Quote:
Originally Posted by glennQNYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nextbooost
Hilarious thing is mkiv owners and previous owners are in life positions now that a 60k to 100k proper Supra would be a sure buy. With in the next 5 years ill be Lexus LC or new M4 for me. A 80k Supra(ft1) would have been a must buy.
|
Not only do I support a more "modest" Supra that is priced significantly lower than an M2, rather than a Supra priced in M4 territory... But I think it's the smarter move for something badged as a Toyota. I also argue this new one is priced more similarly to the last generation than a $80k Supra would be.
EDIT: I need to retract my last point regarding relative pricing. While a 1995 Supra $38k Base Liftback is $49k in today's money; the $49k Turbo Liftback works out to $80k in today's money. Interesting.
|
Well, your point is still a good one vs market. The sports car market is tiny compared to 20 years ago also.
I guess people were expecting the new Supra to me more of a Skyline GTR. Even Nissan admits that Godzilla is a hard car to keep developing for the small number sold globally.
I'm not sure what else the Supra could have been. A more Toyota/Lexus interior? A more Lexus feel to the ride? Even though they've proven that outside of the LFA have struggled to design a sporty suspension. The turbo has finally been embraced, and then there is the issue of engine design.
Developing an engine costs billions. In the case of a bespoke engine for a Supra, those billions couldn't be recovered since it wouldn't go into other vehicles across the family lines. To their defense, Toyota is working on electric motors and battery tech in R&D, so an engine for a sports car was likely far from their minds, thus this mashup.
I don't know, does seem weird that Toyota hardly touched the car under the hood. Guess they know that their fans really want a BMW.