Subaru-powered Toyota FT-86 gets closer to production...

The Running Man said:
surely the whole point of a car like this is to be quicker than your average 2.0 turbo diesel or some such...
Click to expand...

Not really no, its designed to be an involving sports car rather than a rep mobile. As others have said, it would show them a clean pair of heels on a B road.

I think even Chris Harris commented on this car that if you expect it to out drag an Audi 2.0 TDi on the motorway then you have missed the point of the car.
 
Last edited:
hmm yes but the mx5 100bhp was fun and the car was very light and chuckable .. most cars had a 2.0 litre like the average rep mobile that had 120-130bhp..the diesel varients 88bhp for Nissan and something i don't know for the mondeo .

now the average rep has a 1.8 or 2.0 turbo/diesel with loads of power and loads of torque. remap them which is easy and cheap and they will out accelerate these easily. on a damp b road you'd probably have more coincidence to drive the a3 or golf or whatever faster than the ft 86 too.

even the older celica 190 was criticised for lack of power and it was faster than the ft ! i just feel its a waste of potential.
 
Janesy B said:
Ultimately that boils down to carrying speed around corners and general pace over headline figures.
Click to expand...

To a certain degree yes, but ultimately this thing is running on only 215 section tyres, has a 200hp motor, FR layout with LSD, it's about going sideways, having the car move around under you and having to get involved with driving the thing.
 
If the comparative power/acceleration that a 2.0 TDI Audi A3 has in any way matters to you when you look at this car, you're obviously not even remotely close to the target market and it isn't the car for you.
 
Janesy B said:
Ultimately that boils down to carrying speed around corners and general pace over headline figures.
Click to expand...

since when is putting your foot down and feeling the exhilaration of accelerating not fun?its not like an a3 or something is going to feel like its going to fall off a cliff when it goes around a corner most cars handle pretty well these days from a fiesta to a focus and beyond..
 
ScoobyDoo69 said:
To even question the 0-60 time of this car kind of defeats the object of this car. So to ask the question, or to moan about the 0-60 means you are missing the point. You do not need speed to have fun, the MX-5 proves this time and time again. This is actually faster than an MX-5 and yet still too slow?
Click to expand...
But the thing is, in terms of straight-line power it's *not* faster than a 2.0 MX-5 which can be had new, OTR for £17.5k - a whole £7.5k cheaper. That's the real bummer for me, seeing as I don't need the "back seats".
 
Clarkey said:
To a certain degree yes, but ultimately this thing is running on only 215 section tyres, has a 200hp motor, FR layout with LSD, it's about going sideways, having the car move around under you and having to get involved with driving the thing.
Click to expand...

you think these are going to be serious track toys? i see them spending a lot of time on the roads where drifting is going to happen so infrequently its hardly even worth mentioning. putting your foot down happens every time you move sure traffic impedes you but im sure you will accelerate quickly more often than you will or the perspective buyers will do drifting..
 
I really wanted one of these during the pre production phase. By the way that they kept on banging on about it being 'Cheap' I thought it'd come it at WAY less than what the RRP is expected to be. Completely missed the boat price wise given the package. Its too close for comfort on the wallet to the 370Z. Yes, the nissan's running costs are, but it is a car in a class class above where the FT-86 is priced for not an awful lot more.

Its also a shame that the 2JZ is 21 years old this month and yet as the video a few posts above shows, its still a 'better' (in terms of interesting things like performance rather than fuel economy and emissions) engine than modern stuff being put out today.
 
The Running Man said:
you think these are going to be serious track toys? i see them spending a lot of time on the roads where drifting is going to happen so infrequently its hardly even worth mentioning. putting your foot down happens every time you move sure traffic impedes you but im sure you will accelerate quickly more often than you will or the perspective buyers will do drifting..
Click to expand...

I'm going to ***** 26k on one and go round the roundabout sideways for 7 hours a day, arnt you?
 
AndrewNR said:
I'm going to ***** 26k on one and go round the roundabout sideways for 7 hours a day, arnt you?
Click to expand...

Congratulations. If you are spending 26k just to go sideways there are far better cars than the gt86, although I'm sure you are aware of this.

I liked the idea of the gt86 until I saw one. They are tiny. I am 6'4 and damn I feel it sat inside one of them, the rears seats are even more useless than the ones in the back of a 911.

200bhp is ok given the nature of the car, all of people are getting carried away with headline figures.
 
peterattheboro said:
Have you driven anything remotely similar to an FT-86?
Click to expand...

Hmm lets see, ive done a Palmer Audi race day, inc caterhams, porsches (which i span off), single seater racers. VXR day...Ferrari day, again inc caterhams.

Plus i drive an Mr2 MK2 turbo as a daily driver.

So no, clearly nothing as fun as the Ft could possibly be.

My point is this really. The FT looks great so aggressive, hopefuly handles in buckets too. But the performance lacks sparkle compared to current and past cars with sporty aspirations.

S2000, surely more fun than this Ft86 from the factory could be? Mx5 2.0, faster, lighter, more chuckable? When they bring out a new model id expect the power output to increase (although i guess weight might too).

This is like the 200sx, but 10 years too late minus the turbo factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom