Mazda's New Inline 6 Engines! Shames Toyota :-(

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Mazda's New Inline 6 Engines! Shames Toyota :-(

  1. #1
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    401

    Mazda's New Inline 6 Engines! Shames Toyota :-(

    *** Not sure if this was already posted on SF, sorry if it was ***

    This will sure get everyone (especially the MKIV fans) heated....Mazda recently announced that they will be manufacturing three versions of an inline 6 engine for their cars.

    https://jalopnik.com/mazda-challenge...h-d-1834636620

    Wow, I never thought a company with less profits and assets would be able to develop an in-house inline 6 engine, and Toyota couldn't. This is fantastic! I wonder how stout this platform will be?

    Your thoughts?
    2019 Subaru STI - Crystal White Pearl

  2. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Wheel Whore SupraWillis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UT
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,217
    "Just this week, Tetsuya Tada, chief engineer of the new Supra, told Jalopnik it would have been a logistical nightmare for Toyota to develop its own new straight-six for the Supra, involving years of development, a new factory, and would have driven up the cost of the car."

    I'm sorry to say, but I wished Toyota would choose someone else to be the chief engineer of their sports car division. I for one would have been in line for a 100% Toyota Supra even if the costs were higher as they should be.

    I absolutely hate BMW build quality more than any other manufacturer.

    From a business standpoint, Mazda might as well build an inline-6, The new Supra will sell well at that $50k price point but there are droves of customers who will opt to buy something else because of the BMW build quality.
    My old and current favorites.

    Old:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-KrBytvXLE

    Current:
    04 Porsche GT3
    87 Mazda RX-7 Turbo II
    93.5 Premier Edition Original TT

    Poopra by Jeff Willis, on Flickr

  4. #3
    Very Senior Member Silver Supra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    2 Pa Low
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by SupraWillis View Post
    "Just this week, Tetsuya Tada, chief engineer of the new Supra, told Jalopnik it would have been a logistical nightmare for Toyota to develop its own new straight-six for the Supra, involving years of development, a new factory, and would have driven up the cost of the car."

    I'm sorry to say, but I wished Toyota would choose someone else to be the chief engineer of their sports car division. I for one would have been in line for a 100% Toyota Supra even if the costs were higher as they should be.

    I absolutely hate BMW build quality more than any other manufacturer.

    From a business standpoint, Mazda might as well build an inline-6, The new Supra will sell well at that $50k price point but there are droves of customers who will opt to buy something else because of the BMW build quality.
    I could not agree more.
    Furthermore, I do not believe anything that comes from Tada now - he sold out to the bean-counters.
    '94 T Auto Silver Bullet | 471 rwhp at 15.5 psi |

  5. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #4
    SupraForums Member Crocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Ottawa/Toronto
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,158
    Toyota and Tada has been throwing out BS about the Supra since the beginning. They are trying to hide the fact that they wanted an off the shelf solution with almost zero effort. Laziness and greed at its best (or in this case, its worse).

    Never mind the fact many companies (most of them much smaller and less profitable than Toyota) are coming out with inline 6 engines from scratch like Mazda, Mercedes, Jaguar/Land Rover......

    Shame on you Toyota. Shame on you!
    TBD

  7. #5
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    401
    With more and more manufacturers jumping on the inline 6 bandwagon, I wonder if Toyota will see a use case for a new in-house inline 6?

    Things are about to get interesting...

  8. #6
    Very Senior Member Silver Supra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    2 Pa Low
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by PerformanceSound View Post
    With more and more manufacturers jumping on the inline 6 bandwagon, I wonder if Toyota will see a use case for a new in-house inline 6?

    Things are about to get interesting...
    Seriously doubt it. Toyota already sold their soul for beans.

  9. #7
    SF Contributing Member 87supramario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    On the outside
    Posts
    2,446
    I'm glad to hear BMW won't be the only one with the i6.

    We know for a fact the Z4 was a dying production car according to sale figures. Toyota is making money giving BMW a pick-me-up, and I hope Toyota spends this on a engine facility.

    Not that this is impossible or anything, Nissa had already done so and succeeded for the GTR. Toyota's 2009 CEO is a fool. Wheel whore isn't the only one that waited in line.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk


    Resurrection complete. Build thread-> https://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...surrection-1JZ

  10. #8
    Twin Meister
    Moderator
    KenHenderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    SoCali
    Posts
    9,987
    Get ready to be even more disappointed, guys. This article says it all: https://www.autoblog.com/2019/05/11/...-patent-count/ Pay particular attention to the very last paragraph. This is why I have continued to say that the richest (by far) automotive manufacturer in the world cannot figure out how to make a business case for its own inline 6 and a manual transmission. It's been pure, unadulterated BS from the very beginning. Expect the BS line to continue.

    "When Toyota started the original Prius program in the early 1990s, it did something that was atypical at the time: As this was an all-new approach to developing a powertrain, it decided that it would have its engineers develop as much as possible internally — down to the geometry of the wire used for motor winding. Arguably, that deep knowledge resulted in "Prius" becoming synonymous with "hybrid."

    That kind of commitment to creating and developing things goes back to at least Henry Ford, whose "tinkering" led to the development of a raft of innovations, not just the moving assembly line and the flathead V8, but even charcoal briquettes (wood was used to build Model Ts; there was scrap, especially from the sawmill; so he thought about it and eventually Kingsford Charcoal became a product).

    In an industry that is becoming increasingly defined by ACES — as in autonomous, connected, electrified, shared, although there is something of a Las Vegas gamble to the whole thing — intellectual chops within organizations are becoming more important than the ability to creatively shape sheetmetal or to optimize the output of a downsized, turbocharged engine.

    So how do we know how companies are doing in this realm of product and process development?

    One of the ways this internal know-how can be quantified is to look at the number of U.S. patents a company has obtained in a given year. That's something Harrity Patent Analytics, part of law firm Harrity & Harrity, which describes itself as "the nation's leading patent preparation and prosecution firm," has codified in what it calls the "Patent 300." It looks at the number of utility patents — which cover products, processes and machinery — companies have been issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

    The patent holders include a full suite of companies, organizations and industries, and there are certainly automotive OEMs among them. According to Harrity, the firms that make up the list of 300 represent those that have obtained 54 percent of the more than 300,000 U.S. patents issued in 2018.
    The firm's analysis shows that 68.5% of the patents encompassed in its report are in the electrical, software and computer-related technologies, with 19% being mechanical. Which pretty much defines the auto industry.

    What isn't surprising is that the OEM that ranks highest is Toyota. It is ranked sixth on the overall list. Only IBM, Samsung, Canon, Intel, Alphabet, and GE are above it. Toyota obtained 2,554 U.S. utility patents in 2018.

    The spirit of Henry lives on, because the next OEM on the list, at No. 15 with 2,149 U.S. patents, is Ford. According to Harrity, 72% of Ford's patents are in the mechanical category and 23% electrical, which is not wholly unlike Toyota, which had 55% and 25%, respectively.

    Hyundai is No. 22, with 1,539 patents. At No. 34, behind Fujifilm (seriously: did you know that company still exists?), is General Motors, with 1,197 patents.

    Honda is tied for 43rd, at 958 patents, with TCL, a Chinese consumer electronics company.

    Then there is a considerable gap, to position 89, bracketed by chemical company BASF and ag equipment manufacturer Caterpillar, where Porsche is found, with 503 patents.

    Nissan makes the top 100, at 97, with 446 U.S. patents.

    But then, below the likes of Nike, the State University System of Florida, Whirlpool, Walt Disney, eBay, and even Walmart, there is BMW with 190 U.S. patents in 2018, which allows it to make the top 200, at position 198.

    Tied for 234th with a Japanese Chemical firm, Nitto Denko, and a South Korean environmental products company, LSiS, there's Mazda, with 159 patents.

    FCA is tied with semiconductor firm Rambus and defense and aerospace company Northrop Grumman at 244, with 155 patents.

    And the last automotive OEM that makes the "Patent 300" is Tata Motors, at 126, which ties it with a company named Waters, which is in the life sciences industry.

    So of the top 300 there are 10 automotive OEMs, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai, GM, Honda, Porsche, Nissan, BMW, Mazda, FCA, and Tata. Only the first two have more than 2,000 U.S. utility patents; only the second two have more than 1,000; then starting with Honda and down, the rest are in triple digits.

    However, something that isn't often talked about but which is absolutely the case in the auto industry is that suppliers do a considerable amount of development that is integrated into OEM products transparently. And in this regard, the number of suppliers on the list is impressive.

    For example, the top 100 includes Bosch (28), Denso (36) and Continental (100).

    Patents are just one indicator of the overall innovativeness of a company, and innovation without market success is irrelevant.

    But consider this: The market cap for Toyota is on the order of $199 billion, which is more than GM ($54.2 billion), Ford ($41.1 billion) and FCA ($20.7 billion) combined. So there's something to be said for invention."
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


    Ken.
    www.sp-power.com
    HKS 3.4L: 1110 all-boost whp/839 lb-ft @ 2.6KG/CM^2
    1994 "SP ENGINEERING" TWIN HKS GT3240 TOYOTA SUPRA TURBO

    1985 Toyota Celica Supra P-Type 5MT
    1991 Toyota Supra Turbo Hardtop/Sunroof 5MT (BPU)
    1993.5 Toyota Supra Turbo Hard Top (BPU)
    1995 Toyota Supra Turbo 6MT (APU)
    2006 Toyota 4Runner Limited V8
    2010 Lexus IS-F
    2016 Lexus IS 350 F Sport

  11. #9
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    401
    Ken, do you have a footnote version of what you said above? Lol...damn homie, TMI!

    So are you saying that shame on Toyota for not being innovative enough with a market cap of $199 billion, or that because they are at a market cap of $199 billion that they got the recipe down cold?

  12. #10
    Twin Meister
    Moderator
    KenHenderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    SoCali
    Posts
    9,987
    Quote Originally Posted by PerformanceSound View Post
    Ken, do you have a footnote version of what you said above? Lol...damn homie, TMI!

    So are you saying that shame on Toyota for not being innovative enough with a market cap of $199 billion, or that because they are at a market cap of $199 billion that they got the recipe down cold?
    Both. I called out its market cap because, after all, this is a company that built a bespoke manufacturing plant at Motomachi for the LFA and a truly incredible carbon fiber production loom, but, according to Tada, can't make a business case for an all-Toyota MKV with a manual transmission.

    I copied and pasted the entire article because I thought it was excellent background information on the company for those who do not follow it closely, and provides perspective on what could have happened if the company was as committed to the Supra as it is committed to the Camry.


    Ken.

  13. #11
    Blue Thunder $9ktt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    3,269
    Ken proves what we all KNEW all along.... TOYOTA just got lazy and greedy when it came to the MKV !!! They could have made it. AND it's motor. And still made money ! Nissan is WAAAY smaller and did it with the GTR.

    I'd like to know EXACTLY what BMW got out of this ! Maybe Toyota helped them make their cars more reliable? I thought it was a hybrid tech they were giving BMW?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ismael View Post
    In my opinion, Supras are the right hand of god in the car world. Sent to put order when Mustangs and Camaros get wild. To bring justice when cocky Evo and Subaru drivers get out of hand. And to show bikers that two wheels are NOT faster than four!

  14. #12
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    401
    Quote Originally Posted by $9ktt View Post
    Ken proves what we all KNEW all along.... TOYOTA just got lazy and greedy when it came to the MKV !!! They could have made it. AND it's motor. And still made money ! Nissan is WAAAY smaller and did it with the GTR.

    I'd like to know EXACTLY what BMW got out of this ! Maybe Toyota helped them make their cars more reliable? I thought it was a hybrid tech they were giving BMW?
    Yeah, it's gotta be the hybrid tech...Toyota and Nissan are dominating that segment. Interesting time to be looking for a sports car....so much competition. I like it!

  15. #13
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    52
    Toyota knew what they were doing from the start and executed it well... from a business perspective.
    As an enthusiast, yes, they dropped the ball and killed a legacy. Just when we thought the 80's and 90's were coming back, we were shown how wrong we can be.
    All Toyota cares is that they break even or don't suffer much of a loss.

  16. #14
    iSketch Master! AlxRSPTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico
    Age
    33
    Posts
    9,004
    We don't care what excuses there are for not being able to develop a new I6 platform. The reasons are garbage. All they had to do was the same thing they did with the 2J. Make an aluminum block "3J", go get Yamaha to do your heads if you want to outsource more stuff, and drop that thing in every single new RWD platform possible. Hell, just as Mazda has done, they can make diesel versions for the entire truck lines as well (with different heads obviously), as that is a glaring hole in Toyota truck lines.

    4Runner, Tacoma: 3J/Base NA/Turbo/TurboD.
    Tundra, LC, Sequoia, GX, LX: 3J/Turbo/TurboD.
    Supra, IS, RC, GS: 3J Turbo. Maybe the next gen 86 as a special edition TRD/Gazoo variant.

    Obviously they would all have their V8 powertrains available in some form, and all of these platforms I believe have model redesigns coming up in the next 5 years. If it costs a bunch of money who cares. Your reputation for making cars that last should be worth the money rather than partnering with BMW.

    Quote Originally Posted by $9ktt View Post
    I'd like to know EXACTLY what BMW got out of this ! Maybe Toyota helped them make their cars more reliable? I thought it was a hybrid tech they were giving BMW?
    I think it was only cost savings they got out of it. They were most likely going to ax the Z line if they didn't get a partner. Sales aren't great for 2-seater luxury cars, especially one with its own dedicated platform.

    Alex
    Last edited by AlxRSPTT; 05-15-2019 at 05:33 PM.

    garagesig by Alex Accilien, on Flickr
    1997 RSP TT BPU+ *Supra rebuild*

  17. #15
    iSketch Master! AlxRSPTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico
    Age
    33
    Posts
    9,004
    I was just watching a video of journos having a track day and Tada said, "If you look at the old Supras the first thing that everybody did was raise the boost. And of course they blew their engines right away, and they had a lot of problems and issues with that." What the fuck Tada? He also said that all the vents that are either fake or have plastic cladding to make them smaller was because the cooling was "too much". And so we could open up the two hood vents, and the rear side vent ourselves, or via aftermarket, to add more cooling when modded. Which makes zero sense for the hood vent because there are no provisions for using those vents in the sheetmetal. You would have to just cut a hole yourself and try to line it up with the fake vent. I assume the rear would be the same as well.

  18. #16
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    401
    Quote Originally Posted by AlxRSPTT View Post
    He also said that all the vents that are either fake or have plastic cladding to make them smaller was because the cooling was "too much". And so we could open up the two hood vents, and the rear side vent ourselves, or via aftermarket, to add more cooling when modded. Which makes zero sense for the hood vent because there are no provisions for using those vents in the sheetmetal. You would have to just cut a hole yourself and try to line it up with the fake vent. I assume the rear would be the same as well.
    I am glad you brought this up, I wondered the same for the hood vents.

  19. #17
    Tada really dropped the ball on this project. Sad to see him bad mouth the 2jz with that blown engine comment. Guess he's desperatly trying to save face. looks like Mazda gets it though.

