New Supra

[GG.]

Good spot - I'm guessing the 2 wheel drive model is not 0.7 seconds slower but in honesty haven't got a fucking clue.

EFA.

Taken from Evo:

"Both the Carrera S and Carrera 4S get to 62mph some 0.4sec faster than the equivalent 991s, in 3.7 and 3.6sec respectively. "

I expect there is nothing in it. 2S will do low threes - Supra is at least half a second or more off the 911s pace. Funnily enough physics works roughly as I expected it to.

[Beany]

Good spot - I'm guessing the 2 wheel drive model is not 0.7 seconds slower.

<edited>
I guess its sports chrono with overboost that means it figures quicker than 3.7. Given sports chrono is only about a £1,500 option, I think you can still class that as a standard Carrera S.
</edited>

The backpedal is real.

[GG.]

Good spot - I'm guessing the 2 wheel drive model is not 0.7 seconds slower.

<edited>
I guess its sports chrono with overboost that means it figures quicker than 3.7. Given sports chrono is only about a £1,500 option, I think you can still class that as a standard Carrera S.
</edited>

The backpedal is real.

Nah see above. Either car will smash a Supra to 60, seemingly with or without it.

[GG.]

Given everything is now turbo and a Carrera S is 3 seconds dead to 60 I'm not sure it is in 2019. The whole point of a Jap coupe is that you should be getting Carrera performance for 2/3 the price, no?

according to Evo the carrerra S does it in 3.7...So id say for 2/3rds of the price you are getting it!

I would however like to retract my 2/3rds price statement and change it to almost HALF. £98k base vs £52k base.

In '93 it was $65k for a 964 Carrera 2 and $38k for a Supra. A Supra was 58% of the cost of a 911 then and 53% now so the point stands.

[scotta]

according to Evo the carrerra S does it in 3.7...So id say for 2/3rds of the price you are getting it!

I would however like to retract my 2/3rds price statement and change it to almost HALF. £98k base vs £52k base.

In '93 it was $65k for a 964 Carrera 2 and $38k for a Supra. A Supra was 58% of the cost of a 911 then and 53% now so the point stands.

It really doesnt. Your expectation of a car almost half the cost to match the performance is completely moon on a stick!

[GG.]

I would however like to retract my 2/3rds price statement and change it to almost HALF. £98k base vs £52k base.

In '93 it was $65k for a 964 Carrera 2 and $38k for a Supra. A Supra was 58% of the cost of a 911 then and 53% now so the point stands.

It really doesnt. Your expectation of a car almost half the cost to match the performance is completely moon on a stick!

Apart from of course it is a common feature of Japanese cars such as the GTR, NSX and the original Supra versus their European counterparts (Porsche and Ferrari). You're literally arguing black is white here.

ETA: given the dogmatic nature of internet forums, Toyota's marketing budget is probably best spent getting people to trash their car online so everyone then does a total volte face and say "Erg nehr its like the best thing ever!"

[JLv3.0]

GG's unique 'must start an argument / fight right now this instance!' gland active and well then

[GG.]

Well the forumites have seemingly not disproved that twin turbos are preferred to single turbos, that the currrent Supra is significantly slower than the current 911 Carrera and that it has always been around half the cost so I'm resting easy!

[scotta]

Well the forumits have seemingly not disproved that twin turbos are preferred to single turbos, that the currrent Supra is significantly slower than the current 911 Carrera and that it hasn't always been around half the cost so I'm resting easy!

My point was that 0-60 in 4.0 seconds is sufficiently fast for an entry level sports car. Then you started spraffing bollocks about it not being faster than a 911 that costs nearly £100k. Well..DUH. Car that cost half as much generally are not faster than their more expensive rivals similarly how a base model 992 is not faster than a Ferrari 488 at almost twice the price..

[scotta]

Well the forumites have seemingly not disproved that twin turbos are preferred to single turbos, that the currrent Supra is significantly slower than the current 911 Carrera and that it has always been around half the cost so I'm resting easy!

Turbos - Pros and cons on both in the context of BMW engines.

https://bimmertips.com/bmw-twinpower-tw ... explained/

TL;DR

What is the bottom line?
BMW TwinPower Turbo systems offer similar power to a twin turbo system with more efficient power delivery, less weight and in a smaller package.

[GG.]

Your argument does not stand up in the context of the current GTR that was as quick as a 997 turbo for half the price when launched, an NSX that outperformed a 348 at a significantly lower price and the original Supra which was quicker than the 964.

Comparing the 911 to a 488 seems to suggest you are not grasping this.

[GG.]

Well the forumites have seemingly not disproved that twin turbos are preferred to single turbos, that the currrent Supra is significantly slower than the current 911 Carrera and that it has always been around half the cost so I'm resting easy!

Turbos - Pros and cons on both in the context of BMW engines.

https://bimmertips.com/bmw-twinpower-tw ... explained/

TL;DR

What is the bottom line?
BMW TwinPower Turbo systems offer similar power to a twin turbo system with more efficient power delivery, less weight and in a smaller package.

Which is obviously why they then don't use them on their M cars

[scotta]

Your argument does not stand up in the context of the current GTR that was as quick as a 997 turbo for half the price when launched, an NSX that outperformed a 348 at a significantly lower price and the original Supra which was quicker than the 964.

Comparing the 911 to a 488 seems to suggest you are not grasping this.

I fear its you that is not grasping it. A car based on a Z4 platform is not going to be faster than a 911 that cost significantly more to develop. The GTR was an engineering showcase of what Nissan could do. Quite obviously as Toyota went to find an engineering partner in BMW their project goal was not to showcase their in house engineering talents rather than to bring to market a car that will be profitable.

[GG.]

Look, this is tiring and futile.

The criticism is that it does not live up to the performance standards of previous Japanese developed cars. You've just quite rightly explained this is as a result of it not really being a Japanese car but having the cost base of a German/Austrian one, which is the nub, the entire point, the beating heart of the whole critique.

[scotta]

Well the forumites have seemingly not disproved that twin turbos are preferred to single turbos, that the currrent Supra is significantly slower than the current 911 Carrera and that it has always been around half the cost so I'm resting easy!

Turbos - Pros and cons on both in the context of BMW engines.

https://bimmertips.com/bmw-twinpower-tw ... explained/

TL;DR

What is the bottom line?
BMW TwinPower Turbo systems offer similar power to a twin turbo system with more efficient power delivery, less weight and in a smaller package.

Which is obviously why they then don't use them on their M cars

They use them on their M cars because they produce more power at a higher price point As per the article i linked to states.

[GG.]

So the Supra got the cheaper lower powered engine because a Z4 can't be seen to usurp an M car. Agreed.

Of course that's fine if they do a Supra "M" and get that engine, but then it will be back to being an £75-80k car and still not hitting that price/performance equation previous Jap cars have. Plus I have my doubts BMW will let them have the full fat engine.

Anyway - I think I'll call it a day here!

[NotoriousREV]

For GG’s next argument: which is best, oxygen or water?

[GG.]

For GG’s next argument: which is best, oxygen or water?

Water as you can produce oxygen from it if needed via hydrolysis. Next question

[Holley]

according to Evo the carrerra S does it in 3.7...So id say for 2/3rds of the price you are getting it!

I would however like to retract my 2/3rds price statement and change it to almost HALF. £98k base vs £52k base.

In '93 it was $65k for a 964 Carrera 2 and $38k for a Supra. A Supra was 58% of the cost of a 911 then and 53% now so the point stands.

Although the S isn't the base model, a standard Carrera with lower power is coming which will probably fit with your cost model of past/future.

[scotta]

For GG’s next argument: which is best, oxygen or water?

Water as you can produce oxygen from it if needed via hydrolysis. Next question

What if you run out of oxygen in the time it takes to process the hydrolysis.

Once again you are wrong and Oxygen wins.

Hang fire whilst i trawl the internet for a webpage to prove my theory.