Jump to content

spikyone

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    315

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Posts posted by spikyone

  3. Posted · Report reply

    None of the cars have an auto dimming mirror - it was on the spec sheet but they've never even been an option. If you get leather seats, they will be heated - heating was standard on all leather and leather/alcantara seats.

    I wouldn't bother with the satnav. The whole head unit is dated, to say the least; if you really want built-in nav then buy a decent aftermarket head unit with it built in.

     

    Auto Vs manual: the auto is an old-school torque converter, I think they claimed it had the fastest torque converter shift in the world at launch, most other autos are DCT these days so if you're used to those it may feel slower to shift but by all accounts it's not too bad.

    The manual can be difficult to get into 2nd when cold; most owners report some degree of difficulty. It can apparently be improved with a change to different oil in the box. I haven't had that done, but I do have an aftermarket shift spring and an insert for the gearbox mount. Those improve the 2nd gear a little, and give a very sweet gearchange (some complain about a slight increase in noise from the mount). Very cheap upgrades, and excellent value.

    3card reacted to this

  4. Posted · Report reply

    @BRZ-123 is right. They're stupidly hard. Mine did over 20k miles including a few trackdays and still had about 5mm all round. They last forever.

    I swapped mine for something better because I was bored of them (and got new wheels). They're just not specced for a ~200bhp RWD car and are horrible in the wet, particularly for traction.

  5. Posted · Report reply

    23 hours ago, Lowe said:

    Putting a new car up against a secondhand car that’s depreciated loads isn’t ever fair though. Not to mention the Supra will have 5 years of warranty on it - and something like a Masser will come with 100k car bills and no warranty to back you up... so not really a valid comparison. 

    I did acknowledge that it wasn't entirely fair. The idea of "100k car bills" is only relevant if you're buying it for <£20k, as a leggy 25 year old "bargain supercar". The car I linked has 21st century build quality and only 6k on the clock. You could merrily add another 40 or 50k with little more than routine consumables.

    If you're spending £50k on a coupe/sports car, you're going to be financially comfortable, so you can afford to run a relatively new GranTurismo. I did initially mention an Evora as something more directly comparable and that would doubtless be a little cheaper to run. As £50k-ish cars, I would take one of those two (or perhaps a late V8 Vantage) with under 10k on it in preference to anything that you can buy for £50k new because they are far more special and exciting.

    At most price points you can't pick up something low mileage and more exciting by going used. At £50k I think you absolutely can. For me, that makes it a valid comparison.

    KevinA and Lowe reacted to this

  6. Posted · Report reply

    4 hours ago, Lauren said:

    I always review cars as every day cars. I've tried impractical cars before, but the problem is you don't end up using them. I like to have just one car. I could cope with a Supra, I have zero interest in having more than one passenger and I probably have someone in the back of my car a couple of times a year, normally lift back from a pub or restaurant or some such. For me it would be factoring in the running costs. I do agree that there is a significant amount of competition in that price sector and it's a lot of money to spend so there is much to consider. 

    Fair enough. I guess I'm thinking of the Supra as not being especially practical, in the same way as the GT86 isn't practical for every single time I use a car. I have access to another car that gets used for trips to the recycling centre, as an example - but for well over 90% of my journeys the GT86 is fine. Those same journeys would mostly be just as fine in, say, an Evora, and I'd still have access to something truly practical. Or for more boot space and a very different experience, a low mileage Maserati GranTurismo - worth a shout for that engine, never mind the looks...

  7. Posted · Report reply

    The problem I have with the Supra is its price. Not because I don't think it justifies it - it's Cayman-fast and seems to be a genuine Cayman competitor. It's just a bit of an awkward price point.

    The thing is that at £50k+ you're spending a lot of money, and at the same sort of money you can get some fairly special stuff; a lovely low mileage Evora 400 for instance.

    And I know new vs used is unfair in some ways, but I look at it like this - I bought my GT86 new because at £25k, anything used that's genuinely interesting is likely to be old, high mileage, and have potentially ruinous running costs. The GT86 is, IMO, great value as an ownership proposition (until the inevitable modifications start!)

    On the other hand, if you have £50k to spend on an impractical car you can get something that is very interesting, relatively low mileage, and you're less likely to be worried about high running costs.

    Going back to the Cayman, I can understand those at £50k because you're getting a foot on the Porsche ladder and some of their magic; most other stuff at that money is a range-topper of something relatively mundane (TT RS, M2, even the Alpine is Renault's halo car) or something where you'd really want a faster version (F Type). The Supra is no worse than any of those, I couldn't imagine spending my own money on any of them.

  9. Posted · Report reply

    Nice, about 30% more torque over most of the rev range! Not surprising that it feels fast! Are you still on the stock brakes?

    From memory the Cosworth SC doesn't fit the TD NA kit, which is a shame, but it's handy that the Harrop does. I wonder if Abbey will have any Black Friday deals...

  11. Posted · Report reply

    @BRZ-123 The point with Mazda and Subaru's engines is that they aren't making 100bhp/litre. That's why they can meet emissions standards. Putting in an NA FA24 will not give you an easy route to 230-240bhp that will meet 2019 emissions regs.

    NA vs turbo is not just about traffic lights. You get more power from the same displacement with a turbo, and a turbo engine has better thermal efficiency so needs less fuel to produce the same power, because less energy is wasted as heat out of the exhaust. Of course, there's an element of how you drive them that affects fuel economy, but that's a separate issue. Take a direct comparison with the 197bhp Fiesta ST - our cars get far worse fuel economy and emit 50% more CO2, before you look at any other emissions. That's mostly down to NA vs turbo.

    Every single car a manufacturer sells in Europe has to meet Euro 6. Range average is a separate issue which is solely CO2 related and is a couple of years away. The FA20 in our cars struggles to meet Euro 6, which doesn't limit CO2 at all. Toyota/Subaru had to make changes for the MY16 to make it compliant. There's a good reason that every modern NA car with higher bhp/litre than ours costs £100k+, and why the likes of Ferrari have abandoned them. NA isn't dead, but NA performance engines basically are.

     

    None of that is to say the mk2 GT86 will definitely be turbo. But it seems more likely than the 2.4, given the trends in technology and regulations.

  12. Posted · Report reply

    @Jay Not suggesting the GT86 will be a 3 pot, just showing that downsizing works on small engines too.

    @Deacon I thought that rumour came through the rubbish Aussie clickbait site whose name escapes me, happy to be corrected if it was a more reliable source though! I would be surprised if they can hit that sort of specific output and meet future emissions regs. It's still 100bhp/litre from a not-very-exotic engine. If the FA20 struggles with Euro 6, there's no reason to think that a 2.4 would be much better.

  13. Posted · Report reply

    2 hours ago, Jay said:

    Regarding environmental aspects, a turbo won't be very effective. This mainly holds for large engines with 6, 8 or more cylinders. Those can be significantly downsized by chopping off a few buckets, reducing friction, thermal loss and intake loss. A turbo charged Mini is in the same ballpark as the GT86, regarding emission and fuel consumption.

    Pretty much everyone is running small turbo engines now. The new Fiesta ST is a 3-cylinder, 1.5 putting out 197bhp - a familiar number... The whole point of a turbo is increasing thermal efficiency, and that holds true for any engine size/cylinder count.

    The FA20 in our cars is right on the edge for Euro 6 compliance - it's not just CO2 emissions that regulators restrict. I wouldn't be surprised to see a variant of the Levorg's FB16 being used in the next gen cars.

  14. Posted · Report reply

    4 hours ago, Twigman said:

    Just had an HKS Spec-L catback fitted - rest of zorst is std - but now my attention is turning to the torque hole and manifolds. (yes - I am probably doing this the wrong way round)

    Entirely off-topic, which version of the Spec-L did you go for?  I have my eye on one of those (IIRC @Deacon has one and his car sounds fantastic) and I think the red carbon tips would look rather fetching with grey.

  16. Posted · Report reply

    1 hour ago, james_ly said:

    I read somewhere the facelift has a different final drive so the revs are higher.

    Not in the UK/Europe, we only got cosmetic changes.

     

    @Lussoman 33.2mpg is the new figure based on the WLTP test cycle - the older (NEDC) cycle that gives three figures was not representative of real-world driving and manufacturers were designing their cars to perform well on the test but getting nowhere near the claimed figures on the road.

    No idea why Auto Trader have different figures.  Toyota did make some minor tweaks for the MY16 - the last pre-facelift year - to comply with the Euro 6 emissions standard, so I wonder if it was something around that time that could have caused a change.

    Lussoman and james_ly reacted to this

  17. Posted · Report reply

    33 minutes ago, Dennis Wilson said:

    Thanks everyone, seems like it could be a good option for me... It won't be a daily driver so I don't really need the added luxury of cruise control etc..  main thing is mechanically and (pretty much) visually outside looks the same! Only thing from pictures is i'm not that keen on the 16 inch alloys, but my plan is to keep the car long term so I could always upgrade. 

    Unless you're already looking at a specific car that happens to be a Primo, I wouldn't get hung up on looking for one. Howmanyleft says there are 30 (yep, thirty) Primos registered, so you won't have much choice, maybe one or two in the whole country for sale at any point in time.

    Aside from that, the supposed selling point of the Primo was a £2.5k discount over a normal GT86, which obviously diminishes with a used car.

  18. Posted · Report reply

    17 minutes ago, BRZ-123 said:

    Missing items:

    Keyless entry, Auto climate control, power rear view side mirrors (and its heating), Cruise control, auto headlights, Xenon (Halogen instead), spoiler (Typically only in Pro but could be optioned on based 86), heated seats(Typically only in Pro) . Came in solid paint not metallic and 16 inch alloys instead of 17.

    This was before the Pro, which is a facelift spec. At the time, heated seats were a cost option on the regular car so they're not missing from the Primo. Originally all cars except Primo came with the spoiler, but from mid-2015 (MY16 cars, the last pre-facelift version) it was a no-cost option.

    As per my other post, you could option the Primo in other colours.

    BRZ-123 reacted to this

  25. Posted · Report reply

    We should all get off the OP's back.  I find my entire driving experience is ruined when I have to manually reach for the mirror dimmer.  For all that I love the way the car handles, the feedback it gives, the perfect control weights, Toyota blew the whole thing by forcing me to take my left hand off the wheel to dim the rear view mirror.  Now I can never drive my car at night, or when the sun is low.  😭

    It reminds me of the time I had to kick Scarlett Johansson out of bed for farting.  I just couldn't look at her the same after that and we haven't spoken since.

     

    (Some of these things may not be entirely true)

    GT86Curn, Subota Boy and benmmellor reacted to this
×