  20. #18
    90T 3p141592654's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Thousand Oaks CA
    Posts
    426
    In 1989 Toyota spent over $1 billion USD in research and development in the UZ engine lineup. Imagine the cost of a new engine in 2019. There is no economic justification for it, when the A80 only sold 11.2k units in NA and 45k worldwide it makes even less sense. The GR series is the workhorse and that is where they invested the money. The LFA sold 500 units total. Its a completely different ball game to build a limited run of expensive engines, the investment is far less.

    The more reviews I am reading of the MKV the more I think its a great car, with a lot of future capability builtin at the start.

  21. #19
    Trust In Trance Skyline GT-R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Trance planet
    Age
    37
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post
    The more reviews I am reading of the MKV the more I think its a great car, with a lot of future capability builtin at the start.

    So you read paid reviewers and stupid milenials/"youtube influencers" and you really like what they have to say, right?
    It's a Psychedelic Trance thing.....you wouldn't understand.

    The fun starts @145bpm

  22. #20
    Twin Meister
    Moderator
    KenHenderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    SoCali
    Posts
    9,987
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post
    In 1989 Toyota spent over $1 billion USD in research and development in the UZ engine lineup. Imagine the cost of a new engine in 2019. There is no economic justification for it, when the A80 only sold 11.2k units in NA and 45k worldwide it makes even less sense. The GR series is the workhorse and that is where they invested the money. The LFA sold 500 units total. Its a completely different ball game to build a limited run of expensive engines, the investment is far less.

    The more reviews I am reading of the MKV the more I think its a great car, with a lot of future capability builtin at the start.
    This is not an apples to apples comparison, nor is the context the same. In 1989, Toyota was getting ready to embark upon its most significant strategic decision ever by rolling out the Lexus brand to compete directly against Mercedes and BMW. If they had missed on this decision, it had to potential to permanently damage the company. As a result, Toyota built 975 (!) LS 400 mules and instituted test to destruction protocols for virtually every part on the car. The UZ engine was part of this unprecedented R&D effort. This why there have been recent articles on Matt Farah's million-mile LS 400 and there are, at least, two Tundras with the UZ motor that have logged over 1-million miles. Iterations of the UZ motor have been installed in hundreds of thousands of Toyota and Lexus vehicles over the years.

    The 2JZ-GTE/2JZ-GE motors were installed in a number of different vehicles besides the Supra, both in the U.S. (SC 300, GS 300, MKIV TT, MKIV NA) and Japan (Toyota Aristo, Toyota Chaser and a number of other platforms common to the JDM). The point is, there were far more than 45k vehicles to amortize the cost of the JZ motors. Besides, even if Toyota decided not to develop a Supra-specific motor for the MKV, it could have used the motor in the RC-F/GS-F/LC 500 triplets or the LS 500's twin-turbo V6. As I said in another post, ALL things being equal, Supra owners will pick an inline 6 made by Toyota all day every day. But, IMO, there would have been no great outcry if one of the 472 hp "F" motors was used, or the eminently tunable LS 500 twin-turbo V6, which makes 415 hp and 442 lb-ft. During development of this motor, Toyota said 500 hp, with slightly less torque was easily achievable depending on the "mission" of a particular vehicle. Nissan went from an inline 6 to a V6 with the R35, but 480 hp quickly soothed any hurt feelings and the company has never looked back. Toyota, quite easily, could have done the same thing with the MKV but, instead, made a series of incredibly wrong-headed decisions that will be teaching moments in various business schools for the next 20-years or so.


    Ken.

  23. #21
    iSketch Master! AlxRSPTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico
    Age
    33
    Posts
    9,004
    As I said earlier, and Ken just mentioned there are a shit load of 2J engines. I believe the number is 803,000 produced in its lifetime. They could have done the same exact thing as it is a very versatile platform for RWD cars and trucks.

  24. #22
    Very Senior Member Silver Supra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    2 Pa Low
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by $9ktt View Post
    ...

