U.S.-Market Toyota Supra Four-Cylinder Officially Announced

[KahnBB6]

Ugh. Do not want. This is probably how mustang people felt when they introduced the 4 cyl.

Mustang people had to live with 4cyl variants from 1974-1993. And there was a version that still has respect: the ‘84-‘86 turbo intercooled SVO’s. For a time there were people pushing those blocks into the 500 up to 700hp range with street modified examples going to 350-400hp pretty regularly.

The 1994-2011 V6 models generally weren’t liked very much like the common non-turbo (but near identical to the SVO’s closed deck iron block if someone wanted to build for boost) 4cyl.

When the 2015+ models got a new 2.3L 4cyl turbo model people actually were hoping for a new SVO in addition to the V8’s. Without the SVO name the H.O. 2.3 Mustang versions with the Brembo and LSD packages added are pretty much that.

It took a LONG time for the now discontinued V6 Mustang to become respectable at 300hp after a very long history of penalty old 6cyl 3.8’s and old 6cyl 4.0’s (Explorer V6’s). It’s too bad Ford didn’t keep the good Mustang V6 in production for many model years.

Boost is always welcome compared to total dog engines in a performance car.

The Supra’s 2JZ-GE being a mass-market de-contented version of the 2JZ-GTE with just as much overbuilt strength is something I’d love to see done all over again but which came out of a very very strong Japanese economy where such things were done.

The four cylinder Supra MKV is at least tuneable in its own right being factory turbo. It just needs a more than 250hp stock (but not 300+) and a manual option to make the lower price point smaller engine car unique and not just a penalized lower cost Supra.

Then again, Toyota also needs a parts bin a manual option for the 3.0L which would cut into what the 4cyl has to potentially offer as a unique package other than a lower price point if they were to release that also.

Sponsored

 

[JasonO]

Th

Mustang people had to live with 4cyl variants from 1974-1993. And there was a version that still has respect: the ‘84-‘86 turbo intercooled SVO’s. For a time there were people pushing those blocks into the 500 up to 700hp range with street modified examples going to 350-400hp pretty regularly.

The 1994-2011 V6 models generally weren’t liked very much like the common non-turbo (but near identical to the SVO’s closed deck iron block if someone wanted to build for boost) 4cyl.

When the 2015+ models got a new 2.3L 4cyl turbo model people actually were hoping for a new SVO in addition to the V8’s. Without the SVO name the H.O. 2.3 Mustang versions with the Brembo and LSD packages added are pretty much that.

It took a LONG time for the now discontinued V6 Mustang to become respectable at 300hp after a very long history of penalty old 6cyl 3.8’s and old 6cyl 4.0’s (Explorer V6’s). It’s too bad Ford didn’t keep the good Mustang V6 in production for many model years.

Boost is always welcome compared to total dog engines in a performance car.

The Supra’s 2JZ-GE being a mass-market de-contented version of the 2JZ-GTE with just as much overbuilt strength is something I’d love to see done all over again but which came out of a very very strong Japanese economy where such things were done.

The four cylinder Supra MKV is at least tuneable in its own right being factory turbo. It just needs a more than 250hp stock (but not 300+) and a manual option to make the lower price point smaller engine car unique and not just a penalized lower cost Supra.

The problem Toyota has with the 4-cyl is how to advertise it without robbing sales from the 6 cyl or the 86.

If they advertise power at the wheels like the 2020 model, it will look underpowered for the price. If they advertise at the crank, it may look a bit too close to the 6 cylinder’s marketing. This more or less confirms the rumor that the 6 cyl will get a performance bump in 2021, it almost has to now.

 

[KahnBB6]

If the GR86 turbo (manual) gets 230hp only then a Supra 2.0L with 250hp is probably fine.

But the GR86 *should* have 245-250hp stock. If it does then the Supra 2.0L *really should* get a bump to 280hp to better set itself apart. I still say that being automatic only will not help a 4cyl Supra in the U.S. market. Same with the 6cyl Supra though.

Either of the BMW based engines are going to have an advertised horsepower number that is in reality closer to a wheel horsepower number. We all know now that the Supra B58C makes significantly more than “335hp”. Plus with its cylinder count and layout it makes more power when tuned than a 4cyl will.

The power bump B58D is supposed to be coming but the question is for which Supra variant? Will it be a standard engine across the range or will it be limited to a higher performance trim level? (GRMN?)

 

[John8]

I thought part of the legacy of the Supra, was that it was/is a six?

 

[KahnBB6]

I thought part of the legacy of the Supra, was that it was/is a six?

Yes, traditionally in the 80’s and 90’s and through today since the flagship and desirable A90 is still an I-6 3.0 turbo.

Meeting required overall fleet emissions, overall fleet CO2 output and overall fleet fuel economy for this car are reasons a 2.0L 4cyl primarily exists. That and a rumored $10k less MSRP for 2.0’s to pad out overall sales.

However if we get a factory manual variant out of it that also makes 6cyl manual conversions that much easier then I’m fine with it. If not then, well... it’s just going to be a lower cost de-contented Supra that primarily has to exist for the reasons above.

 

[John8]

I do resent having paid what I did, to have a cheaper car around that looks the same. That is my objection. If the paint were different, and the body molding plainer, then that would be different. I had a 1990 Mitsubishi AWD turbo that went like a bat out of hell. Also it had all of the good moldings and so on, white body and black top, that made it look very different from the cheaper version of the same car. So many times people would come up and ask what make of car it was. It was distinctive and I enjoyed it, even after having the trans rebuilt and a new bored engine dropped in (and it was even faster, the pocket rocket).

So I spend the money, with no knowledge that a cheaper version of the same car is coming out. to "look" the same, with not much to distinguish it, and yes, that bothers me. It took 30 years to put down my hard earned cash on a sports car that I finally really liked. And I had the 1990 Mit for 20 years and when I sold it, it still looked 95% new and ran like a newly broken in car but stronger. :^)

 

[justbake]

Th

The problem Toyota has with the 4-cyl is how to advertise it without robbing sales from the 6 cyl or the 86.

If they advertise power at the wheels like the 2020 model, it will look underpowered for the price. If they advertise at the crank, it may look a bit too close to the 6 cylinder’s marketing. This more or less confirms the rumor that the 6 cyl will get a performance bump in 2021, it almost has to now.

It's easy to market. The Supra is bigger, nicer, and quicker. Just like how BMW sells 2 series, 4 series, and Z4 models with overlapping engine options

 

[tfoxyr]

If the GR86 turbo (manual) gets 230hp only then a Supra 2.0L with 250hp is probably fine.

But the GR86 *should* have 245-250hp stock. If it does then the Supra 2.0L *really should* get a bump to 280hp to better set itself apart. I still say that being automatic only will not help a 4cyl Supra in the U.S. market. Same with the 6cyl Supra though.

Either of the BMW based engines are going to have an advertised horsepower number that is in reality closer to a wheel horsepower number. We all know now that the Supra B58C makes significantly more than “335hp”. Plus with its cylinder count and layout it makes more power when tuned than a 4cyl will.

The power bump B58D is supposed to be coming but the question is for which Supra variant? Will it be a standard engine across the range or will it be limited to a higher performance trim level? (GRMN?)

the bmw b48 is already at 302hp as is the b58 380 hp in other models, but this will come later probably for the z4/supra and let's hope not only for the US (it is confirmed for US , but for europe for example maybe it is further into the future). For the bump in power my bet would be 2 liter supra ->280hp , the 3 cylinder-> 400hp , as for the time in about 1 year or so.

For the 86 ye my hope is that it is at 240-250 hp. For the ones that say it will overlap the supra with this power ill say this , toyota released a 200hp supra that is 10k more than the 200 hp 86, also supra will be auto only. Also in the 90s NA supra was less powerful than the 4 cylinder turbo celica . I dont know if the US got the gt4 celica turbo 250 hp , but it is a legend here and very pricey these days

 

[justbake]

There is also a 240hp 4 Cylinder Lexus RC (starting at $41K USD) to add to the mix

 

[KahnBB6]

We got the early Celica GT-Four as the Celica All-Trac in the U.S. from 1988-1993. The ST165 and ST185 generations. We never got the 1994-1999 ST205 that was available in the rest of the world. That still stings.

Our Celica All-Tracs got 190-200hp 3S-GTE engines just like the SW20 MR2 Turbo that we also got from 1990-1996.

We never had a 250hp or higher 3S-GTE car sold in the U.S. so actually the 2JZ-GE 220-225hp non-turbo Supras and Lexus cars were more powerful.

Our 1994-1999 Celicas all had anemic 5S-FE 2.2L 135hp naturally aspirated four cylinders. They did come in manual at least. No 3S-GE 160hp version either like the Celica SS-II in Japan. That generation looked really good but over here we got very underwhelming running gear.

We did get the 1999-2005 Celica GT-S (2ZZ-GE) but it’s not really the same as the 90’s Celicas that got the GT-Four treatment and which looked so much better.

 

[digicidal]

Imagine the Supra with the same ECU as the RCF?

Holy shit that would be horrible! Though still better than my wife's 2015 RX350 F-Sport... which ironically had no sport mode and would alternately lose traction (1st & 2nd) and drive like a diesel tractor (3rd-8th) with the same pedal travel. At least it had paddles which got me through the worst of it, but it was still one of the worst cars I've ever experienced (and I drove a Buick Century in the late 80s).

 

[Guff]

So I was on Toyota's Parts website looking for more stuff for my jalopy, and they just added a Supra 2.0 AT section that was not there before. So yeah, I'd say the 2.0L is (mostly) confirmed, and doesn't look like there's a manual either. We'll see though!

 

[ayau]

It'll be interesting to see the price of the 2.0L Supra. In Japan, the SZ-R is about 15% less than the RZ. Assuming the US spec would follow the similar price factor, that would make the US spec 2.0L Supra about 42-43k. That would still make it slightly more expensive than an STI and Civic Type R. Just not sure if it's worth it considering how impractical the Supra is compared to similar hot hatches.

If someone is in the market to spend over 40k for a highly impractical sports car, does saving 7-8k really matter? This makes even less sense if it still comes with an 8 speed auto.

 

[digicidal]

If someone is in the market to spend over 40k for a highly impractical sports car, does saving 7-8k really matter? This makes even less sense if it still comes with an 8 speed auto.

I can't imagine that there could be a manual option, at least not this soon... if there was they'd have just released an "extra special launch edition" or something.

As far as the pricing aspect... while I agree with you personally, there are an amazing number of people that literally buy up to the very maximum payment they are capable of qualifying for... so there's likely to be several who can get approved for a $42K loan but not a $56K one. Naturally, those are the same buyers who would be incapable of bringing the additional $14K to the table in a down payment.

 

[KahnBB6]

Concerning the Japanese market (and other markets such as Italy) there is a significant tax bracket increase when you exceed 2.0L engine displacement. I believe 2.1-2.5L is the next even higher tax tier, then 2.6-3.0L, then 3.5L and finally 4.0L+.

This is also the reason why the 1986-1991 Supra MKIII 2.0L parallel twin turbo 1G-GTE I-6 had a reason to exist in Japan: people could buy the Supra with an inline-six turbo engine and better afford it with lower taxes and insurance rates than the 3.0L 7M-GE, 7M-GTE, 2.5L 1JZ-GTE and the later 3.0L 2JZ’s.

Displacement for displacement the B48 2.0L falls into exactly the same market case in Japan.

Sponsored