Car enthusiasts. Apart from car designers they’re absolutely the worst people imaginable (and I say that as a car enthusiast and designer). You can’t say or write anything remotely contentious without getting metaphorically duffed up – I should know. OEMs constantly get it in the neck for ignoring enthusiast demands and getting on with the business of building cars they know (or hope) will sell to normal customers. ‘If only this car came equipped with x, y and z it would sell thousands more!’ Or the classic “I would have bought one of those but it costs $10k too much!” And then there is the old “I was interested in getting that car but twenty years ago the OEM let a minor defect get out which was blown out of all proportion on the forums so I’ll never buy one their cars again.”
This fickle attitude manifested in the return of a much storied and much loved nameplate: The Toyota Supra. At first the A90 was decried for containing too much Munich seasoning. Eventually it gained a manual transmission and a cheaper two liter model and it still struggled to sell more than 6 thousand units a year worldwide. Oh yeah, it was too expensive! Back in 1993 the inflation adjusted price of an A80 turbo was getting on for $86k – they were never the accessible rear wheel drive everyday coupe that exists solely in enthusiasts’ minds. Now the A90 is dead. Twenty years hence people wearing a faded tee shirt with a stick shift graphic on it will be bemoaning the death of cars like this even though they didn’t buy any at the time. Catering to these entitled babies-on-wheels is a tricky business, because like me they are never happy.
If you’ve been following along with this series for a bit you’ll know it’s not just about what’s good and why or what’s bad and why, but what examining a car’s design context and history can teach us (or rather you because obviously I know it all already). It affords me the opportunity to talk about other aspects of car design and conception beyond just the drawing pretty pictures-part that some online commentators assume is the only thing (apart from talking utter bollocks) that car designers are capable of.
Because we’re a dynamic and membership focused media organization at the Autopian, one of our mottos is customer service fourth – we listen to our members and then immediately get sidetracked by looking at cars shaped like boats or boats that are classed as trains, which actually happened the afternoon I started writing this. Recently a reader got in touch and wanted an expert take on the Toyota GT(R)86. More specifically comparing the first generation which they disliked and the second generation, which they adored. This sounded like a job for me so I’m here to deliver. Less facetiously it gives me the chance to cover in more depth a couple of things I’ve talked about tangentially in other articles; namely why cars targeted at enthusiasts must cater to a wider market and how the design of a car evolves over time.
How The GT86 Came Into Being
The story of the modern “86” begins with the Toyota FT-HS (FT standing for Future Toyota) hybrid sports car concept shown at the 2007 Detroit show. A joint product of Toyota’s CALTY advanced design studio and the Advanced Product Strategy Group, it was envisaged as a 3.5 liter V6 with associated hybrid system combining for around 400bhp – a sports car for the eco-conscious generation.
An odd mix of sharp creases and more rounded surfaces, the cab forward proportion and openings behind the doors gave the impression of the FT-HS being mid-engined but the powerplant was up front. Visually and conceptually, reall,y the FT-HS was a progenitor for the later 2014 FT-1 concept that became the A90 Supra; its relevance here is that it demonstrated Toyota was thinking seriously about a rear wheel drive enthusiast-targeted car, something they didn’t sell at the time.
The concept that really marked the genesis of the GT86 was the FT-86 which debuted at the 2009 Tokyo show, designed by Toyota Europe Design Development (ED2) in the Cote d’Azur in France. Nice work if you can get it.
This Flash Red five seat coupe contained hints of the earlier FT-HS but, with realistic sized wheels and calmer exterior surfacing, it was a lot closer to a realistic production proposal than fever dream show car.
The typical concept bullshit was mostly limited to the interior – funky secondary controls around the instrument binnacle and a CD slot concealed behind a zipper — fun and original but not a hope in hell of making production. The expensive 3.5 V6 hybrid powertrain bit the dust and was replaced by a more prosaic 2.0 boxer engine, and the 86 moniker left you in no doubt precisely where this new model was targeted.
