Mazda's New Inline 6 Engines! Shames Toyota :-( - Page 2

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 30 of 30

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

  1. #26
    90T 3p141592654's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Thousand Oaks CA
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Supra View Post
    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.
    Of course not, I am an idiot. Or maybe that was rhetorical?

    Mazda is not Toyota. Remember Amati? They have a history of bad decisions which is why they are #3 in Japan.

    There is no justification to drop a $B to make an inline 6 at Toyota, None. Anyone who tried to convince the Board and CEO it was a good decision would be putting their career into the trash bin.

    If you don't like the car don't buy it, but I would suggest you go for a drive first.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #27
    iSketch Master! AlxRSPTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico
    Age
    33
    Posts
    9,004
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post
    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.
    As we have said before, the Supra wasn't the first, or the last car to sport the 2JZ. There were almost a million produced. Sales of the MKIV are irrelevant when it comes to bringing back a JZ series engine. Hell they even added direct injection to the thing and used it up to 2005 as the 2JZ-FSE. So no, it isn't dumb. There are at least 10 cars that could use the engine in the Toyota/Lexus lineup. If the GTR was a V6, but came out like this Supra is coming out, yes people would NOT be happy with that. Imagine them ditching the I6 to bring the GTR back as a $50k car with 330 HP. If the MKV was a V6, but had 400-420hp it would be much more favorable than what we have now.

    EVERYONE that is disappointed with this car feels that way because this is just a re-badged BMW. The car on its own, I'm sure is a tremendous car. We just don't want a BMW for a Supra. No amount of test drives will change that.

    Alex

  4. #28
    Twin Meister
    Moderator
    KenHenderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    SoCali
    Posts
    9,987
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post

    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.
    I think you're missing the point. The Supra community, by and large, would prefer any all-Toyota motor to any BMW motor. With two motors already in-house that make good power, one being a compact V6 TT, I hardly think the faithful would be complaining, just as there were very few complaints from the GTR community when it dispensed with the venerable RB26. And, if you call using any of those motors a me too car, what do you call a badge engineered car using a BMW motor? Sticking the same motor, or derivations of it, in as many cars as possible is almost always smart corporate strategy. It's a strategy that's been followed closely by Mercedes AMG, both in aspirated and forced induction forms, and BMW M as well.

    Most Supra cognoscenti realized a 2020 motor was not going to have a cast iron block so, with just a bit of reasonable justification, Toyota could have easily, IMO, rationalized the selection and use of one its in-house motors for the MKV. Instead....


    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

  5. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #29

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    home
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by 3p141592654 View Post
    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.
    huh!?

    The LFA was never intended to make any money, it was marketing only. Toyota/Lexus LOSES 1.1MM on every LFA.

    What Toyota loses on the MKV is still worse - it's reputation.

  7. #30
    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
    Of course not, I am an idiot. Or maybe that was rhetorical?

    Mazda is not Toyota. Remember Amati? They have a history of bad decisions which is why they are #3 in Japan.

    There is no justification to drop a $B to make an inline 6 at Toyota, None. Anyone who tried to convince the Board and CEO it was a good decision would be putting their career into the trash bin.

    If you don't like the car don't buy it, but I would suggest you go for a drive first.
    No, Mazda is not Toyota - brilliant observation on your part.
    Toyota has a few more dollars to spend and a lot more units sold. Toyota could afford to do this right - if they wanted.
    They did not have to make an inline 6 - they have other engines to work from - but they obviously could. I would take any Toyota engine over any BMW engine, period.
    I would rather find a new job than put out crap when I could be putting out goodness. You might prefer the crap - your choice.
    There will be no test drives for me because I well know what happens to BMWs after about 3 years. Not for me.
    '94 T Auto Silver Bullet | 471 rwhp at 15.5 psi |

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

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
  •