So... who's still "all in"

[jc604]

Just losing patience At this point. Why cant they just give us an exact time frame when to see them? Sean lee one of the z enthusiasts who did get to have one for testing mentioned august or september in his Q n A ig live

 

[FBD]

I'm not really sure where you guys are getting that the automatic Z is only two tenths of a second slower in the quarter mile than the supra. Stock Supra runs flat 12s all day long. And are you guys going to just ignore 0 to 60 times, as well? The tested Z times didn't get anywhere near a 3.8 second 0 to 60.

And not only that, it's not just purely based on acceleration, quarter mile times. It's a combination of price performance, interior quality and the fact that so much of the car is still a 370Z.

That's why I've lost a lot of enthusiasm, because I just can't get excited over this car at the trim level being almost 55k

I'll keep saying this...the Supra 3.0L in Canada is 14K more than the Z. The Z is 58,485 and the Zupra is 73K.

 

[Blackbeard]

So you're driving an automatic?

its the only way it comes

 

[Donalex]

I think Im getting a used one cuz Im poor ?

Smart...use the savings to drive cross country.

 

[FBD]

Back in the 90's, the 300ZX was much slower than the Supra. About 1.0 sec 0-60. I remember that the Supra was a really big deal back then because it could get to 60 in 4.6 sec.

Fast forward to 2022 and the Z is now nearly as fast as a hot BMW, only off by a few tenths and 1mph?
Pfft, WTF do people want?
If the Supra was ACTUALLY made wholly by Toyota, I guarantee the Z would've beat it this time around.
Toyota wasn't messing around by choosing BMW as the surrogate of the Supra, they knew BMW would make a very good performing car.

Personally I'm stoked the Z runs low 12's and traps 116mph.

Jeebus some people should just buy a Tesla. This new Z is actually fast enough, just like the Supra and Teslas, to be wildly dangerous on public roads in only 3-4 seconds

Really great perspective here. I went back and looked at the times in a side by side comparison:

https://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/77jiu3umlpmb

If you look the Supra has less HP but way more torque (a la inline 6) which is what we are seeing in the Hagerty drag race. When you listen to the comments in the Z Icons video about how sweet the old Z inline sounded you can see the pull (pardon the pun) of the inline layout.

IF Toyota actually made the Zupra then this would be a different conversation. But they didn't. And they can't. They could never do it. All Toyota can do is strike partnership agreements with other OEM Manufacturers while they build Corollas. They have no skin in the game. And I'll not drive a car with a Toyota badge on it disguising a German car. I'll take the 2/10's slower drag race (which with better tires or a slight boost or a bit more time on the runway in real world context) which would have been neck to neck around corners. Listen to Savagegeese...the Zupra's diff is wildly unpredictable around corners. I'll take three pedels and a manual shift lever any day. I don't want to lose my license driving this thing...which in my city you will.

 

[Denver the Last Dinosaur]

Why cant they just give us an exact time frame when to see them?

With Covid shutdowns, shipping delays, shipping congestion at ports, etc. it's difficult for anyone to give exact time frames for things arriving these days. Even places like Book Depository have blown out their international delivery times to far longer just to cover themselves against complaints.

 

[romanLegion]

If you look the Supra has less HP but way more torque (a la inline 6).

Several dyno tests have shown that the B58 is severely underrated. It's pushing 375-385 hp at the wheels, which translates to 430-440 hp at the crank. So its higher hp, and higher torque.

But they didn't. And they can't.

They did before, in a car called the Lexus LFA. Brilliant car, but hit the market 5 years too late and with a sticker price of $340k. It's a great car, but hard to justify at that price point. An in-house Supra would've easily been $125k+. The problem is that the price point is too high for the target demographic, and the badge isn't prestigious enough for the people who spend that kind of money on cars. It's the same problem with the second gen NSX and R35 GTRs.

But let's be honest: people would've found a reason to bitch about something.

• Toyota partnered with BMW: "Not a real Toyota"
• Toyota made it in-house and charged 6 figures: "Nobody will pay 6 figures for it. I'd rather get a 911"
• Toyota used the Camry V6 or one of the Lexus UR V8s: "But it's not an inline 6" (oh the irony here....)

 

[takemorepills]

Several dyno tests have shown that the B58 is severely underrated. It's pushing 375-385 hp at the wheels, which translates to 430-440 hp at the crank. So its higher hp, and higher torque.