    I'd like to know EXACTLY what BMW got out of this ! Maybe Toyota helped them make their cars more reliable? I thought it was a hybrid tech they were giving BMW?
    My guess is BMW got to see some of Toyota's IP, and a buttload of money.

  25. #23
    Very Senior Member Silver Supra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    2 Pa Low
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by AlxRSPTT View Post
    I was just watching a video of journos having a track day and Tada said, "If you look at the old Supras the first thing that everybody did was raise the boost. And of course they blew their engines right away, and they had a lot of problems and issues with that." What the fuck Tada? He also said that all the vents that are either fake or have plastic cladding to make them smaller was because the cooling was "too much". And so we could open up the two hood vents, and the rear side vent ourselves, or via aftermarket, to add more cooling when modded. Which makes zero sense for the hood vent because there are no provisions for using those vents in the sheetmetal. You would have to just cut a hole yourself and try to line it up with the fake vent. I assume the rear would be the same as well.
    Exactly right. It fits right in with his claim that the two hood latches were a legacy from the MKIV.
    He failed to mention that they are exactly BMW hood latches and releases - just like other BMWs.
    These are just a few of the examples that lead me to believe NOTHING that Tada says. He is just a cheerleader now.

  26. #24
    Very Senior Member Silver Supra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    2 Pa Low
    Posts
    9,669
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post
    ... Imagine the cost of a new engine in 2019. ...

    The more reviews I am reading of the MKV the more I think its a great car, with a lot of future capability builtin at the start.

    1. Did you read the lead post in this thread? Mazda is doing it.
    2. What I see is an unfinished car - built from BMW parts. Basically that is what Tada said - but in a different way.

  27. #25
    90T 3p141592654's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Thousand Oaks CA
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by KenHenderson View Post
    ... Toyota built 975 (!) LS 400 mules and instituted test to destruction protocols for virtually every part on the car. The UZ engine was part of this unprecedented R&D effort.
    Of course. The LS400 cost $5B to develop. It was a big gamble, but the marketing research showed that there was a real market there and that the risk was reasonable. My point is that making a new engine line is big bucks. There has to be a corporate strategy to make it a sensible investment. That is why they spent another $B to develop the 2GR. That engine had at its debut the most complicated aluminum casting in the industry. Developing engines for volume production is huge money, and there better be a solid corporate strategy to make it justifiable.


    Quote Originally Posted by KenHenderson View Post
    ...The 2JZ-GTE/2JZ-GE motors were installed in a number of different vehicles besides the Supra, both in the U.S. (SC 300, GS 300, MKIV TT, MKIV NA) and Japan (Toyota Aristo, Toyota Chaser and a number of other platforms common to the JDM). The point is, there were far more than 45k vehicles to amortize the cost of the JZ motors. Besides, even if Toyota decided not to develop a Supra-specific motor for the MKV, it could have used the motor in the RC-F/GS-F/LC 500 triplets or the LS 500's twin-turbo V6.
    First, I'll call BS on the V6 acceptance. People are whining about fake vents, you bet there would have been a huge blowup at using a V6. Second, using the RC-F V6 makes it a me too car. Just buy the Lexus and be done with it. The value of an inline 6 is low to Toyota's corporate strategy as the 1st or 2nd largest car company in the world which hinges on leveraging investments across the lines. If I was CE at Toyota you bet I would not take my powerpoint stack to the CEO and pitch an inline 6 development for a single car line that last time sold 45k units. Its just dumb. It adds nothing to their existing profitable SOA V6 series of engines and enables nothing for their other products which all need short engines to meet contemporary packaging needs.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

List your Car(s)

Where you live

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Your Supra's Vehichle Identification Number (Not visible to the public)

Log-in

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-02-2009, 08:07 PM
  2. MK Engines Vs JG Engines
    By DanGuy87 in forum MKIII (1986.5-1992)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-18-2007, 10:53 AM
  3. M-series engines are derived from truck engines...
    By MKIIISupraGuy in forum MKIII (1986.5-1992)
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-04-2002, 11:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •