It doesn't have to be that expensive - I'd figure $30-$35k, and lets face it, even the Toyobaru is just barely within reach of the kind of person who likes those cars. They're required to have more safety gear in them that costs more, and the target market earns even less now. Toyota is not Porsche, they do care about 2nd-hand owners.
GameboyRMH wrote: It doesn't have to be that expensive - I'd figure $30-$35k, and lets face it, even the Toyobaru is just barely within reach of the kind of person who likes those cars. They're required to have more safety gear in them that costs more, and the target market earns even less now. Toyota is not Porsche, they do care about 2nd-hand owners.
I wouldn't say it's barely within reach. I work with the military and I see new Airmen with new GT86s and Genesis turbos all over.
I can be $30k but every article you read about it everyone just assumes or accepts that it should be $60. On Jalopnik I got into a huge argument with people who thought it was ludicrous I think it should be $40k even.
kanaric wrote:bravenrace wrote: But, but, but, Hyundai scored higher than Toyota in the JD power initial quality study!!!! That means they make better cars! Because, you know, how a car gets through the first 90 days has is an incredibly accurate measure of what it's lifespan will be. (We really need a sarcasm emoticon...)I see a lot more $30k Hyundai Genesis on the streets than $60k Lexus. That is how you build a name selling performance cars. By actually selling cars. Nobody wants a $60k BMW-Toyota Supra. 370Z sales have been seriously slumping because it's behind the Genesis, Mustang, Camaro, STI, etc at the same price point or more. Nobody is going to want to buy a Toyota equivalent for double the price again. And don't say "i will" because no, you wouldn't. It makes no sense. Also BMWs are not known for long term reliability and I havn't been hearing of problems with new Hyundais. Ironically I HAVE with Toyotas with that massive lawsuit and everything.
..Trying to figure out how that statement is a reply to me...
bravenrace wrote:kanaric wrote:..Trying to figure out how that statement is a reply to me...bravenrace wrote: But, but, but, Hyundai scored higher than Toyota in the JD power initial quality study!!!! That means they make better cars! Because, you know, how a car gets through the first 90 days has is an incredibly accurate measure of what it's lifespan will be. (We really need a sarcasm emoticon...)I see a lot more $30k Hyundai Genesis on the streets than $60k Lexus. That is how you build a name selling performance cars. By actually selling cars. Nobody wants a $60k BMW-Toyota Supra. 370Z sales have been seriously slumping because it's behind the Genesis, Mustang, Camaro, STI, etc at the same price point or more. Nobody is going to want to buy a Toyota equivalent for double the price again. And don't say "i will" because no, you wouldn't. It makes no sense. Also BMWs are not known for long term reliability and I havn't been hearing of problems with new Hyundais. Ironically I HAVE with Toyotas with that massive lawsuit and everything.
I'm assuming you are replying to my comment that a BMW partnership is going to cause it to be expensive and they would be better off partnering with Hyundai so they can release and inexpensive RWD chassis car. I am not serious but i'm saying that it would make more sense for a Toyota to be reasonably priced and Hyundai releases a car they should of been building to begin with. Nissan continued the Z with no problem. Toyota abandoned the Supra. Hyundai releases a Z equivalent despite having no history of such a car. Toyota meanwhile abandoned the entire performance segment.
In reply to kanaric:
You implied that Toyota made better quality products than Hyundai, and I was just pointing out that Hyundai scored higher than Toyota in the JDP study. It was all sarcastic, and probably was more a slam on the JDP study than anything else.
The endless blithering drivel about the twins makes me ashamed to have one.
I had to laugh when the first book written on the Marque proclaims "Built by passion, not by committee". If ever there was a committee car, the twins is them.
This isn't first time I have heard of this. An early plan was chassis development by BMW and engines by Toyota.
Now that BMW has went away from i-6 as the bread and butter engine, I think it is very feasible.
Remember, Apple has enough cash to buy BMW in it's entirety. BMW is actually quite small for a major OEM.
Any GT car is going to have a hard time selling once the first year struggles of the 2015 moostang are done. 29k for a properly equipped (base + performance pack + cloth recaros - spoiler) 3300lb turbo 4 cylinder RWD 4 seat coupe is going to be tough to touch.
kanaric wrote:GameboyRMH wrote: It doesn't have to be that expensive - I'd figure $30-$35k, and lets face it, even the Toyobaru is just barely within reach of the kind of person who likes those cars. They're required to have more safety gear in them that costs more, and the target market earns even less now. Toyota is not Porsche, they do care about 2nd-hand owners.I wouldn't say it's barely within reach. I work with the military and I see new Airmen with new GT86s and Genesis turbos all over. I can be $30k but every article you read about it everyone just assumes or accepts that it should be $60. On Jalopnik I got into a huge argument with people who thought it was ludicrous I think it should be $40k even.
There's a BRZ on our local Subaru lot for $24.5k, that's well within reach of most of it's intended audience. Sure it's not competitive with a stripped out Fiat 500, but it's not meant to compete with those cars either.
I test drove a BRZ before I bought the 370, and truthfully, it probably would have done a similar job, but the 370 is nicer inside, and faster of course. The BRZ however was $10k cheaper. It's clearly built to a price point, but it's driving dynamics let it compete with cars costing far more. The fact that I shopped it against pricier cars I think says a lot.
As far as Toyota goes, I think it's a great idea for both companies. People think that only Toyota would benefit, but I disagree, I think BMW can also learn a lot. I have experience with both companies, and BMW can definitely benefit from Toyota's approach to electronics.
I hate it for Subaru if this is true, but to me, Toyota and BMW make more sense, as Subaru has always been a company that goes a different path. Both BMW and Toyota are shall we say, more traditional in their approaches.
mad_machine wrote: notice they said that Toyota wants to put a sports car beneath the 86 and one above it.. might there be a 4th generation of MR2 coming out?
THIS!
racerdave600 wrote: I hate it for Subaru if this is true, but to me, Toyota and BMW make more sense, as Subaru has always been a company that goes a different path. Both BMW and Toyota are shall we say, more traditional in their approaches.
When Subaru had the STi and Mitsu the Evo8, I read a comparison test between the two cars. The writer remarked that he felt that Subaru was more "European" in how they did things more for the engineering's sake
TTAC's article suggests that Toyobaru production could be cut short...I don't think anyone involved wants that.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/06/toyobaru-might-only-last-for-one-generation-as-partnership-under-evaluation/
bravenrace wrote: In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker: Because there aren't enough vowels to properly pronounce Toyobmw.
toybimmer 
irish44j wrote:b13990 wrote: some of the most dangerous and mediocre vehicles ever produced.While I'll fully agree that most of toyota's regular car line are "mediocre" in terms of performance, appearance, and most other things other than "economy"...and I'd never buy one... 1. Toyota trucks (at least historically) are quite the opposite of "Mediocre." If I'm doing a cross-Africa safari or something, I'll take a land cruiser, 4Runner, or even Sequoia long before I'll take any other kind of 4x4 SUV out there. Hell, there's a reason that every third-world country with nasty terrain (Afghanistan, most of Africa, etc) is chock-full of Toyota Hilux pickups, and not full of Jeep Wranglers. I've owned Jeeps, and I've owned Toyotas. The Toyotas are better in every single respect aside from hardcore rock-crawling where the IFS isn't as capable. Toyota is one of the few brands that still builds a real truck-based SUV and not a big station wagon on 20" wheels like most other brands have gone to. 2. Curious, what about Toyotas in general is "dangerous" apart from maybe the gas pedal thing which is hardly a problem that ONLY Toyota has had over the years?
I agree with #1. Praise goes to Toyota for still building real trucks the right way.
As for #2, the main "dangerous" thing that I had in mind was simply a lack of road-holding ability.
People hold up the Prius, Corolla, etc. as safe, efficient vehicles, but consider for a moment that, for 2014, most examples of the two models I just mentioned come with off-brand "touring" tires that are less than 200 millimeters wide, with a 65% aspect ratio. These carry a speed rating of 112 mph. They're mounted on 15" rims (and you don't have to go back too far in time to find examples with 14" rims).
I guess this isn't horrible by the standards of 20 years ago, but there are just so many better options out there today. My 2009 Impreza came with Bridgestone Potenzas, 205/55R16. These are marketed as a "high performance" tire and have a 149mph rating. That's a whole lot more contact patch, and stickier rubber, and it's just backed up by a much better manufacturer. And I haven't even gotten into all the other handling and safety advantages the Impreza has. The bottom line is that I wouldn't even consider putting my wife or children into a Toyota given that basically every other manufacturer out there produces a safer product.
Even if you step up to a sportier trim level, you'll often find that Toyota couldn't really figure out what to do with the extra rubber. I read a review of the 2013 Corolla "S" (with 17" wheels) and it only made 0.79g on the skidpad. A few years ago, I remember reading a review of the top-of-the-line Solara that commented on the fact that the "sport" model with 17" wheels actually handled worse than the base, 16"-wheeled model.
The message I get from all of this is that Toyota just doesn't care about handling. They'll whittle down the size of the tires they sell you to get the MPG number up, and then they'll buy the tires from manufacturers that most car makers wouldn't touch. And even if you do spring for something more sporty-looking than a Prius, with its grocery cart wheels, you're (amazingly) still not guaranteed decent handling.
I couldn't find that Solara article today, but I did notice that a top-of-the-line final-generation Solara coupe only pulled 0.77g on the skidpad, and the convertible only managed 0.73g. In fact, if you read a skidpad number, and it starts with "0.7", you're probably looking at a Toyota or a Hummer.
Now I realize that maximum grip under static conditions isn't everything... but it's something. And it's a bit disquieting that those Solaras are actually pretty powerful. They do 0-60 in six seconds and change, the quarter in around 15 seconds flat, etc.; these cars need far better handling capabilities, in my estimation.
Braking is something to think about, too. Motor Trend (who are pretty generous with this sort of thing) were able to stop a 2014 Corolla "S" from 60mph in 135 feet. I did a web search on "60-0 braking 135'" to get an idea of where this put the "S" in the overall scheme of things, and I was unimpressed. 135' is on par with a 1972 Fiat 128, a Pontiac Fiero, and the 3rd generation F-bodies before they got ABS.
Subjectively, my experiences with the one and only Toyota I ever owned backed up all these objective claims. Driving in the wind, rain, or snow required constant diligence. Speeds easily maintained by other vehicles were dangerously disconnected-feeling in mine.
And that really is the heart of the matter. The rest of the world is increasingly moving toward bigger, sportier tires from top-tier manufacturers. Toyota seems to be alone in viewing tires and brakes as a necessary evil. The result is a vehicle that, increasingly over time, will simply not respond to sudden demands the way drivers have grown to expect.
mad_machine wrote:racerdave600 wrote: I hate it for Subaru if this is true, but to me, Toyota and BMW make more sense, as Subaru has always been a company that goes a different path. Both BMW and Toyota are shall we say, more traditional in their approaches.When Subaru had the STi and Mitsu the Evo8, I read a comparison test between the two cars. The writer remarked that he felt that Subaru was more "European" in how they did things more for the engineering's sake
Only if you compared it to a US Evo8, because those didn't get all the gizmos of the JDM one.
OK, I'm biased in the sense that I'm now on my second Evo (used to have an Evo 2, now an Evo X) and if especially the later Evos aren't engineering for engineering's sake, you'll be hard pressed finding something that is this side of a Skyline/Nissan GT-R.
Hungary Bill wrote:bravenrace wrote: In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker: Because there aren't enough vowels to properly pronounce Toyobmw.toybimmer
Bimota
my bad that is already taken
b13990 wrote:irish44j wrote:I agree with #1. Praise goes to Toyota for still building real trucks the right way. As for #2, the main "dangerous" thing that I had in mind was simply a lack of road-holding ability. People hold up the Prius, Corolla, etc. as safe, efficient vehicles, but consider for a moment that, for 2014, most examples of the two models I just mentioned come with off-brand "touring" tires that are less than 200 millimeters wide, with a 65% aspect ratio. These carry a speed rating of 112 mph. They're mounted on 15" rims (and you don't have to go back too far in time to find examples with 14" rims). I guess this isn't horrible by the standards of 20 years ago, but there are just so many better options out there today. My 2009 Impreza came with Bridgestone Potenzas, 205/55R16. These are marketed as a "high performance" tire and have a 149mph rating. That's a whole lot more contact patch, and stickier rubber, and it's just backed up by a much better manufacturer. And I haven't even gotten into all the other handling and safety advantages the Impreza has. The bottom line is that I wouldn't even consider putting my wife or children into a Toyota given that basically every other manufacturer out there produces a safer product. Even if you step up to a sportier trim level, you'll often find that Toyota couldn't really figure out what to do with the extra rubber. I read a review of the 2013 Corolla "S" (with 17" wheels) and it only made 0.79g on the skidpad. A few years ago, I remember reading a review of the top-of-the-line Solara that commented on the fact that the "sport" model with 17" wheels actually handled worse than the base, 16"-wheeled model. The message I get from all of this is that Toyota just doesn't care about handling. They'll whittle down the size of the tires they sell you to get the MPG number up, and then they'll buy the tires from manufacturers that most car makers wouldn't touch. And even if you do spring for something more sporty-looking than a Prius, with its grocery cart wheels, you're (amazingly) still not guaranteed decent handling. I couldn't find that Solara article today, but I did notice that a top-of-the-line final-generation Solara coupe only pulled 0.77g on the skidpad, and the convertible only managed 0.73g. In fact, if you read a skidpad number, and it starts with "0.7", you're probably looking at a Toyota or a Hummer. Now I realize that maximum grip under static conditions isn't everything... but it's something. And it's a bit disquieting that those Solaras are actually pretty powerful. They do 0-60 in six seconds and change, the quarter in around 15 seconds flat, etc.; these cars need far better handling capabilities, in my estimation. Braking is something to think about, too. Motor Trend (who are pretty generous with this sort of thing) were able to stop a 2014 Corolla "S" from 60mph in 135 feet. I did a web search on "60-0 braking 135'" to get an idea of where this put the "S" in the overall scheme of things, and I was unimpressed. 135' is on par with a 1972 Fiat 128, a Pontiac Fiero, and the 3rd generation F-bodies before they got ABS. Subjectively, my experiences with the one and only Toyota I ever owned backed up all these objective claims. Driving in the wind, rain, or snow required constant diligence. Speeds easily maintained by other vehicles were dangerously disconnected-feeling in mine. And that really is the heart of the matter. The rest of the world is increasingly moving toward bigger, sportier tires from top-tier manufacturers. Toyota seems to be alone in viewing tires and brakes as a necessary evil. The result is a vehicle that, increasingly over time, will simply not respond to sudden demands the way drivers have grown to expect.b13990 wrote: some of the most dangerous and mediocre vehicles ever produced.While I'll fully agree that most of toyota's regular car line are "mediocre" in terms of performance, appearance, and most other things other than "economy"...and I'd never buy one... 1. Toyota trucks (at least historically) are quite the opposite of "Mediocre." If I'm doing a cross-Africa safari or something, I'll take a land cruiser, 4Runner, or even Sequoia long before I'll take any other kind of 4x4 SUV out there. Hell, there's a reason that every third-world country with nasty terrain (Afghanistan, most of Africa, etc) is chock-full of Toyota Hilux pickups, and not full of Jeep Wranglers. I've owned Jeeps, and I've owned Toyotas. The Toyotas are better in every single respect aside from hardcore rock-crawling where the IFS isn't as capable. Toyota is one of the few brands that still builds a real truck-based SUV and not a big station wagon on 20" wheels like most other brands have gone to. 2. Curious, what about Toyotas in general is "dangerous" apart from maybe the gas pedal thing which is hardly a problem that ONLY Toyota has had over the years?
I'll agree with you and the dislike of crappy tires, but as we all know, the general appliance-driving public doesn't even know what tires are on their car, and don't really care unless they get a flat. I think a lot of this is driven by the "economy" tires to bump fleet MPG up by % points. I don't really care about OEM tires since I never keep them (on any vehicle), but I see where you're coming from.
That said, this is hardly a problem specific to Toyota. Ex: My 2000 Maxima came with the Potenza RE92, an "all-season" tire. Anyone who has ever owned those tires knows well that they are really bad in rain even at full tread, and in winter weather, they are downright dangerous - I'd rather be on r-comps than RE92s on a snowy street.
I will give it to you on the Subarus. My 09 WRX came with Dunlop SP Sport01s, and I think they're great tires. I like them enough that I've bought two takeoff sets from other WRX owners who swapped out for all-seasons (I run summers since I have a set of winter wheels).
Manufacturers are trying to keep cars to a pricepoint, and I guess putting Hankooks or Wanli or other cheapo brands on them helps with that. They go with whatever the tire manufacturers will give them a good deal on, it seems. And let's be honest, for the guy driving a Corolla to and from work, even those lousy tires are probably sufficient for them.
I've always thought that as much difference as tires make, it would behoove manufacturers to put really good tires on their cars, but then you're adding $500 maybe, and that puts the car more $$ than a competitor or whatever...
For people like us, that's what Tire Rack is for 
One note, Toyota put Dunlop AT20s stock on the 4Runner, Tacoma and other trucks for years. Dunlop being a "big name" brand. The AT20s ("highway all-terrain) are hands-down the most dreadful tire in that category out there (look at TR reviews). So just going with a "reputable brand" doesn't really guarantee that the tire will be any good.
As to brakes, that's not a "Toyota thing." EX: Sport Edition 4Runner has 13" rotors and 4-pots up front. Even stock, it was the best-stopping vehicle I've ever owned (including my WRX, Maxima w/Wilwoods, Integra, etc). Whereas my Maxima's stock brakes were woefully undersized for the car....and that was the "4 Door Sportscar" thing....
Stock pads in most cars are meant for low dust, low noise, and long wear. The tradeoff is bite and fade performance. Again, not an issue for me....all my cars get aftermarket pads at very least (hell, we have Hawk HPS on my Sequoia, haha...)
Appears Subaru is in for gen 2.....
https://autos.yahoo.com/news/second-generation-brz-coming-says-boss-subaru-parent-140010617.html
What I found odd... Yahoo (in above article) states less than 12,000 units of both cars have been sold..... 
You can buy a BRZ right off the lot in Covington, LA
oldeskewltoy wrote: What I found odd... Yahoo (in above article) states less than 12,000 units of both cars have been sold.....
What's odd about that? Seems about right for the market. Pretty much what I expected it would be.
I would really like to know why Toyota wants to kill their partnership with Subaru and possibly kill the GT86. I suspect that we will be able to find out 2+ years after it's done. I've ridden in one (haven't driven one yet) and it has better driving dynamics than any car I've autocrossed or ridden in before. It's too good to kill. I would like them to keep working with Subaru on the GT86 and work with BMW on their higher market sports car. I also think it's the best street car in Gran Turismo 5 if that means something to you gamers. I'm also looking at Miata sales (along with Z4 and Boxster) and there doesn't seem to be much room for a MR-2 or equivalent sports car.
Mr_Clutch42 wrote: It's too good to kill.
You have to remember that Toyota managed to outdo GM by out GMing them, GM loves to kill good things that aren't Corvettes.
What good cars have GM killed? I just know that GM cheaped out on some cars that got them killed, like not giving the LS1 Camaros and Firebirds IRS or not having the Pontiac GTO look more exciting and cool (yet look similar to LS1 Camaros and they don't get that criticism).
In reply to Mr_Clutch42:
Let me name a few:
Fiero Solstice G8
You'll need to log in to post.