Toyota then wheeled out the FT-86 II at the Geneva show in 2011. Again the work of the ED2 studio it was a gussied up version of the production car that finally broke cover at the Tokyo show in December of that year and appeared in showrooms in 2012. Subaru had recently started staying with Toyota at weekends so the new coupe was a joint effort; Subaru supplied the engine and built the whole car at their Gunma plant. Initially available in the U.S. and Canada as the Scion FR-S, it was called the Toyota GT86 everywhere else. The Subaru version nobody cared about was the BRZ. [Ed Note: Some people prefer the Subi! -DT].
The brief was clear enough – create and build a stylish car that wouldn’t empty your wallet and was fun to drive on the road, much like the original AE86 in the eighties. On the surface it looks like Toyota got things mostly right, but if we cast our designer’s eye over it and consider the whole execution, some odd choices were made.
Toyota made a big deal about this car being the spiritual successor to the AE86. The bore and stroke of the engine are both 86mm. The diameter of the exhaust is 86mm. There’s an 86 roundel flanked by opposing pistons in the scalloped area of the front fender. So far so on the nose.
The new car had a trunk as opposed to a hatch, even though part of their spiel to the aftermarket crowd was the ability to fold the rear seats flat so a set of wheels and tires for track days could be chucked in the back. Instead of a buzzing straight four motor it had a throbbing cast-iron stove of a boxer motor with a hole in the torque curve. A car aimed squarely at people who used to read Tarmac Scraping Hatchback and Swimsuit Model magazine on the toilet but now had real adult money to spend, it ended up being a simulacrum of an OEM tuner car created from expedient ingredients that sounded good on paper, but to some didn’t quite add up to sum of it’s parts. [Ed Note: Many people loved the BRZ/FR-S, though that hole in the torque curve was indeed strange. -DT].
Critiquing The Design
When it comes to the exterior of the GT86, there’s not a huge amount wrong with how it looks (sorry John). The proportions are good, the surfacing is clean and it’s not trying to be something it isn’t. You view this car and understand what it is straight away.
I think the shapes of the lighting units both front and rear are out of place and sit uneasily with the surrounding bodywork, and some of the detailing like the diffuser feel contrived. Other than being a modern rear wheel drive two door coupe there is nothing visually remarkable about it. The overall effect is fussily acceptable rather than heart-wrenchingly captivating – it’s mildly anodyne with a few odd details in the bland grand Toyota tradition.
Cars like this I always think of as being a bit “thin” – lacking in substance and depth. There’s no love, personality or overarching style to draw you in and keep you there once you get past the driving experience. Offering special editions with trick aero and suspension pieces is admirable, but didn’t broaden the appeal to offer anyone outside the enthusiast target market a compelling reason to buy one.
Narrow appeal aside, one of the key issues with the design of the GT-86 is how Toyota marketed it. Toyota released a series of videos with chief designer Akihiro Nagaya outlining how the exterior of the GT-86 was directly influenced by the Toyota 2000GT – a Yamaha built straight six Japanese E-Type that went on sale in 1967. I thought the GT86 was supposed to be a modern incarnation of the original Hachi-Roku? Now it’s here you’re pointing out how the curved body side and DLO (the outline of the side glazing) and the humps on the instrument panel upper are meant to deliberately evoke a completely different car from forty five years ago?
While we’re about transposing visual motifs, those odd lighting shapes are meant to represent a piston and con-rod – something that is replicated again in the trim piece at the base of the gear shifter. I’m always against this sort of thing because taking A and slapping it on B and calling the result C is not useful design – it’s too literal an interpretation. This sort of post-modernist bullshit is fine for art, fashion, architecture or interior design if you enjoy that sort of playschool whimsy, but here it’s misplaced. A Memphis Group designed car as a thought exercise might amuse design bores but as a design movement the ideas and style of overt post-modernism are rarely suited to mainstream automobiles, even if it’s just sparingly done on the details. It feels corny to me but I’m a snob.
GT86 Becomes The GR86
The GT86 became the GR86 for the arrival of the 2021 second-generation car. More significant than the letter change was the concerted effort Toyota made to make the car more attractive to the wider market. The power deficit was addressed by punching the boxer motor out to 2.4 liters. Michelin Pilot Sport 4s replaced the Prius spec ditch finders on the first gen and the exterior was given an extensive makeover. Designed by Kosuke Kobo and Kazuhiko and led by chief designer Koichi Matsumoto, according to Kubo one the stated intentions was:
“to create a simple and timeless design by trimming away all excess, so customers can treasure it for a long time”.
Out went the odd lights and slightly fussy detailing for a much smoother, joined up muscular look. The scallop in the front fender which served no purpose other than providing somewhere to put the 86 logo was banished and replaced by a vent that neatly flows down to run along the rocker, adding solidity and width between the wheel arches.
The rear diffuser and lights are far tidier and compliment each other much better this time around. They look like they were drawn by an adult as opposed to someone coming off an all night Initial D bender. The trunk volume actually got smaller, demonstrating what a load of bollocks that spare set of wheels and tires thing was, and the trunk lid itself received a more convincing duck tail style spoiler ameliorating the need for aftermarket tea trays. It just looks like a completer and more grown up car.
It Needed Wider Appeal
None of these improvements should come as a rattling surprise. OEMs solicit feedback constantly – not just from customers who bought their car but crucially from those who didn’t.
A year or so after the on-sale date when it’s time to start thinking about the facelift or replacement they have a fairly good idea of what changes need to be made. At Land Rover during a quiet afternoon I would dig around on the company intranet and read these reports to try and better inform my work. Toyota had the best of intentions designing a car to appeal to a specific subset of the enthusiast market: In Japan the GT86 was even available with a stripped out interior, unpainted bumpers and steel wheels. But crucially by accommodating the type of customer who enjoys fitting aftermarket parts and personalizing their cars, they designed everyone else out. Regular drivers won’t be thanking you for engineering in easy oversteer when they gun the motor on a wet on-ramp.
The problem was the first generation was just too single minded to capture the type of customer who just wants to walk into a dealership, slap down a check, slip the sunglasses on and drive out in style.
Making it an unfinished blank canvas for drifting fans meant it had no hope of peeling customers out of Miatas. Toyota must have realized this quickly; it seems the reason the GT86 had a trunk instead of a hatch is because it was design protected from the beginning to offer a convertible version.
Design protection is when you try and anticipate future variants and make the necessary engineering accommodations. For example I would be floored if the new Dodge Charger cannot accommodate the Hemi V8 – even though it’s not currently in the product mix. We don’t know exactly why the convertible GT86 never happened – Toyota showed it twice in 2013 at the Geneva and Tokyo shows but Subaru chief Yasuyuki Yoshinaga said the car would need complete re-engineering but in the same interview admits there had been requests from the U.S. market for an open GT86. A convertible would certainly have added to the GT86’s rather lackluster sales figures, which cratered two years after release dropping from around 40k to just over 20k worldwide, suggesting everyone caught up in the initial hype bought one, and didn’t buy another. Sales picked up slightly when the second generation went on sale to about 25k, but because of the EU implementing Global Safety Regulations 2 , the latest model has been pulled from the European market.
Understanding The Market
It’s easy to sit at our keyboards and throw stones at enthusiasts for wanting what they can’t have and at OEMs for not building what enthusiasts want, but the reality is much more nuanced. A point I’ve made elsewhere before is we used to get cars like the original AE86 because they were the consequence not the conclusion – that car was built during Japan’s bubble period and was based on the previous generation Corolla from 1979.
The new car market has changed out of all recognition since then. The Miata has endured for thirty five years because it overcame the stigma of being a car for dog walkers and hairdressers. The ND made a marked departure from the cutesy design of previous generations. Mazda also offers the RF giving the security and style of a hardtop (if not the practicalities) for those customers who want it, cleverly without requiring any alterations to the existing body in white (the underlying structure). There’s even a smaller 1.5 liter engine available in non-US markets. With a niche vehicle you have to offer as much choice as possible – the success of cars like the Fiat 500 and Dodge Challenger and even the 911 is proof of that.
