spwolf

lol, so Toyota cant sell 35k coupe, but they can sell 60k coupe.

right

common sense is lost on 3 of you.

gymratter

the $35k-$40k market is full of muscle cars like the Mustang, Camro, and Challenger. a Supra is NOT a muscle car. why do you think sales of the Z sucks... why does Honda, Mazda, Subaru, Hyundai, and Kia not offer a sports car in this price range?

think about it. what is old Supra most compared to most? corvettes yes? does anyone offered a direct competitor to the base C7? no, didn't think so. so should Toyota just compete with one C7 or join a already crowded field of Mustangs, Camros, and Challengers and where the Z has failed.

a $50k+ Supra is pretty reasonable. that isnt too expensive and not super cheap either. if you ask me that is the prefect price range. if you read the statements and watch the video it has been said over and over. this will be a halo car. no where did anyone said it was suppose to be cheap. what do you think the FRS is for?

despite costing almost $20k more the C6, it has pretty much always outsold the 370z. by your logic the Z is suppose to out sale the C6 because it is cheaper. but in reality it is the other way around.

2005: 32,489
2006: 36,518
2007: 33,685
2008: 26,971
2009: 13,934
2010: 12,624
2011: 13,164
2012: 14,132
2013: 17,291

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

gymratter

look at it this way. what do people want?

A. 300hp $35k Supra that would get killed by a $23k V6 Mustang in both sales and performance?

or

B. a 400-450hp $50k Supra that would really only have the C7 as competiton?

across the forums/boards, and blogs people are going with (B).

Vh_Supra26

iTrader: (1)

Just because a company makes a somewhat affordable car with crap under the hood doesn't mean it's going to sell. Also people are saying to expect a new Supra to be priced around the RC350. RC is a $45k car starting, so does a $50k price tag for a new Supra seems that far off? The old SC and MK4 Supra had a pretty close starting price. I don't know why we are going back and forth on pricing. Not one, but two Toyota officials have already given us a reasonable price range.

Initial B

iTrader: (2)

I would buy a Supra for $35k with 300 hp. It's been too long since I owned my '97 TT 6-spd, and far too long since Toyota offered an affordable sports car with some grunt. If the car Toyota releases is a turbo 6 (which it needs to be), then the power will not be a factor.

The Z is not doing well currently because a) word of mouth has spread of the oil cooling issues the Z's have or had...b) many import buyers want BOOST, not continuously punched-out NA engines...and c) because it's a 2 seater with poor cargo area.

They should make it a 2+2 and use a smaller displacement turbo 6. I guarantee it would sell. I'd buy one, and I have had no interest in the 350/370.

In general, most people do not cross-shop a Z with a Mustang. People who buy imports want nice interiors and tech features. Domestic buyers don't really care...they want HP above all else.

The FR-S with its mighty 150 lb-ft is not a Z competitor at all, lol. The freakin Civic SI is more a competitor to the FR-S, lmao.

If Nissan takes the Z too far down-market, they will ruin the history of the car. Where is the Silvia replacement that has been rumored? That is the car that should be tasked with competing with the FR-S in the $25-30k market.

Vh_Supra26

iTrader: (1)

The $35k-$40k range is dominated by American Muscle. If Toyota enters that segment with underpowered Supra it will get slaughter like with the Z.

spwolf

you are spending a lot of times on this, while still showing little understanding of car sales, car market and Toyota as a company.

By your definition, FR-S should have sold 0... why would anyone buy FR-S, when there is a V6 Mustang and Camaro, for less? Who is going to buy 200hp 4cly non turbo car?

Yet 86, BRZ and FR-S sold almost 100k last year, world wide. In fact, if you look at USA alone, FRS did not sell a lot more than much more expensive Z.

Toyota will cover $35k sports car market, just like they covered $25k market. Or like how they cover 20k, 25k, 30k, 35k sedan markets. 4 different cars from same platform, all within $15k and selling millions world wide.

You have to understand why is Toyota building these cars. They are building them to ignite passion about Toyota brand so people dont dismiss them automatically.

That means that if they build a Supra, it will have to sell worldwide. If it sells worldwide, it means that it has to be priced at maximum $35k in the USA for starting model.

Now, they may build some crazy $60k car version that will sell 100 per month, but they will not build only that. They dont throw away money and their time into the wind to win forum wars.

It has nothing to do with Corvette at all, which is a brand into itself and sells only in the USA.

If Toyota thinks they can sell 200 RC-F's per month, which is wonderful car, from luxury brand, fully optioned at $71k, with V8 engine, you really have to be something else to think their $60k Toyota version would sell more.

All these arguments make so little sense. Toyota does this all the time... they built RC and now they will build cheaper "Supra" off the same platform. They did it yesterday, they are doing it today and they will do it tomorrow. They will do whatever they can to maximize the sales and return on investment.

Toyota is a global brand, that sells over 10 million cars worldwide. If hey build Supra, it will be sold everywhere, and it will have to not lose money for Toyota.

Now I am trying to explain all of this to you and we completely lost track of actual TF-1 discussion, instead of that we are arguing if Toyota needs to build Avalon since Camry sells good.

gymratter

yeah and you are some of the very few that will. don't think anyone on Supraforums would agree with you.

sales of the 350z were pretty good and were actually higher than the FRS. so that throws out your whole 2+2 augment.

the Si is more of a Z competitor? The Si is a cheap fail wheel drive that doesn't come anywhere close to the Z.

have you sat in a mustang lately? the interior is pretty nice.

I have no interested in the Z either. I'm just pointing out the fact that what you want in a new Supra isn't working so well for Nissan.

