Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Supra Topics' started by JT, May 12, 2019.
You can just hear the grin on his face when he's driving. Cant take this wait any longer.
I'd assume so...there's a Japanese video online that compares the Supra, M2, and 718 Cayman GTS. By the end it was determined that the GTS came first and then the Supra...followed by the M2.
I saw a comment by Tara saying that it should be benchmarked against the S rather than the GTS.
In another review (from Portugal) the secondary engineer was being interviewed...when asked about the Cayman benchmark, he said the came close.
Numbers released by Toyota and Porsche are one thing and actual drives are another...Car and Driver rates the Supra 0-60 at a 3.9 and an old review of the Cayman S placed it at 3.6. So who knows what the GTS is doing.
I for one am very torn and cross shopping the two...I'd love to pick up a used manual GTS but the engine in the Supra seems so much more torquey and charismatic.
Is it just me or this car actually looks better with the front license plate? Almost as if the license plate is giving this car the nose job it needs. I am in Plano, Texas where front license plate is required and cops here are notorious for pulling folks over it. Which reminds me, none of the Supras at the headquarter doesn't have the plate. Wonder why they are not pulling them over...
Nice video of the MKV at the limit!
Wait what? So it objectively is a better overall car than the GTS but loses because it doesn't have as much "mechanical feel" as the Porsche? Meh, still a win for me because it's around 20k pounds cheaper than the Cayman GTS.
Mechanical Feel = Manual Transmission, no more no less.
So we do get heated and more importantly cooled seats? Or is that just the UK? Or did I misunderstand completely?
All the US gets is heated.
What a strange review.
He also closes with saying the $80,000 Cayman GTS is a better car than the $50,000 Supra which completely disregards what he said earlier about price and how the GTS was not the correct competition.
Yeah, Top Gear is definitely on the "iTs A ReBaDgEd z4" and "Zupra" bandwagon. I wouldn't be caught dead in an Alpine A110 even if it drove like an F1 car. That thing is hideous and looks like an Eclipse and a Celica got pregnant and had a miscarriage in the second trimester.
The writer was clearly trying to find bad things to say about the MKV.
Too comfortable (how is this bad?)
10hp over the MKIV (sure, let's be ignorant)
Too much BMW (wow, really? Who would have thought?!)
Looks like any other GT (yeah, the Supra should have become a sedan or maybe even an SUV)
But the Alpine on the other hand is "fun", yay! Even though the MKV is very clearly the superior car in every single way and form and costs the exact same with Toyota's reliability seal of approval.
Hey Top Gear, get a boosted 86 with 250whp. I guarantee you it's more "fun" than that hideous thing.
Hey, it's not just Top Gear, it's also the the majority of these shitty, biased British reviewers that always moan about Japanese cars (even if they're legendary). Fuck them. They're nobodies who don't understand the beauty of a Japanese car, so who gives a flying fuck about what they say? We can just curve their asses and disregard them as they can go into limbo by themselves. They're purposely trying to be oblivious to everything and also think they're above everything and everyone by sticking up their noses at them. We know they're stupid, so instead of calling them out, why don't we just ignore them? They're not worth our time.
This is why I never give a flying shit about what they think nor do I watch their reviews for cars that much. I only watch for press launches, and special reviews (comparisons, supercars, racing, etc.).