I have had six vw's, three 2.0 slows, and three 1.8T's. On the 2.0 engine I use mostly 10w40 conventional, and on the early 1.8t's 5w30 and my last 2 nothing but 0w or 5w40. All my cars got to 250K miles + before they were sold. 1 was wrecked in a crash or should I say totaled. Right now I have a 2015 Jetta 1.8 has got nothing but total quartz 9000 5w 40, and runs great. I did use Royal Purple in my mother in laws VW 2.5 and she thought the car ran like new. I may try it when my stash of M1 0w40 runs out, I got 6Q pack at BJ's for $28.
VW 2.5L and 502 Approved Oils
- Thread starter CARJ
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by edyvw
Toyota does not have a list since their engines are less sophisticated than was M50 engine in my 1991 BMW E34. However, where Toyota uses sophisticated engines, like European market where fuel prices are very high, and demand for fast car far more present than here, they do use those lists. Actually, two most unreliable diesel engines ever existed on European market in the last two decades were 1.4 and 2.2 engines made by, guess who? Toyota. So now, since beginning of 2000 Toyota buys diesels from BMW (and now for Supra too).
So no, Toyota is not MOST RELIABLE company on earth as their diesels could not make 60k in miles without engines literally disintegrating.
On top of that, it drives like beer can compared to Tiguan I have, including Land Cruiser I own in Europe, which had more issues than my BMW X5 I owned before this atrocity called Sienna.
Edit. since September of this year I had to invest in Sienna more money than in Tiguan since 2013.
Oh god, this is rich.
Please explain how, exactly, Toyota engines are "less sophisticated"
I'm all ears.
It's funny that you mention the M50, an engine which didn't have variable valve timing until 1993 (when the Japanese untermensch had been using it since the 80s) and it NEVER worked correctly when it did, despite systems from Honda, Toyota, Nissan and even Mitsubishi functioning flawlessly. Truly, the mark of superior engineering is being worse than Mitsubishi...
Do tell us what makes Toyota engine sophisticated? What makes my 2GR-FE engine sophisticated in this beer can of a vehicle? What makes 5.7 V8 in LC or other SUV's sophisticated? Valve timing is not the end of the world. What makes today DI engines in Highlander and other vehicles sophisticated except it is well, DI< same thing Volvo had in 1998, or VW in 2002?
M50 did not have VANOS, and I sold it with 425k km on the clock, and was still much more of an engine than this V6 hair dryer in Sienna, and we are talking about 1991. It had simple oil chart, same like today's Toyota's. However, testament about BMW engines is the fact that, well, Toyota is using them, not other way around.
Still, as you are obviously not aware, Toyota diesel engines were some of the biggest failures in automotive industry.
And VANOS never worked properly? LOL, well BMW is not built nor intended to be dumb proof. South Dakota market was never their intended marketplace.
Here we go, falling back into the "everyone is dumb but me" defense of German cars. That one is always a winner. Almost as good as dodging questions with another question.
If you can't even name one thing that makes your beloved German junk "sophisticated", then it's pretty clear you're not smart enough to be having this discussion. So really, the target audience for German cars. Arrogance is their bread and butter, after all.
By the way, have you ever considered that Toyota is using a BMW engine in the new Supra because they didn't want to design an all new engine for a niche sports car, rather than them being too dumb? You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
Who is talking about hp? Mitsubishi Evo made 400hp from 2.0l engine, so what?
As I have already told you, Supra is not only car that uses BMW engine (well, BMW everything pretty much), but whole line up of diesel engines.
As for VANOS, interestingly Toyota thinks is good. Your logic goes like this: VVT-I is better than VANOS, but people who built VVT-i thinks VANOS is better than VVT-I.
When I see Toyota engine in BMW, than we can talk.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by edyvw
Toyota does not have a list since their engines are less sophisticated than was M50 engine in my 1991 BMW E34. However, where Toyota uses sophisticated engines, like European market where fuel prices are very high, and demand for fast car far more present than here, they do use those lists. Actually, two most unreliable diesel engines ever existed on European market in the last two decades were 1.4 and 2.2 engines made by, guess who? Toyota. So now, since beginning of 2000 Toyota buys diesels from BMW (and now for Supra too).
So no, Toyota is not MOST RELIABLE company on earth as their diesels could not make 60k in miles without engines literally disintegrating.
On top of that, it drives like beer can compared to Tiguan I have, including Land Cruiser I own in Europe, which had more issues than my BMW X5 I owned before this atrocity called Sienna.
Edit. since September of this year I had to invest in Sienna more money than in Tiguan since 2013.
Oh god, this is rich.
Please explain how, exactly, Toyota engines are "less sophisticated"
I'm all ears.
It's funny that you mention the M50, an engine which didn't have variable valve timing until 1993 (when the Japanese untermensch had been using it since the 80s) and it NEVER worked correctly when it did, despite systems from Honda, Toyota, Nissan and even Mitsubishi functioning flawlessly. Truly, the mark of superior engineering is being worse than Mitsubishi...
Do tell us what makes Toyota engine sophisticated? What makes my 2GR-FE engine sophisticated in this beer can of a vehicle? What makes 5.7 V8 in LC or other SUV's sophisticated? Valve timing is not the end of the world. What makes today DI engines in Highlander and other vehicles sophisticated except it is well, DI< same thing Volvo had in 1998, or VW in 2002?
M50 did not have VANOS, and I sold it with 425k km on the clock, and was still much more of an engine than this V6 hair dryer in Sienna, and we are talking about 1991. It had simple oil chart, same like today's Toyota's. However, testament about BMW engines is the fact that, well, Toyota is using them, not other way around.
Still, as you are obviously not aware, Toyota diesel engines were some of the biggest failures in automotive industry.
And VANOS never worked properly? LOL, well BMW is not built nor intended to be dumb proof. South Dakota market was never their intended marketplace.
Here we go, falling back into the "everyone is dumb but me" defense of German cars. That one is always a winner. Almost as good as dodging questions with another question.
If you can't even name one thing that makes your beloved German junk "sophisticated", then it's pretty clear you're not smart enough to be having this discussion. So really, the target audience for German cars. Arrogance is their bread and butter, after all.
By the way, have you ever considered that Toyota is using a BMW engine in the new Supra because they didn't want to design an all new engine for a niche sports car, rather than them being too dumb? You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
Who is talking about hp? Mitsubishi Evo made 400hp from 2.0l engine, so what?
As I have already told you, Supra is not only car that uses BMW engine (well, BMW everything pretty much), but whole line up of diesel engines.
As for VANOS, interestingly Toyota thinks is good. Your logic goes like this: VVT-I is better than VANOS, but people who built VVT-i thinks VANOS is better than VVT-I.
When I see Toyota engine in BMW, than we can talk.
German auto makers underrate horsepower.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
I am not sure he realizes that the US market never had European version of M3, both 282hp and 321hp.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
You do realize that they had a 3.0 I6 engine that made just about the same power as your vaunted German wundermotor all the way back in 1991, right? It was around the same time that the Aryan supermen in Bavaria could only manage 240hp from their very best engine of the same size, probably because they weren't smart enough to embrace modern technology like Toyota. In fact, Toyota's engines were so far ahead of the German garbage that a regular, mass produced 2JZ-GTE made more horsepower than BMW's hand built homologation specials.
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Of course, that's not a fair comparison. The M3 was only a midrange car, after all. Now, if we were to compare BMW's top of the line sports car, the 8 series, to the Supra, BMW was able in their very tippy top of the line model, with less than 2000 ever made, to wring out more horsepower than Toyota (from twice the cylinders and nearly double the displacement) but the end result was a car that was still considerably slower, less reliable, far more complex and literally 3x as expensive. You can replace Supra with 300ZX, 3000GT or RX-7 and the outcome is still the same. BMW's stone age cars couldn't compete with the Japanese even at 3 times the price. But hey, the 8 series had advanced German technology, like 4 wheel steering, similar to that of a 1988 Honda Prelude.
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
I am not sure he realizes that the US market never had European version of M3, both 282hp and 321hp.
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
I mean this is the truly weird part. He keeps bringing up that guy from WWII but Germany and Japan were on the same side
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
I mean this is the truly weird part. He keeps bringing up that guy from WWII but Germany and Japan were on the same side
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
I mean this is the truly weird part. He keeps bringing up that guy from WWII but Germany and Japan were on the same side
He's got preferential Axis allegiance
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, VANOS didn't work because it was garbage, not because everyone on earth is too stupid to comprehend the genius of the Aryan superman.
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
I mean this is the truly weird part. He keeps bringing up that guy from WWII but Germany and Japan were on the same side
Originally Posted by edyvw
Who is talking about hp? Mitsubishi Evo made 400hp from 2.0l engine, so what?
As I have already told you, Supra is not only car that uses BMW engine (well, BMW everything pretty much), but whole line up of diesel engines.
As for VANOS, interestingly Toyota thinks is good. Your logic goes like this: VVT-I is better than VANOS, but people who built VVT-i thinks VANOS is better than VVT-I.
When I see Toyota engine in BMW, than we can talk.
So what is this mythical "sophistication" that you babble on about, but cannot in any way define, then? It seems to be an amorphous concept that means "it was built by Germans" more than anything else. Please, go ahead and define exactly how BMW or German engines in general are sophisticated in ways no one else can match. I'm STILL waiting, but I know that explanation will never come.
Also, no, Toyota has and continues to have a large number of their own diesel engines, and is the owner of Hino, one of the largest commercial vehicle manufacturers in the world, and one of the best. They licensed two small diesels from BMW because it was cheaper than designing new ones as a stop gap for a few European model cars.
Similarly, Toyota uses VANOS in exactly one car, a limited production niche model which will never be a major seller for them.
And when it comes to BMW licensing Toyota tech, how about BMW licensing Toyota's hydrogen fuel cells, an ACTUAL piece of sophisticated technology, because they were not capable of designing their own?
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Yes, because if we're talking about actual sophistication instead of this mythical, German only "sophistication", Toyota's twin turbo engine was much more sophisticated than anything BMW had at the time, as it's output (not to mention durability and ease of mass production) would indicate. There was nothing, except BMW, stopping BMW from making a twin turbo engine. Even now, their German engineered wundermotor in the new Supra just barely tops the 2JZ of 1990s vintage.
Quote
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
They're the same type of car and the same vintage, though. Besides one being objectively worse in every measurable way, yet also costing 3x as much, they are direct competitors. What demographic was the 8 series targeting, anyway? Someone who wanted a worse version of a Supra or Z that cost more, went slower and broke more often? People with shrines to Rommel in their basement? It was not at all competitive with anything in it's "demographic", either, which is probably why it was such a flop.
Quote
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Yes, the objective fact that the Toyota engine was more sophisticated does matter, and is the exact point I was making. Thanks for noticing.
Quote
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
Well, maybe if German car owners didn't arrogantly insist that their cars are magical due to the inherent superiority of German engineering, there wouldn't be such a backlash against them?
Originally Posted by kschachn
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
The lack of self awareness here is shocking, even from a German car fan. Tell me, what is it called when you insist that people of a particular national origin are smarter and better than everyone else in the world? I'll give you a hint, it starts with an R and ends with an acism.
Who is talking about hp? Mitsubishi Evo made 400hp from 2.0l engine, so what?
As I have already told you, Supra is not only car that uses BMW engine (well, BMW everything pretty much), but whole line up of diesel engines.
As for VANOS, interestingly Toyota thinks is good. Your logic goes like this: VVT-I is better than VANOS, but people who built VVT-i thinks VANOS is better than VVT-I.
When I see Toyota engine in BMW, than we can talk.
So what is this mythical "sophistication" that you babble on about, but cannot in any way define, then? It seems to be an amorphous concept that means "it was built by Germans" more than anything else. Please, go ahead and define exactly how BMW or German engines in general are sophisticated in ways no one else can match. I'm STILL waiting, but I know that explanation will never come.
Also, no, Toyota has and continues to have a large number of their own diesel engines, and is the owner of Hino, one of the largest commercial vehicle manufacturers in the world, and one of the best. They licensed two small diesels from BMW because it was cheaper than designing new ones as a stop gap for a few European model cars.
Similarly, Toyota uses VANOS in exactly one car, a limited production niche model which will never be a major seller for them.
And when it comes to BMW licensing Toyota tech, how about BMW licensing Toyota's hydrogen fuel cells, an ACTUAL piece of sophisticated technology, because they were not capable of designing their own?
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Just so we are clear, you believe it's perfectly OK to compare the output of a twin-turbo i6 to one that's naturally aspirated, ignoring that aspect of it, and dubbing the TT engine superior because the specific output is higher? The non-turbo 3.0L 2JZ-GE made 212-227HP; 71-76HP/L. The naturally aspirated S50B30 of the same timeframe fitted to the M3 produced 282HP; 94HP/L.
Yes, because if we're talking about actual sophistication instead of this mythical, German only "sophistication", Toyota's twin turbo engine was much more sophisticated than anything BMW had at the time, as it's output (not to mention durability and ease of mass production) would indicate. There was nothing, except BMW, stopping BMW from making a twin turbo engine. Even now, their German engineered wundermotor in the new Supra just barely tops the 2JZ of 1990s vintage.
Quote
Why would you compare the E31 8-series to the Supra? Other than the fact that the S70/2 being fitted to the McLaren F1 (@ 618HP) is an interesting talking point, these cars are not targeting the same demographic, nor even remotely the same price point
They're the same type of car and the same vintage, though. Besides one being objectively worse in every measurable way, yet also costing 3x as much, they are direct competitors. What demographic was the 8 series targeting, anyway? Someone who wanted a worse version of a Supra or Z that cost more, went slower and broke more often? People with shrines to Rommel in their basement? It was not at all competitive with anything in it's "demographic", either, which is probably why it was such a flop.
Quote
And again, you are ignoring that one is forced induction, the other naturally aspirated as if it doesn't matter, which is ridiculous.
Yes, the objective fact that the Toyota engine was more sophisticated does matter, and is the exact point I was making. Thanks for noticing.
Quote
I've owned 2x VANOS-equipped BMW's including an E39 M5, and the system works just fine. I'm not sure what you are going on about but it seems based on a deep-rooted hatred for German cars and their owners rather than any sort of legitimate critique of the products themselves.
Well, maybe if German car owners didn't arrogantly insist that their cars are magical due to the inherent superiority of German engineering, there wouldn't be such a backlash against them?
Originally Posted by kschachn
And seems unable to communicate it without racist language.
The lack of self awareness here is shocking, even from a German car fan. Tell me, what is it called when you insist that people of a particular national origin are smarter and better than everyone else in the world? I'll give you a hint, it starts with an R and ends with an acism.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, because if we're talking about actual sophistication instead of this mythical, German only "sophistication", Toyota's twin turbo engine was much more sophisticated than anything BMW had at the time, as it's output (not to mention durability and ease of mass production) would indicate. There was nothing, except BMW, stopping BMW from making a twin turbo engine. Even now, their German engineered wundermotor in the new Supra just barely tops the 2JZ of 1990s vintage.
I'm sorry, but that line of logic doesn't work. Toyota's non-turbo offering, which I've already covered, is what would be directly comparable to the BMW engine because both were naturally aspirated. Adding turbo's to something doesn't make it sophisticated, if that were the case then the 80's Dodge Caravan was highly sophisticated and I'm sure we can agree that's not the case.
BMW didn't make a turbo engine because they didn't traditionally make turbo engines for their over-the-road cars, they made naturally aspirated engines and carried on that tradition up until quite recently where DI and emissions standards made pursuing forced induction logical. Mercedes, Ford, GM and Honda have all recently gone this way as well.
Following your train of logic, the NSX and S2000 were both unsophisticated because they weren't forced induction
it doesn't hold up there, just like it didn't hold up with the M3. It's ridiculous folly.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
They're the same type of car and the same vintage, though.
And that's roughly where the comparison ends.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Besides one being objectively worse in every measurable way, yet also costing 3x as much, they are direct competitors.
Being in completely different price brackets eliminates them from being direct competitors. That's like saying a Bentley and a Crown Victoria are direct competitors because they are both large cars with 4 doors.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
What demographic was the 8 series targeting, anyway? Someone who wanted a worse version of a Supra or Z that cost more, went slower and broke more often?
People with more money than those shopping for the Supra obviously.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
People with shrines to Rommel in their basement?
So, by that metric, the Supra is catering to folks with shrines of Emperor Hirohito in theirs? Do you have one?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
It was not at all competitive with anything in it's "demographic", either, which is probably why it was such a flop.
Which is why contrasting it to the M3 might be a better choice. The E31 was a large, heavy car (4,112lbs) targeted at folks that wanted something more "sporty" than a 7-series, which was not a sporty car. The Supra was roughly 1,000lbs lighter, as was the M3. The market for the 7-series isn't huge and the one for the 8-series was subsequently even smaller.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, the objective fact that the Toyota engine was more sophisticated does matter, and is the exact point I was making. Thanks for noticing.
That's simply nonsense. Further regurgitation of such nonsense makes one look foolish, not clever.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Well, maybe if German car owners didn't arrogantly insist that their cars are magical due to the inherent superiority of German engineering, there wouldn't be such a backlash against them?
Which German car owners? The guy that owns the Jetta or the guy that owns the Veyron? There's a rather broad range of folks that buy German cars and not all German cars are even remotely close to the same. I've had numerous critiques of the German cars I've owned and I certainly don't think they are infallible. I do however find your broad-brushed and scathing condemnation utterly ridiculous. I've been in many a Toyota product where the build quality was less than stellar. They don't get a pass just because they are Japanese any more than my M5 got a pass by being German for requiring an entire driveshaft assembly replacement because it didn't have U-joints.
Worshipping at the alter of Nippon godliness is no more redeeming than what you claim is happening with German marques in this thread. They are two sides of the same coin.
Yes, because if we're talking about actual sophistication instead of this mythical, German only "sophistication", Toyota's twin turbo engine was much more sophisticated than anything BMW had at the time, as it's output (not to mention durability and ease of mass production) would indicate. There was nothing, except BMW, stopping BMW from making a twin turbo engine. Even now, their German engineered wundermotor in the new Supra just barely tops the 2JZ of 1990s vintage.
I'm sorry, but that line of logic doesn't work. Toyota's non-turbo offering, which I've already covered, is what would be directly comparable to the BMW engine because both were naturally aspirated. Adding turbo's to something doesn't make it sophisticated, if that were the case then the 80's Dodge Caravan was highly sophisticated and I'm sure we can agree that's not the case.
BMW didn't make a turbo engine because they didn't traditionally make turbo engines for their over-the-road cars, they made naturally aspirated engines and carried on that tradition up until quite recently where DI and emissions standards made pursuing forced induction logical. Mercedes, Ford, GM and Honda have all recently gone this way as well.
Following your train of logic, the NSX and S2000 were both unsophisticated because they weren't forced induction
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
They're the same type of car and the same vintage, though.
And that's roughly where the comparison ends.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Besides one being objectively worse in every measurable way, yet also costing 3x as much, they are direct competitors.
Being in completely different price brackets eliminates them from being direct competitors. That's like saying a Bentley and a Crown Victoria are direct competitors because they are both large cars with 4 doors.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
What demographic was the 8 series targeting, anyway? Someone who wanted a worse version of a Supra or Z that cost more, went slower and broke more often?
People with more money than those shopping for the Supra obviously.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
People with shrines to Rommel in their basement?
So, by that metric, the Supra is catering to folks with shrines of Emperor Hirohito in theirs? Do you have one?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
It was not at all competitive with anything in it's "demographic", either, which is probably why it was such a flop.
Which is why contrasting it to the M3 might be a better choice. The E31 was a large, heavy car (4,112lbs) targeted at folks that wanted something more "sporty" than a 7-series, which was not a sporty car. The Supra was roughly 1,000lbs lighter, as was the M3. The market for the 7-series isn't huge and the one for the 8-series was subsequently even smaller.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, the objective fact that the Toyota engine was more sophisticated does matter, and is the exact point I was making. Thanks for noticing.
That's simply nonsense. Further regurgitation of such nonsense makes one look foolish, not clever.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Well, maybe if German car owners didn't arrogantly insist that their cars are magical due to the inherent superiority of German engineering, there wouldn't be such a backlash against them?
Which German car owners? The guy that owns the Jetta or the guy that owns the Veyron? There's a rather broad range of folks that buy German cars and not all German cars are even remotely close to the same. I've had numerous critiques of the German cars I've owned and I certainly don't think they are infallible. I do however find your broad-brushed and scathing condemnation utterly ridiculous. I've been in many a Toyota product where the build quality was less than stellar. They don't get a pass just because they are Japanese any more than my M5 got a pass by being German for requiring an entire driveshaft assembly replacement because it didn't have U-joints.
Worshipping at the alter of Nippon godliness is no more redeeming than what you claim is happening with German marques in this thread. They are two sides of the same coin.
This argument reminds me of a sports fan who thinks their team is the best because they won three championships thirty years ago and have done nothing since. The 2JZ was a great engine for its day but in today's world nobody wants to (or has to) deal with the power curve of an engine like that.
At least in the performance car world Toyota has done pretty much nothing in two decades. Even today they still have limited use of GDI and turbocharging when other brands were doing it a decade ago or more. They focused on hybrid technology, and their focus is on reliability, and that's fine, but it's not exactly exciting.
At least in the performance car world Toyota has done pretty much nothing in two decades. Even today they still have limited use of GDI and turbocharging when other brands were doing it a decade ago or more. They focused on hybrid technology, and their focus is on reliability, and that's fine, but it's not exactly exciting.
Quote
I'm sorry, but that line of logic doesn't work. Toyota's non-turbo offering, which I've already covered, is what would be directly comparable to the BMW engine because both were naturally aspirated. Adding turbo's to something doesn't make it sophisticated, if that were the case then the 80's Dodge Caravan was highly sophisticated and I'm sure we can agree that's not the case.
And what exactly then is this magical "sophistication" edyvw has been nattering on about? How is it defined beyond the car was made by Germans, and is therefore sophisticated?
Quote
BMW didn't make a turbo engine because they didn't traditionally make turbo engines for their over-the-road cars, they made naturally aspirated engines and carried on that tradition up until quite recently where DI and emissions standards made pursuing forced induction logical. Mercedes, Ford, GM and Honda have all recently gone this way as well.
Toyota didn't traditionally make turbocharged engines, either. Right up until they did. I fail to understand how you could call a company that rejects new technology for nebulous reasons of "tradition" sophisticated, unless of course your definition of "sophistication" is purely based on the nationality of the engineers.
Quote
Following your train of logic, the NSX and S2000 were both unsophisticated because they weren't forced induction
it doesn't hold up there, just like it didn't hold up with the M3. It's ridiculous folly.
They were both niche cars, and I'd argue that the entire point of the S2000 was that it wasn't sophisticated. It was an intentional throwback, much like the Miata.
Quote
And that's roughly where the comparison ends.
Right, so beyond the two cars being competitors, the two are somehow not competitors. If you must get totally anal about specs, the 3000GT is closer to the 8 series in dimensions and features, but the performance comparison between the two is, if anything, even more lopsided. The fact is the 8 series was simply mediocre and hideously overpriced, something edyvw would have me believe was impossible. We don't have to focus on just it vs the Japanese, either, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe, a car I'm sure edyvw thinks was assembled in a cave using dinosaur bones.
Quote
Being in completely different price brackets eliminates them from being direct competitors. That's like saying a Bentley and a Crown Victoria are direct competitors because they are both large cars with 4 doors.
You are aware that there were cheaper 8 series BMWs, right? You know, the V8 ones that actually sold. I just excluded them from competition because it would have frankly been entirely unfair to the BMW. The 840s weren't even in the same league of performance or sophistication. Also, I don't think you realize just how much the Japanese GT cars of that era cost. The Supra turbos eclipsed 50,000 dollars. It's a big reason why they eventually died. The Japanese proved they could make a car that was every bit the equal to anything else in the world, but they lacked the cachet to sell them for prices every bit the equal of everyone else in the world. The numbers could be made to work when the yen was artificially deflated, but once it was more realistic, Toyota could not get Porsche or BMW money even for a car that was better than anything Porsche or BMW offered.
Quote
People with more money than those shopping for the Supra obviously.
Right, so people who wanted a worse car for more money. Not a surprise they didn't sell.
Quote
So, by that metric, the Supra is catering to folks with shrines of Emperor Hirohito in theirs? Do you have one?
No, the Supra was catering to people who wanted a world class performance car and didn't care what the badge said.
Quote
Which is why contrasting it to the M3 might be a better choice. The E31 was a large, heavy car (4,112lbs) targeted at folks that wanted something more "sporty" than a 7-series, which was not a sporty car. The Supra was roughly 1,000lbs lighter, as was the M3. The market for the 7-series isn't huge and the one for the 8-series was subsequently even smaller.
Yes, and the Supra turbo was still both faster and cheaper than the M3 of that vintage. The numbers are a little closer, but the supposedly "unsophisticated" Toyota still wins. I compared it to the 8 series largely because the 8 series was the top of the line BMW
Quote
Which German car owners? The guy that owns the Jetta or the guy that owns the Veyron? There's a rather broad range of folks that buy German cars and not all German cars are even remotely close to the same. I've had numerous critiques of the German cars I've owned and I certainly don't think they are infallible. I do however find your broad-brushed and scathing condemnation utterly ridiculous. I've been in many a Toyota product where the build quality was less than stellar. They don't get a pass just because they are Japanese any more than my M5 got a pass by being German for requiring an entire driveshaft assembly replacement because it didn't have U-joints.
Worshipping at the alter of Nippon godliness is no more redeeming than what you claim is happening with German marques in this thread. They are two sides of the same coin.
Well, it was mostly edyvw until you jumped in to defend him. Also, I don't think that the Japanese are inherently any smarter or better than anyone else, but rather the point I've been making is that they are perfectly capable of designing and building things as good as anything else in the world. I'd have thought that would just be accepted as a given by now, but some people still assume anything touched by the hand of a German is inherently superior, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
This argument reminds me of a sports fan who thinks their team is the best because they won three championships thirty years ago and have done nothing since. The 2JZ was a great engine for its day but in today's world nobody wants to (or has to) deal with the power curve of an engine like that.
At least in the performance car world Toyota has done pretty much nothing in two decades. Even today they still have limited use of GDI and turbocharging when other brands were doing it a decade ago or more. They focused on hybrid technology, and their focus is on reliability, and that's fine, but it's not exactly exciting.
I mean, they're a business. They're trying to make cars that sell. There's a reason why they're the largest automaker in the world, after all. BMW, meanwhile, making a more niche car, can't even beat out Suzuki.
Also, Toyota has made plenty of exciting cars, even in the past two decades, but they get ignored by car snobs because of brand cachet. You just need to look more towards Lexus for that end of things.
I'm sorry, but that line of logic doesn't work. Toyota's non-turbo offering, which I've already covered, is what would be directly comparable to the BMW engine because both were naturally aspirated. Adding turbo's to something doesn't make it sophisticated, if that were the case then the 80's Dodge Caravan was highly sophisticated and I'm sure we can agree that's not the case.
And what exactly then is this magical "sophistication" edyvw has been nattering on about? How is it defined beyond the car was made by Germans, and is therefore sophisticated?
Quote
BMW didn't make a turbo engine because they didn't traditionally make turbo engines for their over-the-road cars, they made naturally aspirated engines and carried on that tradition up until quite recently where DI and emissions standards made pursuing forced induction logical. Mercedes, Ford, GM and Honda have all recently gone this way as well.
Toyota didn't traditionally make turbocharged engines, either. Right up until they did. I fail to understand how you could call a company that rejects new technology for nebulous reasons of "tradition" sophisticated, unless of course your definition of "sophistication" is purely based on the nationality of the engineers.
Quote
Following your train of logic, the NSX and S2000 were both unsophisticated because they weren't forced induction
They were both niche cars, and I'd argue that the entire point of the S2000 was that it wasn't sophisticated. It was an intentional throwback, much like the Miata.
Quote
And that's roughly where the comparison ends.
Right, so beyond the two cars being competitors, the two are somehow not competitors. If you must get totally anal about specs, the 3000GT is closer to the 8 series in dimensions and features, but the performance comparison between the two is, if anything, even more lopsided. The fact is the 8 series was simply mediocre and hideously overpriced, something edyvw would have me believe was impossible. We don't have to focus on just it vs the Japanese, either, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe, a car I'm sure edyvw thinks was assembled in a cave using dinosaur bones.
Quote
Being in completely different price brackets eliminates them from being direct competitors. That's like saying a Bentley and a Crown Victoria are direct competitors because they are both large cars with 4 doors.
You are aware that there were cheaper 8 series BMWs, right? You know, the V8 ones that actually sold. I just excluded them from competition because it would have frankly been entirely unfair to the BMW. The 840s weren't even in the same league of performance or sophistication. Also, I don't think you realize just how much the Japanese GT cars of that era cost. The Supra turbos eclipsed 50,000 dollars. It's a big reason why they eventually died. The Japanese proved they could make a car that was every bit the equal to anything else in the world, but they lacked the cachet to sell them for prices every bit the equal of everyone else in the world. The numbers could be made to work when the yen was artificially deflated, but once it was more realistic, Toyota could not get Porsche or BMW money even for a car that was better than anything Porsche or BMW offered.
Quote
People with more money than those shopping for the Supra obviously.
Right, so people who wanted a worse car for more money. Not a surprise they didn't sell.
Quote
So, by that metric, the Supra is catering to folks with shrines of Emperor Hirohito in theirs? Do you have one?
No, the Supra was catering to people who wanted a world class performance car and didn't care what the badge said.
Quote
Which is why contrasting it to the M3 might be a better choice. The E31 was a large, heavy car (4,112lbs) targeted at folks that wanted something more "sporty" than a 7-series, which was not a sporty car. The Supra was roughly 1,000lbs lighter, as was the M3. The market for the 7-series isn't huge and the one for the 8-series was subsequently even smaller.
Yes, and the Supra turbo was still both faster and cheaper than the M3 of that vintage. The numbers are a little closer, but the supposedly "unsophisticated" Toyota still wins. I compared it to the 8 series largely because the 8 series was the top of the line BMW
Quote
Which German car owners? The guy that owns the Jetta or the guy that owns the Veyron? There's a rather broad range of folks that buy German cars and not all German cars are even remotely close to the same. I've had numerous critiques of the German cars I've owned and I certainly don't think they are infallible. I do however find your broad-brushed and scathing condemnation utterly ridiculous. I've been in many a Toyota product where the build quality was less than stellar. They don't get a pass just because they are Japanese any more than my M5 got a pass by being German for requiring an entire driveshaft assembly replacement because it didn't have U-joints.
Worshipping at the alter of Nippon godliness is no more redeeming than what you claim is happening with German marques in this thread. They are two sides of the same coin.
Well, it was mostly edyvw until you jumped in to defend him. Also, I don't think that the Japanese are inherently any smarter or better than anyone else, but rather the point I've been making is that they are perfectly capable of designing and building things as good as anything else in the world. I'd have thought that would just be accepted as a given by now, but some people still assume anything touched by the hand of a German is inherently superior, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
This argument reminds me of a sports fan who thinks their team is the best because they won three championships thirty years ago and have done nothing since. The 2JZ was a great engine for its day but in today's world nobody wants to (or has to) deal with the power curve of an engine like that.
At least in the performance car world Toyota has done pretty much nothing in two decades. Even today they still have limited use of GDI and turbocharging when other brands were doing it a decade ago or more. They focused on hybrid technology, and their focus is on reliability, and that's fine, but it's not exactly exciting.
I mean, they're a business. They're trying to make cars that sell. There's a reason why they're the largest automaker in the world, after all. BMW, meanwhile, making a more niche car, can't even beat out Suzuki.
Also, Toyota has made plenty of exciting cars, even in the past two decades, but they get ignored by car snobs because of brand cachet. You just need to look more towards Lexus for that end of things.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
And what exactly then is this magical "sophistication" edyvw has been nattering on about? How is it defined beyond the car was made by Germans, and is therefore sophisticated?
I'm guessing he might be talking about interior fit and finish and generally well-put-togetherness of higher end German offerings?
My M5 was a beautifully assembled car. It had its faults, but thought put into how it was assembled around the driver wasn't one of them.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Toyota didn't traditionally make turbocharged engines, either. Right up until they did. I fail to understand how you could call a company that rejects new technology for nebulous reasons of "tradition" sophisticated, unless of course your definition of "sophistication" is purely based on the nationality of the engineers.
Toyota didn't traditionally make performance engines period. BMW has a long history of producing naturally aspirated performance-geared engines and continued long after Toyota stopped making the Supra. Turbo's weren't new technology then, either. BMW produced a turbocharged variant of their aircraft radial in the early 1940's, which made 1,785HP. Their CHOICE of high revving naturally aspirated engines for their road cars was just that, and had nothing to do with the brand's lack of familiarity with forced induction.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
They were both niche cars, and I'd argue that the entire point of the S2000 was that it wasn't sophisticated. It was an intentional throwback, much like the Miata.
The primary claim to fame of the S2000 was its naturally aspirated power density. The fact that it "only" made 220HP wasn't the point, it was the 9,000RPM rev range and power from the displacement given without boost.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Right, so beyond the two cars being competitors, the two are somehow not competitors.
They weren't competitors. I have no doubt in my mind that BMW, catering to a 7-series driver who might have wanted something more sporty, was in any way remotely interested in what Toyota was doing with the Supra when considering its design.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
If you must get totally anal about specs, the 3000GT is closer to the 8 series in dimensions and features, but the performance comparison between the two is, if anything, even more lopsided. The fact is the 8 series was simply mediocre and hideously overpriced, something edyvw would have me believe was impossible. We don't have to focus on just it vs the Japanese, either, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe, a car I'm sure edyvw thinks was assembled in a cave using dinosaur bones.
As with every BMW series, there is a range of performance options. The 8-series never saw an M-car based on it, thus, despite its V12 offering (which saw duty in the McLaren F1, as already noted) it was not a "performance" car in that sense. And yes, the 8-series was expensive, as was the 7-series, and the higher-tier 5-series offerings.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
You are aware that there were cheaper 8 series BMWs, right? You know, the V8 ones that actually sold.
The 840i started at $73,140. That's still insanely expensive; a far cry from "cheap". Cheaper than the 850ci isn't much of a benchmark here.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I just excluded them from competition because it would have frankly been entirely unfair to the BMW. The 840s weren't even in the same league of performance or sophistication.
What's your definition of "sophistication" in this context? It was likely a very well equipped car internally, for the time period and reasonably sophisticated in that respect. It had a reasonably decent performance engine under the hood as far as naturally aspirated offerings went.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, I don't think you realize just how much the Japanese GT cars of that era cost. The Supra turbos eclipsed $50,000 dollars. It's a big reason why they eventually died.
Yet that's still $23,000 cheaper than the base 840i, proving my point.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The Japanese proved they could make a car that was every bit the equal to anything else in the world, but they lacked the cachet to sell them for prices every bit the equal of everyone else in the world. The numbers could be made to work when the yen was artificially deflated, but once it was more realistic, Toyota could not get Porsche or BMW money even for a car that was better than anything Porsche or BMW offered.
They still stuffer from being unable to fetch that kind of coin. There is a prestige associated with the German marques that the Japanese have, despite their best efforts, been unable to replicate. But that doesn't make the German cars bad cars. It may make them overpriced however.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Right, so people who wanted a worse car for more money. Not a surprise they didn't sell.
The 750i didn't sell any better. These are not high volume products. Have you driven an 8xx? Do you know how it drives; what the fit and finish was like, that kind of stuff, which is generally the metric used for cars at this price point. Or are you basing it solely on the fact that Toyota's turbocharged offering that weighed 1,000lbs less was faster? Because that's a massively overly-simplified way of trying to make a comparison.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
No, the Supra was catering to people who wanted a world class performance car and didn't care what the badge said.
So, like the Ford GT then? Or the GT40 back in the 1960's? Or like the NSX, or the E39 BMW M5? At various points there have been cars that have aspired to fill that role, depending on how it's defined. The E39 M5 was the fastest sedan on the planet for quite a stint, capable of 190Mph. It was a beautiful car.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, and the Supra turbo was still both faster and cheaper than the M3 of that vintage. The numbers are a little closer, but the supposedly "unsophisticated" Toyota still wins. I compared it to the 8 series largely because the 8 series was the top of the line BMW
Why do you assume the 8-series was the top of the line BMW? Because it's the highest number in the series? That's a gross oversimplification. The M5 was, for the longest time, their highest tier performance offering. The E34 doesn't align perfectly with the timeframe we are discussing, but the E34 M5 was fitted with the S38B38 from 1992 onward, which lines up reasonably well. This engine was a 3.8L I6 producing 335HP. This car would be around $58K, so more expensive than the Supra, but not a whole heck of a lot. At around 3,700lbs, it was lighter than the 8-series, but still heavier than the Supra. It also was a 4-door sedan that would comfortably seat 4 adults.
Basically, if it doesn't have an M prefix badge and an S prefix engine in it, it's not a performance car in the BMW lineup. Hence M3, M5 and now M2 and M6. For the SUV's the M trails, so X6M, X5M..etc. Now, there was the 850Csi which was fitted with the 375HP S70B56, but there was no M8, which is why the 850Csi ended up existing, and produced in ridiculously low volume. At only 40HP more than the S38, while it wore the S prefix, this isn't an M-car.
The 7-series is also more expensive than the 5-series, but again, there's no M7. So the M5 still holds in that scenario as the top performance offering from the company until we get into an era that the M6 exists, which is basically a coupe with the same powertrain.
If there had been an M8, it's likely it would have ended up with a more performance geared engine like the S70/2, which ended up in the McLaren F1 and as I noted before, made 618HP. The engine was plenty capable.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Well, it was mostly edyvw until you jumped in to defend him.
I didn't jump in to defend him. I jumped in because you were making claims that I felt were ridiculous broad-brushes and generally devoid of facts or logic, like comparing a twin-turbo engine to a naturally aspirated one on the basis of specific output.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, I don't think that the Japanese are inherently any smarter or better than anyone else, but rather the point I've been making is that they are perfectly capable of designing and building things as good as anything else in the world. I'd have thought that would just be accepted as a given by now, but some people still assume anything touched by the hand of a German is inherently superior, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Well, your comments certainly didn't seem to convey that mindset. It's quite possible to draw reasonable parallels in engineering and development without using racially-charged labels or slamming an entire culture because some folks feel fancy driving a car with the star or roundel on the hood.
Some folks on here speak of Toyota equally snobbishly, just from a different direction.
You don't need to slam BMW to praise Toyota. I'm certainly not slamming Toyota while I bring up positive aspects of BMW's cars and history here, nor am I using potentially offensive labels that might betray any claims of neutrality that I might be making
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
BMW, meanwhile, making a more niche car, can't even beat out Suzuki.
Also, Toyota has made plenty of exciting cars, even in the past two decades, but they get ignored by car snobs because of brand cachet. You just need to look more towards Lexus for that end of things.
I believe BMW is comfortable with their position in the market at this point. Regarding Lexus, you are quite right, they have had numerous products that have flown under the radar that are well equipped and quite impressive.
And what exactly then is this magical "sophistication" edyvw has been nattering on about? How is it defined beyond the car was made by Germans, and is therefore sophisticated?
I'm guessing he might be talking about interior fit and finish and generally well-put-togetherness of higher end German offerings?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Toyota didn't traditionally make turbocharged engines, either. Right up until they did. I fail to understand how you could call a company that rejects new technology for nebulous reasons of "tradition" sophisticated, unless of course your definition of "sophistication" is purely based on the nationality of the engineers.
Toyota didn't traditionally make performance engines period. BMW has a long history of producing naturally aspirated performance-geared engines and continued long after Toyota stopped making the Supra. Turbo's weren't new technology then, either. BMW produced a turbocharged variant of their aircraft radial in the early 1940's, which made 1,785HP. Their CHOICE of high revving naturally aspirated engines for their road cars was just that, and had nothing to do with the brand's lack of familiarity with forced induction.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
They were both niche cars, and I'd argue that the entire point of the S2000 was that it wasn't sophisticated. It was an intentional throwback, much like the Miata.
The primary claim to fame of the S2000 was its naturally aspirated power density. The fact that it "only" made 220HP wasn't the point, it was the 9,000RPM rev range and power from the displacement given without boost.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Right, so beyond the two cars being competitors, the two are somehow not competitors.
They weren't competitors. I have no doubt in my mind that BMW, catering to a 7-series driver who might have wanted something more sporty, was in any way remotely interested in what Toyota was doing with the Supra when considering its design.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
If you must get totally anal about specs, the 3000GT is closer to the 8 series in dimensions and features, but the performance comparison between the two is, if anything, even more lopsided. The fact is the 8 series was simply mediocre and hideously overpriced, something edyvw would have me believe was impossible. We don't have to focus on just it vs the Japanese, either, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe, a car I'm sure edyvw thinks was assembled in a cave using dinosaur bones.
As with every BMW series, there is a range of performance options. The 8-series never saw an M-car based on it, thus, despite its V12 offering (which saw duty in the McLaren F1, as already noted) it was not a "performance" car in that sense. And yes, the 8-series was expensive, as was the 7-series, and the higher-tier 5-series offerings.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
You are aware that there were cheaper 8 series BMWs, right? You know, the V8 ones that actually sold.
The 840i started at $73,140. That's still insanely expensive; a far cry from "cheap". Cheaper than the 850ci isn't much of a benchmark here.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I just excluded them from competition because it would have frankly been entirely unfair to the BMW. The 840s weren't even in the same league of performance or sophistication.
What's your definition of "sophistication" in this context? It was likely a very well equipped car internally, for the time period and reasonably sophisticated in that respect. It had a reasonably decent performance engine under the hood as far as naturally aspirated offerings went.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, I don't think you realize just how much the Japanese GT cars of that era cost. The Supra turbos eclipsed $50,000 dollars. It's a big reason why they eventually died.
Yet that's still $23,000 cheaper than the base 840i, proving my point.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The Japanese proved they could make a car that was every bit the equal to anything else in the world, but they lacked the cachet to sell them for prices every bit the equal of everyone else in the world. The numbers could be made to work when the yen was artificially deflated, but once it was more realistic, Toyota could not get Porsche or BMW money even for a car that was better than anything Porsche or BMW offered.
They still stuffer from being unable to fetch that kind of coin. There is a prestige associated with the German marques that the Japanese have, despite their best efforts, been unable to replicate. But that doesn't make the German cars bad cars. It may make them overpriced however.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Right, so people who wanted a worse car for more money. Not a surprise they didn't sell.
The 750i didn't sell any better. These are not high volume products. Have you driven an 8xx? Do you know how it drives; what the fit and finish was like, that kind of stuff, which is generally the metric used for cars at this price point. Or are you basing it solely on the fact that Toyota's turbocharged offering that weighed 1,000lbs less was faster? Because that's a massively overly-simplified way of trying to make a comparison.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
No, the Supra was catering to people who wanted a world class performance car and didn't care what the badge said.
So, like the Ford GT then? Or the GT40 back in the 1960's? Or like the NSX, or the E39 BMW M5? At various points there have been cars that have aspired to fill that role, depending on how it's defined. The E39 M5 was the fastest sedan on the planet for quite a stint, capable of 190Mph. It was a beautiful car.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, and the Supra turbo was still both faster and cheaper than the M3 of that vintage. The numbers are a little closer, but the supposedly "unsophisticated" Toyota still wins. I compared it to the 8 series largely because the 8 series was the top of the line BMW
Why do you assume the 8-series was the top of the line BMW? Because it's the highest number in the series? That's a gross oversimplification. The M5 was, for the longest time, their highest tier performance offering. The E34 doesn't align perfectly with the timeframe we are discussing, but the E34 M5 was fitted with the S38B38 from 1992 onward, which lines up reasonably well. This engine was a 3.8L I6 producing 335HP. This car would be around $58K, so more expensive than the Supra, but not a whole heck of a lot. At around 3,700lbs, it was lighter than the 8-series, but still heavier than the Supra. It also was a 4-door sedan that would comfortably seat 4 adults.
Basically, if it doesn't have an M prefix badge and an S prefix engine in it, it's not a performance car in the BMW lineup. Hence M3, M5 and now M2 and M6. For the SUV's the M trails, so X6M, X5M..etc. Now, there was the 850Csi which was fitted with the 375HP S70B56, but there was no M8, which is why the 850Csi ended up existing, and produced in ridiculously low volume. At only 40HP more than the S38, while it wore the S prefix, this isn't an M-car.
The 7-series is also more expensive than the 5-series, but again, there's no M7. So the M5 still holds in that scenario as the top performance offering from the company until we get into an era that the M6 exists, which is basically a coupe with the same powertrain.
If there had been an M8, it's likely it would have ended up with a more performance geared engine like the S70/2, which ended up in the McLaren F1 and as I noted before, made 618HP. The engine was plenty capable.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Well, it was mostly edyvw until you jumped in to defend him.
I didn't jump in to defend him. I jumped in because you were making claims that I felt were ridiculous broad-brushes and generally devoid of facts or logic, like comparing a twin-turbo engine to a naturally aspirated one on the basis of specific output.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Also, I don't think that the Japanese are inherently any smarter or better than anyone else, but rather the point I've been making is that they are perfectly capable of designing and building things as good as anything else in the world. I'd have thought that would just be accepted as a given by now, but some people still assume anything touched by the hand of a German is inherently superior, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Well, your comments certainly didn't seem to convey that mindset. It's quite possible to draw reasonable parallels in engineering and development without using racially-charged labels or slamming an entire culture because some folks feel fancy driving a car with the star or roundel on the hood.
Some folks on here speak of Toyota equally snobbishly, just from a different direction.
You don't need to slam BMW to praise Toyota. I'm certainly not slamming Toyota while I bring up positive aspects of BMW's cars and history here, nor am I using potentially offensive labels that might betray any claims of neutrality that I might be making
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
BMW, meanwhile, making a more niche car, can't even beat out Suzuki.
Also, Toyota has made plenty of exciting cars, even in the past two decades, but they get ignored by car snobs because of brand cachet. You just need to look more towards Lexus for that end of things.
I believe BMW is comfortable with their position in the market at this point. Regarding Lexus, you are quite right, they have had numerous products that have flown under the radar that are well equipped and quite impressive.
Quote
So what is this mythical "sophistication" that you babble on about, but cannot in any way define, then? It seems to be an amorphous concept that means "it was built by Germans" more than anything else. Please, go ahead and define exactly how BMW or German engines in general are sophisticated in ways no one else can match. I'm STILL waiting, but I know that explanation will never come.
Also, no, Toyota has and continues to have a large number of their own diesel engines, and is the owner of Hino, one of the largest commercial vehicle manufacturers in the world, and one of the best. They licensed two small diesels from BMW because it was cheaper than designing new ones as a stop gap for a few European model cars.
Similarly, Toyota uses VANOS in exactly one car, a limited production niche model which will never be a major seller for them.
And when it comes to BMW licensing Toyota tech, how about BMW licensing Toyota's hydrogen fuel cells, an ACTUAL piece of sophisticated technology, because they were not capable of designing their own?
You know exactly ZERO about Toyota diesels.
Toyota developed from ground up diesel for European market. They did not opted for anyone's diesel as they wanted to jump into at that time very lucrative market on their own. Two engines, which suppose to be blockbusters were 1.4 D-$D and 2.2 D-4D offered in vehicles like Corolla (1.4) or Avensis and RAV4 (2.2).
However, their record pretty quickly became abysmal. 1.4 D4D needed almost laboratory clean diesel with no traces of sulfur, while 2.2 D4D could not make 100k km without having failed piston rings and rod bearings. That is when Toyota decided to completely abandon 2.2 D4D for BMW 2.0 diesel.
They, as usual, as they are doing today with 8 speed transmissions in Highlander, Sienna etc. blamed other factors, not wanting to make recalls so that they can push this myth about reliability. But when it became obvious that their small diesels are failing in countries like Austria, which has almost potable diesel, they just quietly settled with owners. I have LC Prado with their 3.0 D4-D diesel. It is absolutely unremarkable engine where Toyota managed to get out 156hp at and some 290lb-ft at 2,000rpms in time when 1.9tdi in VW was pushing 160hp and similar torque. Number of changed EGR's on that Prado is impossible to count anymore, same as number of ball joints and rotors who one needs to change almost every OCI. But, it has good 4WD and it was much cheaper than Puch G diesel that was really my target.
So, small diesels in Toyota from BMW were not stop gap. One does not do stop gap when 65% of sold engines on market of 510 million people (EU) is diesel.
On hybrid technology, yes BMW is doing it with Toyota (BMW had hydrogen cells in 1990's under their own development) and yes, you are right, Toyota is probably best in that.
But apparently, they can develop that "actual" sophisticated technology but not internal combustion engines? Since they are so good, can you send them message how to make my 2GR-FE warm up faster, and not need like 15 minutes to start heating? Since they are at it, I would appreciate that.
So what is this mythical "sophistication" that you babble on about, but cannot in any way define, then? It seems to be an amorphous concept that means "it was built by Germans" more than anything else. Please, go ahead and define exactly how BMW or German engines in general are sophisticated in ways no one else can match. I'm STILL waiting, but I know that explanation will never come.
Also, no, Toyota has and continues to have a large number of their own diesel engines, and is the owner of Hino, one of the largest commercial vehicle manufacturers in the world, and one of the best. They licensed two small diesels from BMW because it was cheaper than designing new ones as a stop gap for a few European model cars.
Similarly, Toyota uses VANOS in exactly one car, a limited production niche model which will never be a major seller for them.
And when it comes to BMW licensing Toyota tech, how about BMW licensing Toyota's hydrogen fuel cells, an ACTUAL piece of sophisticated technology, because they were not capable of designing their own?
You know exactly ZERO about Toyota diesels.
Toyota developed from ground up diesel for European market. They did not opted for anyone's diesel as they wanted to jump into at that time very lucrative market on their own. Two engines, which suppose to be blockbusters were 1.4 D-$D and 2.2 D-4D offered in vehicles like Corolla (1.4) or Avensis and RAV4 (2.2).
However, their record pretty quickly became abysmal. 1.4 D4D needed almost laboratory clean diesel with no traces of sulfur, while 2.2 D4D could not make 100k km without having failed piston rings and rod bearings. That is when Toyota decided to completely abandon 2.2 D4D for BMW 2.0 diesel.
They, as usual, as they are doing today with 8 speed transmissions in Highlander, Sienna etc. blamed other factors, not wanting to make recalls so that they can push this myth about reliability. But when it became obvious that their small diesels are failing in countries like Austria, which has almost potable diesel, they just quietly settled with owners. I have LC Prado with their 3.0 D4-D diesel. It is absolutely unremarkable engine where Toyota managed to get out 156hp at and some 290lb-ft at 2,000rpms in time when 1.9tdi in VW was pushing 160hp and similar torque. Number of changed EGR's on that Prado is impossible to count anymore, same as number of ball joints and rotors who one needs to change almost every OCI. But, it has good 4WD and it was much cheaper than Puch G diesel that was really my target.
So, small diesels in Toyota from BMW were not stop gap. One does not do stop gap when 65% of sold engines on market of 510 million people (EU) is diesel.
On hybrid technology, yes BMW is doing it with Toyota (BMW had hydrogen cells in 1990's under their own development) and yes, you are right, Toyota is probably best in that.
But apparently, they can develop that "actual" sophisticated technology but not internal combustion engines? Since they are so good, can you send them message how to make my 2GR-FE warm up faster, and not need like 15 minutes to start heating? Since they are at it, I would appreciate that.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
I'm guessing he might be talking about interior fit and finish and generally well-put-togetherness of higher end German offerings?
My M5 was a beautifully assembled car. It had its faults, but thought put into how it was assembled around the driver wasn't one of them.
Yet, this is also not a good comparison given as the Japanese could and did equal that, too (see: Lexus) and you have to compare cost vs cost. Of course, a 5 series is going to have higher rent materials than a Camry. It had better, too, given the 20k+ price premium. Compare that 5 to the equivalent model from Lexus and suddenly the gap is closed.
Quote
Toyota didn't traditionally make performance engines period. BMW has a long history of producing naturally aspirated performance-geared engines and continued long after Toyota stopped making the Supra. Turbo's weren't new technology then, either. BMW produced a turbocharged variant of their aircraft radial in the early 1940's, which made 1,785HP. Their CHOICE of high revving naturally aspirated engines for their road cars was just that, and had nothing to do with the brand's lack of familiarity with forced induction.
Toyota actually has more experience with that than you'd think. There was the 2000GT, for one, but also Toyota was making high performance (for the time) twin cam Coronas all the way back in the 60s. In fact, they were getting 110hp from a 1.6 back in 1967, which was very impressive for those days. BMW could only manage 83 from their 1.6 of the same time. The next generation of Corona improved on that, getting 143hp from their 18R-G 2.0, which was a VERY impressive number for that day. Their turbocharged rally versions of that engine could reach nearly 300hp.
So yeah, they've been doing it for a while. It's just that since the 50s on, BMW has focused on sporty cars, while Toyota makes all sorts of cars, with sporty ones only comprising a fraction of their business.
Quote
The primary claim to fame of the S2000 was its naturally aspirated power density. The fact that it "only" made 220HP wasn't the point, it was the 9,000RPM rev range and power from the displacement given without boost.
Yes, and that makes it a throwback. It was a modern take on the screaming twin cams of old, a very anachronistic type of engine in the age of turbocharging bringing on maximum power at lower RPMs.
Quote
They weren't competitors. I have no doubt in my mind that BMW, catering to a 7-series driver who might have wanted something more sporty, was in any way remotely interested in what Toyota was doing with the Supra when considering its design.
I mean, they're cars of similar dimensions, configuration and intended purposes. It's hardly Toyota's fault the 8 series was astronomically overpriced.
Quote
As with every BMW series, there is a range of performance options. The 8-series never saw an M-car based on it, thus, despite its V12 offering (which saw duty in the McLaren F1, as already noted) it was not a "performance" car in that sense. And yes, the 8-series was expensive, as was the 7-series, and the higher-tier 5-series offerings.
I mean, I could point out that Toyota's pedestrian engines see duty in Lotus cars, with even their most hardcore, race ready model sporting a Camry V6. That's not even to mention their special performance engines, which they can and do make. See: 1LR-GUE
Quote
The 840i started at $73,140. That's still insanely expensive; a far cry from "cheap". Cheaper than the 850ci isn't much of a benchmark here.
Yes, it was overpriced.
Quote
What's your definition of "sophistication" in this context? It was likely a very well equipped car internally, for the time period and reasonably sophisticated in that respect. It had a reasonably decent performance engine under the hood as far as naturally aspirated offerings went.
It didn't have a single option that you couldn't get on say, a 3000GT (and the Mitsubishi had a few things BMW didn't offer), and was considerably slower. So really, it wasn't that the BMW was somehow magically sophisticated. It was just overpriced.
Quote
Yet that's still $23,000 cheaper than the base 840i, proving my point.
I mean, you admit yourself that German cars are overpriced so...
Quote
They still stuffer from being unable to fetch that kind of coin. There is a prestige associated with the German marques that the Japanese have, despite their best efforts, been unable to replicate. But that doesn't make the German cars bad cars. It may make them overpriced however.
Yes, this is because people still seem to believe that German mega geniuses spread pixie dust on every car they build, or at the very least will pay a huge premium for a badge they think may impress the neighbors.
Quote
The 750i didn't sell any better. These are not high volume products. Have you driven an 8xx? Do you know how it drives; what the fit and finish was like, that kind of stuff, which is generally the metric used for cars at this price point. Or are you basing it solely on the fact that Toyota's turbocharged offering that weighed 1,000lbs less was faster? Because that's a massively overly-simplified way of trying to make a comparison.
The 750i was a limo, so no, it didn't sell very well. Limos usually don't. Toyota's Century limo doesn't sell very well, either. When it comes to the 8 series, what exactly DO you think it compares to? A 3000GT is much closer to the 8 in weight and dimensions than a Supra, and it STILL stomps the 8 series in every performance metric, plus it had more toys. If you want to get really out there and compare it to a Eunos Cosmo, the BMW still loses. If you want to use the "personal luxury car" definition for it (which is more or less the same as a GT car), it really doesn't compete well there either. Again, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe. Maybe it's just time to face facts that the 8 series was an overpriced and mediocre car? Really, in that regard it's more like a German Subaru SVX instead of a German Supra.
Quote
So, like the Ford GT then? Or the GT40 back in the 1960's? Or like the NSX, or the E39 BMW M5? At various points there have been cars that have aspired to fill that role, depending on how it's defined. The E39 M5 was the fastest sedan on the planet for quite a stint, capable of 190Mph. It was a beautiful car.
The difference being that BMWs have pretty much always been cars for people who DO care what the badge says.
Quote
Why do you assume the 8-series was the top of the line BMW? Because it's the highest number in the series? That's a gross oversimplification. The M5 was, for the longest time, their highest tier performance offering. The E34 doesn't align perfectly with the timeframe we are discussing, but the E34 M5 was fitted with the S38B38 from 1992 onward, which lines up reasonably well. This engine was a 3.8L I6 producing 335HP. This car would be around $58K, so more expensive than the Supra, but not a whole heck of a lot. At around 3,700lbs, it was lighter than the 8-series, but still heavier than the Supra. It also was a 4-door sedan that would comfortably seat 4 adults.
The 8 series was the most expensive car BMW made. Hence, the top of the line.
Now, I don't think it's really a good comparison if you compare a 4 door sedan to a 4 door sports car. Toyota didn't make anything directly comparable at that time. About the closest you'd get from Japan was the Nissan Skyline GT-R (which is similar in size, but only offered as a coupe, however the base Skylines were usually 4 doors), and that is a fight the BMW wouldn't have even a ghost of a chance at winning.
Quote
I didn't jump in to defend him. I jumped in because you were making claims that I felt were ridiculous broad-brushes and generally devoid of facts or logic, like comparing a twin-turbo engine to a naturally aspirated one on the basis of specific output.
No, I was arguing that it was utterly ridiculous to call Toyota engines unsophisticated when they are provably anything but.
I'm guessing he might be talking about interior fit and finish and generally well-put-togetherness of higher end German offerings?
Yet, this is also not a good comparison given as the Japanese could and did equal that, too (see: Lexus) and you have to compare cost vs cost. Of course, a 5 series is going to have higher rent materials than a Camry. It had better, too, given the 20k+ price premium. Compare that 5 to the equivalent model from Lexus and suddenly the gap is closed.
Quote
Toyota didn't traditionally make performance engines period. BMW has a long history of producing naturally aspirated performance-geared engines and continued long after Toyota stopped making the Supra. Turbo's weren't new technology then, either. BMW produced a turbocharged variant of their aircraft radial in the early 1940's, which made 1,785HP. Their CHOICE of high revving naturally aspirated engines for their road cars was just that, and had nothing to do with the brand's lack of familiarity with forced induction.
Toyota actually has more experience with that than you'd think. There was the 2000GT, for one, but also Toyota was making high performance (for the time) twin cam Coronas all the way back in the 60s. In fact, they were getting 110hp from a 1.6 back in 1967, which was very impressive for those days. BMW could only manage 83 from their 1.6 of the same time. The next generation of Corona improved on that, getting 143hp from their 18R-G 2.0, which was a VERY impressive number for that day. Their turbocharged rally versions of that engine could reach nearly 300hp.
So yeah, they've been doing it for a while. It's just that since the 50s on, BMW has focused on sporty cars, while Toyota makes all sorts of cars, with sporty ones only comprising a fraction of their business.
Quote
The primary claim to fame of the S2000 was its naturally aspirated power density. The fact that it "only" made 220HP wasn't the point, it was the 9,000RPM rev range and power from the displacement given without boost.
Yes, and that makes it a throwback. It was a modern take on the screaming twin cams of old, a very anachronistic type of engine in the age of turbocharging bringing on maximum power at lower RPMs.
Quote
They weren't competitors. I have no doubt in my mind that BMW, catering to a 7-series driver who might have wanted something more sporty, was in any way remotely interested in what Toyota was doing with the Supra when considering its design.
I mean, they're cars of similar dimensions, configuration and intended purposes. It's hardly Toyota's fault the 8 series was astronomically overpriced.
Quote
As with every BMW series, there is a range of performance options. The 8-series never saw an M-car based on it, thus, despite its V12 offering (which saw duty in the McLaren F1, as already noted) it was not a "performance" car in that sense. And yes, the 8-series was expensive, as was the 7-series, and the higher-tier 5-series offerings.
I mean, I could point out that Toyota's pedestrian engines see duty in Lotus cars, with even their most hardcore, race ready model sporting a Camry V6. That's not even to mention their special performance engines, which they can and do make. See: 1LR-GUE
Quote
The 840i started at $73,140. That's still insanely expensive; a far cry from "cheap". Cheaper than the 850ci isn't much of a benchmark here.
Yes, it was overpriced.
Quote
What's your definition of "sophistication" in this context? It was likely a very well equipped car internally, for the time period and reasonably sophisticated in that respect. It had a reasonably decent performance engine under the hood as far as naturally aspirated offerings went.
It didn't have a single option that you couldn't get on say, a 3000GT (and the Mitsubishi had a few things BMW didn't offer), and was considerably slower. So really, it wasn't that the BMW was somehow magically sophisticated. It was just overpriced.
Quote
Yet that's still $23,000 cheaper than the base 840i, proving my point.
I mean, you admit yourself that German cars are overpriced so...
Quote
They still stuffer from being unable to fetch that kind of coin. There is a prestige associated with the German marques that the Japanese have, despite their best efforts, been unable to replicate. But that doesn't make the German cars bad cars. It may make them overpriced however.
Yes, this is because people still seem to believe that German mega geniuses spread pixie dust on every car they build, or at the very least will pay a huge premium for a badge they think may impress the neighbors.
Quote
The 750i didn't sell any better. These are not high volume products. Have you driven an 8xx? Do you know how it drives; what the fit and finish was like, that kind of stuff, which is generally the metric used for cars at this price point. Or are you basing it solely on the fact that Toyota's turbocharged offering that weighed 1,000lbs less was faster? Because that's a massively overly-simplified way of trying to make a comparison.
The 750i was a limo, so no, it didn't sell very well. Limos usually don't. Toyota's Century limo doesn't sell very well, either. When it comes to the 8 series, what exactly DO you think it compares to? A 3000GT is much closer to the 8 in weight and dimensions than a Supra, and it STILL stomps the 8 series in every performance metric, plus it had more toys. If you want to get really out there and compare it to a Eunos Cosmo, the BMW still loses. If you want to use the "personal luxury car" definition for it (which is more or less the same as a GT car), it really doesn't compete well there either. Again, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe. Maybe it's just time to face facts that the 8 series was an overpriced and mediocre car? Really, in that regard it's more like a German Subaru SVX instead of a German Supra.
Quote
So, like the Ford GT then? Or the GT40 back in the 1960's? Or like the NSX, or the E39 BMW M5? At various points there have been cars that have aspired to fill that role, depending on how it's defined. The E39 M5 was the fastest sedan on the planet for quite a stint, capable of 190Mph. It was a beautiful car.
The difference being that BMWs have pretty much always been cars for people who DO care what the badge says.
Quote
Why do you assume the 8-series was the top of the line BMW? Because it's the highest number in the series? That's a gross oversimplification. The M5 was, for the longest time, their highest tier performance offering. The E34 doesn't align perfectly with the timeframe we are discussing, but the E34 M5 was fitted with the S38B38 from 1992 onward, which lines up reasonably well. This engine was a 3.8L I6 producing 335HP. This car would be around $58K, so more expensive than the Supra, but not a whole heck of a lot. At around 3,700lbs, it was lighter than the 8-series, but still heavier than the Supra. It also was a 4-door sedan that would comfortably seat 4 adults.
The 8 series was the most expensive car BMW made. Hence, the top of the line.
Now, I don't think it's really a good comparison if you compare a 4 door sedan to a 4 door sports car. Toyota didn't make anything directly comparable at that time. About the closest you'd get from Japan was the Nissan Skyline GT-R (which is similar in size, but only offered as a coupe, however the base Skylines were usually 4 doors), and that is a fight the BMW wouldn't have even a ghost of a chance at winning.
Quote
I didn't jump in to defend him. I jumped in because you were making claims that I felt were ridiculous broad-brushes and generally devoid of facts or logic, like comparing a twin-turbo engine to a naturally aspirated one on the basis of specific output.
No, I was arguing that it was utterly ridiculous to call Toyota engines unsophisticated when they are provably anything but.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yet, this is also not a good comparison given as the Japanese could and did equal that, too (see: Lexus) and you have to compare cost vs cost. Of course, a 5 series is going to have higher rent materials than a Camry. It had better, too, given the 20k+ price premium. Compare that 5 to the equivalent model from Lexus and suddenly the gap is closed.
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Toyota actually has more experience with that than you'd think. There was the 2000GT, for one, but also Toyota was making high performance (for the time) twin cam Coronas all the way back in the 60s. In fact, they were getting 110hp from a 1.6 back in 1967, which was very impressive for those days. BMW could only manage 83 from their 1.6 of the same time. The next generation of Corona improved on that, getting 143hp from their 18R-G 2.0, which was a VERY impressive number for that day. Their turbocharged rally versions of that engine could reach nearly 300hp.
So yeah, they've been doing it for a while. It's just that since the 50s on, BMW has focused on sporty cars, while Toyota makes all sorts of cars, with sporty ones only comprising a fraction of their business.
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
Toyota has had performance-oriented products from time-to-time over their history, BMW's M division has been a staple of the brand since 1972 whose existence was to produce performance-oriented versions of regular cars. Philosophically, the companies are not similar, and I don't believe there is anything wrong with that.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, and that makes it a throwback. It was a modern take on the screaming twin cams of old, a very anachronistic type of engine in the age of turbocharging bringing on maximum power at lower RPMs.
Age of turbocharging maybe in Japan? Certainly wasn't the case in Germany (Porsche excepted) or North America where reasonably large displacement V8's like the LS1 were popular. Might be a cultural thing, and that's another aspect of this discussion that's been slammed, but also likely explains some of the differences in how this stuff is approached.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, they're cars of similar dimensions, configuration and intended purposes. It's hardly Toyota's fault the 8 series was astronomically overpriced.
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, I could point out that Toyota's pedestrian engines see duty in Lotus cars, with even their most hardcore, race ready model sporting a Camry V6. That's not even to mention their special performance engines, which they can and do make. See: 1LR-GUE
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, it was overpriced.
Yes, I'd say it was, given how poorly it sold.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
It didn't have a single option that you couldn't get on say, a 3000GT (and the Mitsubishi had a few things BMW didn't offer), and was considerably slower. So really, it wasn't that the BMW was somehow magically sophisticated. It was just overpriced.
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
That'd be an option, lol. It's not like the 372HP 850CSI was spectacularly slow. 0-60 in 5.9, 1/4 mile in 14.4 seconds. It was slower than the 13.3 seconds the VR4 ran, sure, but the VR4 was 400lbs lighter and had AWD. That said, I doubt you'd find a comparison that lined these cars up. Generally, you'd see like a 911 or something, a car more geared toward performance rather than a sporty luxury barge.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, you admit yourself that German cars are overpriced so...
They can be. I bought my M5 used. Even new, while I wouldn't say it was a performance bargain, it was still a lot of car for the money and incredibly well-equipped. I'd say the E34 M5, which, even with 4-doors, likely compares better here, despite not being a really good match. Certainly a better one than the E31, and lines up better in the bang-for-buck department too.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, this is because people still seem to believe that German mega geniuses spread pixie dust on every car they build, or at the very least will pay a huge premium for a badge they think may impress the neighbors.
Sure, but you can't blame BMW for that.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The 750i was a limo, so no, it didn't sell very well. Limos usually don't. Toyota's Century limo doesn't sell very well, either.
The 750i was not a limo, the L7 was a limo. The 750i was just a large sedan, the same as the 740i, but came fitted with the M73 V12 instead of the M62 V8 or other, smaller engines. 750i:
![[Linked Image]](https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MzJYMzI=/z/hkcAAOSwcEtZkxsk/$_86.JPG "[Linked Image]")
BMW L7:
![[Linked Image]](http://kimbex.pl/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IMG_4497-1024x768.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
When it comes to the 8 series, what exactly DO you think it compares to?
Why does it need to compare to anything?
It was a car that BMW thought there was a market for and there wasn't. That's why the M-version never came to fruition.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
A 3000GT is much closer to the 8 in weight and dimensions than a Supra, and it STILL stomps the 8 series in every performance metric, plus it had more toys. If you want to get really out there and compare it to a Eunos Cosmo, the BMW still loses.
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
If you want to use the "personal luxury car" definition for it (which is more or less the same as a GT car), it really doesn't compete well there either. Again, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe. Maybe it's just time to face facts that the 8 series was an overpriced and mediocre car? Really, in that regard it's more like a German Subaru SVX instead of a German Supra.
I doubt BMW ever thought of it as a German Supra. The performance stuff is expressed in the M-cars, of which this wasn't one. M3, M5, generally. Watch Sabine Schmidt run the Nurburgring in an E39 M5, it's pretty impressive.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The difference being that BMWs have pretty much always been cars for people who DO care what the badge says.
That's an entirely American phenomenon. In Germany, a low-end 3'er is no different than a Corolla. Same with the low-end Mercedes offerings.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The 8 series was the most expensive car BMW made. Hence, the top of the line.
The 750i was $95,492, and could be optioned to be even more expensive. The various other versions of the car, like the Alpina, could be significantly pricier. I don't believe the 8-series was any more expensive than the 7.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Now, I don't think it's really a good comparison if you compare a 4 door sedan to a 4 door sports car. Toyota didn't make anything directly comparable at that time. About the closest you'd get from Japan was the Nissan Skyline GT-R (which is similar in size, but only offered as a coupe, however the base Skylines were usually 4 doors), and that is a fight the BMW wouldn't have even a ghost of a chance at winning.
Why does there need to be a comparison? Companies can make vehicles that don't directly compete. Generally one would compare a BMW to a Mercedes, not a Porsche for example. Even among German marques, there may not be a suitable basis for comparison due to what's being offered.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
No, I was arguing that it was utterly ridiculous to call Toyota engines unsophisticated when they are provably anything but.
The language you used as well as the comparison you made (forced-induction vs non) was what I took issue with. It was certainly possible to disagree and provide some reasonable comparisons without the language and keeping the discourse civil like I've endeavoured to do here. I think what was posted was inappropriate.
Yet, this is also not a good comparison given as the Japanese could and did equal that, too (see: Lexus) and you have to compare cost vs cost. Of course, a 5 series is going to have higher rent materials than a Camry. It had better, too, given the 20k+ price premium. Compare that 5 to the equivalent model from Lexus and suddenly the gap is closed.
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Toyota actually has more experience with that than you'd think. There was the 2000GT, for one, but also Toyota was making high performance (for the time) twin cam Coronas all the way back in the 60s. In fact, they were getting 110hp from a 1.6 back in 1967, which was very impressive for those days. BMW could only manage 83 from their 1.6 of the same time. The next generation of Corona improved on that, getting 143hp from their 18R-G 2.0, which was a VERY impressive number for that day. Their turbocharged rally versions of that engine could reach nearly 300hp.
So yeah, they've been doing it for a while. It's just that since the 50s on, BMW has focused on sporty cars, while Toyota makes all sorts of cars, with sporty ones only comprising a fraction of their business.
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
Toyota has had performance-oriented products from time-to-time over their history, BMW's M division has been a staple of the brand since 1972 whose existence was to produce performance-oriented versions of regular cars. Philosophically, the companies are not similar, and I don't believe there is anything wrong with that.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, and that makes it a throwback. It was a modern take on the screaming twin cams of old, a very anachronistic type of engine in the age of turbocharging bringing on maximum power at lower RPMs.
Age of turbocharging maybe in Japan? Certainly wasn't the case in Germany (Porsche excepted) or North America where reasonably large displacement V8's like the LS1 were popular. Might be a cultural thing, and that's another aspect of this discussion that's been slammed, but also likely explains some of the differences in how this stuff is approached.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, they're cars of similar dimensions, configuration and intended purposes. It's hardly Toyota's fault the 8 series was astronomically overpriced.
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, I could point out that Toyota's pedestrian engines see duty in Lotus cars, with even their most hardcore, race ready model sporting a Camry V6. That's not even to mention their special performance engines, which they can and do make. See: 1LR-GUE
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, it was overpriced.
Yes, I'd say it was, given how poorly it sold.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
It didn't have a single option that you couldn't get on say, a 3000GT (and the Mitsubishi had a few things BMW didn't offer), and was considerably slower. So really, it wasn't that the BMW was somehow magically sophisticated. It was just overpriced.
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
I mean, you admit yourself that German cars are overpriced so...
They can be. I bought my M5 used. Even new, while I wouldn't say it was a performance bargain, it was still a lot of car for the money and incredibly well-equipped. I'd say the E34 M5, which, even with 4-doors, likely compares better here, despite not being a really good match. Certainly a better one than the E31, and lines up better in the bang-for-buck department too.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yes, this is because people still seem to believe that German mega geniuses spread pixie dust on every car they build, or at the very least will pay a huge premium for a badge they think may impress the neighbors.
Sure, but you can't blame BMW for that.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The 750i was a limo, so no, it didn't sell very well. Limos usually don't. Toyota's Century limo doesn't sell very well, either.
The 750i was not a limo, the L7 was a limo. The 750i was just a large sedan, the same as the 740i, but came fitted with the M73 V12 instead of the M62 V8 or other, smaller engines. 750i:
BMW L7:
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
When it comes to the 8 series, what exactly DO you think it compares to?
Why does it need to compare to anything?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
A 3000GT is much closer to the 8 in weight and dimensions than a Supra, and it STILL stomps the 8 series in every performance metric, plus it had more toys. If you want to get really out there and compare it to a Eunos Cosmo, the BMW still loses.
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
If you want to use the "personal luxury car" definition for it (which is more or less the same as a GT car), it really doesn't compete well there either. Again, the 840 was scarcely faster than a Thunderbird Supercoupe. Maybe it's just time to face facts that the 8 series was an overpriced and mediocre car? Really, in that regard it's more like a German Subaru SVX instead of a German Supra.
I doubt BMW ever thought of it as a German Supra. The performance stuff is expressed in the M-cars, of which this wasn't one. M3, M5, generally. Watch Sabine Schmidt run the Nurburgring in an E39 M5, it's pretty impressive.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The difference being that BMWs have pretty much always been cars for people who DO care what the badge says.
That's an entirely American phenomenon. In Germany, a low-end 3'er is no different than a Corolla. Same with the low-end Mercedes offerings.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
The 8 series was the most expensive car BMW made. Hence, the top of the line.
The 750i was $95,492, and could be optioned to be even more expensive. The various other versions of the car, like the Alpina, could be significantly pricier. I don't believe the 8-series was any more expensive than the 7.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Now, I don't think it's really a good comparison if you compare a 4 door sedan to a 4 door sports car. Toyota didn't make anything directly comparable at that time. About the closest you'd get from Japan was the Nissan Skyline GT-R (which is similar in size, but only offered as a coupe, however the base Skylines were usually 4 doors), and that is a fight the BMW wouldn't have even a ghost of a chance at winning.
Why does there need to be a comparison? Companies can make vehicles that don't directly compete. Generally one would compare a BMW to a Mercedes, not a Porsche for example. Even among German marques, there may not be a suitable basis for comparison due to what's being offered.
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
No, I was arguing that it was utterly ridiculous to call Toyota engines unsophisticated when they are provably anything but.
The language you used as well as the comparison you made (forced-induction vs non) was what I took issue with. It was certainly possible to disagree and provide some reasonable comparisons without the language and keeping the discourse civil like I've endeavoured to do here. I think what was posted was inappropriate.
The 850i was made to compete with the Mercedes SL. They were highway cruising GT cars made for grey hairs who recently retired. They were not performance cars.
The only Lexus (performance car) I can think of that was truly a great car was the LFA. However just like supermodels that stuff doesn't really do it for me because it totally unobtainable. Building world class product for the layman is more my speed.
The other new stuff they've made, the F line or whatever to try and compete with the Germans, it just doesn't hold up. Maybe in another few years they'll figure it out, but they also need to tone down the looks a bit IMO.
The only Lexus (performance car) I can think of that was truly a great car was the LFA. However just like supermodels that stuff doesn't really do it for me because it totally unobtainable. Building world class product for the layman is more my speed.
The other new stuff they've made, the F line or whatever to try and compete with the Germans, it just doesn't hold up. Maybe in another few years they'll figure it out, but they also need to tone down the looks a bit IMO.
Last edited:
Quote
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Only in Europe. Everywhere else BMWs are sold as a premium brand. Worth pointing out that until recently, Toyota also didn't have a seperate luxury brand in it's home market, either. They just sold everything as Toyotas. Even today, their top JDM model, the Century, is sold as a Toyota rather than a Lexus.
Quote
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
I suppose that's reasonable IF one can accept that Toyota's focus on economy cars is also a matter of choice rather than one of ability.
Quote
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Yet, many similar cars DID end up being successful, probably because they were either better, more realistically priced or both.
Quote
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
And the same point can be made about Toyota's allegedly "unsophisticated" engines. Even their regular family car engines can be, and have been, worked over and used as the heart of exotic cars.
Quote
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
That'd be an option, lol. It's not like the 372HP 850CSI was spectacularly slow. 0-60 in 5.9, 1/4 mile in 14.4 seconds. It was slower than the 13.3 seconds the VR4 ran, sure, but the VR4 was 400lbs lighter and had AWD. That said, I doubt you'd find a comparison that lined these cars up. Generally, you'd see like a 911 or something, a car more geared toward performance rather than a sporty luxury barge.
I mean, it was closer in size and weight to the 8 series than the 911, which is a considerably smaller car.
Quote
Why does it need to compare to anything?
It was a car that BMW thought there was a market for and there wasn't. That's why the M-version never came to fruition.
That's sort of the way the car market works. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
Quote
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
The 3000GT, at least, had adjustable (which was both manually AND automatically adjusted) suspension, adjustable aerodynamics, electronic exhaust to make it louder or quieter, AWD (which was a lot more rare back then), four wheel steering (which, yes, the top model 8 series did have, but only after Mitsubishi did it), satellite navigation and a "fuzzy logic" automatic which (at least in theory) learned how you drove and adjusted shift patterns accordingly.
I think you're underestimating just how crazily advanced the 3000GT was. I mean, it was also an atrocious POS that constantly broke and cost a fortune to fix, but Mitsubishi absolutely swung for the fences with it. It helps that they're also a large electronics manufacturer.
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Only in Europe. Everywhere else BMWs are sold as a premium brand. Worth pointing out that until recently, Toyota also didn't have a seperate luxury brand in it's home market, either. They just sold everything as Toyotas. Even today, their top JDM model, the Century, is sold as a Toyota rather than a Lexus.
Quote
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
I suppose that's reasonable IF one can accept that Toyota's focus on economy cars is also a matter of choice rather than one of ability.
Quote
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Yet, many similar cars DID end up being successful, probably because they were either better, more realistically priced or both.
Quote
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
And the same point can be made about Toyota's allegedly "unsophisticated" engines. Even their regular family car engines can be, and have been, worked over and used as the heart of exotic cars.
Quote
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
I mean, it was closer in size and weight to the 8 series than the 911, which is a considerably smaller car.
Quote
Why does it need to compare to anything?
That's sort of the way the car market works. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
Quote
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
The 3000GT, at least, had adjustable (which was both manually AND automatically adjusted) suspension, adjustable aerodynamics, electronic exhaust to make it louder or quieter, AWD (which was a lot more rare back then), four wheel steering (which, yes, the top model 8 series did have, but only after Mitsubishi did it), satellite navigation and a "fuzzy logic" automatic which (at least in theory) learned how you drove and adjusted shift patterns accordingly.
I think you're underestimating just how crazily advanced the 3000GT was. I mean, it was also an atrocious POS that constantly broke and cost a fortune to fix, but Mitsubishi absolutely swung for the fences with it. It helps that they're also a large electronics manufacturer.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Quote
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Only in Europe. Everywhere else BMWs are sold as a premium brand. Worth pointing out that until recently, Toyota also didn't have a seperate luxury brand in it's home market, either. They just sold everything as Toyotas. Even today, their top JDM model, the Century, is sold as a Toyota rather than a Lexus.
Quote
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
I suppose that's reasonable IF one can accept that Toyota's focus on economy cars is also a matter of choice rather than one of ability.
Quote
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Yet, many similar cars DID end up being successful, probably because they were either better, more realistically priced or both.
Quote
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
And the same point can be made about Toyota's allegedly "unsophisticated" engines. Even their regular family car engines can be, and have been, worked over and used as the heart of exotic cars.
Quote
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
That'd be an option, lol. It's not like the 372HP 850CSI was spectacularly slow. 0-60 in 5.9, 1/4 mile in 14.4 seconds. It was slower than the 13.3 seconds the VR4 ran, sure, but the VR4 was 400lbs lighter and had AWD. That said, I doubt you'd find a comparison that lined these cars up. Generally, you'd see like a 911 or something, a car more geared toward performance rather than a sporty luxury barge.
I mean, it was closer in size and weight to the 8 series than the 911, which is a considerably smaller car.
Quote
Why does it need to compare to anything?
It was a car that BMW thought there was a market for and there wasn't. That's why the M-version never came to fruition.
That's sort of the way the car market works. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
Quote
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
The 3000GT, at least, had adjustable (which was both manually AND automatically adjusted) suspension, adjustable aerodynamics, electronic exhaust to make it louder or quieter, AWD (which was a lot more rare back then), four wheel steering (which, yes, the top model 8 series did have, but only after Mitsubishi did it), satellite navigation and a "fuzzy logic" automatic which (at least in theory) learned how you drove and adjusted shift patterns accordingly.
I think you're underestimating just how crazily advanced the 3000GT was. I mean, it was also an atrocious POS that constantly broke and cost a fortune to fix, but Mitsubishi absolutely swung for the fences with it. It helps that they're also a large electronics manufacturer.
You are right about one thing, it is choice. Toyota, regardless of Supra and some other cars, was not across the world recognized as primarily builder of sporty cars. In the end Toyota, VW, BMW are all in business of making money.
So yes, it is choice and yes, their engines are not as sophisticated, because of their choice. Toyota did sell 1.8 VVT-I engines to for example Lotus, but that is irrelevant, BMW and Mercedes are doing it and selling it to much more expensive manufacturers of exotic cars. Point is that unlike Toyota, BMW does not shy to sell twin turbo twin scroll engine in 525d that is used for taxis services for example. It is their choice that they do not do that, but that choice also means that over time, because of focusing on customer base that drive 20mph below speed limit in left lane, they have to go with BMW for new Supra, according to, well, Toyota engineers.
And all this focus on Supra, GT3000. There are numerous European cars that left far greater impact on automotive world than Supra or 3000GT, like Lancia Integrale, Audi Quattro etc. Integrale and Quattro were at it before Subaru knew what is rally championship in the first place. Putting turbo in sports cars in 80's and 90's is not Japanese specialization as one could buy in Europe far cheaper, for every day use cars with turbo like Passat's, Vectra's (actually Vectra A had an excellent engine, problem was that rest of the car was developed under watchful eye of GM accountants). Japanese manufacturers deliberately shy away from turbo downsizing that started in 1990's as they, correctly, understood that that will have an impact on reliability, but that is why today their 2.0T engine is somewhere in mediocrity of all other engines. And BMW did not enter this turbo era late. In 1997 BMW and FIAT were two companies who pushed common rail technology to masses and probably pushed VW to cheat decade later as they bet on wrong technology (PD). Going back to sophistication, next time I see taxi in Berlin that is Toyota and has three turbos and 200k on the clock, we can talk about sophistication. Yes it is choice, but every choice comes with consequences.
Quote
Sure, but we are back to gross over-simplification now. BMW doesn't have a separate luxury brand, each series can, within reason, be optioned from base to extravagant; Corolla to Lexus.
Only in Europe. Everywhere else BMWs are sold as a premium brand. Worth pointing out that until recently, Toyota also didn't have a seperate luxury brand in it's home market, either. They just sold everything as Toyotas. Even today, their top JDM model, the Century, is sold as a Toyota rather than a Lexus.
Quote
OK, so we can agree that BMW's focus, and Toyota's focus are not the same then? And that BMW's lack of pursuing turbos on their cars until quite recently was a matter of choice that followed that history rather than one of ability.
I suppose that's reasonable IF one can accept that Toyota's focus on economy cars is also a matter of choice rather than one of ability.
Quote
It's nobody's fault. BMW produced a car that they thought would appeal to consumers of their more expensive sedans but who were looking for something more "sporty". It didn't end up being a great success which is why it was discontinued.
Yet, many similar cars DID end up being successful, probably because they were either better, more realistically priced or both.
Quote
Certainly. But the point I was making was that the engine in the 850 was more than capable of making vast amounts of power. Because there wasn't an M-version, that variant wasn't put in a BMW chassis, instead, it ended up going in a McLaren instead.
And the same point can be made about Toyota's allegedly "unsophisticated" engines. Even their regular family car engines can be, and have been, worked over and used as the heart of exotic cars.
Quote
The Mitsubishi had a V12?
I mean, it was closer in size and weight to the 8 series than the 911, which is a considerably smaller car.
Quote
Why does it need to compare to anything?
That's sort of the way the car market works. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
Quote
The 3000GT is still 400lbs lighter, even with AWD. I'm not intimately familiar with the specific suite of toys that these cars came equipped with, but can you give some examples of toys that somebody buying a sport-luxury car would be interested in that were not present on the 8-series but were on the Supra or 3000GT?
The 3000GT, at least, had adjustable (which was both manually AND automatically adjusted) suspension, adjustable aerodynamics, electronic exhaust to make it louder or quieter, AWD (which was a lot more rare back then), four wheel steering (which, yes, the top model 8 series did have, but only after Mitsubishi did it), satellite navigation and a "fuzzy logic" automatic which (at least in theory) learned how you drove and adjusted shift patterns accordingly.
I think you're underestimating just how crazily advanced the 3000GT was. I mean, it was also an atrocious POS that constantly broke and cost a fortune to fix, but Mitsubishi absolutely swung for the fences with it. It helps that they're also a large electronics manufacturer.
You are right about one thing, it is choice. Toyota, regardless of Supra and some other cars, was not across the world recognized as primarily builder of sporty cars. In the end Toyota, VW, BMW are all in business of making money.
So yes, it is choice and yes, their engines are not as sophisticated, because of their choice. Toyota did sell 1.8 VVT-I engines to for example Lotus, but that is irrelevant, BMW and Mercedes are doing it and selling it to much more expensive manufacturers of exotic cars. Point is that unlike Toyota, BMW does not shy to sell twin turbo twin scroll engine in 525d that is used for taxis services for example. It is their choice that they do not do that, but that choice also means that over time, because of focusing on customer base that drive 20mph below speed limit in left lane, they have to go with BMW for new Supra, according to, well, Toyota engineers.
And all this focus on Supra, GT3000. There are numerous European cars that left far greater impact on automotive world than Supra or 3000GT, like Lancia Integrale, Audi Quattro etc. Integrale and Quattro were at it before Subaru knew what is rally championship in the first place. Putting turbo in sports cars in 80's and 90's is not Japanese specialization as one could buy in Europe far cheaper, for every day use cars with turbo like Passat's, Vectra's (actually Vectra A had an excellent engine, problem was that rest of the car was developed under watchful eye of GM accountants). Japanese manufacturers deliberately shy away from turbo downsizing that started in 1990's as they, correctly, understood that that will have an impact on reliability, but that is why today their 2.0T engine is somewhere in mediocrity of all other engines. And BMW did not enter this turbo era late. In 1997 BMW and FIAT were two companies who pushed common rail technology to masses and probably pushed VW to cheat decade later as they bet on wrong technology (PD). Going back to sophistication, next time I see taxi in Berlin that is Toyota and has three turbos and 200k on the clock, we can talk about sophistication. Yes it is choice, but every choice comes with consequences.
They didn't cheat with PD engines, they cheated with common rail engines. The PD stuff was phased out after only a few years because it wouldn't have passed emissions even with cheating (lol).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked