Poll: Is a 1994 Toyota a Supercar or is Kerry a fucking moron

[Aaron]

although at this point it's got so much damn tech in it there's really nothing separating a Z06 from something like a 458 except prestige.

 

Wellallrightythen.

[Turbs3000]

What I get from all of this is that the 1991 3000GT VR4 was definitely a supercar, thanks all!

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Edited January 16, 2019 by Turbs3000

[CRed05]

What I get from all of this is that the 1991 300GT VR4 was definitely a supercar, thanks all!

 

Not with that 18 spline transfer case!

[Otis Nice]

Most would like what Clarkson has to say

 

Well, he's right so I do.

 

A "supercar" is a noun to me, not an adjective. It's not something you define and decide to later change or "downgrade" because performance standards have risen so high. The MKIV was and still is just a sports car. If Toyota had dropped the MKIV in 1980 - at the same MSRP it was tagged in the 90's - it would have a supercar title. But in 1993 there were Bugatti EB110s, Jaguar XJ220s, Lamborghini Diablos, Ferrari F50s, McLaren F1s...some of the most influential vehicles of all time.

 

Well said.

 

What I get from all of this is that the 1991 300GT VR4 was definitely a supercar, thanks all!

 

[Turbs3000]

Not with that 18 spline transfer case!

Pshhh they were solid, as was the 5sp getrag as long as you kept to stock power. Which, speak of the devil, is a supercar requirement! Boom, still a supercar.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

[Otis Nice]

Last Saturday DJ (Orion) joined us on our podcast and we discussed this very thing getting the opinion of someone who is not actively on CR (Martelle) and did not see the CB convo nor this thread. DJ and I also weighed in. That may mean prezactly squat to y'all but if you need some background noise at work...prob try some music. If you want something else click here. The episode just dropped.

 

 

Shameless plug.

[caseyctsv]

If you have to ask if it is a Supercar, it’s not.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Green Bastard]

So a base model MK4 Supra is not a supercar? I wouldn't consider the turbo model to be either. Just my opinion.

[fRAZER]

I'm a huge supra fan but I have to agree if the options make or break calling it a super car it's not a real super car. It was built to beat out the other sports cars of the era ie. 300zx, 3000gt, mustang and all the likes. Super car shouldn't need a third party shop and mods to make it keep up with super cars otherwise a $500 crx with a built motor and axles is a supercars.

 

GTR is lowest I would consider super car due to its lowest optioned model hitting the under 5 second 0-60 time and tip speed of around 190. Finally a big decision of super car or not is the tire rating, GTR comes with Z rated tires while supra had W rated.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[gillbot]

Just read an article, disagreed a lot and it reminded me of this thread so

 

::flamesuit on::

 

Most Affordable Supercars

2018 Audi R8 - $164,900 | 532 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.5/10

2018 Acura NSX - $157,500 | 573 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.1/10

2018 Tesla Model S P100D - $133,000 | 518 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.3/10

2019 Jaguar F-Type SVR - $122,750 | 575 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

2019 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 - $120,900 | 755 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.4/10

2018 Mercedes-AMG GT - $112,400 | 469 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.2/10

2018 Nissan GT-R - $99,990 | 565 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.0/10

2018 Lexus LC - $92,000 | 471 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.2/10

2019 Cadillac CTS-V - $86,995 | 640 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.1/10

2019 Porsche Cayman GTS - $80,700 | 365 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.4/10

2019 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Redeye - $69,650 | 797 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.3/10

2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R - $67,135 | 526 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

2019 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat - $65,345 | 707 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.5/10

2019 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 - $62,000 | 650 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

[Turbs3000]

That feels like it's written in the modern view of having super cars and hyper cars. But I will say I've driven the majority of that list and the tesla and the Audi r8 were my stand out favorites

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

[Otis Nice]

Most Affordable Supercars

2018 Audi R8 - $164,900 | 532 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.5/10

2018 Acura NSX - $157,500 | 573 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.1/10

2018 Tesla Model S P100D - $133,000 | 518 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.3/10

2019 Jaguar F-Type SVR - $122,750 | 575 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

2019 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 - $120,900 | 755 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.4/10

