The new "Supra"... if you can call it that

donk_316 · Post by **donk_316** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:56 pm

http://www.toyota-supra.info/forums/sho ... php?t=3903

Ghey or what? I would take the last version instead of this bozomobile anyday

Fastback86 · Post by **Fastback86** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:01 pm

Looks like they tried to crash a Ferrari and an S2000 together. Its not that bad, really.

Mr. Pat · Post by **Mr. Pat** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:07 pm

I like it.

donk_316 · Post by **donk_316** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:20 pm

but its non turbo V8? Thats enough to turn alot of Supra owners off of becoming new Supra owners...
The Supra is known as a brutal beasty with its inline 6 3.0L turbo engine...

Same deal as the new GTR...

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:32 pm

I wonder how long it'll be before someone puts an LS1 into one of them.

You import snobs are just a bunch of elitists who think you know better than the manufacturers.

whipped · Post by **whipped** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:39 pm

450hp..... v8..... doesn't look like a camry...

I like it. :thumbleft:

crzyone · Post by **crzyone** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:03 pm

Ahhh man that is gay. Update the body, use a more powerful 2JZ. Actually, call it a 3JZ and keep it a straight 6.

The engine made the supra.

A ford mustang GT would not be a mustang without a V-8. A Viper would not be a viper without the V-10. Why do these companies mess around with the engines that made the car as famous as they are?

Straight 6 TT > NA V-8

Oh well, I won't be buying one.

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:08 pm

The Z stayed the Z when it went from straight 6 to V6.

whipped · Post by **whipped** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:13 pm

crzyone wrote:A ford mustang GT would not be a mustang without a V-8. A Viper would not be a viper without the V-10.

pfft... I disagree. An engine does not make a car.

well.... I guess I would be disappointed if they put a 350 in a ferrari :scratch:

crzyone · Post by **crzyone** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:22 pm

The Dark Side of Will wrote:The Z stayed the Z when it went from straight 6 to V6.

Well, I think all the Z cars are different enough from eachother that it doesn't much matter. The cars only need to reflect engine displacement. If a 280z went from a straight 6 to a newer V-6 then it would ruin the 280z.

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:40 pm

Not following your logic. 240/260/280's are all VERY similar. The 280ZX is only a little off and there wasn't significant change to the platform until the first 300 came out. That car went through several iterations of engine design.

People were saying the same things when the 350Z came out... "It's not really a Z..." "It'll suck compared to the Z32 because it's not turbo..." etc...

You know what? They're selling like hotcakes.

The MkV's STOCK output will be the limits of what a MkIV can do on the stock turbos.

To go beyond that power on a MkIV, you'd need:
exhaust manifold
turbo
full exhaust
intercooler and piping
injectors
engine management
fuel pump

To turbocharge a MkV, you'd need:
exhaust manifolds
turbo(es)
full exhaust
intercooler and piping
injectors
engine management
fuel pump

I really don't see a whole lot of difference.

donk_316 · Post by **donk_316** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:24 pm

Will.. the parts may be the same but youll get two totally different results...

that 2JZ takes 800hp without touching the bottom end... god knows what this new V8 will do. Whatever it does it at it will be about 2000-3000 lesss rpm and "more bottom end torque" to make the American market think it is faster than it is... while MKIV scream past it like its standing still.

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:14 pm

Power is power. You sound like the "torque wins races" crowd.

Your assumptions about the characteristics of the engine are... highly unlikely to be correct.
450-500 HP from a 5 litre engine is hardly lacking in top-end. From that output, I'd guess the factory redline will be at least 7000. I'm sure it'll have variable cam phasing as well, which will give it low RPM torque AND top end power... without waiting to spool.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea ... ge=1&pp=20

Ended up maxing a T76 Q trim (750 whp SPINNING on the dyno) on a BOX STOCK LS1 with 103 octane. The LS1 is a 350 HP engine stock... do you think a 450-500 HP engine WOULDN'T be able to hit 800 on boost?

donk_316 · Post by **donk_316** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:48 pm

Im not going to argue about pretend engines with you. I think you missed the point... anyways...

the new Supra is ugly!

Fastback86 · Post by **Fastback86** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:49 am

What makes you think that this V8 will suck? Toyota knows how to make a damn good engine. Why would this one be any less bulletproof than any other Toyota engine? Same thing with the new Skyline. Its not like its some other company taking over. Its still Nissan and Toyota, and they're marketing department knows that people like you are going to be reacting just like this. They know the new car is going to need to live up to the old ones.

The Dark Side of Will · Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:30 am

donk_316 wrote:Im not going to argue about pretend engines with you. I think you missed the point... anyways...

the new Supra is ugly!

Then don't make prejudiced and unsupportable statements about how much a "pretend engine" will suck.

In terms of looks, I like it. I think they're fairly obviously aping Ferrari's recent cars, especially the 600 Imola/599 GTB

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/01/07/new- ... -600-imola
www.ferrari.com

I also think that if you see a MkV next to a MkIV, they'll look more alike than you think now. C6's look like C1's, ya know.

whipped · Post by **whipped** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:06 am

Fastback86 wrote:What makes you think that this V8 will suck? Toyota knows how to make a damn good engine. Why would this one be any less bulletproof than any other Toyota engine?

:withstupid:

more displacement = 1000whp turbo stock internals

Unsafe At Any Speed · Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:32 am

I think the front fascia needs a few tweeks, but other than that it looks good. As for the engine, who cares whether its an inline 6, a V-8 or external combustion, as long as it performs like it should.

crzyone · Post by **crzyone** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:22 pm

Hey, all I'm saying is that the Supra was not made famous by its looks or how it handles. Its reputation comes from a bulletproof straight 6 twin turbo engine. Without that engine the supra would have been just another japanese luxury sports car.

Why change the BEST thing about a particular car? Might as well change the looks and name as well. The best feature of the car has been taken away.

I don't think the new supra will be a big hit with tuners. Might as well go out and buy an F-body and slap a few turbos on it.

Guarantee within a year of the car comming out someone goes and swaps in a 2JZ and the import magazines will love it. The same way I love when people swap an RB26DETT into a G35 coupe. Its the right drivetrain for that car.

whipped · Post by **whipped** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:56 pm

I think toyota is going to capture some of the "american muscle" movement..... GTO, Fbody, mustang... whatever...

Maybe they shouldn't have called it a supra, but...

Unsafe At Any Speed wrote:I think the front fascia needs a few tweeks, but other than that it looks good.

Just remove the ugly grille :thumbleft: