change your oil.

Personally, I'd rather just buy a car with suspension that isn't garbage in the first place.

Actually, your twitchy straight line behavior and significant tire wear are going to be more affected by front toe settings than camber. BTW, don’t kid yourself into thinking that SLA setups don’t benefit from high static camber settings as well.

As for all Mcstrut setups being “crap”... Sure, a properly engineered double wishbone setup is better from a pure performance POV (actually, a multi-link setup is an even better ideal), but with production cars packaging and cost concerns sometimes dictate compromise solutions. That’s the difference between real world engineering and armchair designers that think they know everything.

I've driven plenty of poorly engineered (and even more poorly set up) SLA cars, and I've driven plenty of very good Mcstrut cars. Personally, I’ll take a well engineered Mcstrut car over a poorly engineered SLA car any day.