4 Cylinder B48 Supra vs the Straight Six B58

[geert.bieseman]

Btw, their cars had a "recommended gear" indicator for fuel economy on the cluster. Do the North American cars not have that option, because I've never seen one with it? Wondering if that's buried in the menus somewhere.

The EU cars also have this indicator when you drive in manual mode

Sponsored

 

[vb22]

 

[KahnBB6]

^^ Carguy11 states that the U.S. spec Supra 2.0 has a non-active (Plate mechanical or gear type?) LSD rear end but I thought it has already been established that this is not the case and all those 2.0 cars have a conventional open differential.

Unless something changed one model year after the 2.0L’s introduction isn’t this an open differential Supra?

 

[type-964]

^ I thought the 2.0 was Torsen.

 

[KahnBB6]

^ I thought the 2.0 was Torsen.

I had previously read at its launch that all 2.0’s are open differential. If anyone can confirm the 2.0 actually has a Torsen LSD or even a mechanical clutch pack LSD I am very interested to know.

The 93-98 Supra non-turbo didn’t have an LSD as standard but it was a (rare but available) option.

As it stands the cheaper GR86 comes standard with this crucial hardware in addition to the manual option.

 

[diablo2112]

IMHO, the 2.0 wasn't really intended for the US market. Many countries have punative taxes based on engine size or fuel consumption. The 2.0 makes considerably more sense there, where the OTD cost will be substantially less than the 3.0.

 

[Enri93]

IMHO, the 2.0 wasn't really intended for the US market. Many countries have punative taxes based on engine size or fuel consumption. The 2.0 makes considerably more sense there, where the OTD cost will be substantially less than the 3.0.

Exactly this.
In my case (Italy) for the 3.0 you have to pay more than 3x more taxes than the 2.0, yearly.

 

[2JZ-No-Sh*t]

IMHO, the 2.0 wasn't really intended for the US market. Many countries have punative taxes based on engine size or fuel consumption. The 2.0 makes considerably more sense there, where the OTD cost will be substantially less than the 3.0.

Yup, a number of us here have said the same thing when the 4 banger was announced.

 

[autopc25]

IMHO, the 2.0 wasn't really intended for the US market. Many countries have punative taxes based on engine size or fuel consumption. The 2.0 makes considerably more sense there, where the OTD cost will be substantially less than the 3.0.

Winner-winner chicken dinner!

2.0L is the magic number for displacement in many other countries. In the case of the Supra was it the chicken or egg first?

 

[Dannyvandelft]

In the 86 community they're all crying for a turbo.

Well, here it is. A turbo 86. You're welcome.

 

[2JZ-No-Sh*t]

In the 86 community they're all crying for a turbo.

Well, here it is. A turbo 86. You're welcome.

Except there isn't a manual offered, no LSD, and pretty heavy and expensive for what it is as noted by guff.

 

[Dannyvandelft]

Except there isn't a manual offered, no LSD, and pretty heavy and expensive for what it is as noted by guff.

I think that's just a matter of time before an LSD and manual are happening. As far as weight goes, 3200 lbs with a car that has 255 horsepower isn't bad at all.

 

[CarGuy11]

It has a mechanical LSD just not e-LSD.

 

[johnny_10196]

Except there isn't a manual offered, no LSD, and pretty heavy and expensive for what it is as noted by guff.

This is especially true. People just wanted Toyota to slap on turbos, intercool, better brakes for an extra $5k or so. Not a watered down $43k Supra ($47k with options).

 

[Dannyvandelft]

This is especially true. People just wanted Toyota to slap on turbos, intercool, better brakes for an extra $5k or so. Not a watered down $43k Supra ($47k with options).

Ebay kits might cost 5k, a quality kit certainly doesn't. A factory turbo 86 would easily approach $40k and then you're still sitting in a cheap, plastic, crap interior. You're not JUST paying for horsepower in the Supra. If you think Subaru quality is equal to BMW quality...

Sponsored