Toyota Supra

Prototype in camo being tested on the road

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/07/t...ra-spy-images/

https://s.blogcdn.com/slideshows/ima...-supra-4-1.jpg

https://s.blogcdn.com/slideshows/ima...-supra-9-1.jpg

Quote:

---

It has a long hood, doors with concave panels, and what appear to be fake headlights. The sides and back fenders channel the look of the FT-1 concept revealed in 2014 at the Detroit auto show. Put simply, it's the Supra straight out of central casting.

-------------------

Expect it to arrive for the 2019 model year, which is inline with the Z5's arrival. The powertrain lineup will likely include four- and six-cylinder engines, and perhaps employ some electrification (likely from Toyota's side of the development). Lexus is rumored to be supplying a twin-turbo V6 for the car.

---

It's like a 370Z with ass tumors...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The359

It's like a 370Z with ass tumors...

---

My reply was going to be "It's a 370Z with a Z4 Coupe shoved up it's ass."

Oh, shit. I didn't even read the blurb. I didn't realize the Supra/Z5 were the same car.

Damn it.

It definitely looks Japanese.

Looks smaller than I expected... I didn't even know that Toyota and BMW had a joint taskforce.

Promising...

Hate camo cars. Too hard to tell the shape.

I want the Supra to look like this, not like a BMW.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/i...3425620105.jpg

Hurry up and show it Toyota!

You did a bloody awesome job looks wise with the new 86, please do the same to the Supra!

Fingers crossed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The359

It's like a 370Z with ass tumors...

---

And ass tumors are not attractive!!!!!!

It is such a different age now, I wonder how Toyota will keep this car from being stillborn. :|

Seems like they're doing it by splitting all the development and manufacturing costs with BMW. It worked for the Toybaru, and this will presumably have higher margins + BMW's marketing and name cache clout.

(Based on what I perceive as the greater popularity of the Subaru vs the Scion/Toyota, going solely by our GTXF group, and BMWs popularity for premium vehicles vs Toyota's, this almost seems like Toyota has been contracted out to develop sports cars for the other brand, and part of their payment structure is the ability to sell their own version of the car as well. Too much of a stretch?)

Yeah but I'm not talking about the BMW version -- that shit will MSRP at $200K+ and wealthy Bimmer fans will buy them regardless of if they're Kings o' da Streetz or not.

But a Supra? There's really only one reason (and one vociferous group of non-new-car-buying enthusiasts) that people want it back: dick-size.

So that puts Toyota the Brand in a tough spot. If the new Supra doesn't run with Godzilla, isn't just another Celica? Only now it'll be a $100K Celica...

Oh, I wasn't expecting it to be in that market at all. I thought it was going to be closer to the Stingray than the Z06, in broad price and performance terms. Never considered the $100k thing. Hmmm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kchrpm

Oh, I wasn't expecting it to be in that market at all. I thought it was going to be closer to the Stingray than the Z06, in broad price and performance terms. Never considered the $100k thing. Hmmm...

---

Same.

Z8 MSRP was only $131k, similar to the i8. I don't see how the Z5 would be six figures, let alone the most expensive BMW ever sold. I mean, the most expensive BMW ever sold is a rebadged Toyota? lulz

I agree, I think Toyota is aiming for something around $50k. Anything above that would be Lexus RC-F and LC territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by novicius

So that puts Toyota the Brand in a tough spot. If the new Supra doesn't run with Godzilla, isn't just another Celica?

---

They cannot make a car run with the GT-R with a U.S. MSRP of $50K.

A Supra that cannot compete with the GT-R is a Celica Supra not a H00PRA.

Ergo my original statement:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by novicius

It is such a different age now, I wonder how Toyota will keep this car from being stillborn. :|

---

But I think your first statement is wrong. Sports cars don't have to run with Godzilla just to be relevant, even sports cars from Japanese manufacturers. The world of new sports car purchases is not just a dick swinging competition, as much as magazines and brand-specific forums might want you to think.

Aiming for Corvettes/Caymans/base 911s is a completely reasonable proposal.

Agreed.

And I would expect a Z5 to fill a similar slot the Z4 is leaving behind. Maybe slightly upscale into SL territory instead of SLK (SLA?), but not wannabe supercar stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kchrpm

But I think your first statement is wrong. Sports cars don't have to run with Godzilla just to be relevant, even sports cars from Japanese manufacturers. The world of new sports car purchases is not just a dick swinging competition, as much as magazines and brand-specific forums might want you to think.

Aiming for Corvettes/Caymans/base 911s is a completely reasonable proposal.

---

But I think historically people expect a car with the name SUPRA to run with Godzilla (But really, until the MKIV was that even true?)

With the gentlemen's agreement of the time, it's hard to say what any of the cars were really trying to do. To me, the GT-R jumped classes when it ditched its family car underpinnings and went for supercar territory in the latest generation. The Supra could make that jump, too, but I don't think the investment would be smart or justified when the car you're sharing development with is just going to be a sports car.

$60k was the target price that was thrown out by their chief designer a few years ago ($100k it would be a Lexus, no?)

This report from 2014 says the Toyota would be a hybrid, to differentiate from the BMW with the same basic engine: http://www.automobilemag.com/news/re...sion-possible/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MR2 Fan

But I think historically people expect a car with the name SUPRA to run with Godzilla (But really, until the MKIV was that even true?)

---

No, they didn't, in markets which got the GTR it was seen as a step above. GTR's were expected to be running with, or in front of, a 911 turbo around a track, supra has never been expected to play in that space.

I was at the local Harbor Freight store yesterday. I was checking out the finest in Pittsburgh-labeled Chinese steel when I saw a guy wearing a black t-shirt that said "SUPRA" on it. I walked up to him and struck up a short conversation.

I asked him if he thought that the next Supra should be a $55K, 450ish HP, 12-second quarter-mile sports car (basically a Japanese/German Corvette)... or should it compete with the GT-R?

He wanted to see a GT-R fighter. #anecdotal

EDIT: This anecdote is not intended as proof of what a ToyoBimmer sporty car ought to be (and certainly not a prediction on what it's *going* to be).

On Friday Keith & I debated the topic back channel and really came to the conclusion that we have different opinions on what people are asking for when they say "Bring back the Supra!"

Keith can explain his position (I don't want to put words into his mouth). My opinion is that those people (forum fanboys and former MKIV owners alike) want a GT-R fighter.

I write this fully understanding Greg's statement but the MKIV in the U.S. was a different situation compared to the rest of the world.

Looks a sensible size, not too big. Like the curved doorline and double-bubble-ish roof.

Waist is a bit high, like with most modern cars.

Is the Z5 going to get front double wishbones, or is the Supra going to make do with McPherson struts up front?

V6 TT sounds good to me. It might all get a bit heavy with V6, turbos and electric motors, though.


Interesting - and much more likely to actually happen than the mythical new Mazda rotary I really want.

I think there's a segment of the Supra-enthusiast population that just wants the brand name they like to come back as an all-conquering hero for bragging rights. I don't know how many of those people can or would buy a brand new $110k+ car.

It's similar to the mid-engined Corvette argument, IMO. Yes, there are Corvette fans out there that want a mid-engined Corvette, not just journalists. But have they thought through what it really means? Have they realized that a mid-engined, small block powered car is likely going to start close to 6 figures with the LT1 engine? Do they understand the size of the market they are leaving behind if they have that car and get rid of the FR car and its price range?

But perhaps the answer for both the Corvette and Supra is "both"! Make the MR Vette a new model, alongside the Stingray, Grand Sport and Z06, and have a 6-figure, AWD w/vector blah blah Supra TRD.

It's also similar to MR2 fandom. When the MKIII came out, a lot of people didn't like it, because it was much more like the MKI than the MKII (not to mention questionable styling). Most people want a resurrection of the MKII MR2 if Toyota does bring it back again

If we're filling out a wishlist I too would like the Z5 to compete with the GTR. Easy for me to say because I'm not in the market for a Z5 at $60K or $160K.

So coming back to the real world, I realize I'm behind the times but how did the last BMW Z... 4 (?) stack up against the C7?

Can a Z5 deliver the goods? The base C7 is... formidable.

Hahahaha

I'll take that as a 'No' then.

Z4 was never marketed as more than a trophy wife's plaything was it? The Z4M Coupe is one of my favorite of all time but I never really considered it as competition for anything like the C7 or even a tarted up Mustang.

Yup, it's more like a techno-version of the SLK. Which in turn used to be a Boxster competitor, although none of them are really aimed at the same market. And clearly the Boxster (which is probably the sportiest out of the SLK/Z4/Boxster) is not really... comparable to a C7.

Z4 was just a new Z3 if that helps. And yeah, like above pretty much Z3/4 = SLK = TT for years, and similar market but performance below Boxster.

It's debatable if Z5 would mean Z4 successor or not. I don't think so. I think the Z3 became the Z4 because BMW wanted to change from 3 to 4 for coupes, not just because 4 comes after 3. If the new one is Z5, I think that means a different segment.

Audi TT is the only car that came to mind when I was thinking of the Z4M Coupe competitors. I think the BMW is a better car by leaps and bounds but that seems to be the market segment.

Would have to be a TT S to compete with a Z4M though, TTs are the very definition of a hairdresser car.

In Aus the supra was considered to be a Japanese camaro, not a Japanese corvette. Lots of power, not completely shit around a circuit and with some work and compromises could be really quick on a circuit but we're really about great gobs of power and 12 second quarter miles at 156 mph.

If you ask GT4 owners if they'd prefer the GT4 had the GT3 engine 95% would say yes. Doesn't mean it could have ever happened or that the price could have been remotely where it was if they did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IMOA

hairdresser car.

---

I was dancing around this term but avoided it because (1) I didn't want to offend the Miata crowd (2) I will probably own a Z4M Coupe someday and didn't want to have to backtrack this conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IMOA

In Aus the supra was considered to be a Japanese camaro, not a Japanese corvette.

---

That's how the Supra was thought of in the US at the time, which is why pricing the A80 Turbo higher than the Corvette (which had respectable LT1 power by this time) was part of the terrible sales results. There were a total of 11,239 US sales of the A80 Supra over 5 model years, or less than the A70 Supra sold in 1989 alone (14,544).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBenior

That's how the Supra was thought of in the US at the time, which is why pricing the A80 Turbo higher than the Corvette (which had respectable LT1 power by this time) was part of the terrible sales results. There were a total of 11,239 US sales of the A80 Supra over 5 model years, or less than the A70 Supra sold in 1989 alone (14,544).

---

Hmmm, I hadn't taken that into consideration in my discussions with Carlo. Good point.

That definitely moves the bogey on the price range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dodint

I was dancing around this term but avoided it because (1) I didn't want to offend the Miata crowd (2) I will probably own a Z4M Coupe someday and didn't want to have to backtrack this conversation.

---

It's cool, bro, just buy whatever you want.

A Miata it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBenior

That's how the Supra was thought of in the US at the time, which is why pricing the A80 Turbo higher than the Corvette (which had respectable LT1 power by this time) was part of the terrible sales results. There were a total of 11,239 US sales of the A80 Supra over 5 model years, or less than the A70 Supra sold in 1989 alone (14,544).

---

You have not done your homework on the origins of the MKIV, Ross. It absolutely was not a "Camaro-fighter". :rolleyes:

I love when novi gets his jimmies rustled.