2018 Mercedes-AMG GT - $112,400 | 469 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.2/10

2018 Nissan GT-R - $99,990 | 565 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.0/10

2018 Lexus LC - $92,000 | 471 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.2/10

2019 Cadillac CTS-V - $86,995 | 640 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.1/10

2019 Porsche Cayman GTS - $80,700 | 365 hp | USN Performance Score: 9.4/10

2019 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Redeye - $69,650 | 797 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.3/10

2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R - $67,135 | 526 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

2019 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat - $65,345 | 707 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.5/10

2019 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 - $62,000 | 650 hp | USN Performance Score: 8.9/10

 

:lolguy:

[ShowHBK]

This thread gave me dysentery... I was hospitalized for 5 days...

 

I'm going to help people out with a visual presentation, because words are not working.

 

 

OK.. Let's use the word "TOYOTA"

 

 

Z-E-R-O Supercars in there... Lets try something more direct...

 

 

Nope, No Toyotas on that list... weird... what does that mean?

 

 

IM ANGRY BECAUSE A CROWBAR DID NOT SHOW UP ON MY SEARCH FOR CHAINSAWS!!! A CROWBAR IS A CHAINSAW!!!

 

[Geeto67]

Does the word "Super car" have any real meaning in the modern era? or has it become basically synonymous with "Exotic car"?

 

Once upon a time (the 1960's) Super Car was what journalists used to refer to muscle cars - pedestrian cars that the factory had stuffed big engines into to make "fast" and hence "super". Prior to that ad agencies had used it as a description for anything from high quality cars to highly technologically advanced cars regardless as to top speed or 0-60. To call something a supercar is to try and hit a moving target blindfolded. Esp when so much "image" becomes associated with a term, to the point where the metrics may cease to matter entirely.

 

 

Again, in the context of the mid 90's I think the supra Turbo met a lot of the qualifications to be considered a supercar at the time, most of them performance and technology based, but people are reluctant to call it, or anything japan made at the time, a supercar, not because the cars aren't super - but because the cars are Japanese. Cars like the NSX and the GTR also carry the same kind of debate, and there is always some "excuse" for why the car isn't a supercar despite in some ways exceeding the super car staples from Italy or Germany.

 

Was a 1969 camaro with a 427 a supercar in 1969? Sure it was (heck Don Yenko put it in the name SYC badges on the car stand for "Yenk Super Car"). Was a ferrari 365 GT4 BB a supercar in the 1970's? Sure, even though a dodge durango SRT has more hp and just as good handling. The point isn't to say it's a supercar by modern standards, it is to recognize that the car met the criteria in the time and place when it was new. I legit thing the japanese made supercars in the 1990's, and the Supra Turbo was one of them and deserves it's due. I think its exclusion then and to a certain degree now has a lot more to do with anti Japanese industrialization in America than it does with whether the car "not being special" enough.

 

your opinion my vary though.

[greg1647545532]

In terms of performance and technology, what's the gulf between a mk4 Supra and a 4th gen Camaro?

[Geeto67]

In terms of performance and technology, what's the gulf between a mk4 Supra and a 4th gen Camaro?

 

Pretty significant. Let's compare a 1994 Supra Turbo with a 1994 Camaro Z28:

 

Engine:

Supra: DOHC I6, with twin sequential stainless steel turbochargers. Iron Block Aluminum cylinder head. 3.0L making 320 hp and 315 ft/lbs torque.

 

Z28: Pushrod, Iron block and head 350 ci (5.7L) LT1 engine making 275hp. About the only thing technologically advanced was the FI system for the LT1 engines, otherwise the LT1/LT4 was the last of the original Small block chevy architecture in use since 1955, and was only significant because of the reverse cooling that cooled the heads first.

 

At the time even the Ferrari F40 didn't use Sequential Turbochargers, to be honest I am not sure any other turbo cars in the market did - maybe the RX7 and the 3000GT VR4, but that's it.