Toyota had become the beige cargo shorts and fleece normcore dad; boring and utterly dependable. The first GT86 was a hail Mary to prove they were still cool – ripping the fleece off to reveal a Pixies tee shirt underneath. Their intention was commendable but it took ten years and a second generation to become the car it arguably should have been in the first place.
We’ll Send You A Prize If You Help Us Out By Sending A Car-Tip That Becomes A Viral Article
I just picked up a 2013 BRZ to dedicate(more or less) to track. I paid a little more, but got a really clean example. I’m super happy with how it drives, and it feels more than fast enough for my skill level.
I can see how this might have been a hard sell when it came out, but now? It’s a steal of a car for what it offers. I’ve already picked up some new wheels and plan to put grippier tires on it.
Tying to the Mitsubishi article from earlier today, I do think there’s a market for sports car at 14k. The Mirage isn’t it, but you give someone the bones of a great car at econobox prices? A truly winning formula.
I happily re-upped my subscription. This article is a great example of why.
But do we need the inline editorial notes that dull some of the edge in the hope of keeping everyone happy?
David is just trying to hitch a ride on my greatness.
I see a lot of people bring up all wheel drive but I thought I had read somewhere that the Toyobaru Twins can’t accommodate all wheel drive because they put the engine lower and further back in the chassis than in other Subaru applications?
I wasn’t aware people wanted that. If ever a car did not need four wheel drive, this is it.
500000% yes
Plus if you really want 4WD buy any other Subaru.
I think the writer has somewhat missed the point of the GT86 project. It wasn’t designed to appeal to the masses like the miata, it is a niche vehicle. Simple, light rear drive, easy to tune, mod and track and very fun to drive especially on original prius tyres. There is a degree of practicality with 2 small rear seats and a boot that can accommodate a second set of wheels. We bought a red manual 2013 in 2021 with 50k miles on it for £10k and use it as a second car. There are compromises for sure, it’s not going to meet everyone’s needs. A fun car with potential for 40+mpg on longer trips. Ours is now tucked up in storage and with only around 6000 GT86 in UK the value is creeping up.
I put Michelin Pilot Sport 5s on and it transformed the grip and handling, whilst the tail out nature is fun my preference is for safely and quickly getting round corners not drifting. I for one will be sorry to see it go
I am aware of what the car was and what it was trying to achieve. The point is it was too narrow in its focus to succeed beyond that audience, and sales were poor as a result.
Great read as always, I’d always assumed a large part of the reason the styling was so bland was because of needing to sell it as both a Subaru and a Toyota. And this doesn’t even get into the funky sea creature mid-cycle front end refresh on the Toyota version that tacked on some personality but at least to my eye looks weird rather than getting rid of the bland. Ironically for the 2nd generation the Subaru’s front end got hit with the funky stick and is imo weird enough that it would need to be substantially cheaper than the Toyota for me to consider one.
I think the omission of the hatchback to possibly offer a convertible variant (at least in hindsight) was a major misstep-I know for myself I’d be much more interested in these cars with a hatch and I wish they offered these in a more useful overall body shape. But styling clearly matters, I’ve been genuinely tempted to buy a GR86 in a way I never was by the 1st generation cars and if we hadn’t just bought a house last year I might have actually gone out and done it.
Interesting. I have always thought the second generation is the more boring and generic looking of the two. It does look a bit more special in person than photos I suppose.
I’d love to have one of either generation but always busy buying houses for the wife and clothes for the kids, etc. I’ve never driven either but the torque gap of the 1st gen (and the fact that its a Subaru engine) and the slightly dull looks of the second have always been the hesitation points for me.
I do very much appreciate that they exist and its likely I could own one of them … at their low depreciation point … another flaw of the enthusiast – we don’t buy new cars generally.
