dublet
-
Posts
10,937 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
82
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Club Shop
Collections
Posts posted by dublet
-
-
I strangely find myself attracted to:
-
4 hours ago, teamdoa said:
I use Vpower, and sometimes I am convinced they put the lesser stuff in when my car is running crappy :S
That would be illegal.
-
7 hours ago, EasyRight89 said:
Isn't that the deal with Momentum99? That's why I've been steering clearing and driving miles out of town to a Shell garage XD If that's not the case, would much rather use Tesco as I can use my clubcard and it's five mins down the road...
I'm afraid it does over here:
I can confirm that Shell V-Power unleaded contains up to 5% ethanol as stipulated by the European fuel specification EN228 and UK government legislation. In addition Shell FuelSave Regular Unleaded and Shell V-Power Nitro+ Unleaded also contain up to 5% ethanol. This is in order to respond to the European Union and UK government’s initiative to promote biofuels, whose aim is to reduce CO2 emissions and enhance energy supply security.
http://www.fordcapriforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43967
Seems you can save yourself a few miles.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Askari said:
Pointless unless your ECU is mapped for high RON fuels.
-
I just checked the Shell website, and indeed at present in the UK V Power is 99 RON at present. They are doing all sorts of shenanigans by having it 95 RON fuel but with a 5% ethanol mix in some countries though. The ethanol can actually be harmful to older cars.
It's been mentioned on some forums that the V Power here is actually a base 97 RON but with fuel cleaners that only last a few days, so after they expire (while in your tank) the fuel reverts to 97. But I'm not sure if that's correct.
-
VPower is actually quite low octane in the UK compared to continental Europe.
In any case you'll only notice a difference with a JDM ECU.
Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk -
The correct rigid front fork for my MTB build..
-
5 hours ago, G.Lewarne said:
I think only the Toyota machine, maybe the snap-on and other really expensive readers can read the other control units.
I believe it's more due to proprietary extensions to the ODB-II that's the problem. These can be reverse engineered but it's rarely worth the effort.
-
Only JDM models have ECUs that take higher RON into account AFAIK.
-
1
-
-
Err.. another bicycle frame.
-
Hammerite's Kurust is along similar lines.
-
Maybe because of Insurance purposes for younger drivers...
But RWD would be quite a bit more expensive than FWD for the younger, inexperienced? -
On 24/04/2017 at 09:54, bricktop said:
The main problem at least for the UK is that people still generally hold the German brands as prestige. Unlike Toyota and Honda which are still seen as mainstream akin to Ford and Vauxhall. The Audi TT was a huge success yet the likes of the Gen 7 although most likely a more sporty car and more reliable had an interior made of crisp packets. Generally English are very vain and prefer soft touch plastics and a upmarket badge over engineering and driving feel. You sit in a Gen 5 or 6 and then sit in Gen 7 and it doesn't feel anywhere near as nice or solid.
That's how fickle people are. The MK3 MR2 is a better roadster than a MK2 without question. Faster, more focused, more efficient, doesn't rust as bad with the only downside being storage. Mazda have built such a strong reputation with the MX5 that they would have too build an absolute turd to lose its affordable roadster crown.
It's quite ironic Mercedes is seen as high quality when they have had some very serious quality problems. But then again, so have Toyota. The 2003 Avensis I had, had very flimsy interior and was falling apart in a way that my gen 5 or 6 never would even contemplate.
It has to be said that the sales figures quoted in my initial post were US ones, not the UK ones, so the snob factor only holds true in the sense that there's plenty of people who see Japanese cars as inferior to the ones from Ford, GM or Chrystler.
Personally, the biggest reason I haven't got rid of the GT4 is that there's no decent replacement. Well, the TT, but I don't want one of them.
-
HIDs are of course only legal in projector light units.
Not sure why there's some hate here for Nightbreakers, as they are not meant to last due to their increased brightness.
-
As for the MR2, should it have sold better? Probably but I thought the 2nd one had lost what made the original so good. It became too big but was still only a 2 seater sports car even though it closer to the size of a 2+2 coupe. If they had kept something closer to the original dimensions it may have been better received, Or maybe everyone would have still bought MX-5's instead.
That's exactly what Toyota did with the MR-S, still sold as well as hot dog turds. And people kept on buying MX5s.
-
18 hours ago, Freeman558 said:
Rivals? I hope he wasn't talking about the cars I mentioned earlier.
The GT4 rivals or at least the cars that the GT4 was meant to compete with would be Evo IV's and Impreza WRX's. I would be surprised if it was pricey in comparison to them.
Also, the 4WD would bump the price up over a 2WD car.
My argument was always that the manufacturers always seemed to put more powerful engines into saloons or hatchbacks instead of their Coupe's.
Corolla T-Sport? Why didn't they put that super charger on the T-sport or GT? Ok it's only an extra 25hp but it takes it over the 200 mark.
Ignoring JDM models, The Honda Prelude never got as powerful H22a engine as the Accord Type R received and never received the Type R treatment as "It was already a sports car"
But, maybe you're right, the GT4 should, by my own logic and arguement, have sold better, maybe not as well as the Impreza's and Evo's but certainly much better than it did.
Here's Tiff about the ST185 and the MR2:
And Clarkson destroying the ST202 in a bit about coupes:
And then about the GT4:
So, the gen 6 was:
- too ugly; and,
- too expensive.
But that first video is really making me want to get a 5.
By your logic the MR2 should've been a bit of a sales success, which I don't think it was. Toyota used to put its most powerful engines in its coupes, the 3S-GTE and 7M-GTE, 1JZ-GTE. That changed with the 7.
1 hour ago, Cal670 said:Coupes are a fashion item aswell as a car, and this has been the case for many, many years. Alot of (but not all) people who buy coupes brand new, are more concerned about looking good than going fast. They want people in the streets to see their stylish, and expensive car, and recognize their wealth and status. The performance is secondary to them, since they want to travel at a speed where they'll get noticed.
With the state of the roads nowadays, the increase in traffic over the last 20 years, not to mention the speed cameras and speed traps going up, there seems to be less and less point in having a really powerful car. IMO, handling is the most important performance characteristic in a car, and I think it's more true now than ever before. Atleast with a Celica, you can actually use the power you have most of the time, and not have to worry to speed limits too much. I would rather own a lower power car with an amazing chassis, than something than can do 0-60 in 5 seconds or so. I find it satisfying to drive a car which you can rev, but not get yourself into trouble.
Just my thoughts, nothing more.
Coupes may be a bit of a fashion item, but so are the Fiat 500. Ironically I think the 500 Abarth is quite desirable.
The fact is though that the lower powered versions will always outsell the higher powered ones, simply as most people want a good looking car but the best fuel economy, or simply the lowest cost car. And of course, when Toyota made a superb handling coupe with a low power engine that's very usable, what do people do? Complain about a lack of power!
Looking at the US sales for the Scion FR-S (which is what the GT86 is sold as in the States), we get the following sales figures:
Scion
FR-S
2016 7.457 2015 10.507 2014 14.062 2013 18.327 2012 11.417
Looks like it sold worse than the gen 6!
I think at the moment only Audi are making a decent coupe in the TT.
-
GT4 anyone?
Problem with performance is that it costs a lot. The Top Gear review of the ST205 by Clarkson mentions just how expensive it was compared to rivals.
Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk -
4 hours ago, EasyRight89 said:
That's about to change, the new Yaris GRMN looks like the real deal and the specs are decent.
Too little, too late? Watch it flop.
-
I wouldn't hold out much hope for the next Toyota Coupe. I know there's a Supra-esque car in the pipeline. But look at their latest model..
There's not many new-ish cars I actually find interesting. If anything, I would be very tempted by a Tesla Model 3.
-
4 hours ago, GreyRacer said:
I used to fit TRD iridium grade 7 which will make better use of VPower or Momentum etc.
Is the gen 7 ECU set up to take advantage of higher RON fuels?
-
Yup. I still have a set in the silver that my Avensis was in. Works ok for small chips but you have to be quite precise.
-
I wonder if Toyota missed a beat by not having a diesel gen 6 & 7. Imagine a 2AD-FHV gen 7 with 177bhp and 400Nm@2krpm.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, ams said:
With the US, Id imagine a lot of it do with tax. Sometime in that time line, car manufacturers (and buyers) clocked on to the fact that SUVs could be classed as business vehicles and 100% written off as tax on purchase - which led to a huge rise in popularity of SUVs around the same time of the decline shown above.
For UK figures try howmanyleft - im sure they have some figures on there of the original registrations - may not go back as far as the 5.
That's a fair point. There's certainly something to be said about SUV popularity in the 90s in the US. One wouldn't have thought that people interested in coupes could be that interested in SUVs,
as we're all such dedicated followers of fashion. I guess the price motive is a powerful one.
howmanyleft doesn't go very far back.
The hot hatch theory is interesting. I don't think Toyota ever did a proper hot hatch, only ever lukewarm ones at best.
-
7 hours ago, Sherv said:
A lot of the older gens were sold with the weaker powered engines as well.Ive seen plenty of the US guys with 162s seeing the 3sge as an actual upgrade.Though thats not the only factor.It shows that the figures tell that it was time for change.To be honest Toyota pretty much moved away from anything remotely performance based a long time back,though generally apart from the turbo cars the Celica was never really an out and out sports car,so i wonder which niche the Celica was going to fit into moving forwards.
2 hours ago, Freeman558 said:It's understandable in Europe or at least the UK.
Front Wheel drive with not much power or practicality when compared to (even their own) hot hatch. Why go for a celica?
Does it really make sense? The gen 5 had very similar models to the 6, though the low power was a 1.6, not a 1.8. The 6 still had a high performance model, like the 5. So in pure performance terms, that surely can't be it. If the points above were right, then how did they manage to sell five gen 5s for every gen 6?
Having owned both, there's not really that much difference in terms of driving, power or general ownership terms.
Even the gen 7 managed to outsell the 6, which I thought was surprising, and that never really had a performance model (well, no 4WD or turbo). And the high and low power versions both had the same engine capacity.
I would be nice to get sales figures for gen 1-4 to see if the gen 5 was an outlier in terms of sales, or if the gen 6 doomed the series.
6 hours ago, bazz54 said:I recall seeing a figure of just 18,000 for US sales of the GT86 during its peak year (2013); guess that fits the trend.
That would kind of suggest it's a one off model unlikely to have a successor.
Car not locking with fobs?
in General Celica Discussion
Posted
Not quite as funny as that time someone in the middle of winter couldn't figure out how to close their passenger window and drove like that for miles until they realised the window lock button was pressed though.