[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

YES!!! I love the shitty sales on GTR's. The less I see, the better. To me, thats a fabulous thing. Who wants a car where you see one every 3 minutes. Mustang, Camaros, Srt this and that. People can talk shit on the GTR all they want. When it came out in 2009, it changed the game. 80 Grand for a car that was whipping up on supercars. It made all others up there game. Finally 11 years later, BMW has an AWD/Turbo car with some decent power. LOL. All these years later and this new M car will be close to the performance of my 2010 GTR when it was just some bolt on parts. Also, If you don't think a GTR is Iconic, not sure what Model car you would. R32,R33 and R34's. In my opinion, it's been Iconic for a long time

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by David70

Yes it would have been great and it's also completely unrealistic to think the $76k complete TOYOTA Supra would have had near 911 Turbo performance. Then we would have been back to hoping someday to get another Supra.

The new one also goes 0-60 in 3.7 seconds, no way it is getting anywhere close to 911 turbo territory without going mid engine (zero chance at $76k) or AWD, then of course no one wants a Supra to be AWD (with AWD comes a lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car).

I disagree with your statement on the AWD. I would never buy that shit ass Supra, but I want all my cars to be AWD. Not sure what your saying about A lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car?

[supra93]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

I generally agree with this statement, but you make it sound like its the car's fault. As I have explained, the market condition for the U.S. at the time was not favorable to Japanese sports car in general. The RX7, 300zx, and Supra all did much better in their home market vs overseas.

We can see this with the 300zx. It had a MSRP of $29,100-$33,800 in 1990 and ballooned to $41,089-$44,879 for its last year in 96.

1996- 2.929
1995- 4.176
1994- 4.836
1993- 9.801
1992- 9.628
1991- 14.903
1990- 22.095

Base MSRP
1994- $36,489 (+$10,473 for inflation)
1993- $30,555

[chris719]

Sports cars are not a daily driver for most people, and the middle class can't afford a brand new sports car as a 3rd car. Thus, the majority of people buying these hot new cars are well-off and end up buying the Porsche because it's pretty much always better.

I think there is room in the market for cheap sports cars (MX5) and expensive sports cars, and not a lot in the middle.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by chris719

Sports cars are not a daily driver for most people, and the middle class can't afford a brand new sports car as a 3rd car. Thus, the majority of people buying these hot new cars are well-off and end up buying the Porsche because it's pretty much always better.

I think there is room in the market for cheap sports cars (MX5) and expensive sports cars, and not a lot in the middle.

I think it depends on the execution. The Vette has no issues moving units.

On a different note I'm really curious to see how Nissan's next Z will do.

[evil-G-nius]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

They already make that car, it's the Lexus RC F. And it starts at $15k more than the I6 Supra.

LOL...you act like they have never put the same engine in more than one car. It could have easily been a detuned version to still offer great performance but leave the LCF & RCF as the expensive top of the line picks

[chris719]

Originally Posted by supra93

I think it depends on the execution. The Vette has no issues moving units.

On a different note I'm really curious to see how Nissan's next Z will do.

It does to some degree. I think the Corvette has a big nostalgia / American boomer appeal, too. It being a magazine test darling doesn't hurt.

I have little hope for the Z, sadly. Nissan probably won't get it right. Even if they do, starting at $40k might mean it ends up too expensive for the kids that want it, and not good enough for the demographic that can afford it.

I am sad that the Z4 and Supra aren't more popular. I really hope the segment survives.

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by chris719

It does to some degree. I think the Corvette has a big nostalgia / American boomer appeal, too. It being a magazine test darling doesn't hurt.

I have little hope for the Z, sadly. Nissan probably won't get it right. Even if they do, starting at $40k might mean it ends up too expensive for the kids that want it, and not good enough for the demographic that can afford it.

I am sad that the Z4 and Supra aren't more popular. I really hope the segment survives.

Come on Bro. 40 thousand is a new Maxima? Shit is expensive now. It's not 1990 anymore. You can finance shit for 96 months now a days. It's easier to get a new car for people with less Funds. 40 is a basic car now a days.

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by SickGTR

Come on Bro. 40 thousand is a new Maxima? Shit is expensive now. It's not 1990 anymore. You can finance shit for 96 months now a days. It's easier to get a new car for people with less Funds. 40 is a basic car now a days.

^ yet most people can justify a Maxima for 40k (with those super long term finance terms), because it has 5 seats, and can carry your cargo, and is an automatic, and is far more utilitarian. People are also not buying a Maxima, its all crossovers these days, which is even cheaper. Pathfinder start at 32k in the US, and that's VERY utilitarian.