This is a big part of the problem – only buying them second hand.
Guilty as charged. I picked up a near perfect low mileage ‘17 BRZ in yellow with the performance pack rather than go get a brand new 2nd gen and eat more depreciation.
Use the money you saved to buy me something nice.
Will do, something in…dang it what’s your favorite color again? Can never remember.
I’ve always wanted a sporty car, but it’s never really worked out for (reasons). I was so thrilled when my Japanese host brother’s project came out. He wrote a good chunk of the transmission and steering code for the LFa. (My wish would be for a GR Prius at this point…
This bit here got me thinking: “(…) it was envisaged as a 3.5 liter V6 with associated hybrid system combining for around 400bhp”, and it got me thinking about those Koenigsegg plug-in hybrids.
Toyota could easily take the Lexus TX 550h+ powertrain and invert the axles. Put the 3.5 liter V6 and the e-CVT transmission with its two motor-generators in the rear; in the front, swap the single electric motor for the 150 kW one on the Lexus RZ. Then add a rear-facing bench seat and call it the Toyota MR4.
Maybe Adrian can sketch it for us in his next article…
That does easy.
Funny enough, the FRS/BRZ was the reason I didn’t look at the Supra when I bought my last car. A friend has the valve spring recall done on his abd the dealer botched it. Turns out having Toyota techs work on a Subaru engine isn’t the best idea. So then, what happens when they work on a BMW engine?
Toyota botched the valve spring recall on mine too. The first attempt they got the timing wrong, and proudly showed me pictures of my engine in bits resting on an old tyre under the ramp my car was on. No engine stand, no attempt at using a clean room. It was incredibly unprofessional.
The second attempt included fitting a long bolt where a short one should have been, and the chunk of casting they broke off inside my engine eventually got punched out through the RH cam cover by the exhaust cam. Followed by enough oil to wet the entire RHS of the car.
That was fun.
The thing with enthusiasts is you have to modernize what made past vehicles successful, not rely on the good will that past successes had to carry the new vehicle.
The old Supra was reliable. The new Supra IS/WAS a BMW. Automatic turn off for a LOT of people. They want a Toyota built Supra.
The GT-86: Harkening back to the AE86 was a marketing stunt that didn’t even use what made the AE86 successful, other than RWD. Different engine layout, different body style. AE86 was simply the naming taxonomy of that model used for tracking development; which helps the development. Meanwhile an 86mm bore and stroke in the GT86 does nothing to make the car like the AE86.
Now, I’m a grumpy asshole, but, I’m tired of enthusiast cars coming out obviously compromised, the enthusiast not buying it (not falling for the marketing) and being blamed for its lack of success when all the development team had to do was copy/paste using the destination theme, which is what Miata and 911 are. Don’t feed me 86mm bore and stroke bull shit and tell me to buy it because the old car had 86 in it’s name. That’s stupid.
Now, The GR-86 seems like a good fix, but it’s still a flat four coupe. It’s connection to the AE86 is really in name only. They could have called this Celica and that would have had nostalgia too.
100%. The 86 references are the most superficial of nonsense, and since the get go I’ve wished they would had offered these in a more practical body style a la the original AE86, which isn’t even a car I ever much cared about. And +1 on calling it a Celica, this seems like an obvious choice at least in the US market-though I suppose it is easy to forget these were technically sold as Scions when they first came out. But whatever it is you’re totally right about the frustrating inability of carmakers to copy the substance of their own cult classics and instead try to sell superficial copies.
And yeah the Subaru engine is a turn off. Toyota has made some decent rev happy 4 cylinders in their time too! I don’t know if Subaru just had more plant capacity for a semi-bespoke engine but whatever packaging and center of gravity benefits are offered by the boxer engine are offset by the fact that Subaru engines are pretty uninspiring to drive-and it’s hard for me to believe they meet normal Toyota reliability metrics. Still waiting to hear if they develop the head gasket issues that seem to plague nearly every other Subaru motor-time will tell. Meanwhile supposedly the 2nd gen cars (which are generally far more appealing) have oiling issues when driven on track…which is maybe fine for a cheap performance car but it makes you worry that even driven hard on back roads they may be oiling poorly enough to have excessive wear over time.
Superficial! That’s the word I neglected to use and wrote a book instead. 😉
And don’t get me wrong. I’d love to own one and would wring the shit out of it. I’m not hating on the car more so the idea enthusiasts are to blame when an OEM misses the mark and feeds us marketing BS. We’re a smart and fickle bunch. You’re not going to trick us.
It’s not that they missed the mark, they aimed at slightly the wrong mark.
That’s fair! It’s still a good car. I’d love to have one. Maybe I will someday, the newer one is good looking and seems to have fixed the torque dip!
All that guff about 86mm bore and stroke was silly. It’s the only bore and stroke for a square 2.0 litre engine.
My other car has a GM 2.0 and that is also 86/86.
I think perhaps the biggest failing of this car is the lack of a halo version. It is a good price for what you get, even more so with the bigger motor, but with it being a lot Subie underneath, it would have been very good for Toyota to offer and AWD halo version with turbo’s and none of that Subaru Japanese Power output limitations. I really think the 400BHP number is attainable with some very slight tuning changes and perhaps stronger Head studs. I personally like the GR86 better than the Supra, so if they wanted to call this top dog the Supra to draw in traffic and then sell them a Celica GR86, then I would not see an issue with it. This is how so many GT and even ecoboost mustangs still get sold.
I think the success of the Eco-boost Mustang is simply because it’s the same price as the Miata and GT/GR-86 but considerably faster.
Fair points all around. I have a ‘17 BRZ, and I vastly prefer the second gen styling wise but I didn’t want to pay for that much depreciation, and it was unclear just how bad the oiling issues were going to turn out to be at the time., and the higher trims with the brembos weren’t out yet. I do find myself more annoyed by the torque hole than I anticipated but it’s still not as bad as many make it out to be. I would prefer it as a lift back though, or even “gasp”, a shooting brake! Regardless it’s a great daily and even a good one kid car despite what many think. Honestly though probably my least favorite thing about it is the shifter, it’s not nearly as nice as I’d hoped, although I am somewhat of a shifter snob thanks to growing up with my Dads Miata’s.
problem is, it has some of those reported issues that niggle at the back of your brain when you consider the limitation of living with a small car that is not that fast, to do the mundane stuff using it daily. Miata kind of has a lock on that and there are no convertible versions.
These are my thoughts exactly. Why GR86 when Miata? Need backseats? Get Mustang.
I love Miata’s but don’t fit in them and needed the back seat for kid duty. And Mustangs are too fast and too expensive on consumables (also Ford’s reliability leaves plenty to be desired as well these days). I’m a big slow car fast type, a lot of days I feel like the BRZ is too quick…
Don’t get me wrong. I would love to own one. It’s a 200 HP RWD coupe. I feel like I’m being hard on the CAR in here, but I do like it and that it exists. I’m more being hard on the idea enthusiasts are to blame when OEMs come out with something that misses the mark and try supplant that with marketing bs.
That is fair, I feel like enthusiasts are almost never to blame cause there just aren’t enough of us anymore anyway, it’s the fact there are so few enthusiasts that’s to blame and the main reason “enthusiast” cars don’t sell much anymore.
The point I was making is there are different types of enthusiasts – this car was solely aimed at the ‘aftermarket parts’ type and didn’t have quite enough style or breadth of ability and performance for enthusiasts who don’t want to spend all weekend on the wrenches.
Mine has enough performance for me certainly, but I do strongly prefer the style of the 2nd gen, I was just too cheap to pony up, haha. And my plan is to keep it pretty much stock or very close too. Except its styling is more Japanese mod culture as you note, and I keep looking at the rear end and thinking a big dumb STI/Type R wing of some kind would be more appropriate…
I know, I’m not even really coming at you when I say this, it’s more of a general feeling. I’m obviously in the minority of car buyers. So, it doesn’t really matter what I think. 🙂 That’s also a side of the problem, if we don’t buy them, it doesn’t really matter what we think.
Your articles always spur discussion from me, so you’re doing your job well! Glad this place exists and we can just discuss.
I probably would’ve bought one by now if it had been offered as a shooting brake, and still find them tempting used, good to read your comments! I’ve read some folks have had success with aftermarket dyno tuning and headers getting rid of the torque hole – have you looked into this at all?
Yeah I’ve heard all that and looked at it some, but it doesn’t bother me near enough to start spending that kind of money and getting into potential aftermarket reliability worries. Maybe someday in the future after it’s paid off and not the daily anymore but the weekend car. For now I wanted something I could daily, enjoy on the weekend drive, autocross, track day, whatever, without worrying about mods and spending more money, and it’s doing that all quite well.
….wrong thread.
Love it, Adrian! Keep ’em coming! I’d actually love to hear your “hot take” on the design language of the new Scout.
I don’t care at all about this car, but if Adrian is writing about it, I’m in.
Seriously, he’s one of the best writers on this site, and I would really like see more articles from him.
Just PERFECT. More, MORE! Aside from his talent for being a shit at the highest levels, the entire piece is cohesive, informed and a delight to read.
Also, where the hell is SWG?
“Michelin Pilot Sport 4s replaced the Prius spec ditch finders on the first gen”
I try ti give you something you want to read, even if you don;t care for the subject matter. Thank you for your kind words.
Great article, as usual. It’s nice to see a bunch of 86 owners chiming in in the comments, showing that at least some enthusiasts bought them.
I considered one, but chose a Focus ST instead. It seemed both more practical and more sporty than the toyobaru twins (cue enthusiast “but it’s FWD” screeching, proving the point that enthusiasts are impossible to please).
My Hakone Edition is *allegedly* being delivered this weekend. I’ve had it on order for over four months now. I’ll celebrate when it’s finally in my garage, but I haven’t been this excited to get a car since my 911SC in 2013.
I saw those. Looks lovely.
That is one gorgeous car in my humble none professional designer opinion.. I think people get a bent out about numbers and lose sight of the fun of driving.. Adrian – I have more than once had to look twice and scratch my head upon reading your stuff but I learn stuff..
You are right in that numbers are not everything but that is what American car magazines have concentrated on for a very long time. The latest C8 maybe quantifiably better performing than a 296GTB but I wouldn’t buy one in a million years over the Ferrari. But everyone likes different things.
My GT86 is one of a long line of cars I’ve bought because of how they drive, not how they look.
It doesn’t look bad (apart from the wheels that I ordered replacements for the day I bought it, and the stupid spoiler) but even after seven years I only like bits of it and not the whole thing. The rear lights are always jarring, and look like early 2000’s aftermarket shit. I hate the fake vents too, not because of how it looks, but because it’s fake. God and that thing up the bonnet/hood that makes it look like the Hulk fits the Toyota badge by punching it on. And the shit not-really-a-diffuser. Urgh. Why is the fog light a triangle?
As a former semi-pro drifter I like the shit tyres and the ease with which the worlds most famously feeble engine will stick the back end out, but I lent it to a friend a few weeks ago and he drive it home, parked it and decided he didn’t need to drive it again. He said it was too slidey. I could do skids in anything, so they didn’t need to scare off everyone else.
The torque dip is only really an issue if you’re in the wrong gear. To be fair I’m in the wrong gear a lot, but that’s my fault.
I’ve got no idea what to replace it with. I can just squeeze a bike in the back (I’m furious the lack of hatch is because of a convertible version that I’d have hated and then never even happened), it uses very little fuel, it can goes sideways all the time, yet it’s not fast enough that it makes speed limits seem too slow.
I’d replace it with a hatchback version of the same car tomorrow.
Welcome back, Adrian, and of course you are correct regarding all that cutesy postmodern self-referentiality on cars today. I’ve always preferred premodern fillips myself, and I still regret selling my Citroën CX Édition Lascaux Break to this day.
I do have to say that this remark disappointed me:
It’s sad to see Britain getting so soft. There was a time not all that long ago when it wouldn’t have been metaphorical.
What I could never stomach about the original GT86 is the fake vent or “scallop” as you called, Adrian, which does not quite line up with the window line. The window line and the character door diverge as they move towards the nose of the car from the base of the back window, while the bottom and the top of the scallop, which are supposed to continue those lines, are parallel.
It is something that has always deeply bothered me about this car!
It’s done that way to give the suggestion of movement. It’s not the worst example of this.
As with Mercedes’ lament of the Indian FTR, I just wasn’t a target buyer. I sat in a first generation one and the seat bolsters pinched my shoulders so I lost what interest I had. Then again I had subsumed my need for sporty cars after getting a motorcycle. At the time the BR-Z/FR-S came out I was far more interested in a Mazda5. That said I have fond memories of old Sciroccos so I have not closed the door on a sports car. My wife’s Fiat 500 is pretty fun, even in Poptrim with automatic.
Fiat 500 is an absolute masterclass in nailing the brief, retro done right and brilliant marketing. Until recently still selling 100k units pa across Europe.
Welcome back Adrian, was wondering where you went!
As for the article, no notes
There was another article today about the Porsche Cayman and Boxster and I had forgotten how cool/sexy it looked from the rear. That said:
Perhaps the biggest regret in my automotive life is that I didn’t get the manual in my ’86 Accord. It had a comfy and surprisingly agile suspension and a spirited 2-liter engine. Honda’s manual transmissions were wonderfully crisp and a lot more durable than the automatics they put in them back then. (Perhaps still to this day?) Ours ate itself up a bit before 100K miles back then. But the dealership I bought it from fixed it on an extended warranty. So, no hard feelings.
But, that car with a stick would have been so much more fun.
Almost 40 years later, my ’17 V6 Accord is almost ridiculously over-powered. It just effortlessly wafts around town (and getting depressingly bad fuel economy) and then delivers 40+ MPG on a long drive on an interstate.
In Washington state, I don’t even think I’ve gotten it into VTEC beast mode since I was in Texas and making passes on 75-MPH two lanes. Maybe once, merging into I-5 traffic after a fuel stop and was surprised to see how much particulate matter got blown out when I got on it.
I don’t want a Supra/BRZ, of any iteration. I want a nice ’86 Accord with a stick.
As anyone with an older subaru (80s) can tell you it’s a wobble. Flat4 are unbalanced in a way they wobble. Balanced in 1st and 2nd orders which is nice. Modern subarus start/stop too quick and are effectively nailed down compared to the old engines so you don’t see it.
“a throbbing cast-iron stove of a boxer motor”
Wouldn’t that be a throbbing alumin(i)um stove?
Yes but not as funny.
Fair.
The problem is that they’re not Toyotas. The GT/GR86 is a Subaru, and the “Supra” is a BMW.
When you’re shopping for a Toyota, it’s because you want a Toyota because they make the best cars.
People who want a Subaru want AWD. Since Subaru sold them under their own name, why wasn’t the BRZ AWD? That would also provide some differentiation between the two, and maybe a turbo BRX STi would’ve been cool, too.
Also, a hatchback would’ve been nice. Maybe a sunroof, too.
At the time the BRZ launched equal time between awd only and a mix or 2wd only existed in the US. Everywhere else had less/no awd only. Fun fact subaru started US sales with rear engine rwd before going FF on its more mainstream model.
The twins only came out like 10 years ago, and EVERY other contemporary Subaru was AWD then. Subaru became AWD-only in the US in the late 90s.
By the 20-teens when the BRZ came out, Subaru was all-AWD everywhere except Japan, where they still get a FWD Impreza/Crosstrek and some FWD kei cars.