Get the Feeling: Toyota

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnBM01
  • 58 comments
  • 2,456 views
JohnBM01
Hiya again to not only McLaren'sAngel, but also M5Power, who has to be GTPlanet's number one car stat guy. Or as in ESPN terms, "stat boy."

McLaren, you've stated that "Toyota sure do kno whow to attract the biggest amount of customers due to like about...90%+ of the customers that cares more about going to from point A to point B more than performance," so let's see what I can ask you. McLaren, as a fan of the Nissan Skyline, you obviously know about the rivalry between Toyota and Nissan, especially in motorsport. I can remember the JGTC fight last year at the Autopolis Circuit in Oita, Japan (beautiful city). I can recall Skylines banging into Supras, then Supras banging into Skylines last year. Anyhow, what you said about Toyota was mentioned in quotation.

So which Japanese car company do you think does the better job at "Point A to Point B" regardless of performance? Toyota or Honda?

Hiya! :D :O :lol:

ahhh that is a tough question! :eek: I dont personally own a Toyota or Honda so I cant give an answer base from real life experience, but could only give an answer from my surrounding. :O:O
Based on my surrounding between those two makers, I would have to say that it looks like Honda have the upperhand over Toyota. I see more Hondas than Toyotas out on the street and also in high/university parking lots. I think they are both the same for "point A to point B" driving but Honda seems to be more popular for that and even alot of people themselves around here recommend Honda as the best USED car for a student. :O:O:O
 
rollazn
As for the JGTC Supra's, they use a V8 in their Supra. I heard it came out of the Toyota Tundra.

i believe the jgtc supra comes with a turbo inline 4. better weight distribution
 
Don't forget the 'wedge' (60's) 👍

Yes, Toyota is my all-out favorite asian manufacurer, and Mazda makes my favorite engine. (take a wild guess... 13b)
 
M5Power
Nope, I agree.

Incidentally, did you know that there is not one single Toyota on the market that does zero to sixty in less than 6.9 seconds?
You gotta be kidding me... or is the Supra Turbo (especially the U.S. version, with 320 hp instead of 'just' 276) that slow?
 
RB26DETT
i believe the jgtc supra comes with a turbo inline 4. better weight distribution

Nope. They use a V8 from the Toyota Tundras. Search online if you have too, but they have switched from Inline 6s to V8s.

Why would they go with Inline 4s? Those Supras come stock with Inline 6s.
 
Victor Vance
You gotta be kidding me... or is the Supra Turbo (especially the U.S. version, with 320 hp instead of 'just' 276) that slow?

If you have been ready properly, He means Toyotas that are on the US market right now. Toyota dont sell the Supra at the moment.
 
Victor Vance
You gotta be kidding me... or is the Supra Turbo (especially the U.S. version, with 320 hp instead of 'just' 276) that slow?

I think he meant on the market right now. The Toyota Supra was cancelled in 1998, therefore he said it dosent count.
 
VIPERGTSR01
If you have been ready properly, He means Toyotas that are on the US market right now. Toyota dont sell the Supra at the moment.

Bastard, posted before I did!! :dopey:
 
Hahahahaha....... Loser... :D
 
Oh. And... ouch.

Not even the buzzy 2zz-ge-equipped Celica GT-S 6 speed can break 6.9?

By the way... that's hachi-roku in my ava :cool:
 
No trying to start something, but VIPERGTSR01 just OWN Rollazn? :D

Just joking! Relax. Any more Toyota talk?
 
JohnBM01
No trying to start something, but VIPERGTSR01 just OWN Rollazn? :D

Just joking! Relax. Any more Toyota talk?

its OWN3D not OWN. Your an idiot John!

Just joking! Relax.
 
JohnBM01
Your stepmother must be pretty trendy, AP1. Hope she likes it and has fun in it.

Trendy?! She's...strange...
 
Victor Vance
Oh. And... ouch.

Not even the buzzy 2zz-ge-equipped Celica GT-S 6 speed can break 6.9?

Reputable sites and magazines (Road & Track, ePinions, Consumer Guide) say 7.1-7.4; Internet-based fanboy sites (supercars.net, fast-autos.net) say 6.6.
 
the_undrtaker89
Im proud to own a 93' toyota corrola. I have never had problems with my corrola...EVER.


Join the club, my 95 Corolla hasnt given me any problems yet either.
 
The thing about most of the japanese import cars that I've noticed is that they're damn near indestructable, but once they reach a certain point, everything goes wrong at once. My stepdad had a 93 lexus LS400 and drove it like hell(with absolutely no problems) to 283000 miles, and then traded it because it started falling apart.
 
M5Power
Reputable sites and magazines (Road & Track, ePinions, Consumer Guide) say 7.1-7.4; Internet-based fanboy sites (supercars.net, fast-autos.net) say 6.6.
Damn, 2450 pounds and 180 hp, and it can't even get to 60 in less than 6.9. Something's wrong. :banghead:
 
So I'm starting to think the reason there's no cars below 6.9 is because they are geared more towards fuel efficency for each one then?
 
M5Power
Reputable sites and magazines (Road & Track, ePinions, Consumer Guide) say 7.1-7.4; Internet-based fanboy sites (supercars.net, fast-autos.net) say 6.6.

M5Power, I think the current Camry Solara can do 0-60. I mean you have shown and said that the Solara couldnt but yet Motorweek has done it. At first I though you only wanted to compare to very reliable sources but when you list the 0-60 time for the Celica, and said that "Reputable sites and magazine says 7.1-7.4".. Motorweek is a magazine also. They did 0-60 in 6.7s. With a good driver and the condition, I think the Solara, and Celica can possbiliy do 0-60 faster than 6.9.


2004 Toyota Camry Solara

Engine 3.3 liter 24-valve V6

Horsepower 225

Torque 240 lb feet

0-60 mph 6.7 seconds

1/4 mile 15.2 seconds @ 91 mph

60-0 mph 134 feet

EPA Mileage 20 mpg city
29 mpg highway

MotorWeek's
mileage loop 24 mpg
mixed city/highway

Also... Researchyourcar.com said the Celica GT-S Coupe Manual can do 0-60 in 6.5 and 1/4 in 15.2@94.1mph.

http://researchyourcar.com/cars/drivetrain.php?id=838
 
rollazn
M5Power, I think the current Camry Solara can do 0-60.

I never said it topped out at 59... :odd:

I mean you have shown and said that the Solara couldnt

Dude, this isn't the Citroen 2CV we're talking about. I showed and said it couldn't go from 0-60? You're off your tree.

but yet Motorweek has done it.

They got it above 60?!

At first I though you only wanted to compare to very reliable sources but when you list the 0-60 time for the Celica, and said that "Reputable sites and magazine says 7.1-7.4".. Motorweek is a magazine also. They did 0-60 in 6.7s. With a good driver and the condition, I think the Solara, and Celica can possbiliy do 0-60 faster than 6.9.

Well, look. I never buy anything Car & Driver says. Ever. Because they always performance-test their cars to an unbelievable extent, then beef up performance numbers saying "every car is different". Yeah, and yours just happen to always be faster. But when even Car & Driver concedes that the Celica can't break 7.1, it's not breaking 7.1.

Solara V6 goes no faster than 6.9 - it's an automatic, so flooring it is all you're going to get from the thing.
 
Yesterday, on a suspicion, in a drive in my friend's 2000 GT-S, I asked him to punch it from 5 mph in 1st until 60 mph, and I'd say the car accelerated lazily until about 6000, then the VVTL-i 2ZZ-GE switched onto its more agressive cams and DAMN the car really picked up! I think I now understand why the Celica accelerates initially so slow...

OK, Initial D fans, remember Wataru's ride with Takumi? He was quite aggravated that Takumi said that the 'genuine racing motor' was slower. Well, every time he hit about 6,250 RPM, the car would suddenly jerk on a burst of power, but then Takumi would upshift carefully at no more than 7,000 RPM (remember, this was almost right after the 4-AG died due to him overrevving)... Wataru couldn't figure it out. Then, suddenly he realized that the engine was a high-rev unit that he believe could rev to 10,000 RPM (It actually can go to 11 :sly: ), and that early in the rev band the motor just starts to pick up at 6,000 RPM...

Well, it's the same basic principle. The 2ZZ-GE, the old S2000 motor (don't know its code) and the latest non-turbo (RENESIS) 13B all share one thing in common: They all have to be revved very high to produce any power. See, let's pretend an L48 could fit under a Celica's hood and only made 180 hp (not too far off... the old L-48 in Dad's Roadmaster made 210). If you squared the cars off at 5 mph and floored it, the 2ZZ would pick up slowly, meanwhile the L48 would take off in a cloud of smoke but it would have to shift at a 5,000 RPM redline. Now, as the L48 is shifting, the 2ZZ is just getting into the power range and accelerating quickly. As the L48 tops out in second and grabs for third, the 2ZZ hits it's, what, 8,500 RPM rev limit and grabs for second, they're both doing about 50. As the L48 hits 60 MPH at around 4,500 RPM and is getting close to upshifting into 4th, the Celica is still doing less than 45 MPH and is playing catch-up. As the car hits around 7,000 RPM, it finally hits 60. Considering the diesel-like torque band of the L48, and that both cars are being power-shifted, the L48 GT-S would hit 60 in about 6.3, while the 2ZZ took a whole 7.5 seconds, since it was well off of its power band in 1st gear, took so long to wind up that the L48 easily pulled away at the start.

The moral: Horsepower is great for going fast, but you need torque to get fast quickly :)
 
So how would you explain the Dodge Viper, Victor Vance (not that I'm trying to divert the topic from Toyota talk to another car company)?
 
Since you put it that way, either the latest Viper, or more importantly, the Viper GTS of the 1990s. It had more torque than horsepower. Well, go ahead, Victor.
 
:cry: my GT-S is that slow? :cry: well, everthing is relative. When you've been driving a 1989 22R (no, no E on the end of that :) ) powered P/U with a 4spd (yes a 4spd, it's a wierd damn truck for 1989) anything else seems fast. I love shifting. And that 6spd makes you shift. recomended speed for a shift to 5th gear is 45mph. And yeah, maybe performance does suffer because toyota still wants to squeeze in economy. My GT-S only get 5mpg worse than a GT but same as Highway mileage as the GT, 33mpg. Oh, I think C&D also said that the engine (2zz-ge) was not happy until you hit 6k in the Lotus Elise also. I haven't had mine that high yet. I guess i'm afraid. Never revved anything that high before. I mean, my Chevy 350 sounds like it's gonna blow at 4000, it's just so loud! ah crap, gotta go to class, i'll finish this later.
 
M5Power
I never said it topped out at 59... :odd:



Dude, this isn't the Citroen 2CV we're talking about. I showed and said it couldn't go from 0-60? You're off your tree.



They got it above 60?!



Well, look. I never buy anything Car & Driver says. Ever. Because they always performance-test their cars to an unbelievable extent, then beef up performance numbers saying "every car is different". Yeah, and yours just happen to always be faster. But when even Car & Driver concedes that the Celica can't break 7.1, it's not breaking 7.1.

Solara V6 goes no faster than 6.9 - it's an automatic, so flooring it is all you're going to get from the thing.

M5Power, I know when it comes to automotive you are one of the smartest at GTP. I know that my knowledge of cars is nothing compared to you. I just want to get that out in the clear.

You claimed that no current Toyota could break 0-60 in less than 6.9s. You have use researchyourcar.com as a source, so I will too. Researchmycar.com may not be very accurate but since you used it with other sources, I will use it also.

They claimed that the Celica GT-S coupe did 6.5s. I just want to know what you think about it. You said,

Well, look. I never buy anything Car & Driver says. Ever. Because they always performance-test their cars to an unbelievable extent, then beef up performance numbers saying "every car is different". Yeah, and yours just happen to always be faster. But when even Car & Driver concedes that the Celica can't break 7.1, it's not breaking 7.1.

You said you never use Car & Driver as a reference and that their time are beefed up. Is that to all cars or just some? Aren’t there some cars that Car & Driver have not beefed up on? Well lets use some car that they have tested before as reference. They have tested the 350Z in the August 2002 edition. They claimed it ran 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.1 seconds at 101 mph. If you go to a 350Z forum, they have improved their 0-60 and ¼ times! There are people who did 13.5 in a stock 350Z. However, of course, the Z has been broken into, and the driver is more accustomed to the car.

I am not claiming that the Celica GT-S can do 0-60 in less than 6.9, since I have never driven the car. I bet you have though, so I don’t see why I am disputing with you. You’re the one who works for some kind of car magazine/company, or some **** so I don’t doubt you.

Is MotorWeek better than Car & Driver on performance data?

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2315a.shtml

They reviewed a 2004 Toyota Camry Solara Automatic and it ran 0-60 in 6.7 seconds (.2 second than what you claimed) and ¼ at 15.2 seconds @91 mph!

Whatever the case is, If no Toyota model can do more than 6.9 second then I apologize.
 
JohnBM01
Since you put it that way, either the latest Viper, or more importantly, the Viper GTS of the 1990s. It had more torque than horsepower. Well, go ahead, Victor.
Well, a Viper is simple. Hit the gas at idle in 2nd. WHOOOOOOOOAH! Hello, TORQUE! Acceleration is something that is truly incredible, I'm thankful my dad is good friends with someone rich enough to own a 1997 R/T 10. You really have to experience a Viper at full throttle, it's like a rocket ship. Redline is at 5,000 RPM, however, but the Tremec T-56 has tall ratios, so shifting ain't often. Unfortunately, the 'sound system' is poorly tuned :indiff:

Did you know, the original 487 cu. in. is based off the old Magnum 5.9? The idea was take the truck motor and add 2 more cylinders...
 
Back