Toyotaness

[MrH]

I think they should have just sold as a Toyota and skipped the Scion/Subu versions.

Well, they couldn't skip the Subaru version.  It was a joint development project with them.  Subaru did all the engineering and manufacturing, they had to get a vehicle out of the whole thing.

If they had badged this as a Toyota, that would be the death of Scion.  Their lineup is weak, and taking the most sporty thing Toyota has made in years and passing up badging it as a Scion would mean Toyota has given up on it as a brand.  This is the exact vehicle Scion was designed for.

[Raza]

Well, they couldn't skip the Subaru version.  It was a joint development project with them.  Subaru did all the engineering and manufacturing, they had to get a vehicle out of the whole thing.

If they had badged this as a Toyota, that would be the death of Scion.  Their lineup is weak, and taking the most sporty thing Toyota has made in years and passing up badging it as a Scion would mean Toyota has given up on it as a brand.  This is the exact vehicle Scion was designed for.

Well....Scion should die.  No point in weakening a good product to attempt to save a dying brand. 

[ifcar]

This is the exact vehicle Scion was designed for.

I'm not sure I agree. The point of Scion was to bring in young people with cheap, funky cars who would later graduate into bigger, more expensive Toyotas. There's nowhere else in the Toyota lineup for an FR-S owner to go, and no part of that product that would make them in any way attached to Toyota for, say, their wife's minivan.

The iQ is more of a perfect-fit car than the FR-S, really.

[Raza]

I'm not sure I agree. The point of Scion was to bring in young people with cheap, funky cars who would later graduate into bigger, more expensive Toyotas. There's nowhere else in the Toyota lineup for an FR-S owner to go, and no part of that product that would make them in any way attached to Toyota for, say, their wife's minivan.

The iQ is more of a perfect-fit car than the FR-S, really.

I agree.  And at the price point, it's a turn-off for a lot of people who would be buying their own cars.  Sure, if you're in high school or college and your parents are footing the bill, a $25,000+ car isn't a lot of money, but 25 grand isn't exactly what people find in their couches post-college in a shitty economy. 

[sportyaccordy]

25K for a car is a ton of money for the avg family, even for dad

I agree though that it should have just been the Celica, with a beefier 6 cylinder version (maybe with the V6 from the IS) being the Supra

Scion needs to go back to its "roots"... its lineup went from cool, funky and hip to stodgy and "GM like" in one generation. Really they should market all their compact cars (including the Yaris) under the Scion umbrella, but make them funky

[Rich]

There's nowhere else in the Toyota lineup for an FR-S owner to go, 

(I know, I know, they are all sold out)

[Madman]

Well...

1.  They do have different front clips.  The two pictures are in the post you quoted!  I'm questioning if you even know what you're saying when you say "front clip".  Intake is all different, fog lights are different.  The entire shape is different.

2.  You have zero clue what differentiating things actually costs.  It has nothing to do with the difference in assembly time, and everything to do with tooling costs.  Tools costs millions of dollars.  Money that you have to pay up front before you ever make a dime on a vehicle.  OEMs have very strict capital spending plans and requirements.  If they can't pay for that tool, plus the cost of capital for it for the first few years until you can pay it back, they won't do it.

The subaru is relatively low volume compared to the Toyota and Scion version.  They're not going to dump a ton of money into tools to make minor changes most customers won't care about.  They need the differentiation between the drive models to drive enough additional sales to pay for the additional tools.  You can't reskin the entire damn thing with that kind of volume and ever expect to gain enough sales to cover the enormous tooling bill.

Different headlights?  They look EXACTLY the same!  The front fenders and hood also appear to be identical.  These bolt-on pieces are fairly cheap to produce, so Toyota/Subaru could have easily given the nose of the car a more individual look.  It's done all the time.

Prime example.......







See?  Different headlights, front fenders, hood and bumper skin.  Same core structure underneath.  And VW could have made these two look even more different if they really wanted to.

And I never said Toyota/Subaru should reskin the whole damn car.  But they could have at least TRIED to make the two look a little bit different.  Sure, this car is a thousand times better than, say a Chevy Celebrity/Pontiac 6000 or a Cavalier/Sunbird.  But the badge engineering is just as lazy.

[Raza]

Madman, this is an affordable enthusiast's car in a down economy.  Stop looking a gift horse in the mouth.

[Madman]

Madman, this is an affordable enthusiast's car in a down economy.  Stop looking a gift horse in the mouth.

I have no doubt this will be a good, fun little car.  I just find it curious how everyone beats up on GM for badge engineering but when the Japanese are guilty of doing the exact same same thing the enthusiast community gives them a free pass.  Double standard, methinks?

[sportyaccordy]

I have no doubt this will be a good, fun little car.  I just find it curious how everyone beats up on GM for badge engineering but when the Japanese are guilty of doing the exact same same thing the enthusiast community gives them a free pass.  Double standard, methinks?

Well for starters, GM got shit about badge engineering because they were 1 company peddling 1 shitty car under 5 marques. This is a collaboration between 2 manufacturers, so why you have such trouble comprehending they would each get a version of the product is beyond me. Plus like Raza said the car is actually worth building, so crying about what its branded as (and that goes to you anti-Scion folks too) is silly.

[GoCougs]

Different headlights?  They look EXACTLY the same!  The front fenders and hood also appear to be identical.  These bolt-on pieces are fairly cheap to produce, so Toyota/Subaru could have easily given the nose of the car a more individual look.  It's done all the time.

Prime example.......







See?  Different headlights, front fenders, hood and bumper skin.  Same core structure underneath.  And VW could have made these two look even more different if they really wanted to.

And I never said Toyota/Subaru should reskin the whole damn car.  But they could have at least TRIED to make the two look a little bit different.  Sure, this car is a thousand times better than, say a Chevy Celebrity/Pontiac 6000 or a Cavalier/Sunbird.  But the badge engineering is just as lazy.

ANY product development project is under HUGE budget constraints when it comes to COGS. Sure it's a $25k product but $25 here or $50 there is a big deal. It's not lazy, it's engineering + finance + product planning.

[MrH]

I'm not sure I agree. The point of Scion was to bring in young people with cheap, funky cars who would later graduate into bigger, more expensive Toyotas. There's nowhere else in the Toyota lineup for an FR-S owner to go, and no part of that product that would make them in any way attached to Toyota for, say, their wife's minivan.

The iQ is more of a perfect-fit car than the FR-S, really.

False.  Next IS is built off the same platform.  Perfect next car for people growing up with an FR-S.

Different headlights?  They look EXACTLY the same!  The front fenders and hood also appear to be identical.  These bolt-on pieces are fairly cheap to produce, so Toyota/Subaru could have easily given the nose of the car a more individual look.  It's done all the time.

Prime example.......



See?  Different headlights, front fenders, hood and bumper skin.  Same core structure underneath.  And VW could have made these two look even more different if they really wanted to.

And I never said Toyota/Subaru should reskin the whole damn car.  But they could have at least TRIED to make the two look a little bit different.  Sure, this car is a thousand times better than, say a Chevy Celebrity/Pontiac 6000 or a Cavalier/Sunbird.  But the badge engineering is just as lazy.

You clearly didn't read my post.  It already has a different nose, so stop arguing that point.  And you really want to compare it to a Jetta/Golf scenario?  The difference in volume between the two platforms is enormous.  You're talking about spreading fixed costs.  3-4 times as many vehicles means 1/3 to 1/4 as expensive to do.

The headlights are different too, btw.

And they are two different brands.  They both need to profit off the joint development program.  How else do you suggest they do that

[Raza]

Not to mention the Golf chassis underpinned not only the Jetta, but also the Golf Plus, the Audi TT, the Audi A3, the Skoda Octavia, the Seat Leon (or Ibiza, I can't remember), and I'm sure there were others.  It was a much higher volume car with a huge set of cars over which to spread and the recoup the costs.  The FRBRSZ is a drop in the bucket compared to what Volkswagen did with that chassis.  Production would likely be a week's sales of the A4 chassis.

[ifcar]

I'd agree with the comments that spending a bit more money to make them look more different would have been wisely spent. Certainly if they do already have different headlights, they should be investing to make headlights that don't look nearly identical.

I can see them not taking the time to totally restyle the two cars, but they are virtually indistinguishable, probably more so than any other two current cars sold concurrently in the same market. At least you could tell a 1984 Buick from a 1984 Pontiac with a quick glance at the grille; there are minor tweaks, to the fascia of the BRZ and FR-S but just nothing that indicates which one it is.

[Cookie Monster]

I'd agree with the comments that spending a bit more money to make them look more different would have been wisely spent. Certainly if they do already have different headlights, they should be investing to make headlights that don't look nearly identical.

I can see them not taking the time to totally restyle the two cars, but they are virtually indistinguishable, probably more so than any other two current cars sold concurrently in the same market. At least you could tell a 1984 Buick from a 1984 Pontiac with a quick glance at the grille; there are minor tweaks, to the fascia of the BRZ and FR-S but just nothing that indicates which one it is.

Does it really matter? It's such a small volume seller that most people probably won't even know what it is. The people who do know what it is will probably be able to spot the differences.

[TurboDan]

It's how business is done.  You have to sell products.  I'm not upset at manufacturers making boring cars--it's perfect if they do that to sell the rest of us fun ones.  It seems like Toyota is getting their balls back with the FRS.  Hopefully it doesn't suffer the same ignominious fate as the MR2 Spyder did. 

I agree. But it's a shame that if you want a driver's midsize car, you now have to buy an A4 or a 3er instead of a Passat. 

That the consumer who can only afford a mainstream vehicle is limited to American and Japanese mediocrity, or a phony, watered down German option, is sad. Hopefully the Fusion will prove to be an alternative.

The issue, of course, will be the potential canibalization of sales between the Tiggie and Q3, just like the Passat and A4 of old.

[TurboDan]

I have no doubt this will be a good, fun little car.  I just find it curious how everyone beats up on GM for badge engineering but when the Japanese are guilty of doing the exact same same thing the enthusiast community gives them a free pass.  Double standard, methinks?

Who has given them a free pass? There have been hundreds (if not thousands) of posts here bashing Toyota for making the FR-S a Scion. 

[TurboDan]

Not to mention the Golf chassis underpinned not only the Jetta, but also the Golf Plus, the Audi TT, the Audi A3, the Skoda Octavia, the Seat Leon (or Ibiza, I can't remember), and I'm sure there were others.  It was a much higher volume car with a huge set of cars over which to spread and the recoup the costs.  The FRBRSZ is a drop in the bucket compared to what Volkswagen did with that chassis.  Production would likely be a week's sales of the A4 chassis.

Golf underpins the Tiguan and its soon-permiering badge-engineered sister, the Q3, too. And it kicks ass. Who cares. I don't care about badge engineering if the underlying product is good. There is no comparo between VW/Audi badge engineering and the Cavalier/Sunfire gimmicks of old GM. 

[AltinD]

Whens the last time youve been close to, let alone over 100 MPH?

Today, and almost every day ... I like it when the headlights (on Auto mode) come and stay on when the car reaches that speed

[AltinD]

Golf underpins the Tiguan and its soon-permiering badge-engineered sister, the Q3, too. And it kicks ass. Who cares. I don't care about badge engineering if the underlying product is good. There is no comparo between VW/Audi badge engineering and the Cavalier/Sunfire gimmicks of old GM. 

TOuareg/Cayenne/Q7 ... they can't get any different that that. Or should I mention Phaeton/Continental GT/Flying Spur?

[ifcar]

Does it really matter? It's such a small volume seller that most people probably won't even know what it is. The people who do know what it is will probably be able to spot the differences.

I can't. I know where the differences are, but I don't know which bumper shape is which car. It's not that low-volume -- they collectively sold 3k last month.

[AutobahnSHO]

I can't. I know where the differences are, but I don't know which bumper shape is which car. It's not that low-volume -- they collectively sold 3k last month.

Only because they didn't have more made.    I'm sure sales will stay hot for a little while, there are lots who knew it was coming and are anxiously waiting. Once they can meet demand they'll fall off some.

I really wonder how well it will keep selling compared to the Miata and Mustangs/Camaros. It's a small niche, but wide open since the main competitors (CRX, Integra, etc...) have all disappeared.

[sportyaccordy]

That the consumer who can only afford a mainstream vehicle is limited to American and Japanese mediocrity, or a phony, watered down German option, is sad. Hopefully the Fusion will prove to be an alternative.

What is mediocre about cars today, vs cars 10, 20 years ago?

And there are plenty of "fun" options... Accord V6-6, Camry SE V6, Mazda6 is still dynamically pretty good

Plus you are not considering the C segment, which is pretty much the size of what your beloved Passat was... Civic Si/ILX 2.4, WRX, Jetta GLI, Mazdaspeed3, Focus ST, S40 T5 R design, upcoming Audi A3 sedan, GTI, Lancer Ralliart/EVO...

Then theres all the little cars like the Cooper + Veloster, and the little runarounds like the Rio, Elantra GT, Fit, Mazda2

Over the B5's tenure most of these cars were not available, and what was available REALLY WAS mediocre. You could argue that things peaked in the mid aughts (Altima/Maxima with the V6 + manual, S2000) but even still most of the cars that were available then are still available now, with more power, better gas mileage, better performacne and often a lower price (after inflation)

So what are you talking about????

[sportyaccordy]

Today, and almost every day ... I like it when the headlights (on Auto mode) come and stay on when the car reaches that speed

Are you and Cougs the same person?

[AltinD]

Are you and Cougs the same person?

Hey, I just wanted to put him to shame for never cruising at those speeds ... ncuk, ncuk, ncuk

[Rupert]

Well, they couldn't skip the Subaru version.  It was a joint development project with them.  Subaru did all the engineering and manufacturing, they had to get a vehicle out of the whole thing.

If they had badged this as a Toyota, that would be the death of Scion.  Their lineup is weak, and taking the most sporty thing Toyota has made in years and passing up badging it as a Scion would mean Toyota has given up on it as a brand.  This is the exact vehicle Scion was designed for.

I realize that.

[GoCougs]

Hey, I just wanted to put him to shame for never cruising at those speeds ... ncuk, ncuk, ncuk

In an old Passat??? No.

[Raza]

In an old Passat??? No.

B5 Passats were incredibly stable at speeds over 100mph.  Actually, even at top speed (limited to 130 in the US), the car felt completely normal, only wind noise and the blurring of the trees would tell you that you're going 130 and not 80.  I set my cruise control at 130 once and did a 20 mile run mostly at that speed once.  It was surreal going that fast for that long. 

[AltinD]

In an old Passat??? No.

I've brought the old Passat (B5.5) up to 120 MPH, and 100 MPH was cruising speed of most of my daily commute. Now they have put speed cameras every mile of the highway and lowered the limigt in a big part of it, so with the new car hitting 100MPH is almost daily, but not a regular cruizing. It certanly was more stable at 100 MPH then a Camry in 80.

And of course, who in their right mind would hit 100 MPH in a 250 HP V6 AWD (my current) car, with a 155 MPH maximum speed and designed to drive in unlimited Aufobahns?