They did before, in a car called the Lexus LFA. Brilliant car, but hit the market 5 years too late and with a sticker price of $340k. It's a great car, but hard to justify at that price point. An in-house Supra would've easily been $125k+. The problem is that the price point is too high for the target demographic, and the badge isn't prestigious enough for the people who spend that kind of money on cars. It's the same problem with the second gen NSX and R35 GTRs.

But let's be honest: people would've found a reason to bitch about something.

• Toyota partnered with BMW: "Not a real Toyota"
• Toyota made it in-house and charged 6 figures: "Nobody will pay 6 figures for it. I'd rather get a 911"
• Toyota used the Camry V6 or one of the Lexus UR V8s: "But it's not an inline 6" (oh the irony here....)

Toyota didn't "partner" with BMW. They completely outsourced to BMW and phoned-in the design. There isn't a single part in the Supra from the Toyota parts bin.

Toyota could've recycled the RC chassis, shortened it for 2 seater duty, and used the V35A-FTS from the Lexus, Tundra and Sequoia.
Of course, it wouldn't even come close to the BMW and would likely have a very tough going against this new Z.

Some would've complained it was no longer inline 6, or it reused a dated chassis. But, it could've met pricing targets and been 100% Japanese.

To me, the cool thing about the Toyota Supra was that it was an amazing performer, and carried the aura of "Toyota Reliability and Practicality"

 

[FBD]

Several dyno tests have shown that the B58 is severely underrated. It's pushing 375-385 hp at the wheels, which translates to 430-440 hp at the crank. So its higher hp, and higher torque.




They did before, in a car called the Lexus LFA. Brilliant car, but hit the market 5 years too late and with a sticker price of $340k. It's a great car, but hard to justify at that price point. An in-house Supra would've easily been $125k+. The problem is that the price point is too high for the target demographic, and the badge isn't prestigious enough for the people who spend that kind of money on cars. It's the same problem with the second gen NSX and R35 GTRs.

But let's be honest: people would've found a reason to bitch about something.

• Toyota partnered with BMW: "Not a real Toyota"
• Toyota made it in-house and charged 6 figures: "Nobody will pay 6 figures for it. I'd rather get a 911"
• Toyota used the Camry V6 or one of the Lexus UR V8s: "But it's not an inline 6" (oh the irony here....)

Nope I have to agree with you on all points. I was going off that website and the point I was making is the inline 6 makes crazy torque which wins 0-60 battles and 1/4 miles. It is a massively underrated power plant. Agreed. Loved the LFA.

 

[romanLegion]

Toyota didn't "partner" with BMW. They completely outsourced to BMW and phoned-in the design. There isn't a single part in the Supra from the Toyota parts bin.

Toyota could've recycled the RC chassis, shortened it for 2 seater duty, and used the V35A-FTS from the Lexus, Tundra and Sequoia.
Of course, it wouldn't even come close to the BMW and would likely have a very tough going against this new Z.

Some would've complained it was no longer inline 6, or it reused a dated chassis. But, it could've met pricing targets and been 100% Japanese.

To me, the cool thing about the Toyota Supra was that it was an amazing performer, and carried the aura of "Toyota Reliability and Practicality"

No thanks on the V35A-FTS. Wastegate actuator failures. Several Tundras have failed while the car was on the lot and are $60k bricks.

As for using the RC chassis or engine, the RC-F starts at $67k, and is much worse than any of the F8x BMWs. Glad they didn't try to compete with the Cayman on an underachieving platform, which probably would've cost more than what Toyota charges for the Supra now.

I really don't get this hangup of "100% Japanese". That's of a bygone era before computers and automation was the industry standard. Reliability has been stepped up across the board (Buick ranked better than Toyota last year for dependability). A lot of the "new cars aren't reliable" opinions come from older folks who think they're better than computers at constantly monitoring the state of their car.

 

[takemorepills]

No thanks on the V35A-FTS. Wastegate actuator failures. Several Tundras have failed while the car was on the lot and are $60k bricks.

As for using the RC chassis or engine, the RC-F starts at $67k, and is much worse than any of the F8x BMWs. Glad they didn't try to compete with the Cayman on an underachieving platform, which probably would've cost more than what Toyota charges for the Supra now.

I really don't get this hangup of "100% Japanese". That's of a bygone era before computers and automation was the industry standard. Reliability has been stepped up across the board (Buick ranked better than Toyota last year for dependability). A lot of the "new cars aren't reliable" opinions come from older folks who think they're better than computers at constantly monitoring the state of their car.

