Are they really bringing it back?

Posted by: Dev

I have driven my friends Factory 5 Cobra  and it was a dream.  The non powered brakes sucked but he is getting the work around to make them much better but apart from that I loved everything about it. It was raw.  

 I think it depends on how the Factory 5 was built and the kind of choices that were made but I think in many ways its the right direction if you want to make it your own and you have the stills.  

The one thing I like about my Spyder is that I made it my own and now it has that raw sensation especially after I pulled the PS and upgrade the front brakes. 

What !!!  I can't believe you'd be caught driving a fake cobra after all those rants about fake Ferrari's  . 

I can see it now " Dev's 360 Ferrari kit build "  LOL  

Posted by: phats

Posted by: Dev

I have driven my friends Factory 5 Cobra  and it was a dream.  The non powered brakes sucked but he is getting the work around to make them much better but apart from that I loved everything about it. It was raw.  

 I think it depends on how the Factory 5 was built and the kind of choices that were made but I think in many ways its the right direction if you want to make it your own and you have the stills.  

The one thing I like about my Spyder is that I made it my own and now it has that raw sensation especially after I pulled the PS and upgrade the front brakes. 

What !!!  I can't believe you'd be caught driving a fake cobra after all those rants about fake Ferrari's  . 

I can see it now " Dev's 360 Ferrari kit build "  LOL  

LOL...

😜

My philosophy is if you build it from the ground up to be a replica then it passes my standard for proper homage to the original  Shelby Cobra which was ripped of from the AC Cobra.

Then we can take it to another level and say that AC ripped it from the Ferrari Barchetta which started it all.   

Some how I can make this go full circle and bring it back.     

Posted by: Dev

My philosophy is if you build it from the ground up to be a replica then it passes my standard for proper homage to the original  Shelby Cobra which was ripped of from the AC Cobra.

Then we can take it to another level and say that AC ripped it from the Ferrari Barchetta which started it all.   

Some how I can make this go full circle and bring it back.     

 

I think your philosophy is flawed .... since when is building from the ground up the same as buying a kit from factory five and putting it together . Now if he was shaping body panels out of sheets of aluminum I'd probably agree with you . A fake is a fake full circle or not . I was just surprised that is all !!!

I see it as a replica that was purposely built to be a replica and nothing else. The Spyder with a fake Ferrari kit is a Spyder not a replica. 

At least when the owner is asked what kind of car it is he always says  Its a Factory 5.   If someone said its an AC cobra that would be a problem. 

There were a few with the fake Ferrari  kit admitting that its the real thing to other people. 

while they may have tooling lying around for the mk3, that chassis is extremely unlikely to make a comeback sue to current homologation regulations in the various automotive markets. their current platform is the most likely recipient of the mid engine treatment.

the underpinnings of the current generation corolla is a prime candidate for a gasoline revival whether it be pure gasoline or hybrid.
- engine mounts and upper/lower subframes that fit the front of the corolla chassis to fit the engine facing the opposite direction for a new mr2. the rotation of the engine mounts and a new subframe are much less costly than the development of a new transmission, so this is more likely than a new transmission which outputs backwards (but with a change of differential orientation and location, it's possible, though not probable)

- Floor pan looks to be two major stampings and is is spot welded to the trunk pan stamping, which could be replaced with a new subframe for the front of a new mr2

- side panels of the unibody are also spot welded to the floor pan and firewall (which could be eligible for direct carry-over) and so the side panels of the unibody can be replaced with high strength steel stampings which stiffen the chassis since a new mr2 should still be either a targa or convertible.

- mcPhaerson struts on all four corners which may be cross compatible with the corolla struts would be able to reduce costs, but the rear and front knuckles would need a redesign. it may be possible that the front and rear struts on a new mr2 would all be corolla front struts to only require a redesign on the rear knuckle (no steering in rear but has drive axles) and the ability to reuse the rear knuckle (previously corolla front knuckle) in front.  Electric awd aftermarket opportunity if the front knuckles are able to accept corolla shafts if you unbolt the hub from the knuckle and swap a corolla front hub onto the knuckle.

- utilize the same engine as the current corolla, with a terrible long rerouted dipstick tube and dipstick we all know, love, and hate.

- transmissions available would then be those already offered on the fwd corolla.

- front firewall would be a new stamping, and would tie into the windshield frame (also a new stamping), and a convertible top should be able to fit between the rear firewall and the front seats.

- front and rear fenders would be separate pieces like the mk3, and the hood and rear engine lid may end up being similar in frontal profile to the mk3 due to the McPherson struts.

- front bumper, rear bumper, headlights, and taillights would follow some design cues from the gt86 and supra and would be all new.

-interior pieces would be partsbin corolla parts with the exception of the seats which may be partsbin gt86, and some storage compartments behind the seats if implemented in the design.

I estimate a $35k-40k price point going down this route.

I thought the Spyder was the first Toyota with an experimental TNGA platform. Any who, the SUV craze definitely took a hit with reliability and the millenni-moms and soyboys flock to the CUV alternative.

When I brought my Spyder home my mother had a new Ford Explorer (4th gen) I told her the price I paid and she pointed at her pos and said, "you could of got one of these and saved some money!"

That Ford Explorer needed two transmission in her time of ownership, because of it's sealed nature most owners failed to realize it needed constant fluid flushes to remain operable.

When my Grandmother saw the Spyder she flipped out because she thought the world was done producing deathtrap coffin-mobiles. She was truly upset at the world and me (LOL). Due to the performance nature of mid-engine cars during mid corner and corner entries, Porsche has over engineered the electronic and traction control "features" to protect the average Yogi Tai Chi crystal healing master. Do a count of drivers who apply their brakes around a turn rather than slowing down before entry and you'll see that auto manufacturers are just going to go with the flow.  I can't really blame them, they are out there to ultimately make money and generate social equity in regard to preconceive performance characteristics. My buddy told me just last night his Ford F150 handles well.... Most folks don't know the first thing about true performance characteristics because cars like roadsters are few and far between.

TNGA launched in 2015. Spyder was a custom chassis. Hence why an MR2 MK4 is not happening: Toyota building a custom chassis for a low sales mid engine car won't happen. 

I'll disagree with the whole traction control thing. Modern traction control is pretty magical. I put my Lexus front wheels into a snow pile and floored it, on all seasons. The car smoothly drove out of the snow like I was lightly pushing the throttle. None of that "CUT ALL POWER TO THE WHEELS" crap we saw in the 2000s, that was dangerous. Porsche traction control is particularly lax, allowing you to kick the rear end out without stepping in. I did a 180 from a stop on a 4 lane road just trying to turn around and the rear happily swung out, spinning tires, without TC kicking in (and it was on). 

I was referring to "project genesis" and Toyota's desire to make a vehicle which could be panel repaired easily. Couldn't find reference to the old articles concerning the chassis design as a modular experimentation, not specifically tnga but for "tuner" attraction.

FWD cars have always been known for snow and soft sand performance, have a lot of friends who are way older than I whom confirm their experiences driving out to remote desert locations in honda accords and early subarus.

I have not driven a Porsche post 2008, but am fairly certain the entire experience is managed.  I am loosely using TC to describe managements such as VSC. Rotational sensors and the effective management of ESC could not be turned off in the last Porsche review video I watched.