18 months wait for a car that will inevitably blow up, chew oil like theres no tomorrow and who's gearbox will almost certainly play up constantly within 12 months..........poor bastards.Quote:
Originally Posted by team_v
Printable View
18 months wait for a car that will inevitably blow up, chew oil like theres no tomorrow and who's gearbox will almost certainly play up constantly within 12 months..........poor bastards.Quote:
Originally Posted by team_v
That's a fair summary - look at the price of the Mazda MX5 (~$50K)Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel_vert
Only one problem, NOT ENOUGH KW, same problem in the MX5
It's hard to get out of a car with ~205kw (even if it's FWD) and contemplate living with the 86 or MX5
I contemplated it, and decided against it, mainly due to lack of squirt (have to admit I don't like the shape/look of the 86)
It's also the same case here, long waiting times.Quote:
Originally Posted by team_v
Well, naturally-aspirated and turbocharged engines have their own strengths and weaknesses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin
One obvious negative aspect of naturally-aspirated engines is their difficulty in developing as much power lower down in the rev range compared to a similar turbocharged engine. Likewise, it's less difficult to liberate more power in a turbocharged engine than it is in a naturally-aspirated engine.
(Having said that, with ever tightening emissions and fuel economy requirements, I fear it won't be long before the N/A engine will be all but history from the affordable performance car scene in the near future :().
One way of getting around that is to make to car lighter, which also tends to improve nearly every aspect of the car simultaneously, but given the intended selling price of the 86, I suppose there was only so much Toyota were prepared to do.
I haven't driven the 86 but if the principles are similar to the Porsche Cayman/Boxster, there's something fundamentally "right" about partnering an NA engine's torque response to a RWD car. The loss in traction with an NA car is far more progressive, with a linear torque buildup and far easier to catch when you are stringing a couple of corners together. An on/off torque curve could be far more harrowing and can be frustrating to drive.
I got out of a 220kw awd Passat and bought an MX5 NC1 roadster to fill in a gap year inbetween real cars... the NC1 is a million times funner, DoggieH makes a brillian point, (but then I tend to agree with people that think like me):cookie:Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin
Drive a 5 through a clear un-Camry-ed Nasho, Maquari Pass, Kangaroo Valley (insert your local twisties) and I think you would be enjoying it too much to worry about whether you rather being in a high HP car or not.... and I am a HP kind of guy (though not FWD)...
Whatever you like is good, I sometimes get annoyed when people judge what other peeps enjoy....
Edit... Except Camry's, I hate everything they stand for!
A Camry killed my first car - shunted me off the road, up a bank, hit a tree & rolled.Quote:
Originally Posted by FSI 220
It is a Toyota with capped price servicing for 3 years. Much more cost effective to own over a polo and no reliability concerns with the twin charger motor or dsg.
Capped price servicing that has to occur every 6 months which adds up to more than the 1 yearly service on my VW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finance_Analyst
Why not just buy a Runout Mk6 GTI.
Cos I already own a Mk6 GTI :PQuote:
Originally Posted by team_v
Plus I already do 2 services a year anyway (oil and filter change every 6 mths) so it is six or half a dozen really.
Polo GTI reliability is the main concern for me, with all the problems which have been well documented