The Case For And Against A 260bhp Turbo Toyota GT86
The old adage that suggests you should be careful what you wish for seems particularly fitting for the Toyota GT86. Car enthusiasts the world over have bemoaned the sports car’s alleged lack of power and ‘torque hole’ ever since its launch in 2012, and with leaked details from a recent dealer conference suggesting the next GT86 will be turbocharged and be good for more like 260bhp, both of those apparent issues will be fixed.
The news was not universally welcomed, however. And in some ways, we get why. Whether or not this is a good call for what’s set to be christened the ‘GR86’ is open for debate, so we thought we’d put all the arguments for and against the power move on one page. Let’s get started with the cons…
Against
Criticise it for being underpowered all you want, but the GT86 is an incredibly rare beast - a naturally-aspirated sports car. N/A performance cars are rocking horse excrement anyway, but atmospheric rear-drive coupes? As far as the UK market goes, your only other non-supercar options are a Porsche Cayman GT4/GTS (expensive) or a Ford Mustang GT (not a sports car).
The FA20 Subaru flat-four (rebranded by Toyota as the ‘4U-GSE) needs to be worked hard, with peak power of 197bhp arriving at 7000rpm. But isn’t that the main draw? Particularly when that last-gasp change can be done with a slick six-speed manual gearbox? And while 0-62mph in 7.6 seconds doesn’t sound like much, it’s arguably fast enough for a good country road.
In contrast, the FA24 set for use in the ‘GR86’ makes its peak power at just 5600rpm. You’d hope that the top end might be in for a little tweak before the engine goes into the Toyota and in Subaru’s jointly-developed BRZ (right now it’s only used in more humdrum stuff), but even if it’s given a comparable redline to the FA20, it’s not going to be an engine you need to spin up to the limiter.
You’ll be swapping the brilliant responsiveness of an N/A engine for frustrating turbo lag, removing one of the car’s most unique features, and making it more like every other performance car out there right now.
Then we have to consider weight. Tipping the scales at under 1300kg, the ‘86 is not a heavy car. The GR Supra, even in inline-four guise, is well over 100kg bulkier. Adding more displacement, a turbocharger and all the associated plumbing means the GR86 is unlikely to be as lithe as its predecessor. The engine won’t be as compact either, meaning the central point of its mass won’t sit quite as low in the car.
For
It’s probably best we kick off with the obvious: speed. Yes, I know only a few paragraphs ago I stated that the GT86’s performance is more than adequate for road use, but on the occasions we’ve tried a modified one making 250bhp or thereabouts, it’s felt like a great match for the chassis.
It’s enough go to make for thrilling straight-line performance without being excessive. And you can wave goodbye to the FA20’s torque hole - the FA24 is good for a peak of 277lb ft, available between 2000 and 4800rpm.
It’ll be a much more tuneable engine than the N/A FA20 too. Extracting a significant power increase from the current GT86 engine is an expensive business since you need to plough at least £5000 into a turbocharger or supercharger conversion. The already turbocharged FA24 will be capable of significant gains with minimal fiddling, and some firms are already playing around with the engine in examples of the Subaru Ascent SUV, the first vehicle to receive it.
While it’s a fair point that turbocharged performance cars are boringly common these days, we should point out that the GR86’s powertrain won’t just be any old turbo mill. As a boxer engine, it’ll still be far more characterful than the average inline-four, and remember, turbocharged fast cars are Subaru’s thing. The next GR86 and the BRZ will be - if you like - Subaru WRXs in compact coupe form. Which sounds awfully tempting.
It’d be wise to expect an increase in price relative to the current model, but it won’t be a big one. The GR86 can’t be too expensive, otherwise, it’d end up competing with the 2.0-litre GR Supra. A 250bhp+ rear-wheel drive coupe for the price of a mid-tier hot hatch seems like a good deal.
Finally, we need to bear in mind the business case. Which sounds boring, but a reality check is needed - making a car that ticks boxes for petrolheads doesn’t equal something people are actually going to buy. The GT86 is one of the most enthusiast-focused cars you can buy right now, but that doesn’t sell in the real world - the Audi TT outsells it by a factor of eight. If Toyota can broaden the appeal of the next one by making it faster and more luxurious while keeping it fun and rear-wheel drive, that’s surely a win for everyone.
Conclusion
Ditching the atmospheric engine seems like a shame given the dominance of turbochargers in the performance car world, but the GR86 is set to gain much more than it loses. The enthusiast focus won’t be quite the same, but since the alternative might have been no next-gen car at all, I’m not sure we’re in a position to moan.
It’s a question of maintaining a balancing act between satisfying petrolheads and keeping more general car buyers interested. It’ll be a little while before we know how successfully Toyota has done that. You wouldn’t want to be against the company that surprised us all with the GR Yaris though, so our hopes are high.
Whatever we say doesn’t matter, of course. Even if the GR86 is a blinder, we’ve no doubt the debate over its powertrain will rage on for years after its launch. Just look at what happened with its predecessor.
Growing up on a diet of World Rally Championship highlights and lengthy Gran Turismo 2 sessions, a life in cars was as good as inevitable for Matt.
Comments
I understand how turbochargers make boost in an exponential manner (as far as I understand) and I always figured since superchargers are belt driven, speed of supercharger = k * speed of crankshaft with k being a constant. Am I getting this wrong ?
An Mx5 is another brand new N/A cheap, fun sports car that can rival a Toyota gt86…
Something changed in the poll system.
It only shows a blank screen now.
In the app and on a mobile browser.
Full disclosure: I own a 2013 BRZ so I have my own bias.
It should be noted that the other big rumour is that it will be on the TNGA-L platform which means the new car is expected to be bigger, heavier and more expensive than the outgoing car. With only 260hp, the final acceleration numbers will only be a mild bump from the current car.
Even if we ignore that rumour and suppose they manage to build one with 260hp and managed to keep the weight, handling and price close to the existing car, it’s still not going to change much in terms of sales. When journos get the car, instead of calling it slow, they will say it’s what the last generation car should have been from the beginning but it’s fallen behind the curve now. A Camaro and WRX has ~280hp, a V6 Camry or Ecoboost Mustang have ~310, and are all within cross shopping range. Most of these cars are also available in a higher performance trim level.
My point is that 260hp isn’t a number that will excite anyone who already dismisses the current car for being slow. I think it’s a waste to chase the sales of people who are complaining about the power because they’re impossible to please. These people need to see 350hp as a minimum to care at all. Case-in-point, even the new Supra rated at 335 HP had many people decide it wasn’t worth their time based on it’s power figure. How can you blame them when you can get into an M2 or AMG C 43, or 718 Cayman for similar money? It’s even worse if you’re in North America where you can get a Camaro SS or Mustang GT for 10k less and even a base Corvette is similar money and all 3 of these cars boast at least 450hp.
Personally, I’d rather see the car remain reliable, affordable, light and fun, they really just need to do something about the torque dip. A modest peak power bump would be appreciated, probably whatever is possible by going to an NA 2.4L motor with a similar redline to the existing motor, but that isn’t required if you ask me.
Let’s take a look at what Toyota recently had to offer, and what will be soon offered :
We have a 2 seater coupe, the Supra with a 3.0L 6cyl turbo rwd good for 340hp (4.3sc 0-62), and a 2.0L 4cyl turbo rwd good for 260hp (5.2sc 0-62). Both ZF8 btw.
We will have a Compact 260ch, 1.6L 3cyl turbo and 4WD car, the Yaris GR. 5.2sc 0-62.
We recently had a 210hp 1.8L supercharged FWD Yaris GRMN. 6.4sc 0-62. No longer available and very limited.
We have a 2.0L 200hp rwd NA Toyota GT86. 7.6sc 0-62. Soon to be replaced.
The only thing a 2.0L 260hp GT86 would have over the 2.0L Supra…is a manual tranny (a thing that would have been simpler for Toyota to directly put as an option for the A90) and 4 seats. Imo it’s too little to give it a distinctive identity.
The answer could have been to find a bigger NA engine for it, a cooperation with Nissan to implement a revised version of the VQ37 (to keep emissions as low as virtually possible) could have been interesting, even with a bit lowered power (let’s say around 300hp, half more than the current one). NA V6, manual, RWD, something lacking for Toyo now. However I suppose that it’s really too much of a headache on a “emission point” to go this way… Moreover it may have increased it’s weight too much…
The 2nd solution (and maybe the best), would have been to take the 4cyl 1.8L supercharged of the Yaris GR, boost its power as much as possible and improve its emissions a bit. 240hp-350nm would have been more than enough (and considering the weight of this motor, the 86 could have lost like 100lbs in the process).
But let’s be honest, on a pure performance, emissions and cost-development point, the 2.0L Turbo probably makes more sense…