So....what you're saying is that Toyota, in no way, could have built a legitimate Z competitor? Yup, I'd agree with that. They basically hired a hit man.
And your assertion about "older folks" is completely wrong. Those "older folks" are the ones who developed and designed the technology, and the older customers with money are gladly buying those kinds of vehicles up, with no complaints. You're just trying to throw shade at people who have legitimate opinions differing from yours.

 

[Raven1]

So....what you're saying is that Toyota, in no way, could have built a legitimate Z competitor? Yup, I'd agree with that. They basically hired a hit man.
And your assertion about "older folks" is completely wrong. Those "older folks" are the ones who developed and designed the technology, and the older customers with money are gladly buying those kinds of vehicles up, with no complaints. You're just trying to throw shade at people who have legitimate opinions differing from yours.

And I Want My Over 50 Discount on my Grand Slam Breakfast Sonny ! ! !

 

[romanLegion]

So....what you're saying is that Toyota, in no way, could have built a legitimate Z competitor?

Course they could've. Lower quality interior, toss in the old Camry V6, put it on the RC chassis, and it would've been a Z competitor.

But they aimed higher than the Z, at the Cayman, and got help from BMW to achieve that loftier goal. Data suggests they did a good job if we consider sales numbers and comparison reviews.

And your assertion about "older folks" is completely wrong. Those "older folks" are the ones who developed and designed the technology, and the older customers with money are gladly buying those kinds of vehicles up, with no complaints. You're just trying to throw shade at people who have legitimate opinions differing from yours.

You wildly missed the point here.

First off, I've noticed its been quite common that people love using BMW reliability standards from the 90s and 00s to try and say the Supra is unreliable, which is an invalid comparison, especially when the data around the B58 platform shows that it's a reliable engine. If you want to make a comparison, look at the modern reliability metrics, not ancient data.

Secondly, I never said "older folks" in general. I was specifically referring to folks who say that modern cars are unreliable because they have an older car that still runs. That specific group tends to be older folks.


And you can complain as much as you want about companies collaborating, but the truth is that some of the biggest names in cars came about due to collaborations, and that's not going to stop: McLaren F1, Vauxhall Lotus Carlton, SLR McLaren, MB 500E, Audi RS2 Avant, BMW M1

 

[rocksandblues]

Just to add to the “could have Toyota done it alone”. :

Lotus uses a Toyota supercharged v6 in current and past models. Around 400 hp

fwiw

 

[takemorepills]

Course they could've. Lower quality interior, toss in the old Camry V6, put it on the RC chassis, and it would've been a Z competitor.

But they aimed higher than the Z, at the Cayman, and got help from BMW to achieve that loftier goal. Data suggests they did a good job if we consider sales numbers and comparison reviews.




You wildly missed the point here.

First off, I've noticed its been quite common that people love using BMW reliability standards from the 90s and 00s to try and say the Supra is unreliable, which is an invalid comparison, especially when the data around the B58 platform shows that it's a reliable engine. If you want to make a comparison, look at the modern reliability metrics, not ancient data.

Secondly, I never said "older folks" in general. I was specifically referring to folks who say that modern cars are unreliable because they have an older car that still runs. That specific group tends to be older folks.


And you can complain as much as you want about companies collaborating, but the truth is that some of the biggest names in cars came about due to collaborations, and that's not going to stop: McLaren F1, Vauxhall Lotus Carlton, SLR McLaren, MB 500E, Audi RS2 Avant, BMW M1

I personally never bring up reliability in the Z vs. Supra debate, in fact I have mentioned several times on this forum that I have personally seen Infiniti Qs with their drivetrains out to get at the turbos. I have a Q60 that I take to the dealership and they said it's common. Then I warn people to remember that the Nissan warranty is typically shorter than the Infiniti.

So, you'll never hear me suggest one is more reliable than the other.

However, you have the typical bravado about new German cars suddenly being "reliable" and that's pure bullshit. Everyone says that, then we look back 10 years and see the truth.

I have and would again lease a German car. But I think you're hitting Hunter Biden's stash if you honestly think a 3 year old car has proven it's reliable in the long run.

That may not matter to you, you may change up cars too frequently to care about 10 years out. But you'd be a damn fool to buy a 10year old BMW and pretend it'll be reliable