Not a lot of people can justify having a third car that's a toy in their driveway when people can barely afford their mortgage

[David70]

Originally Posted by SickGTR

I disagree with your statement on the AWD. I would never buy that shit ass Supra, but I want all my cars to be AWD. Not sure what your saying about A lot of negatives for what is supposed to be a sports car?

AWD adds weight, cost, maintenance and repair. This weight hurts braking and cornering performance and when the weather is decent I only see a benefit from a stop, likely 0-30. Great for 0-60, ok for 1/4 mile, overall a negative on a road course and normal driving. Also great for snow. If looking for maximum acceleration in a high powered front engine car it is the best option. Same reason the M3/M5 have gone to AWD and same reason the Corvette went mid engine.

I drive two RWD cars and have no interest in AWD. If I bought a 911 it would be RWD, if I was interested in an R8, I would also prefer a RWD. Corvette would only be worse with AWD. In a medium hp car like the Supra there is no use in AWD and the negatives would out weigh the positives.

[David70]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

It was a dream car to people that couldn't buy it. It's really no different than today's GTR. The people that lust over them can't afford them and the people that can afford them won't buy a Nissan. The Nissan hasn't sold over 500 GTR's a year in the USA since 2015 and even in its best sales year they sold 1700 which is about how many 911's Porsche sells in two months. The Supra suffered miserable sales for the same reason the GTR does today and it's because expensive Japanese sports are are not desirable. Kids, teenagers, and young adults lusting over unattainable cars does not make it a success or an icon.

Kind of agree except every review I ever read on the GTR with it's weight, complexity, overall lack of involvement, and how it looks never had me wanting one. People that like them seem to only point to the numbers. Seems like the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times were what everyone always wanted to talk about and this isn't what I am most interested in. If I bought a $100k plus 2 door car is would have the engine behind me or at least be RWD, preferably with a much lower weight.

I do agree few want to buy a $133k Nissan, partly for the manufacturer but then partly for how they will actually use them.

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by chris719

It does to some degree. I think the Corvette has a big nostalgia / American boomer appeal, too. It being a magazine test darling doesn't hurt.

I have little hope for the Z, sadly. Nissan probably won't get it right. Even if they do, starting at $40k might mean it ends up too expensive for the kids that want it, and not good enough for the demographic that can afford it.

I am sad that the Z4 and Supra aren't more popular. I really hope the segment survives.

I think the new Z may sell okay in its first year but I see sales petering out quickly and going into 370Z territory. The engine will breathe life into an old chassis but with the reports of it costing over $40 for top models do not bode well as they couldn't sell the 370Z at just over $30k.

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

I think the new Z may sell okay in its first year but I see sales petering out quickly and going into 370Z territory. The engine will breathe life into an old chassis but with the reports of it costing over $40 for top models do not bode well as they couldn't sell the 370Z at just over $30k.

You gotta handicap the nissans for age though. Nissan sold plenty of $30k Z cars....in 2005 or so. Someone mentioned the gtr only selling 500 units last year. Well. That’s 500 more than Toyota sold Supras in their 10th year on the American market.

I am hopeful for the Z. The last time it did well, it was offering close to Mustang GT power at a Mustang GT price point, but with only 2 seats and a lighter chassis. That’s a thing they’re looking to repeat with the upcoming Z car.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by evil-G-nius

LOL...you act like they have never put the same engine in more than one car. It could have easily been a detuned version to still offer great performance but leave the LCF & RCF as the expensive top of the line picks

I never implied or suggested any such thing.

You said they should make their own body and stuff the ISF V8 in there. I was stating they already have done that with the Lexus.

Apparently, they didn't see the business case for a baby RCF.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Moflow

You gotta handicap the nissans for age though. Nissan sold plenty of $30k Z cars....in 2005 or so. Someone mentioned the gtr only selling 500 units last year. Well. That’s 500 more than Toyota sold Supras in their 10th year on the American market.

I am hopeful for the Z. The last time it did well, it was offering close to Mustang GT power at a Mustang GT price point, but with only 2 seats and a lighter chassis. That’s a thing they’re looking to repeat with the upcoming Z car.

Yep. I'll be curious how long until it's actually released and the final specs.

I'm eyeing the new BRZ since it's fairly cheap, but I'm still going to wait on the specs/looks for the new STi and 400Z before I make any final decisions.

I had also thought about the new Mach 1 Mustang.......but at that price, I'll save $10k and buy an SS 1LE that is likely still faster.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by chris719

It does to some degree. I think the Corvette has a big nostalgia / American boomer appeal, too. It being a magazine test darling doesn't hurt.

I have little hope for the Z, sadly. Nissan probably won't get it right. Even if they do, starting at $40k might mean it ends up too expensive for the kids that want it, and not good enough for the demographic that can afford it.

I am sad that the Z4 and Supra aren't more popular. I really hope the segment survives.

I have always though of the Vette as the best bang for your bang. Speaking of nostalgia, a lot of new A80 and A90 owners I spoken with are getting one because they now can afford it.

Personally, I like the looks of the Z proto, and the manual is icing on the cake. Rumors about pricing has been all over the board. Some with "connections" have said just a few grand over the 370z; while others are saying $40k-$50k. So who knows who is telling the truth. I hope it stays affordable as hinted by a Nissan official.

Idk about the Z4, but the Supra would probably be a little more popular if they could throw in a manual. Even still, it's not all that bad. Last year the Supra alone handy outsold both the Cayman and Boxster.

[supra93]

Originally Posted by evil-G-nius

They should have made their own body and stuffed the V8 from the ISF in there...that would have been a better progression for the name IMO

Originally Posted by evil-G-nius

LOL...you act like they have never put the same engine in more than one car. It could have easily been a detuned version to still offer great performance but leave the LCF & RCF as the expensive top of the line picks

When the FT-1 was first unveiled a lot of people on the Toyota/Lexus forum thought it was going to be RC based. The concept's dimensions and hinted price tag also lined up with the RC's price range as well. To father add that speculation; at the time reports of a new V6 turbo had already started to circulated.

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Apparently, they didn't see the business case for a baby RCF.

Yup, seems they didn't want to put the time and money into R&D for a low selling niche product.

[SickGTR]

Originally Posted by David70

AWD adds weight, cost, maintenance and repair. This weight hurts braking and cornering performance and when the weather is decent I only see a benefit from a stop, likely 0-30. Great for 0-60, ok for 1/4 mile, overall a negative on a road course and normal driving. Also great for snow. If looking for maximum acceleration in a high powered front engine car it is the best option. Same reason the M3/M5 have gone to AWD and same reason the Corvette went mid engine.

I drive two RWD cars and have no interest in AWD. If I bought a 911 it would be RWD, if I was interested in an R8, I would also prefer a RWD. Corvette would only be worse with AWD. In a medium hp car like the Supra there is no use in AWD and the negatives would out weigh the positives.

I understand all that. But the GTR is no slouch on a track even with it's weight. Just saying. I don't ever road race my cars. So I could care less about that anyway. The zero to sixty and from a 40 roll is what I want! If your trying to have a track car and be cheap, grab a Miata, VROOm VROOM LOL. This new M series will not be cheap to track either with it's fat ass. Especially the AWD version. I'm just not a fan of RWD high HP. My M4 is horrible and it's only 500 HP. To me, spinning first and second gear is the worst!!!!!

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by SickGTR

But the GTR is no slouch on a track even with it's weight.

Yep, that's why up until the last couple of years it consistently dominated One Lap of America.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by SickGTR

Not every year was Iconic. Unless you live under a rock, the 93-97 Supra turbo was. There are still used ones going for more than a new M 3/4. I get it, not everyone will like them but It was a bad ass car!! That motor is a beast! I personally love the sound of them. All along when I heard it was going to be re-released, I assumed it would have hit the market like the GTR did. Unfortunately we got a BRZ/Z4 bastard child. I probably pumped it up in my head to much. I just feel like the new one is just so BLAH. I was ready to sell My GTR but that never even crossed my mind when that abortion came out

Wasn't the 93-97 Supra not a big hit with consumers? Too expensive for a Toyota was the general consensus at least in my circle-I had just entered driving age at the time. Sales were so bad it basically killed the Supra didn't it? It was the aftermarket and tuning potential as a used car that made the Supra iconic.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by evil-G-nius

They should have made their own body and stuffed the V8 from the ISF in there...that would have been a better progression for the name IMO

Slower and heavier?

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by jmg

Wasn't the 93-97 Supra not a big hit with consumers? Too expensive for a Toyota was the general consensus at least in my circle-I had just entered driving age at the time. Sales were so bad it basically killed the Supra didn't it? It was the aftermarket and tuning potential as a used car that made the Supra iconic.

My understanding of the era was that a lot of it had to do with economic factors outside of Toyota's control. The end of the japanese bubble economy and exchange rates kind of killed the car more than anything else. It was released to pretty glowing reviews at the time and people who were into Japanese cars revered it from day one.

No denying that the car had a second life thanks to the tuning potential, but it wasn't as unloved as the sales numbers would have you believe when it came out, it was more a victim of circumstance.