2020 Supra - Anyone else liking it and would replace your S2k for it?
05-21-2019, 09:42 AM
#31
I'd buy it as a second car. Theres too much i love about the S2k that i know the new Supra wouldnt have. Its too new, too refined, not raw enough. That being said i would LOVE to own one. The AT doesnt actually bother me at all as that specific transmission is supposed to be one of the best BMW has ever made.
I really, really like it. It looks like a BRZ w a better chassis and more power + refinement. But I wouldn't replace the S for it. It would be a second sports car - ( I like manual transmission, and top down). I'm not ready for a second sports car right now, but it is on the short list when I'm ready in 5--7yrs. My suspicion is there will be a manual transmission version released by then.
It wasn't even on my radar on cars I thought I'd like until I saw the videos.
- the chassis and suspension tuning looks superb. It looks like it handles like a S2000, maybe a little less edgy, but definitely a playful chassis
- the interior is nice, and it rides well. Idk why people are complaining about the BMW interior. I'd rather have a BMW than a Toyota interior.
- it is CHEAP. It has a true sports car chassis. The closest comparison is the M2 but that is based on a street car chassis and handles more like a BMW than the Supra. An equivalent cayman would be 70k+. A Mustang is comparable maybe at the same price but - again - one can make the argument that the chassis is not as performance focused
- at least the AT it comes w is good
- RWD, LSD, a lot of factory included easy upgrades - bungs already in for oil, trans, diff coolers, easily removable vents for cooling, etc
- what else can you find in the new market for $50k?
- I like the rear end styling. Super aggressive.
I expect there will be many different versions to come. Am thinking this would a good compliment to (and respite from) the S2000 and that it will be a good car for my wife - good balance, playful, w a lot of power, but still has stability control, refined, daily drivable, and comfortable.
It wasn't even on my radar on cars I thought I'd like until I saw the videos.
- the chassis and suspension tuning looks superb. It looks like it handles like a S2000, maybe a little less edgy, but definitely a playful chassis
- the interior is nice, and it rides well. Idk why people are complaining about the BMW interior. I'd rather have a BMW than a Toyota interior.
- it is CHEAP. It has a true sports car chassis. The closest comparison is the M2 but that is based on a street car chassis and handles more like a BMW than the Supra. An equivalent cayman would be 70k+. A Mustang is comparable maybe at the same price but - again - one can make the argument that the chassis is not as performance focused
- at least the AT it comes w is good
- RWD, LSD, a lot of factory included easy upgrades - bungs already in for oil, trans, diff coolers, easily removable vents for cooling, etc
- what else can you find in the new market for $50k?
- I like the rear end styling. Super aggressive.
I expect there will be many different versions to come. Am thinking this would a good compliment to (and respite from) the S2000 and that it will be a good car for my wife - good balance, playful, w a lot of power, but still has stability control, refined, daily drivable, and comfortable.
The only vents that could be easily removed for use are the front brakes. Nothing else is "easily" removable unless you consider cutting sheetmetal with a saw "easy".
Its' many reviews on superb handling and balance is my main interest too.
It's good it handles like a BMW... because the original Supra honestly sucked b*lls in handling. A lot of people complain it's not a good OG Supra successor... but that actually a good thing.
The only thing the original Supra had that was good, was an iron block 2JZ capable of being built for high HP and drag racing, lol. It's only praised as a "legend," because it's one of the only few famous '90s Japanese sports cars; and Not for its' (horrible) handling, balance, suspension, chassis, etc.. That's the only reason they're valued - 2JZ and '90s hype.
Everything else about it sucked donkey nuts. I've ridden in a few (never drove though) and Never liked it (felt like a tugboat, sedan or a truck). I do like the new one though as it's more engineered for handling and balance.
It's good it handles like a BMW... because the original Supra honestly sucked b*lls in handling. A lot of people complain it's not a good OG Supra successor... but that actually a good thing.
The only thing the original Supra had that was good, was an iron block 2JZ capable of being built for high HP and drag racing, lol. It's only praised as a "legend," because it's one of the only few famous '90s Japanese sports cars; and Not for its' (horrible) handling, balance, suspension, chassis, etc.. That's the only reason they're valued - 2JZ and '90s hype.
Everything else about it sucked donkey nuts. I've ridden in a few (never drove though) and Never liked it (felt like a tugboat, sedan or a truck). I do like the new one though as it's more engineered for handling and balance.
I don't understand the "BMW engine" hate. (Especially from the uninformed who think the whole car is just a rebadged Z4.) I do kind of understand the styling hate—the concept looked great, and the Supra, while it's starting to grow on me, is more of an acquired taste. I'm still not a fan of the front fascia. I can also kind of see the "fake vents" hate, although it's somewhat better that they were designed thoughtfully with space to run ducts and such.
Funny you mention that... just got my C&D print mag yesterday and they compared base 4-cyl Z4 vs. base Boxster. In short, same BMW complaints (less engagement, overweight at ~350lbs more despite going back to a ragtop, auto-only) and I don't need to tell you which car won.
05-21-2019, 10:32 AM
#32
Interesting findings. So these guys strapped one down to a Dynojet and put down 4whp more then the advertised crank hp. Trq significantly up as well. They posted a 0-60 time of 3.8 sec as well. Appears the new Supra has been underrated from the factory by a good margin.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/auto...cid=spartanntp
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/auto...cid=spartanntp
05-21-2019, 10:43 AM
#33
The following users liked this post:
WolfpackS2k (05-22-2019)
05-21-2019, 12:25 PM
#34
Interesting findings. So these guys strapped one down to a Dynojet and put down 4whp more then the advertised crank hp. Trq significantly up as well. They posted a 0-60 time of 3.8 sec as well. Appears the new Supra has been underrated from the factory by a good margin.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/auto...cid=spartanntp
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/auto...cid=spartanntp
A manufacturer consistently underrating cars only made sense in mid-90s in Japan. What incentives do the Germans have to do it? EU car taxes are not based on power, but on displacement.
Dyno is a ****ing tool for comparison on the spot, not for bench racing.
That 0-60 time is not that surprising with decent torque down low and good AT.
05-21-2019, 03:21 PM
#35
05-22-2019, 05:29 AM
#36
This BMW marketing technique is getting old. Tune some dyno to read high absolute numbers, pick the highest-reading car out of several, and the fanboys will spread it around the webz.
A manufacturer consistently underrating cars only made sense in mid-90s in Japan. What incentives do the Germans have to do it? EU car taxes are not based on power, but on displacement.
Dyno is a ****ing tool for comparison on the spot, not for bench racing.
That 0-60 time is not that surprising with decent torque down low and good AT.
A manufacturer consistently underrating cars only made sense in mid-90s in Japan. What incentives do the Germans have to do it? EU car taxes are not based on power, but on displacement.
Dyno is a ****ing tool for comparison on the spot, not for bench racing.
That 0-60 time is not that surprising with decent torque down low and good AT.
05-22-2019, 05:50 AM
#38
This car seems like a miss. Some reviewers are saying you don’t need a manual and it sounds great. I think auto reviewers have lost their way.
should have more power, not be a BMW and have a manual. How Toyota calls this a Toyota is laughable. Seems japan has lost its way.
should have more power, not be a BMW and have a manual. How Toyota calls this a Toyota is laughable. Seems japan has lost its way.
05-22-2019, 08:00 AM
#40
I'm not a big fan of modern manual transmissions. Seems like there are too many compromises in order to meet fuel economy and emissions standards. Of course, being S2000 owners, we're pretty spoiled.