Initial B

iTrader: (2)

The Supra or whatever it ends up being, MIGHT sell decently at $50k upon release, but if you think it will be a big hit in the $50-60k range, I disagree. This is not the early 2000s where people pulled out their home equity to live beyond their means. Those days are over, at least for a long while. And the people that DO have the disposable income to drop 60 grand on a car will look towards the RC offerings.

This car needs to be in the ballpark for the mainstream buyer. A starting point of mid-30's would be wise if they plan to sell these in volume and avoid becoming too expensive for their target market again. They don't have the luxury of counting on old, nostalgic, baby boomers to buy up Vettes and the overweight, low-rent interior-having excuses for the current Mustang/Camaro/Challenger. Those cars (aside from the new C7 possibly) are not appealing at all to many younger buyers.

gymratter

the FRS is a different car than the Mustang. it is smaller and lighter. and comes with two cylinders less. it's a totally different animal and you know that.

what are you talking about? sales of the 370z last year were awful when compared to the FRS. 6561 370z were sold when compared to 18,327 FRS.

after all this time you fail to comprehend quotes that are right in front of you. If they are planning an affordable water down version then why didn't they just state $35k-$60k.

you also fail to take note that Toyota's chairman doesn't want a 4 banger Supra and yet you keep on saying they will do 2.0t with a $35k price tag.

its a halo car. they generally dont make any money at all. they lost money on the LFA just to make a statement. im pretty sure they wont be making much if any on the upcoming Lexus LF-LC either.

there is no market for a under powered supra for $35k. the Z is a great example.

why wouldn't a $50k supra not sale more or about the same as a $70k RCF? The two are aimed at different group of people. so will a ATS V coupe take away buyers from the C7?

you also forget that the SC300/400 was priced just about the same as both the NA and TT Supra. seeing that the RC starts at $45k is a $50k Supra really that much off base?

I would buy a $50k supra over a $70k RCF any day.

how do you know a $50k+ supra will only sale a 100 units a month? The 100k GTR sales more than that. Please stop making numbers up.

it seems that you just make things up base on your wants, needs and ideas on what you think a new supra would be. you really have no facts or quotes behind any of your claims.

gymratter

again, it's a halo car. It's just not about sales numbers as much as making a statement.

like I said before, we have a price range from Toyota officials. so that's what I will be going by until there is more info or an update.

Nowhere did Kevin hunter said this car was going to be for young buyers. another clue is it Is wearing a Toyota logo and not a scion logo.

the FRS is for the youth crowd. If y'all watch the video they drop little hints and clues.

you are now making an assumption that the youth isn't into American Muscle.

I'm not trying to fight with you guys. I'm just going by what toyota has said in the past and just last week.

Initial B

iTrader: (2)

The people on Supraforums (I'm a member also, but never go on there anymore) are a vocal few. Sure, there are those on there who will put down deposits regardless of price. But many on there are internet ballers who talk like they'll spend $60k on a Supra, but in reality would have to wait 2-3 years until they become affordable on the used market. Is that what you want to happen AGAIN with the Supra??!! Think for a moment.

And do you think sales of a 2-seater Supra would be the same or greater than one with at least the option to carry a kid or two?

I never said the SI is a Z competitor - I said the FR-S is closer to the SI market than to the Z's. And yes, I realize the Civic has fail wheel drive. Which makes my point sting even more.

And yes, I've sat in the current Mustang. It's sad.

gymratter

1st off the FT-1 is a 2+2 please look up your facts before posting.

even if they do buy something else there will be a new group of buyers waiting.

what are you smoking? an Si is not a FRS competitor. it's more than just about power. What does the Z and FRS offered that can't be found on a Si. fun, styling, and more important RWD.

Initial B

iTrader: (2)

I never stated that the Supra WILL be a 2-seater, I was responding to your sales numbers argument which implied that a 2 seater chassis will sell more than a 2+2, assuming other things equal:

"sales of the 350z were pretty good and were actually higher than the FRS. so that throws out your whole 2+2 augment."

This is apples to oranges and makes no sense. If the 2+2 FRS were made in the same era as the 350, and had the same HP/TQ, then it would have definitely sold better.


A few posts ago, you've said both: "the FRS is kinda a Z competitor" and "the FRS is for the youth crowd". So tell me, are there more youths driving around in new 370Z's ore more in Civic SI's? Again, I merely rebutted that FR-S is closer in intended market to the Civic (which is a car that I despise, primarily due to ricers) rather than the 370Z. If you can't understand that, then let's just agree to disagree.

gymratter

I never said a two seater car will always out sale a 2+2 or the other way around. you were the one that said the FRS sold better than a 370z because it is a 2+2. I was simply stating that may be pricing has a role as well because the 350z had good sales.

Than you brought in a "two seater supra" into things and which does not exist or really have to do with what we are talking about.

do you have the numbers on the average age of the buyers of both cars? because if you don't than you are just making another assumption. also just because the average age for buyers of two cars are similar doesn't mean they are competitors. i guess that would mean that Lexus and Buick are direct competitors because the average age of buyers for both brands are close.

when it comes down to it, claims of a new "$35k supra" is not supported by anything from toyota. at this point they have not given us any clues on such a model. nor have they drop any hints about a "4 banger supra". I'm not saying if they will or will not. I am just going by what we have been given so far.

unlike the two of you, I am not auguring about what I think a new supra should or should not be. I am however stating what was told to us by two Toyota officials. could things change? Yes. could the market take another big hit and toyota just kills the project? Yes. the two of you could be right about a base model in that range. closer to the production they may tell us that a $35k base model is coming. but as of right now that is not supported by any statements or interview by any toyota officials.

I understand what the two of you are hoping to see with a new supra. but that doesnt make it a fact. on the other hand i am just going by what kevin hunter has said. so we are never going to see eye to eye at this point. Agreed, lets agreed to disagreed.