what would you like to see in the soon to be 4th gen mr2? >no

>>17889424
No over-engineered flat-4 in my mr2 please

>>17889424
plz no flat 4

put a inline 4 in almost all of them. turbo 4 as a special option. If it is as big as the sw20, 300hp camry v6 as a madman option. probably no space for that if it is zzw30 sized

simple, light, precise. all it really needs

>>17889424
Good suspension would turn a mr2 from a miata-tier to nearly elise tier.

File: Snow_Wallpaper.jpg (370KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 1920x1200px

>>17889460
This, plus please please please don't make it ugly. Make it look simple.

One thing i like about the 86 twins is that they're simple looking. Not good looking, not ugly, just plain simple looking. I like that

>>17889460
2GR can fit into a W30 with only minor modifications, so they could probably design it for that

File: veryHIHGspeed.jpg (86KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1024x680px

>>17889512
the 86 looks ugly as hell from the front,it looked alright before the facelift
brz looks good though

>>17889424
The only Toyota engine that is still in production that I would absolutely love to see in the W40 would be the 8AR-FTS

>235 hp
>258 lb(ft) of torque
>2.0l l4 turbo
>direct injection

I hope that the W40 MR2 would be a direct successor to the SW20, rather than the ZZW30. This would mean that it would be a larger, high powered, beautiful, incredibly capable platform.

>>17889578
the ZZW30 is more capable than the SW20

>>17889592
Sure, maybe the platform is, but that is entirely because it was made over 10 years after the SW20 was developed. Even then, the SW20 is a much more capable car from the factory. The 1994+ models of the SW20 Turbo in Japan competed directly with the NSX for a fraction of the cost, whereas the ZZW30 only competed with Miatas.

>>17889424
They're gonna borrow that SkyActiv-X from Mazda

>>17889610
The only thing the SW20 has over the third gen is power, which is easily fixed. A W30 with the same power to weight as a SW20 would beat it on any track or road.

>>17889578
sw20 and zzw30 are completely different animals, both worthy of successors

>>17889637
The SW20 also has looks.

But honestly, if the W30 had more power, it would essentially be a Lotus Elise of the same era, therefore driving the prices stupidly high up. Also, buying a W30 and doing the 1zz turbo/2zz swap would cost around double what it would cost to just buy a SW20 turbo and replace the bushings/other suspension components/bypass hose.

keep it nice and compact
keep it under 2,500 lbs
138hp 1.8L base
205 hp SC G-Limited
6 spd manual

tbqh itd probably just have a 4U and weigh 2600-2700 lbs but its nice to dream

>>17889657
SW20 has bland af looks and is pigfat
worst MR2

>>17889781
>138hp
>10 hp increase from aw11
>35 years
>and a bigger engine
>for 10 hp
absolute madmen. it would no doubt be heavier too

>>17890211
ZZW30 was lighter than the AW11
ND is lighter than the AW11

AW11 is a fat car for what it is

maybe you should learn what base models are tho

its a fucking Corolla engine that could be done for cheap

>>17889424
>SW20 with Z32 headlights
>lightweight chassis
>electronic nannies optional for numale market
>turbo 2 liter 4 banger OR screaming 4 banger
>handles like it's on rails

>>17890243
w30 is less than 100 lbs lighter than the aw11 after the pigfatness that was the sw20.. 15 years ago lmao
>nd is lighter than the aw11
nope. check again
>base model
I gave you the hp for the base model.. did you think I was referring to the sc model? are you confused?

sub 2700 lbs and not a convertible

>>17890394
is english your 2nd language

you seem to have problems understanding basic posts

AW11 is still fat for what it is
ND base weighs less than a early base model AW11
why would you shit talk 140hp when its a goddamn basemodel
base Miata makes 130

but you seem kinda special so I wont be too harsh

>under 2500lbs
>under 50 inches tall
>over 200hp
>over 8k max rpm
>no touchscreens in the dashboard

>>17890449
>aw11 still fat
was never a point of contention
>nd is lighter
nope. not in the u.s. if you're going by global stats then the aw11 was much lighter in japan and other countries.

Are you seriously going to defend a car having a WORSE power to weight ratio than 40 years prior? We're comparing base model to base model her if you haven't noticed. I don't understand why you're so upset. Just a tripfag trying to save face I'm assuming.

>>17890519
oh boy another retad that gets rekt then throws insults like a child

>was never a point of contention

nah you just argued and said that it wasnt lol


a 140hp car would have to weigh 2400 lbs to have a worse power to weight than a Supercharged MR2

not my fault you are dumb as hell

>>17890561
;)

Big enough to where a 6'5" guy could comfortably fit inside, an engine set up that lends itself to modding, 6spd manual.

>>17889781
>muh pigfat
>2700 lbs with the heaviest model, the turbo t-tops
>200 hp, 200 lb*ft of torque

what

>take the lotus elise
>make it cheap
wow, you have the w40

>>17889424
>4u north south MR

God damn I would be A-OK with that!

>>17889424
>low weight
>few driver aids
>2l+ turbo 4 standard
>no auto option, no NA option
>factory LSD standard
>aggressive but sleek aesthetics
> sub$30k base
>make it raw and fun again

>>17891518
>no NA option
kanker

>>17891521
the best part of an SW20 is feeling like you're in a fighter jet with the turbo spooling right behind your head. NA cars aren't real MR2s

don't fuck it up like the GT69

>transverse mounted engine to leave room for the cabin
>decent cargo and seating space as a result
>light
>catch chassis dynamics the GT86 can't due to layout - this is a key differentiating factor
>inexpensive N/A base version with free revving that feels like an old cable throttle carb machine
>offer 240HP or more within the first few years as part of premium package

See where it goes from there.

>>17889424
same as MRS but different styling and not convertable.

>>17889657
not really.
SW20 turbo : 6k(cheapest I've ever found)
Maintenance: probs needs around 1-2 k.
ZZW30: friend got a 1.2k mrs that is serviceable so let's say 2k.
Gearbox+engine and all other stuff= 4-5k.
So it comes out to about the same and with MRS you will be outrunning new wrx's.
If you build it well nothing short of a tuned real elise will outhandle your fake elise as evidenced by team spirit mrs

>thicc model with a transverse inline 6

>>17890501
200hp for MR2 is too much. Even 180 is enough if the car is as light as an mrs.
You don't understand MR2 is not a supercar it's a cheap midengined sportscar. Even 150hp is plenty.
If you think mr2 is all about highway pulls you need to get back on your bus you underage fag. MR2 is about being a better driver than smalldick fags who have to resort to huge HP numbers to keep up with a minivan after a roundabout.

>>17891578
>transverse mounted engine to leave room for the cabin
>decent cargo and seating space as a result
>offer 240HP or more within the first few years as part of premium package
drag racing faggot

>>17889424
I want the new car to be to ZZW30 what ZZW30 was to SW20.
>less fat
>better handling
>like gt86 sub 200 horses to keep benchracers away
>made from a corolla and gt86

>>17889537
>Know the difference between a 86 and Miata
>REEEEEEEEEE
>WHEEEEEEEEE

>>17891720

It's too bad there isn't a way to reuse a lot of GT86 assets, would help keep the price low. Would also make both cars easier to produce and possibly cheaper.

>>17891720
I think a good benchmark would be to have slightly better headline figures than, say, a Fiesta ST, but obviously a few hundred pounds lighter (around 2400-2500lbs)

>>17891750
It's certainly possible, but it'll be expensive. I'm also not sure what kind of regulations there are nowadays for MR chassis design. It's entirely possible that without a lot of R&D, crash regs could bump up the weight a bit.

>>17891778
Would a mid engined car not do better in crash tests? You can have both front and rear as large crumple zones

>>17889424
fwd and front transversely mounted engine

>>17891799
Biggest issue is the engine needs reinforcement in a comparison to an FR layout.

Then engine will tend to become a piledriver, and shoot forward into the cabin in a front-end collision if it's not reinforced properly.

FR cars are designed to basically shoot the engine out of the bay so it doesn't end up in the cabin, this can also act as a way to shed some momentum.

File: 1490987133502.png (378KB, 640x352px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 640x352px

>short
>wide
>90s soap bar curvy
>minimalist interior with focus on practical things like sound system and storage space
>no overdone bullshit computers
>manual
>twin pipes
>straight 4 with performance options
>factory lsd
>no ugly headlights or grille design
>90s design roots
everything for that overall nostalic feel

File: 1504839514112.png (86KB, 500x462px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x462px

Is it even confirmed for a revival?

>>17892222
nah
celica might come back though

>>17891526

HOH.. HOH..