 

Performance:

 

Supra Turbo: 0-60 4.6 seconds. 1/4 mile: 13.1 seconds, Top speed: 177 mph tested (155 restricted by computer). As tested by Car and Driver in March 1993.

 

Z28: 0-60 5.6 seconds, 1/4 mile: 14.0. Top speed: 152 mph (restricted by computer to 110).

 

In term of performance the Supra Turbo was faster than the contemporary Vette L98 and LT1 versions. The nearest Chevrolet equalivent was the corvette Zr-1, which boasted a similar hp number (385hp in 1990, 405hp in 1991-95), was an all aluminum DOHC engine developed by Lotus and Mercury Marine, ran a similar 0-60 and 1/4 mile time (4.6 seconds, 13.4 1/4 mile, 185 top speed).

 

The Zr-1's status as a supercar is somewhat debated as well, mostly by people who are unfamilar with the car and judge it off it's looks. While looking like a normal C4, the whole car is actually 4 inches wider than the standard corvette. The engine was designed by lotus and built by mercury marine, and is considered one of the most durable engines ever put in a GM vehicle. Instead of the usual Tremec, Borg Warner, or Doug Nash transmission in standard vettes, it used the ZF 6 speed unit similar to what BMW used in the euro E34 M5. Only the suspension and interior was out of the corvette parts bin, and every ZR1 came with the ZX3 adjustable suspension, a top tier option on the standard corvette. In terms of Exotic cars, it was probably the most "exotic" production car GM ever built considering the number of nations that contributed to the build, the advanced tech in the car, and the exotic materials used. It was also on par with most italian supercars of the era, cost as much as a Porsche 911 turbo (twice as much as a fully optioned std vette), and even gave the F40 ferrari a run for it's money in those multi supercar tests done in the era. It also had the nickname "Corvette from Hell" and "King of the Hill" and was the fastest production american car from the big three until the Viper came out.

 

 

Here is an interesting question: is the 1996 Camaro SS a super car? While not "technologically advanced", SLP did up the HP to 305 hp and pushed the 0-60 to 5.2 and 1/4 mile to 13.6. Since they were built by SLP, they technically fit the definition of "tuner car" and the SS was a $4K option on top of a loaded Z28. I am kind of torn on this question, and kinda leaning toward not because it came in 2 years two late and by 1996, the ZR-1 was out of production, the viper was debuting the GTS, and any other cars like the supra it was "catching up to" were aging out of supercar territory. The 1990's were interesting because we saw a shift in supercars from brute HP to high tech. Porsche abandoned air cooling for first oil cooling and then water cooling, Ferrari was taking what it had learned in the F40 further with the F50 and other cars in it's line, Lambo was playing with AWD, and an old tech iron block pushrod "merican v8 didn't really fit the market anymore, esp since it was neither technologically advanced nor brute strong enough to fill the hole left by the ZR-1. LAter versions would go to 330hp in LT4 and LS1 trim but that's in the early 2000s and not even close to the field.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Geeto67

[Dr. Pomade]

Great thread. Won't read again because there are too many words.

 

If you stopped anyone in the 1990s and told them to name 5 supercars, I bet no one would say Supra.

 

If you stopped anyone on the street today and told them to name 5 supercars, I would bet a large sum of money no one says Supra.

 

Go to a random car meet and ask car people to name some supercars, I bet no one says Supra.

 

Go to a Supra meet, ask same thing, and I still bet no one says Supra.

 

While I am still betting on stuff, I bet no one used the term "supercar" in their response to seeing the Supra commercial during the Super Bowl.

 

Sure, give me a list of criteria, use some nuanced definitions, and throw in a little bit of wordsmithing and I'll find myself agreeing that a Supra (or whatever other kind of sports car you want) seems to meet the criteria of a "supercar." That same kind of word play and fancy talk leaves me agreeing that somehow a hot dog is a sandwich when I know it isn't.

 

The Supra isn't a supercar.

[Geeto67]

If you stopped anyone in the 1990s and told them to name 5 supercars, I bet no one would say Supra.

 

that depends on a lot of factors. In the US, you are probably right because the supra mostly went unnoticed by the American public. they have to know about it to name it. If you asked the same question in Japan at the same time you might have gotten a different answer. If you asked 5 random people at a motor industry event, I betcha 1 would at least mention it. If you asked 5 people in germany, I betcha there wouldn't be an american can on the list and BMW and porsche would both be there.

 

Too bad this is completely speculative and can't be tested.

 

If you stopped anyone on the street today and told them to name 5 supercars, I would bet a large sum of money no one says Supra.

 

Are you asking them to name 5 supercars of the 1990's? or 5 supercars today? Either way, it's a loaded question since nobody here says a 20 year old car is a supercar by modern standards. Even BMW and Toyota acknowledge that the new supra is not a supercar but a sports car for a niche market. Their goals in the 1990's and goals now are very different - they built supercars like the LFA, the supra doesn't have anything to prove nor is it a flagship.

 

Go to a random car meet and ask car people to name some supercars, I bet no one says Supra.

 

We can actually test this one. Come out to CCC this summer and we will walk around together and ask people. I'll take your bet, the stakes are who buys lunch.

 

Go to a Supra meet, ask same thing, and I still bet no one says Supra.

 

Is there such a thing as a "supra only" meet? How about we go to a Supra forum and ask the same question and see if it causes the same debate. My money is on that it will.

 

While I am still betting on stuff, I bet no one used the term "supercar" in their response to seeing the Supra commercial during the Super Bowl.

 

Agreed, but that's not really relevant.

 

Sure, give me a list of criteria, use some nuanced definitions, and throw in a little bit of wordsmithing and I'll find myself agreeing that a Supra (or whatever other kind of sports car you want) seems to meet the criteria of a "supercar." That same kind of word play and fancy talk leaves me agreeing that somehow a hot dog is a sandwich when I know it isn't.

 

The Supra isn't a supercar.

 

 

It's easy to blame "word play" when the word in play has a constantly evolving definition, is contextually dependent on time and space, and a set of examples that exist on a spectrum.

 

What's at stake is whether people are ready to give the Japanese their due for making really far out, weird, and tech advanced performance cars when in their time weren't recognized as such because of lingering anti-Japanese sentiment left over from the 1980's, and Japanese industrialization of America and the shrinking of the american car industry. how long are we going to allow linger 1980's xenophobia and anti Japanese propaganda color how we look at Japanese cars of the past?

[greg1647545532]

If you asked 5 people in germany, I betcha there wouldn't be an american can on the list and BMW and porsche would both be there.

 

Which BMW? Would a 95 E36 M3 be on that list? What's the performance and technology gulf between the Supra and the 320hp high revving M3? Is the M3 a supercar?

 

What's at stake is whether people are ready to give the Japanese their due for making really far out, weird, and tech advanced performance cars when in their time weren't recognized as such because of lingering anti-Japanese sentiment left over from the 1980's, and Japanese industrialization of America and the shrinking of the american car industry. how long are we going to allow linger 1980's xenophobia and anti Japanese propaganda color how we look at Japanese cars of the past?

 

Oh come on, the NSX came out in 1990 and EVERYONE considered it a supercar. Maybe not the fastest, maybe not the coolest, but Winston Wolf was driving a supercar.

[ShowHBK]

83.33% of all automotive enthusiasts in the world believe that it's not a supercar.

 

Democracy wins!!!!

[Geeto67]

Which BMW? Would a 95 E36 M3 be on that list? What's the performance and technology gulf between the Supra and the 320hp high revving M3? Is the M3 a supercar?

 

If you were asking in the early 1990's, There would still be people around who remembered the BMW M1, the orphan child of a deal between BMW and Lamborghini that fell apart.

 

Mid 1990's, it would be the alpina B10-Bi turbo, a car maybe 5 people in the US heard about through the buff books, but in germany was kind of a sensation with 355hp worth of water cooled twin turbos and variable boost control that was sold through BMW dealers with a warranty. Although it wasn't a sub 5 second 0-60 car it was good for sustained and tested 180mph (and still as fast as a testarossa). Costing somewhere between obscenely expensive and mildly filthy lucre and being rare at 507 units produced it really was something that set its sights on supercars on the autobahn.

 

I suspect those same germans might also consider the AMG hammer which was still in production into the early 1990s as a supercar as well considering its 385hp, wide body stance, and bank account draining price tag.

 

However these two Bavarian cream puffs bring up an interesting point....can a sedan be considered a supercar when it isn't a sports car? The Alpina B10 Bi-turbo was the fastest production sedan in the world when it was introduced in 1989-90. They were built specifically to fill the rearview mirrors of supercars on the autobahn, and they were factory endorsed and sold with warranties through dealers, despite being "tuner" cars. Seems a shame to exclude them just because they have more doors.

 

No I don't think the E36 M3 makes the cut, despite nearly everyone loving that car in the 1990s. It just isn't in the cross shopping list of someone looking to buy a supercar in 1994. Also the E36 M3 had 240hp in the US and 282hp in europe during the time we are talking about. The Euro E36 320hp didn't happen until very late 1995 (as I think 1996 models). Even still it isn't about one metric - although it has comparable hp, it just doesn't have the timed performance delivering 6 second 0-6 times and 14 second 1/4 mile times. The E36 M3 Evolution GT2, (of which there were approx 200 made and cost way more than a std m3) might be considered in that realm by some germans, esp with 5.3 0-60, 171mph top speed, and 13.7 1/4 mile times....who knows, I was in italy at that time, not germany and although I did speak to some germans, most of them were obsessed with Harley Davidsons (go figure).

 

Oh come on, the NSX came out in 1990 and EVERYONE considered it a supercar. Maybe not the fastest, maybe not the coolest, but Winston Wolf was driving a supercar.

 

Go back and read this thread from start. There is more than one post calling it an accord with the engine in the back. Maybe they didn't see pulp fiction. Or maybe it was the wrong wolf - maybe they needed a Walter wolf special edition like the lotus esprit:

Edited February 6, 2019 by Geeto67

[iwashmycar]

^^^ Supercar

[greg1647545532]

^^^ Supercar

 

Can't be, in the 93 Esprit Turbo was slower than a Supra.

 

/s

[Crossle]

I'm coming in late. I consider MK4 Supra a grand touring car. I don't put grand touring cars in with my definition of super cars when I talk cars. Phrasing such as rare, nor the price of the car are things I take into consideration.

 

I would argue that Toyota didn't have a super car in the 90's off the top of my head.

[Dr. Pomade]

In the US, you are probably right because the supra mostly went unnoticed by the American public.

 

If it went unnoticed, then I'm not sure how it can qualify as a supercar. You can't help but notice a supercar...

 

Come out to CCC this summer and we will walk around together and ask people. I'll take your bet, the stakes are who buys lunch.

 

Sounds great, you're on.

 

Is there such a thing as a "supra only" meet? How about we go to a Supra forum and ask the same question and see if it causes the same debate. My money is on that it will.

 

I think there are always car-specific meets, be it a Supra, a 300Z, an 03/04 Cobra, Corvette, Porsche, etc. I'd be shocked if there wasn't one. Anyway, maybe we can have someone sign up to a Supra forum, pretend to be a 5th grader doing a homework assignment or something, and have them ask the forum to name 5 of the top supercars of the 1990s.

 

What's at stake is whether people are ready to give the Japanese their due for making really far out, weird, and tech advanced performance cars when in their time weren't recognized as such because of lingering anti-Japanese sentiment left over from the 1980's, and Japanese industrialization of America and the shrinking of the american car industry. how long are we going to allow linger 1980's xenophobia and anti Japanese propaganda color how we look at Japanese cars of the past?

 

This is a very well-crafted, eloquent argument. I totally agree. However, that's not what we're debating, is it? We're debating whether the Supra is/was a supercar. If the poll was "Can we give the Japanese their due for making cool/fast/awesome/unique cars?" then I think most people would answer "yeah, sure." So, maybe you're trying to sell us something we'd more readily buy if you packaged it differently.