Quoted:

The difference between "sports cars" and "muscle cars" meant more when muscle cars couldn't go around corners and most sports cars were a reasonable weight.

The Challenger still fits the stereotype of the big muscle car that is powerful, fast in a straight line, and handles like a boat. The Miata and BRZ/86 fit the old mold of a lightweight sports car with minimal compromises made in the name of balance and handling. Everything else is in a muddy middle ground.

The new Z4 the Supra is based on is 3,097–3,384 lb. The 370Z is 3,232 lb. The 2-series is 3,119.5–3,560.5 lb. The C7 is 3,347-3,560 lb. The current Mustang and Camaro are not far out of that ballpark, and their chassis actually deliver when cornering. Back in 2011, Motor Trend did a comparison between the BMW M3 and the Mustang GT with the sub-caption "No, we're not kidding." This was the previous generation Mustang with a live axle, and the two cars were neck and neck around their track. LINK The jump between the 5th and 6th gen Mustang was huge, and the new car has IRS, a better chassis, and an improved drivetrain. The full spectrum performance of a regular ass Mustang GT with a couple of options boxes checked is hard to beat by any kind of meaningful margin without spending some insane money, and the Camaro is right there with it.

That doesn't leave much of a hole. I agree with everyone asking for a MR2. That would be awesome if done correctly. An updated S2000 with razor sharp handling and a free revving engine would also be pretty cool, especially if there was a hard top option. That could capture a lot of people who don't want a Miata's stereotypes or the less than stellar FA20 in the 86/BRZ. But a $50k NSX? I don't think that idea is grounded in reality. The original NSX was $60k in 1991 ($111k today after inflation). Even if Honda turbocharged a standard J-series V6 and put it in a basic MR chassis, I'm pretty sure the costs all in would put the unit price well over $50k, and it would still get killed by the Cayman.

Quoted:
I bet the Toyota techs are just going to love having to work on a BMW.

Quoted:
i think the current german engines were designed by ex patek phillipe grand complication watch makers...

https://www.excelerateperformance.com/wp-content/uploads/Timing-Chain.jpg

Quoted:

The up charging and fat margins are what makes Porsche viable. People will pay hundreds of dollars for a paint stripe or for strap door handles because it’s a Porsche. Honda can’t get away with that.

I’m also not sure how many of the components Honda has on hand would work in such a vehicle. The redneck/Roadkill thing to do would be to drop a FF drivetrain in the back of a car, but I’m not thinking that’s the right answer. I also don’t know if any of Honda’s existing engines would be suitable for that kind of application.

By the time they develop a drivetrain, chassis, and body, add whatever interior bits are missing, and put it into low volume production... the price point is going to be hard to hit.

ETA: For perspective, the Civic Type R is $35k.

Quoted:
I bet the Toyota techs are just going to love having to work on a BMW.

Quoted:

The difference between "sports cars" and "muscle cars" meant more when muscle cars couldn't go around corners and most sports cars were a reasonable weight.

The Challenger still fits the stereotype of the big muscle car that is powerful, fast in a straight line, and handles like a boat. The Miata and BRZ/86 fit the old mold of a lightweight sports car with minimal compromises made in the name of balance and handling. Everything else is in a muddy middle ground.

The new Z4 the Supra is based on is 3,097–3,384 lb. The 370Z is 3,232 lb. The 2-series is 3,119.5–3,560.5 lb. The C7 is 3,347-3,560 lb. The current Mustang and Camaro are not far out of that ballpark, and their chassis actually deliver when cornering. Back in 2011, Motor Trend did a comparison between the BMW M3 and the Mustang GT with the sub-caption "No, we're not kidding." This was the previous generation Mustang with a live axle, and the two cars were neck and neck around their track. LINK The jump between the 5th and 6th gen Mustang was huge, and the new car has IRS, a better chassis, and an improved drivetrain. The full spectrum performance of a regular ass Mustang GT with a couple of options boxes checked is hard to beat by any kind of meaningful margin without spending some insane money, and the Camaro is right there with it.

That doesn't leave much of a hole. I agree with everyone asking for a MR2. That would be awesome if done correctly. An updated S2000 with razor sharp handling and a free revving engine would also be pretty cool, especially if there was a hard top option. That could capture a lot of people who don't want a Miata's stereotypes or the less than stellar FA20 in the 86/BRZ. But a $50k NSX? I don't think that idea is grounded in reality. The original NSX was $60k in 1991 ($111k today after inflation). Even if Honda turbocharged a standard J-series V6 and put it in a basic MR chassis, I'm pretty sure the costs all in would put the unit price well over $50k, and it would still get killed by the Cayman.

Quoted:

I don't know if the question is whether or not it's going to be a good track car.

My questions are:

1) Who asked for a BMW in Toyota skin?

2) Why would anyone who has a BMW budget, BMW tastes, or a BMW tolerance for maintenance needs buy this "Supra" over a M2/M4?

Quoted:
i think the current german engines were designed by ex patek phillipe grand complication watch makers...

https://www.excelerateperformance.com/wp-content/uploads/Timing-Chain.jpg

Quoted:

ETA: For perspective, the Civic Type R is $35k.

Quoted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lEYaTvvq4g

Quoted:

OK no

Quoted:
The old twin turbo supra had an starting msrp of around $40k in 1998 (Toyota actually dropped the msrp from like 1996 where it was around $50k). That's $63k in 2018 after inflation.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/dd6b9d90eb85a6aaa3ad680960ffccc1/tenor.gif?itemid=7166145

Quoted:

I don't think you're familiar with the history of the 86/BRZ.

Toyota owns a chunk of Subaru's parent company, and the partnership to build the 86/BRZ was born out of that transaction. The concept to build such a vehicle started before that even happened. Toyota is responsible for most of the design of the car. Subaru initially refused to build a RWD vehicle. It is also said that Subaru wanted to go turbocharged while it was Toyota's decision to keep it basic and NA. Subaru did handle much of the hard engineering, but they use Toyota's D-4S intake/fuel injection system on both the 86 and BRZ. That car is a legit collaboration between companies with a direct connection.

The M2/M4 have a confirmed 52:48 weight distribution. That's pretty good, and it's likely within the margins of a tank of gas and/or a little cargo. Or a Mc'Merican in the driver's seat. The Supra has an advantage over the Z4 for anyone wanting a hard top, but until actual details come out, it's going to be hard to believe there will be any meaningful reason to buy the Supra over a M2/M4.

Quoted:
People asking for a modern day $50k range NSX.

Meet the Lotus Evora.