According to CAR magazine, the photos up top are of a Z5 Coupe, not a Supra.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/spy-sho...s-and-details/

" this isn’t a disguised mule of Toyota’s mooted super-coupe. Besides the BMW-derived interior, this car – which is clearly based on the Z5 prototypes spotted previously – wears M4 GTS wheels and Munich plates."

Still super-interested to see what the Supra comes out as, tho. I'm assuming the two models will launch fairly close together, if Toyota were a year or more later they would presumably miss out on many sales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dodint

I love when novi gets his jimmies rustled.

---

Damn straight they're rustled -- it's an incorrect comparison and a ridiculous statement overall.

The MKIV Supra was a redesigned Lexus SC 400, itself a lux coupe built to target the MB SL series. The program began in '89 and the keel was laid down in '91 -- any C4 available during this time would have been completely outclassed by the MKIV, much less a Z28.

The MSRP, power and performance was all greater than the LT1 C4's of its day. The big three car mags only compared it to the the other Japanese halo cars, Corvette and the Dodge Stealth TT (itself a rebadged 3000GT VR-4). I am trying to wrap my head around a world where this car would have been considered a Z28-fighter... just because it has a back seat?? :smh:

Cue my Lewis Black sputtering meltdown!! :angry: ( :lol: )

I agree with Carlo. The MKIV Supra was never designed to compete with the Camaro. It was Toyota's answer to the NSX, FD RX-7 and Skyline GT-R. And in the US it was marketed and priced to compete with the Corvette, NSX and FD RX-7.

I believe Ross was saying that the pre-Mk IV Supras were comparable to Camaros, and that the Mk IV Supra failed on the market when it attempted to go above that in performance and price. And saying the MkIV was better than Corvettes/Camaros when it was first being designed doesn't account for it the ones with the LT1 that were available when it came out.

Perhaps they were just trying to cover both markets with one car, but pushed the price too far up just as the sports car market was diving and were brought down with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phil_SS

I agree with Carlo. The MKIV Supra was never designed to compete with the Camaro. It was Toyota's answer to the NSX, FD RX-7 and Skyline GT-R. And in the US it was marketed and priced to compete with the Corvette, NSX and FD RX-7.

---

But there was also a naturally-aspirated, 220 hp version. A 2+2 with a 220 hp version and a 320 hp version sounds much more like a Camaro than a Corvette.

But Chevrolet was the only one really attacking this market with two different cars*, everyone else had all of their sports car eggs in one basket until the Boxster/Cayman for Porsche, it may just not be a fair comparison at all.

*I don't know how the hell the 240SX fits into all this.

The origins of the c1990 Japanese sports car escalation are quite exciting. The '80s cars were all kind of swimming around in the middle part of the market with things like Camaros, but the Z32 300ZX dropped the gauntlet (maybe to distinguish itself from the 240SX) and the GTO/3000GT, the RX7 and the Supra all went nutso in response. You can't even really draw a line between these cars and their predecessors. They all jumped out of the commodity sports car pond and directly into the near-supercar pond.

The NSX was on a different track - its development started much earlier than the others with Honda always aiming at supercars. It may have been the thing that caused the 3000GT VR4 to exist, but they were never competition. The NSX was 150%-200% the price of all the others.

Somewhere I have a special edition R&T which offers a retrospective on these imports. It's probably a lot of speculation, but it does offer some neat insights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kchrpm

And saying the MkIV was better than Corvettes/Camaros when it was first being designed doesn't account for it the ones with the LT1 that were available when it came out.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by novicius

The MSRP, power and performance was all greater than the LT1 C4's of its day.

---

I already said the MKIV eclipsed all the LT1 cars of its day.

Not too be short-tempered about this but it's all history. The Supra was Toyota's halo car and it's never coming back as the legend it once was. That task is now up to Lexus' LC 500 F, whenever that drops. That'll be 600+ HP, $180K, yadda, yadda, yadda.

We ARE living in another automotive Golden Age, you just gotta have a net worth north of $500K to play.

*checks old 0-60 times* you're right, over 5 second vs under 5 seconds. Mea culpa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samoht

According to CAR magazine, the photos up top are of a Z5 Coupe, not a Supra.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/spy-sho...s-and-details/

" this isn’t a disguised mule of Toyota’s mooted super-coupe. Besides the BMW-derived interior, this car – which is clearly based on the Z5 prototypes spotted previously – wears M4 GTS wheels and Munich plates."

Still super-interested to see what the Supra comes out as, tho. I'm assuming the two models will launch fairly close together, if Toyota were a year or more later they would presumably miss out on many sales.

---

It's kinda moot at this point in development Supra mule = Z5 mule I would think. Just as all the early 86 mules were basically BRZ's as well until they got down to the details.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kchrpm

I believe Ross was saying that the pre-Mk IV Supras were comparable to Camaros

---

If you look at the MSRP's ($25K for the Supra Turbo, $30K for the C4), I really don't think that's apt either.

In 1986 the Corvette was cranking out 250 horse. The Supra Turbo was boosting 230 and heavy but still loaded with advanced tech for its time: 3-channel ABS and adjustable damper settings. It was still Toyota's flagship -- an $11K 190-horsepower IROC-Z did not compete in this space.

I never meant to imply that the A80 Supra was designed as a Camaro fighter, only that it had the market perception as such while being priced higher than the C4 Corvette, which resulted in terrible sales.

By and large, the only way American cars from the 80s through the early 90s could beat their Japanese competitors was on size and price, so no, I'm not saying that Supra Turbos and Camaro IROC-Z had the same performance.

Just because a car has the performance to compete against cars that are perceived to be in a higher class, it doesn't mean that anybody apart from car nerds will care. And we don't typically buy enough new cars to support a unique platform. You can see this in comments about the Focus RS ($40K FOR A FOCUS!?!?), but the Focus RS gets to spread it's platform costs across a couple hundred thousand sales in the US alone, and it's engine development with an engine shared in some form with the Mustang, Explorer, and Mac.

That is your opinion that the U.S. market perception of the Supra was as a "Japanese Camaro". If you have a link supporting that opinion I will gladly read it.

Toyota designed, priced and marketed the car in the U.S.-only as a halo car. Car mags of the day only compared it to the Corvette. Supra owners & fans compare it to the Corvette (at least! :D ).

By no metric did the American market consider the Supra a "Japanese Camaro". :smh:

By no metric?

Quote:

---

A car has to have the goods before it can play in the sports-coupe major leagues. The combatants in this arena include such potent performers as the Corvette, the Porsche 944 Turbo, the Mazda RX-7 Turbo, and the Camaro IROC-Z —cars fully equipped to devour any competitor that dares to enter the field of battle unprepared. In this fiercely contested market segment, superlative performance is essential to survival.

---

Sounds like Car and Driver lumped the Supra Turbo in somewhere along with the Camaro IROC-Z and the Corvette, between where it was in price. Back when significant numbers of people still bought them anyway (33,823 in 1986). A80 sales peaked at 3,405 in 1994. That year, GM moved 23,330 Corvettes with a 10 year old body style, 119,799 Camaros, and 45,992 Firebirds/Trans Ams.

the moral of the story is we'd prefer a Celica Supra, MKI MR2, Cressida, AE86, new 86/BRZ, ... that we can afford to buy and maintain and drive closer to their limits, right? because no one here actually has a MKIV Supra or Corvette

So an IROC-Z is also a Porsche 944 competitor? ;)

Isn't more likely that the honorable mention of the mighty IROC-Z was due more to the legacy of the MKII Celica Supra at that point? By '89 the magazine you linked to compared the Supra Turbo exclusively to the Corvette.

EDIT: Even a MKII might not be considered a "Japanese Camaro" based on its original MSRP alone.

All this talk has gotten me looking at UK Corvettes.