Worst MR2 Spyder article to date...

Yep, opinion articles are like a$$holes, everyone has one...  🤣 

over my 16 years of owning a spyder, I have seen many crash photos and can recall only two fatalities. I think safe is a relative term given a lot of crashes occurred due to snap oversteer, people walked away from these but I think the idea of a mid-engined car that will spin like a top (not a hammer ) has some inherent caveats.

I posted this question on the other site (SC) and am curious to see if there are different responses:

I understand that due to US Safety Regulations, that it would be impossible to build a 2022 duplicate MR2 Spyder. However - If Mazda can build a small 180hp, 2400lb, 2-seat convertible for less than $35,000 - why can't Toyota? Or are mid-engined cars inherently heavier and more expensive (I don't think so) .
If Toyota does not want to, or can't do it, I would bet Kia, Hyundai or Mitsubishi easily could. Obviously Toyota doesn't mind collaborations.
Sure, it would probably not weigh 2200 lbs, but it would brand new with a warranty, still be fun to drive, (kind of like the Miata) !!
I for one would definitely look at it.

Mazda has a niche cut out for themselves, guaranteeing large sales of the Miata. They also have a sporty brand image. And modifying a platform to be smaller is not nearly as hard as Toyota's task. 

Toyota can't sell sports cars. Even selling stuff like the tC is difficult for them. They do not have a sporty image. Almost any sports car they release is guaranteed not to sell well for two reasons: 1. Not that many people want Toyota sports cars, hence why you rarely see A90 Supras and BRZs outnumber FRS/86s 10 to 1. 2. If Toyota invested into a fresh mid engined platform from the ground up, it would cost them millions if not over a billion dollars. Then they'd either use an off the shelf engine like the M20A, which would do 168HP and underwhelm, or build a new engine for the car that suits it. And all that R&D means it would be wildly expensive, guaranteeing not selling. 

Brands like BMW can build sports cars because they have the upper market, they can charge high prices. And they already have a lot of the performance stuff there, like engines. Toyota cannot charge a lot, cannot invest a ton into all new platforms and parts while charging little, and cannot in general sell sports cars very well due to a boring brand image they are fighting very hard to change. That's why they're partnering with other companies. Splitting the cost on the Supra/Z4 platform halved the cost of the R&D there, and using an off the shelf powerhouse of an engine saved a TON of money. The FR-S/86/BRZ trio is on a modified last gen WRX platform, not even on TNGA/Subaru global platform, using an existing Subaru engine. That's why it's so cheap and successful. Toyota simply can NOT do this with an MR2. None of it is possible. No one to partner with for a cheap mid engine chassis, and development of one would mean a car above $60k easy.

Posted by: @haloruler64

Mazda has a niche cut out for themselves, guaranteeing large sales of the Miata. They also have a sporty brand image. And modifying a platform to be smaller is not nearly as hard as Toyota's task. 

Toyota can't sell sports cars. Even selling stuff like the tC is difficult for them. They do not have a sporty image. Almost any sports car they release is guaranteed not to sell well for two reasons: 1. Not that many people want Toyota sports cars, hence why you rarely see A90 Supras and BRZs outnumber FRS/86s 10 to 1. 2. If Toyota invested into a fresh mid engined platform from the ground up, it would cost them millions if not over a billion dollars. Then they'd either use an off the shelf engine like the M20A, which would do 168HP and underwhelm, or build a new engine for the car that suits it. And all that R&D means it would be wildly expensive, guaranteeing not selling. 

Brands like BMW can build sports cars because they have the upper market, they can charge high prices. And they already have a lot of the performance stuff there, like engines. Toyota cannot charge a lot, cannot invest a ton into all new platforms and parts while charging little, and cannot in general sell sports cars very well due to a boring brand image they are fighting very hard to change. That's why they're partnering with other companies. Splitting the cost on the Supra/Z4 platform halved the cost of the R&D there, and using an off the shelf powerhouse of an engine saved a TON of money. The FR-S/86/BRZ trio is on a modified last gen WRX platform, not even on TNGA/Subaru global platform, using an existing Subaru engine. That's why it's so cheap and successful. Toyota simply can NOT do this with an MR2. None of it is possible. No one to partner with for a cheap mid engine chassis, and development of one would mean a car above $60k easy.

It might be possible if they just added more cow bell . . . 

The other bit to consider here in the sport car space is that the internal combustion engine as we know it is likely in it's last 10-15 years of use. Battery tech, pollution concerns and honestly the ease of maintaining a motor vs an engine will like have 80% of the the cars in 2031 plug in only. Performance will change. Toyota knows this and is happy to make its profits on what it can do well rather than push the envelope for exciting new stuff. The last two splashes (FRS and Supra  where both collaborations as noted) happy to lend the name not going to define something new unless it has 4 motors one at each wheel

Was sitting behind a Tesla at a light yesterday -- Tesla was first in line.  Light changed to green and Tesla was gone in an instant.  Clearly the driver was pushing it to the max.  Oh my goodness, that thing was fast!

Torque is real 

There was a Model 3 Performance at autocross. It was not quick in the corners, and its overall times weren't very good, but my god on the straight it was easily the fastest thing there. Just disappeared every time. Beautiful to witness. Only car as quick off the line I saw was a Carrera 4S launching hard.

Posted by: @haloruler64

There was a Model 3 Performance at autocross. It was not quick in the corners, and its overall times weren't very good, but my god on the straight it was easily the fastest thing there. Just disappeared every time. Beautiful to witness. Only car as quick off the line I saw was a Carrera 4S launching hard.

Do you remember Tesla’s first car in the Elsie platform? One can only imagine that would be a hoot to take on a course

I've always wanted to try an original Tesla Roadster

Posted by: @uncle-mush

Was sitting behind a Tesla at a light yesterday -- Tesla was first in line.  Light changed to green and Tesla was gone in an instant.  Clearly the driver was pushing it to the max.  Oh my goodness, that thing was fast!

Just so happens, the Tesla I wrote of earlier was a Model 3.

@uncle-mush,

Yeah, saw the same thing. A white Model 3, first in line, light changes, and in complete silence... GONE.

Naturally, I came back here and posted my pie-in-the-sky plans for what to do if The Frog outlives his powerplant.

It would probably make more sense to just start saving up for an ND, if, of course, I can fit inside it. Still haven't driven one, but it looks fun from back here. I wonder if re-fitting a 2 with electric would still be more affordable, and it would demolish a Miata. Would love to shock (pun intended) the ornery Tesla or Charger drivers too, LOL.

In the other thread, there were concerns about weight of electric components, but I wonder. I would be ditching an ICE, a gas tank, exhaust components (intake too, FWIW), and a good deal of transmission weight. With all of that gone, there is a good chance there would be space to distribute the new weight of batteries, motors (one on each rear wheel, because duh), and vacuum pump. Dont need no stinkin' regenerative braking, unless it works.

The thing is, Prius parts were used in the Spyder, maybe there might be a tad bit of overlap that could be leveraged. Maybe.

LOL!!!

I read that article. So, the Spyder didn't offer lane-drift alarms, and THAT makes it unsafe? I have always admitted to being pretty ignorant about cars, so can someone help me out and tell me which cars had that feature from 2000 to 2005? Wow, what a crock of sh**.

But they say the Spyder does have stability control (oh, really? I guess mine is just disabled), and yet somehow still suffers from crazy snap oversteer?

Wow, and no TSB or recall for that, unless I missed it.

Frickin' totally un-researched garbage journalism. Meh, just leaves more of them on the market for us, I guess.