• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Toyota problems could be electronics

Well that new Scion starts in the mid 20s. So all the action shots of it doing stupid shit on public roads (errr...closed track driven by professional driver) are sticking with Scion's marketing strategy of targeting the younger demographic.

Sharp looking car though. And I applaud them for going RWD. I'd actually really like to drive one.
 
fyi:ALL of the car companies use the 'drift' in their commercials, the worse example being the middle age guy in a MB. agree on the boring ass lineup, Toyota has no affordable sportscars, the closest thing is the tacoma Xrunner, but thats a truck.

so your choices are Scion FR-S for 25k or lexus LFA for 400k.....
 
TheRobSJ said:
Sharp looking car though. And I applaud them for going RWD. I'd actually really like to drive one.
Click to expand...

+1

The "Japanese Empire" was built on cheap, realiable sports cars, this seems like a modern 240Z.

The reports I've read is that the Subaru version is a little better equipped and slightly more "sorted".
 
Since when is a $25K sports car not affordable? :wtf

Where the hell have you people been living for the last 10 years? What TRUE sports car has cost significantly less than $25K in that time frame? :dunno
 
Kornholio said:
Since when is a $25K sports car not affordable? :wtf

Where the hell have you people been living for the last 10 years? What TRUE sports car has cost significantly less than $25K in that time frame? :dunno
Click to expand...

*cough*Miata*cough*




Wouldn't ever buy one, as I am a heterosexual man. But just saying.
 
TheRobSJ said:
*cough*Miata*cough*




Wouldn't ever buy one, as I am a heterosexual man. But just saying.
Click to expand...

Dude, the new MX-5 starts at $24K. It's literally the same damn price as the FR-S and you don't get as much car for your money.
 
But it is a pure sports car. True two seater too.

But yeah I'd totally get the FR-S over a Miata any day. Actually I think I like the Subaru version a little better.
 
TheRobSJ said:
But it is a pure sports car. True two seater too.

But yeah I'd totally get the FR-S over a Miata any day. Actually I think I like the Subaru version a little better.
Click to expand...

Which Subaru version? :dunno


I'm really interested in how a Toyota boxer engine performs. I may have to go check one of those things out.
 
Squidly McSmearstain said:
Toyotas have become automotive appliances. They're dishwashers with wheels. Does ANY auto manufacturer offer a more boring line up than Toyota (here in the US)? It's a world full of Camrys and Priusesesess (or whatever the plural for that POS is).

What happened to the Celica? What happened to the Supra? You would think they would make at least one interesting car.

The Scions are underpowered (plus, I'm not 12 years old) and the only interesting Lexus is $300,000. I can't afford it; if I could I'd buy Italian.
Click to expand...
Not sure about the dishwasher comparison but I will say this: Toyota has taken some very popular cars and gotten weird with design.

I own an 02 Highlander. For a few years, the Highlander was a utilitarian but decently trim looking car. Then about two years ago, they redesigned it, making it look simultaneously bigger, yet more squat.

They also did this with the 4Runner. I've been thinking of upgrading to a 4Runner for towing and ground clearance on the 4wd, because Highlanders, though offering a 4wd, sit too close to the ground for actual offroading.

But look what they did to the 4Runner! It's all puffy and ugly. I don't get it.

I had a rental car last week while WC Toyota was doing a big job on my car. It was a Rav-4. It looked like a slightly shrunken 4Runner. What was weird about that car was that it was loaded with gizmos; a back-up camera (distracting to me), the uber-stupid push-button ignition and keyless entry (I feel like a chimp pressing a button to stop and start a car and yes, I know I have a button to start my bike) and an LCD radio display that was so wonderful that I couldn't figure out how to find AM radio.

It's almost as though Toyota has floundered in its own successes, at least aesthetically. They have tremendous goodwill from decades of loyal owners but they don't seem to know where to turn. I don't think I want a new 4Runner, frankly, because its so ugly, even though it is the kind of car I actually want.

Though there is always the reasoned objection to its veracity, I have been a Consumer Reports subscriber for years. The Highlander has always been at or near the very top of the list and my experience with the car verifies it. Its a damn good car. Too bad they "improved" it. Given this design trend, I don't see how they could come up with a Supra or anything sleek, to underline the point made above. Only Prius' of all things, have retained the basic lines. Camry's just look like nothin'.
 
Last edited:
Toyota comes in and makes it boring; again. Non-turbo. 200hp (nothing to sneeze at, but.............). No AWD.

Looks great.

But the segment they're aiming at for this car is going to take one look at the spec sheet and move on to something else.

Some tuners will buy it because it's rear wheel drive.

Some girls will drive it because it's a damn fine looking car.

The majority of the target market will move on to the competitive set that tends to produce 100 more hp.

Lovely sheet metal. I like the DI. Where's the power? Where's the AWD?

Toyota seems to be dissatisfied with making their line up of cars boring and now they're moving on to making Subarus boring as well.
 
AWD is not necessary in a sports car IMO. Frankly, I think all these people that think they need AWD really don't. Amazing how long people have gotten by in this world driving cars that didn't have it and now all of a sudden it's a necessity? For what? It's as silly as those people that spend all that money on a 4X4 truck and yet the thing see's dirt or snow maybe twice a year at best. Waste of money.
 
Bay Arean said:
Not sure about the dishwasher comparison but I will say this: Toyota has taken some very popular cars and gotten weird with design.
Click to expand...

The dishwasher comparison means that Toyota is building utilitarian cars. Their cars work for the job of moving from point A to point B, but they do it in such a pedestrian and prosaic manner. A Toyota is like a mayonnaise sandwich; fucking boring.

Toyota appears to view the car as yet another appliance; just like a dishwasher. Where's the passion for the automobile?

I wouldn't want to buy a car from a company that has no passion for the automobile or driving.

The new Scion/Subaru model is a nice looker, but the performance specs are too pedestrian. Who is their target demographic?
 
Kornholio said:
AWD is not necessary in a sports car IMO. Frankly, I think all these people that think they need AWD really don't. Amazing how long people have gotten by in this world driving cars that didn't have it and now all of a sudden it's a necessity? For what? It's as silly as those people that spend all that money on a 4X4 truck and yet the thing see's dirt or snow maybe twice a year at best. Waste of money.
Click to expand...

AWD is a differentiating factor for Subarus. When you see a Subaru you think:

AWD
Turbo
Lesbian

This new car has none of that. What makes it a Subaru? Nothing. It's another boring Toyota.

The WRX and Legacy GT are a HOOT to drive because of the AWD. Those cars stick to the road. They're a blast. Necessary? Not really, but this new "Subaru" is really a "Scion" which is really a Toyota which is really boring.
 
I never thought STi's were fun because of their AWD. I thought they were fun because of their power output. Being able to slide in corners with a RWD car has always been more fun for me than an AWD car neutering the fun of pushing a car to its traction limits. Different strokes for different folks I guess. :dunno
 
Kornholio said:
AWD is not necessary in a sports car IMO. Frankly, I think all these people that think they need AWD really don't. Amazing how long people have gotten by in this world driving cars that didn't have it and now all of a sudden it's a necessity? For what? It's as silly as those people that spend all that money on a 4X4 truck and yet the thing see's dirt or snow maybe twice a year at best. Waste of money.
Click to expand...

I started driving when I was 7, in my dad's 46 Willys jeep and probably have a lot more 4wd experience on the ranch than most people who get SUVs. But I have generally agreed with what you are saying. Paying for the extra weight and front-end assembly to drive the freeways to work just seems silly.

I purposely didn't buy 4wd when I got my latest car (the Highlander), thinking along those lines. But since our family lives near the Eel and we like to car camp both in the Sierra and Coast Range, I have had to borrow the folks truck to get up the logging road and into the river basin on multiple occassions to go swimmin..Next car I get will have it.

We took the Subaru Outback wagon (Ms. BA's car) to Anza Borrego but I nearly got us stuck on a big piece of granite or something sticking up in the middle of a desert road, making me want the clearance I mentioned. Not terrible I just scraped, but its a sickening sound, full of implication. I will say that that damn little car went right up the sand "river" (or wash, I guess they call them) at Font's Point as though it was a dune buggy. I was driving and I was feeling crazy to have even tried it, but the AWD came thru there, as well. Otherwise, we just couldn't have seen it. I hate having to miss stuff that way.

I just have always noticed that in the rural roads that challenge my cars, there is always a spot where you're basically trying to drive on a road that is part ditch. So having AWD on a low-clearance car seems weird, except maybe for snow or something on a paved road.

Then there's driving through water. 99 times out of 100 you can probably make it thru a creek (like the one that crosses the road up by Fern Canyon at Prairie Creek) with 2wd, but I have to say that 4wd or AWD is a bit of insurance that a person would want.

These are the real-time scenarios that give one reason to want it. But for snow skiers that now have to chain-up anyway, your point remains well-taken.

Editing in: since she bought the Subaru, I don't call 'em "Liberus" or "Lesbarus" anymore, but I still think it).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top