It looks like WhatCar? missed the point of the GT86 completely.
i would expect nothing less of What Car?
They never concider driver appeal
The following is taken directly from the end of their review: The GT86 will cost you more to run than competitors from Audi and Peugeot, but you’ll get Toyota’s fantastic five-year, 100,000-mile warranty.
So the front wheel drive Audi (at this price) and Peugeot are competitors? I think they have completely missed the point.
If What Car? actually recommended the GT86 i think it would put me off.
Quite. A magazine for those who deperately want a new car but have financially stretched themselves just to purchase it, hence the majoring on depreciation and fuel consumption. The further focus 'premium feel' and cars that are easy to drive (high torque diesels so none of that pesky cog swapping) speaks volumes for their target audience. Of which I am not one. Nor I suspect would anyone considering a GT-86.
For most people a car is just a means to an end, they have no real interest in the subject, so it's natural that they should consider criterion not dissimilar to the sort of criterion that they rank when buying a washing machine or a fridge. I have to remind myself of this sometimes when the conversation turns to cars and I go off on one and faces go blank. Lol!
You know, I do believe that is a 'pec'...
In the States its known as the Scion FR-S; 200 horsepower, it sells under $25,000, pretty much of a bargain. At that sort of price plus low insurance, with a dash that looks as if already customised, it should be a success. (Should, not necessarily guaranteed; in looks rather conventional by coupe standard.) There is only the MX5 to compete, but this is a "full-on" coupe promoted also to have good driving characteristics.
The after-market boys will be right behind hiking up the horsepower in various smart ways, offering chips with everything, and additional ornamentation. Not individualistic enough for me, but then, it's aimed at the youth market. Nice to see something for the many that isn't another generic mega-priced supercar aping Murray's McLaren F1.
in looks rather conventional by coupe standard.
Typical of these kind of Japanese offerings it looks sort of neutered. Polite, almost, where it should be assaulting the eye.
Which is why I find it disappointing. The cabin seems a pleasant place to sit in ... bit too pastiche BMW, all the sharp red illuminated instruments. I have a theory the most memorable Japanese cars that appealed to enthusiast drivers were designed by Europeans. But there's sure to be one or two the exception.
so what is the point then, exactly?
cheap - not really
fast - not especially
devasting looks - if you like kitchen appliances
build quality - if you like lawn mowers
investment - fat chance
brand appeal - on a par with my £6.49 Casio watch
So what we're left with is that hocus pocus called "driver appeal" which, as I have stated previously, is a daft notion you cannot measure. And if you can't measure it, then it's entirely in your head. For every ten drivers who claim the GT86 makes them feel alive (or whatever) I'll find fifty others who state it absolutely does not.
As I keep asking, who is right? I see it like a tennis racket. You buy the one that meets your preference, and anyone who attempts to make you believe there is another racket that only "real" contestants choose and which will make you play better is working for that racket's marketing department.
Rag on What Car? if you must but they tend to take things as they find them, and in the case of the GT86 it's all foam and no beer. I'm sure Jeremy Clarkson will love it though.
(In fact, £10 says his review mentions every one of the negative points I made above, yet in the final few moments we learn of a dramatic volte-face: none of it matters because heavens above, it's only the best driver's car in the world! Until next week at least.)
But have you actualy driven one or were your Efforts Thwarted, in which case please drive one before you try to evaluate it.
Your tennis racquet analogy may apply to all other Toyotas which are pretty much like white goods - a fridge either works or it doesn't - but the GT-86 (as you may discover if you actually drive one) is not like this.
If you drive one and don't appreciate it you are probably on the wrong forum anyway...
I got to drive one a couple of weeks ago and it was fantastic (even compared with BMW's for the last 7+ years).
Thankfully someone has finally realised that a car of this size can have RWD, sharp handling and a roof that cannot be opened with a Stanley knife! In the UK we surely need a roof and maybe air-con far more often than a convertible!
Sigh...I refer you to;
Renault Clio Williams
All of which had...cheap plastics, little brand leverage (at the time), weren't that fast, weren't especially cheap.
By your measures; All pointless...
the crux of this discussion was that neither you nor I can make judgements like that. What you appreciate in a car is not what I appreciate in a car, and vice versa, but we enjoy cars nonetheless. It's like being told by some tiresome opera snob that I can't possibly be a music lover if I don't like Don Giovanni. Bollocks.
As for the next reply, you conveniently fail to mention that cars like the Clio and 205 GTI were unquestionably performance car bargains of the time, and that the Williams particularly had brand recognition by the lorry load - at the time it was released, Williams F1 were mopping up with the unstoppable Renault V10. And the MX5's rivals had disappeared a decade before. The design brief was to recreate the small British sports car niche that no longer existed, so it was as unique as it was inexpensive.
Mind you the Pug and the Renault were small FWD hatchbacks and thus can't possibly be considered in the same breath as the sainted GT86 because (cont'd on page 97...)