I will keep my 95 SC400 Renaissance red lexus.
I’m thinking the people who really want a new Supra will continue to wait until one comes out and not buy a BMW.
It costs too much because it’s a BMW.
But it’s an old Nissan! Never will be a classic, handling is shite and bad Nissan reliability to boot
Cheeper than the Z4 better handling, and toyota dealer support.
Nice ride, but looks like a mid 2000’s M Coupe to me…
Blows me away how many people will state something in black and white despite contrary evidence right under their noses - and expect to be taken seriously. How could you write this, presumably immediately after reading a hardcore Supra fan saying he had ordered one?
Then you must have missed the fairly prominent intro saying this was going to be a perspective piece from a Supra fan. Or do you open a packet of macaroni and complain that it’s not spaghetti?
He gave us his perspective on the car, I gave mine. Is that not allowed? I didn’t tell him not to buy one, I just said I wouldn’t. As I stated, I have owned four Lexus vehicles, and I own one now. Had I went to the Lexus dealership and found the Lexus I was looking at was built by BMW, and had a BMW engine, I wouldn’t buy it. I owned a BMW, they are not as reliable as something built by Toyota. If your a fan of the new Supra, by all means buy it and I wish you good luck with it. Oh and by the way, if I buy a packet of macaroni, when I open it I expect it to be macaroni.
Near the turn of the century, I installed a 2JZ Supra Twin Turbo engine in my Lexus SC300, a rare model with the 5 speed manual. With aftermarket turbo controllers, I was running about 18 PSI boost (as compared to, something like the stock 14PSI or less as I recall). The engine developed close to 450 HP, more than any sane person could want, and I had some great drives with that car. In my mind, the original Lexus SC300/400’s were the epitome of 90’s styling, fit and finish, but, of course, the design is a bit long in the tooth by today’s standards.
Nevertheless, no matter how many fancy gadgets the 5th gen “Supra” boasts, I just cannot wrap my head around the gawdawful styling of this creature… bumps and swirls and break lines throughout the car for no functional or visual reason. It is almost as though they designed the original prototype in clay, and then it melted down to what is left. That gaping Guppy mouth that only a mother could love, on a body completely devoid of any chrome. Call me old school, but this design just doesn’t hold a candle to the MK IV, in spite of its age.
If you want a car that looks like this, then I’d say save yourself a bundle and just buy one of those Subaru sport coupes. Unless you put a big banner on the front, no one will be the wiser.
Looks like a mouth-breathing Carp.
For my taste this is one unfortunate looking car. My first reaction was that it looks like a study hall sketch with every current styling cliché mashed together on one set of 4 wheels. Or maybe eight designers each got to design one eighth of the car. However it got there it isn’t good.
Nicely written article. I’m sure the car looks very good in person. Seems like many manufacturers are fond of the horseshoe grill. Side view kind of looks like my Dodge.
Frankly, I’m surprised at the comments here, but as we all know, opinions are like noses, everyone has one. I thought the article by Mr. Stevens was written well enough and interesting, coming from the perspective of a life-long Supra fanatic. He set the table on his history with the Supra and transitioned to the track day ride, and his thoughts on the car and it’s development background. Good automotive writing involves information as well as the human aspect in order to garner an article worthy of printing. One without the other is quite boring.
Joint efforts between manufacturers are nothing new and to denigrate some for liking the final product, or for being of a particular age, is a bit much. GM/Toyota, Ford/Mazda, Ford/Nissan, Chrysler/Mitsubishi, and probably many more I can’t think of, are all joint efforts that produced some great vehicles. Why wouldn’t this be any different? Only time will tell, but both of these companies, especially Toyota, pride themselves in producing great cars. It wouldn’t have come to fruition if either side had any inkling of producing a less-than-worthy product.
If you don’t like the styling or the joint venture you are entitled. Just don’t attack the guy who wants one and is passionate about driving. Besides, it sounds like some of the stuff in Mr. Stevens stable could spank most of the rides of the posters here. If you want a better perspective, why don’t you go drive one. He did and we all know the result. Or maybe pass judgment on something and continue to live in a bubble. Your choice either way, of course.
Like many enthusiasts, I still prefer the option of manual transmission in my sports cars. Not only for the visceral connection between man and machine, but also cost and complexity. I’d much rather replace a clutch than a megabucks auto transmission. Doesn’t BMW make the transmission for Mini Coopers? How has that little foray turned out?
Toyota should sell quite a few of these, possibly more than BMW moves the new Z4, because this thing is styled as a serious upgrade for the BRZ/FRS/86 crowd (read: younger, wouldn’t look at a US car). Most of them can’t get around the Millennial/Gen Z anti-theft device, either, and paddle-shifting is just like the games they were raised on.
Power isn’t an issue in real life, only in the trip-to-Portugal world of car magazines where they can beat half the life out of the test vehicle in a day and put it away wet before some fine dining. Just about everything is fast – today’s econoboxes can get you put in jail overnight. In a previous era my Mk II Supra was a wonderful GT. Long-legged, luxurious and comfy as pair of Italian loafers, it never aspired to the track or the Stoplight GP.
I’ve tried the new Z4 and, no shocker, BMW has improved on my own gen-two Z4. Not mentioned in the articles I’ve read is the huge gain in ride quality. At least part of it has to come from the Michelin tires (Pilot Super Sports?), whereas my car has Bridgestone run-flats, which were also standard equipment on Flintstones cars. But while its turbo-four engine can really get the Z4 moving, it lacks the visceral qualities of a straight-six with or without the added compression. The cloth top is a delight and doesn’t let much sound in (we’re looking at you, MX-5) but there’s always the security issue. And the new Z4’s rear-quarter visibility is a big step backward, verging on dangerous.
I expect it will be fun and enlightening to add the new Supra to this equation.
Alfa called, they want their grille back.
One of the great things about Hagerty articles, they introduce niche cars I had no idea that there was even a fan club. Hypercars, supercars, tiny cars, and the new “mini-Mustang”, although it looks nothing like the old ones. I remember the old ones that had Mustang taillights, but never thought of them as performance cars. Toyota has had the pedestrian/disposable car market down pat, but performance was never a part of the cars that couldn’t maintain speed up the Grapevine, so this is cool to see them make a fastish car. If it’s actually fast, I didn’t get that from the article. It has styling stuff, but will it perform?
As for purchasing one, if I was in the market and money was no object, I would have to pass, never mind I could get a Redeye for nearly the same monthly payments. I’ve had my experience with BMW built cars, and I like to keep my cars for a long time (still have my first car I bought 45 years ago).
I had a really cool fun MINI. 205 hp, Roots supercharger, and a computer system that made the car ride on rails. It also had a 4 year bumper to bumper warranty. That’s when stuff started breaking, right at 4 years. The right front turn signal broke off, for example. No accident, it failed due to metal fatigue, and that was the design. The repair would have cost $600, luckily it was just before the warranty expired, but the writing was on the wall. I sold it shortly thereafter. The car was fun, but they designed in a very short life span, making the ultimate “disposable car”. Will this Supra hold up over the years with BMW construction?
As a BMW Owner (08 328 Sport), and the new owner of a 18 SC500, I feel duty bound to comment. The Supra name evokes visions from growing up poor in the 70’s, we all loved seeing a Supra, and could never afford one. Now the offer is a BMW/Toyota version of a car that is expected to sell in sufficient numbers to warrant profit for each manafacturer. BMW used to be a purer car to drive, Toyotas from old also were a unique experience. What you see here is the reality of modern design, costs, and an approach that allows each area to be moulded to allow production of a car that otherwise would not happen. The straight 6 of BMW was a legend, and then the economics of reality forced turbos, and slush boxes. That is reality of new, modern vehicles mass produced. If you desire a pure stick and 3 pedals, go get an older version of your favourite vehicle, as the clutch is goin away. My new SC18 also has only 2 pedals, yet the 8 speed auto feels wonderful, so you CAN make a car drive and feel great with a smart tranny, but the costs to do it correctly are well above the BMW/Supra point of entry. Lexus gets it right for just over double the cost of this Supra. Wait a few years, and buy one certified to get the reliability and lower cost that this shared model likely will not provide. BMWs are complex and pricy to fix and maintain. That is reality, so factor it into the cost equation. My 60K mile 328 is fantastic at what it does, yet it is worth less than tenK after 11 years of pure fun ownership, and pricy maintenance. At least you do not have toe deal with old series Run Flats! Go drive and enjoy… and yes, that sound is rare. Cash (In Washington DC)…