Do Japanese Cars Suck?

[2_Liter_Turbo]

What's your opinion on this? I personally think the Japanese have lost their way as well, which is why I stick with the 90's era cars.

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/ ... -Suck.aspx

[AZhitman]

Here's a thought:

In 2017, no one makes a turd. ANY new car you buy will go 100k with minimal issues - hell, you probably don't even need to change the oil. That's no good for a future owner, but realistically, people don't care anymore - they're cash-poor, credit-rich, paycheck-to-paycheck, and more concerned about social media than making smart financial decisions.

You can buy the cheapest thing on the lot (I think you can get a new Mitsu for $10k still) or you can drop $45k on a Kia (when the hell did that happen?)

Both cars will provide basic transport for 100k miles, and "suck" is subjective. Does it mean problematic/troublesome? Does it mean ugly/ill-refined? Does it mean "overpriced/no fun"?

Personally, I'd say a car "sucks" if it's overpriced for the return... Since we remove reliability from the equation, it comes down to styling, performance, comfort, and fun.

With that as a metric, I'd say there's probably a lot of "suck" in the Japanese lineup nowadays.

[Bubba1]

No, I disagree about allnew Japanese cars suck, they have simply evolved and have gotten more complex so I'd say different, not worse. The Japanese are guilty of building cars people want to buy. And if enthusiasts do not buy enough new sports cars, there's less incentive for any manufacturer to keep building them, not just the Japanese. As a buying demographic, enthusiasts need to put their money where their mouth is, and there are some good fun new Japanese cars out there. My generation bought a lot of 'em in the 90's, more recent generations not as much. Hard to blame the manufacturers if y'all don't buy em.

That said, as a old fart, I see every generation likes to complain about the growing complexity/and higher costs of new Japanese cars focusing on the negatives. But at the same time fail to notice how much faster, safer, better handling, better gas mileage, and in many cases, more reliable they are than cars 20 years ago. I agree Nissan is one Japanese make that seems to have have forgotten the fun factor in cars in the last few years, but Mazda certainly has not forgotten. Subaru has not forgotten either, Heck, Toyota has always sold boring cars, but they sell the FRS, which is a great car that young people whine about for not having enough power. The main appeal to 90's cars is the affordability and comparative simplicity, but there's more to a car than that. For perspective sake, when those old Rwd Corollas were new, they were NOT coveted by enthusiasts at all. In fact they were considered boring, underpowered, cheap economy cars. Sound familiar? Many years later after they fully depreciated and became become dirt cheap to buy, and the industry moved to Fwd, the old Rwd corollas got discovered by the younger set and suddenly it's a "hot" car. So as a baby boomer, I don't quite get when a young person reveres an AE86 Corolla and yet has comtempt for an FRS with twice the power and does everything so much better. Seems a bit off. Ok, I'll stop ranting.

[AZhitman]

^ Great points.

To think 20 years ago that a Datsun 610/710, Toyota Starlet, Honda Civic, or Subaru GL would ever be remotely interesting, not to mention collectible, would be laughable. Yet there they were yesterday, lined up at our local Japanese Classics meet.

Again, I think "suck" has a different definition for everyone. A couple butthurt local guys (Challenger T/A and a newish GT) tell me my Z06 "sucks."

[2_Liter_Turbo]

I think a lot of enthusiasts put their money where their mouth is, by buying the old stuff rather than the new. Of course, the MFG's never see that metric. I almost bought a new Ford Mustang GT instead of my R32. I didn't even bother to look at the current offerings by Nissan or Toyota. Having designed suspension for a lot of current market cars, the S550 Mustang was one of the only cars that I was remotely interested in (never thought I'd say that, lol). I ended up going back to 90's era Nissans because I love they way they drive, look, and here in AZ, the cost to register it is exponentially cheaper than a new car, ha ha.

[AZhitman]

Another great point. There's a vast difference in demographics here, and I'd agree that enthusiasts/collectors buy used more often than not.

[wa-chiss]

My coworker and I were just talking about this the other day. One topic we talked about was how complex the vehicles have become. Take a New Sienna for example. They easily have over 35 "ECU's" nowadays. Most Toyota's have over 15 as well. How"s that? Do I really need a computer for my Cruise Control?
Long gone are the days of no frills cars. I understand some things being required nowadays. Like blue tooth, airbags, impact crush zones, and now frontal collision avoidance (or whatever each manufacturer wishes to call it). All of which make driving safer, but can I get a car without power windows, without power seats, without touchscreen entertainment, no auto (rain sensing) wipers, no auto high beams, no power mirrors, no dimming rear view mirror or side mirrors, no reactive suspension (KDSS or X-REAS for Toyota), no auto HVAC or even dual/quad zone HVAC, no power door locks, no alarm, and no automatic transmission? No, I can't. That's because people now associate quality and value with how many options they can cram in a 3500+lbs vehicle. You want higher fuel economy? Get rid of all that crap! You can easily shave a bunch of weight by eliminating the "wants" in our vehicles. Saves on wiring, components, repairs, and complexity of the vehicle. With CAN communication already decreasing the amount of wiring in the vehicles, imagine how simple a car would be without all the added unnecessaries ......... We've just become lazy as a species that we feel we "Need" these things and want them to impress our friends. Driving has become less of a pleasure and more of a chore that we only enjoy it with options.

[Bubba1]

Yes, very true that the age of bare bones/no frill new cars are long gone. They've been disappearing for many years. It s a shame. For those that buy only used cars, I think that's great. But recognize that the reason you have the choices you have is due to people buying/leasing those very same vehicles new. And very few want new stripped down models anymore. It's a little like voting. If you don't pull the lever/push the button in the voting booth, you don't have as much say in your choices later. As far as enthusiasts buying more used cars? Sure. There many more used cars out there than new ones. But enthusiasts hardly corner the market on used cars. In fact, we make up a very small percentage of all car buyers.

I'm probably more tolerant to some technologies than others. For example, Im sure my passengers prefer heated seats over the my old fashioned way of consuming Mexican food the night before. And I don't necessarily agree that driving has become less of a pleasure. CVT's suck, for sure. But there are some really fun new cars out there. I enjoy driving a bare bones, old fashioned Lotus 7 as much as a luxury laden 707hp Hellcat with flappy paddles and all sorts of nannies, it's a different kinda fun, but still fun. I do recognize manufacturers are idiot proofing cars more now because well, American driver skills suck in general and we Americans tend to sue each other over just about anything that goes wrong But most of sporty ones allow you to turn off the nannies if you hate 'em that much. I say experience new cars with an open mind before condemning them. You might be surprised that you like 'em.

[Desert Rat]

I owned an '80 Corolla RWD manual trans 2 door coupe back in the day...paid $500 for it and killed it by doing cartwheels through the ditch at 70mph. That car was the epitome of bare bones. Manual everything. It was mildly fun but was no comparison for even the cheapest of today's cars for stability at speed, quietness, etc. Cars have simply become more refined.

I currently have a '77 F150 4x4 shortbed with a 351 and 4 speed. That truck is loud and uncivilized as it gets, and you don't want to dive it past 70mph due to no overdrive, and it's not pariticularly powerful. Today's trucks will all run 80mph all day quietly and safely, and run circles around that big old V8 truck. Trucks have simply become more refined.

In refining vehicles so much those of us who are old enough to remember when this 70s and 80s stuff was new understand the differences. Hard to compare a 30 year old car with a new one, but if you knew what that 30 year old car was like when IT was new, you have a better comparison. These enthusiasts will tell you new cars have lost the feel, the romance, and the simplicity, and will tout the nuances of that old car to no end, despite the fact that the new car does just about everything better than the old one.

Case in point...When I was in college the hot car was a 5.0 fox body mustang. today's minivans will keep up with those in a drag race stock vs. stock. Like we do with everything else, we romanticize the past while condemming the present, but these new cars out there are vastly superior from a safety and drivability standpoint. The downside is that they cost now what houses used to cost 30-40 years ago.

I've owned 5 Z cars over the years....first one was a 240Z. I loved that car but it can't do anything as well as my 370Z with more than double the horsepower. If you're still driving vehicles with a carb, you can appreciate the turnkey and drive qualities of new cars. You don't mess with automatic or manual chokes, letting cars warm up, etc. We take a lot of that for granted with modern vehicles.

Japanese, Euro, or American....I guess they all suck when you romanticize about past models, but they're all superior to their predecessors in almost every way, except perhaps the ability to tune them in your garage with basic hand tools.

[Jesda]

Aside from the FRS/BRZ/86, little from Japan interests me.
After decades of "rice cooker" jokes, Japanese cars, especially Nissans, have mostly become kitchen appliances.

The British, Swedish, Germans, and even the Americans have done a far superior job of making cars with personalities and appealing designs. Even the Australians for a while.

With the quality gap narrowing, "soul" matters more than ever.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Interperet this as you will, but here's my take:

If a friend was asking me for advice on which family car to buy, I might recommend something Japanese.

Aside from the Miata, there's nothing in production from any Japanese brand that I would consider spending my own money on.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

I would say I'm interested in the Miata, GT-86 and BRZ, The Z (to a much much lesser extent), accord coupe for a rainy day/winter car, the Mazda 3, the Mazda 6, and the NSX.

The miata would be good if it had a taller 6th gear. Damn thing is a non-overdrive transmission.
The Toyobaru twins would be better if they didn't have the god-awful torque dip. I'm not asking for more power, I'm asking for better power.
The Z is old as hell and a gas hog.
Accord coupe is on the list for a replacement for my Prelude (if I don't get an Acura RSX).
The 3 and 6 are just good cars that I recommend to people that are looking for that sort of thing.
The NSX is a bit odd, but I wouldn't mind getting a closer look at it/taking it for a drive.

The civic is too damn weird looking now a days and it seems like the engine has been tough to get to since 2008...

[Desert Rat]

Z a gas hog? Come on, I get low 20s in mine....lol.

Actually not terrible given the power and the RPMs the car runs. It's geared low to take advantage of the higher RPM power band in the 3.7....

Driving one with a manual feels very old school to me, and I like it.

But yeah, when Camaros and Mustangs with 450HP fire breathing V8s get better fuel economy, I see where you're coming from!

[Kompresshun]

It's really sad that I'm currently new car shopping and everything Japanese I've driven has bored me that fits my criteria.

I like the Q50 a lot, but the turbo models are more than I want to spend and I'm not sure I want another VQ engine in my life since I have had a version of them for the past 13 years numerous times. Great looking car though - I just think my money can be spent better elsewhere.

I drove a new Sentra SR Turbo and it was a huge disappointment. It's the only semi performance sedan Nissan currently offers with a manual transmission too sadly.

The Mazda 6 is great looking but lacks the horsepower I'd want. It would be a great daily driver but I feel like I'd grow bored with it quickly and there a few options to make it faster right now.

I have looked at Subaru stuff too, but Subaru isn't the same IMHO that it once was. There are a TON of WRXs for sale locally that are a year or less old with less than 3,000 miles on them. That scares me a lot, because when I started my search that was pretty high up on th list. After reading about all of the issues with the current generation of them though it's a great big NOPE now.

That pretty much exhausts my interest in anything Japanese that is new or CPO. It's a shame too, because I have owned a lot of japanese vehicles over the years.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Some more thoughts:

All the cars that I should be listing as would-be car-guy purchases just lack something.

I don't give two s*** about the GTR. Its price keeps going up and it keeps getting older and they keep releasing less-relevant special editions that don't do anything new.
The NSX is basically just there to sell copies of Motor Trend in pretty pictures.
The FRS is too stubbornly singleminded, but not in a charming way like the Miata.
The RC is SO f*** BLAND LOOKING, which is extra mindboggling because everything else in Lexus's lineup has gone from überbland to overstyled in a huge way. But it's not exciting to drive anyway, so who cares how it looks?
The Z is basically in the same boat as the GTR, except the only reason it feels too pricey is that it's very, very old.

Every single one of those "fun cars" suffers from a 100% lack of sex-appeal. They're just...thoroughly uninteresting. Academically, they're neat. As cars, they're forgettable. When your most outstanding cars are barely memorable, you need to seriously revisit your strategy.

But then there's the real issue:
There's a COMPLETE lack of compelling non-grocery-getters from the Japanese. There are no Chargers, no SSs, no SHOs from the Japanese. Sure, Mazda does a masterful job of making low-horsepower front-wheel-drive very engaging and even fun, but everyone else seems to have forgotten about the markets that aren't VOLUME SELLERS.

That's the key.

Nissan sold their souls to the econobox devil, but they haven't made an econobox worth considering in 25 years.

Toyota is just...doing...honestly, they're just doing what worked 30 years ago and hoping it'll keep working. But it won't. It ISN'T. They have zero understanding of the current automotive landscape, nevermind the future, and their relevance is long gone.

Honda is trying really, really hard to blend modern relevance with the charm of yore, but unfortunately the two are contrary values. The Accord gets bigger and bigger and less efficient and less sharp-looking while offering more of what everyone else can do but less of what anyone else CAN'T do. The Civic has had more ups and downs than a roller coaster and, like its big brother, offers zero compelling reasons to choose it over something else. The HRV is a great little crossover that's very well-suited for the current market, but WAY too expensive for what you get. Honda's probably the least BAD of the big Japanese brands, but it's not any more at being GOOD.

All of this was done for one reason: increase sales volume. Increase sales volume. Be as much like the next guy as possible, because the next guy sells a lot of cars.

But when everyone's the same, why should I choose anyone in particular?

The real problem is that the Japanese brands are all fighting amongst themselves, but their competition is OUTSIDE.

GM, Hyundai, Ford, and FCA all have VASTLY more diverse product portfolios that consist of more than just the same car in 32 different sizes. They have vehicles that are DESIGNED, that have a purpose, that are targetted at a specific need. Some of them are COMPLETE s***, but at least they're not the same as every other car they and their competitors are already building. But some of them are great. You're never going to see a Corvette, or a Viper, or an SS, or even an SHO from any of the big three Japanese brands right now. They don't have the balls to do anything that risky.

And I think THAT last sentence is where the Japanese are falling behind. Not because they won't take risks, but because they falsely perceive risks. Let's get this straight: building exciting cars is NOT a risk right now. We are in the golden age of the automobile. You can buy 300hp in a family sedan for very little money. You can buy 500hp for a little more. You can get street-legal sports cars with 700, 800, 900hp for non-exotic prices from everyday brands. You can get a Mustang with a turbo four that hauls a** AND gets good fuel economy. You can get 330hp in a f*** Ford Edge because groceries don't mind if your 0-60 times are ridiculous. You can buy a stupidly powerful supercharged Hemi in just about anything FCA makes that's bigger than a Dart, and if you don't want a V8 there's the new TT 3.0 V6. And none of these are premium or "performance" brands. They're just regular old carmakers, just like Honda, Toyota, and Nissan.

None of this is risky.

ALL of this sells like CRAZY.

But the Japanese are so busy building what's "safe" they haven't realized that the floods have receded and their high ground is being encroached upon by thunderclouds. It's not SAFE anymore to build what worked 30 years ago. Not even as a basis for a lineup. The Malibu and Fusion are so immeasurably superior to their mid-90s counterparts it's mindblowing. But the Camry, Accord, and Altima have taken, if anything, steps backward in the name of cutting cost to build margins. It's not enough to crap out a halo car and claim you haven't forgotten how to have fun. EVERY CAR in your lineup needs to possess a specific relevance. Whether that's fun or not is up to you, but being boring is NOT relevant. Never has been, never will be. Toyota succeeded with boringness decades ago by coupling it with unrivaled dependability. But now you can get even better dependability with a lot of other desirable traits.

The Japanese need to remember how to build cars people want to buy. That doesn't have to mean "build exciting cars." It means "build cars that are worth their own existence."

Right now, aside from Mazda, they are failing at that.

Z a gas hog? Come on, I get low 20s in mine....lol.

I get that out of my V8, hooning it hard.

[AZhitman]

...and ^ THAT, my friends, is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. NAILED it.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

In 2017, no one makes a turd.

I would argue FCA and VW still make turds.
I'm also not a fan of the current Versa (loved the 1st gen), or Pathfinder.

[float_6969]

Some more thoughts:

All the cars that I should be listing as would-be car-guy purchases just lack something.

I don't give two s*** about the GTR. Its price keeps going up and it keeps getting older and they keep releasing less-relevant special editions that don't do anything new.
The NSX is basically just there to sell copies of Motor Trend in pretty pictures.
The FRS is too stubbornly singleminded, but not in a charming way like the Miata.
The RC is SO f**king BLAND LOOKING, which is extra mindboggling because everything else in Lexus's lineup has gone from überbland to overstyled in a huge way. But it's not exciting to drive anyway, so who cares how it looks?
The Z is basically in the same boat as the GTR, except the only reason it feels too pricey is that it's very, very old.

Every single one of those "fun cars" suffers from a 100% lack of sex-appeal. They're just...thoroughly uninteresting. Academically, they're neat. As cars, they're forgettable. When your most outstanding cars are barely memorable, you need to seriously revisit your strategy.

But then there's the real issue:
There's a COMPLETE lack of compelling non-grocery-getters from the Japanese. There are no Chargers, no SSs, no SHOs from the Japanese. Sure, Mazda does a masterful job of making low-horsepower front-wheel-drive very engaging and even fun, but everyone else seems to have forgotten about the markets that aren't VOLUME SELLERS.

That's the key.

Nissan sold their souls to the econobox devil, but they haven't made an econobox worth considering in 25 years.

Toyota is just...doing...honestly, they're just doing what worked 30 years ago and hoping it'll keep working. But it won't. It ISN'T. They have zero understanding of the current automotive landscape, nevermind the future, and their relevance is long gone.

Honda is trying really, really hard to blend modern relevance with the charm of yore, but unfortunately the two are contrary values. The Accord gets bigger and bigger and less efficient and less sharp-looking while offering more of what everyone else can do but less of what anyone else CAN'T do. The Civic has had more ups and downs than a roller coaster and, like its big brother, offers zero compelling reasons to choose it over something else. The HRV is a great little crossover that's very well-suited for the current market, but WAY too expensive for what you get. Honda's probably the least BAD of the big Japanese brands, but it's not any more at being GOOD.

All of this was done for one reason: increase sales volume. Increase sales volume. Be as much like the next guy as possible, because the next guy sells a lot of cars.

But when everyone's the same, why should I choose anyone in particular?

The real problem is that the Japanese brands are all fighting amongst themselves, but their competition is OUTSIDE.

GM, Hyundai, Ford, and FCA all have VASTLY more diverse product portfolios that consist of more than just the same car in 32 different sizes. They have vehicles that are DESIGNED, that have a purpose, that are targetted at a specific need. Some of them are COMPLETE s***, but at least they're not the same as every other car they and their competitors are already building. But some of them are great. You're never going to see a Corvette, or a Viper, or an SS, or even an SHO from any of the big three Japanese brands right now. They don't have the balls to do anything that risky.

And I think THAT last sentence is where the Japanese are falling behind. Not because they won't take risks, but because they falsely perceive risks. Let's get this straight: building exciting cars is NOT a risk right now. We are in the golden age of the automobile. You can buy 300hp in a family sedan for very little money. You can buy 500hp for a little more. You can get street-legal sports cars with 700, 800, 900hp for non-exotic prices from everyday brands. You can get a Mustang with a turbo four that hauls a** AND gets good fuel economy. You can get 330hp in a f**king Ford Edge because groceries don't mind if your 0-60 times are ridiculous. You can buy a stupidly powerful supercharged Hemi in just about anything FCA makes that's bigger than a Dart, and if you don't want a V8 there's the new TT 3.0 V6. And none of these are premium or "performance" brands. They're just regular old carmakers, just like Honda, Toyota, and Nissan.

None of this is risky.

ALL of this sells like CRAZY.

But the Japanese are so busy building what's "safe" they haven't realized that the floods have receded and their high ground is being encroached upon by thunderclouds. It's not SAFE anymore to build what worked 30 years ago. Not even as a basis for a lineup. The Malibu and Fusion are so immeasurably superior to their mid-90s counterparts it's mindblowing. But the Camry, Accord, and Altima have taken, if anything, steps backward in the name of cutting cost to build margins. It's not enough to crap out a halo car and claim you haven't forgotten how to have fun. EVERY CAR in your lineup needs to possess a specific relevance. Whether that's fun or not is up to you, but being boring is NOT relevant. Never has been, never will be. Toyota succeeded with boringness decades ago by coupling it with unrivaled dependability. But now you can get even better dependability with a lot of other desirable traits.

The Japanese need to remember how to build cars people want to buy. That doesn't have to mean "build exciting cars." It means "build cars that are worth their own existence."

Right now, aside from Mazda, they are failing at that.

[/thread]
Nailed it. I have a brother in law that's been a mechanic for a long time and a DIE HARD Japaneese car guy, especially Honda and Toyota. His entire basis for this is reliability and ease to work on. I fight with him on this constantly. Basically everyone makes reliable cars now. Obviously there's exceptions, but getting 100K miles out of a car is nothing anymore. Hell, I'm at nearly 380K on my work truck (Chevy) and I'm pretty sure I'll get a 500K out of it. And it was built in 1999. I never hear of friends having their cars break down unless it was just neglect related. So as has been stated before, it then comes down to asthetics, soul, passion, purpose. I used to be ashamed to say it, but I'm not anymore. I'm more attracted to just about everything coming out of Detroit than most of what's coming out of Japan right now. I think Mazda still has "it", but it's still not quite there for me. I'd REALLY like to see the Mazda 6 with a turbo or a V6, but I'm just nit-picking. I do genuinely want a BRZ/GT86 and I think about selling the S14 and getting one every time something breaks on it, LOL. The Z is OK, but it's old. A GTR isn't on my radar financially. That's is from Japan for me. I can get a badass V8/TTV6 coupe/sedan from any of my local American car dealers, probably in any color I want, just setting on the lot ready to go, nothing special. And I like the aesthetics better as well. 'Murica!

[2_Liter_Turbo]

If I were to buy a new car today, it would most likely be a Ford *Gasp*!

[AZhitman]

I would argue FCA and VW still make turds.
I'm also not a fan of the current Versa (loved the 1st gen), or Pathfinder.

And I'd stand 100% corrected.

I'm also not convinced that Korean quality is up to Japanese standards - but gaining fast.

[Bubba1]

Yep, I'd say Hyundai and Kia are getting pretty close, judging by their continued improvements in reliability ratings the last couple years. Some of their models, particularly among the transportation appliance set have already become compelling choices, and the Stinger looks promising.

[Buzzman]

Yep, I'd say Hyundai and Kia are getting pretty close, judging by their continued improvements in reliability ratings the last couple years. Some of their models, particularly among the transportation appliance set have already become compelling choices, and the Stinger looks promising.

I've been trying to decide how to replace my 2006 Altima, and it is not an easy choice. Fortunately, I'm not in a hurry, so I have time to do my research.
I'm not even sure if I want/need another 4 door sedan, but that is the kind of vehicle that my better half wants.
I'm tempted to go with a mid size SUV, with the Audi Q5 at the top of my list. The Maxda CX5 is a close second.
As for appliance cars, I don't really want one. Camry, the latest Altima, Accord, etc are all off the list.
The only one I'd consider from that category group would be the Mazda6. I just wish it had a V6.
The Toyota Avalon has some redeeming qualities, but again, I'm unsure. I hate the front end on that thing (just like I hate every front end on a Lexus)
I am definitely interested in the upcoming Kia Stinger though. I'll probably wait until this fall to check it out when it arrives.
It's not easy. So many choices.

[nissangirl74]

This is something I struggle with as I keep piling the miles onto the Speed3. There are some things that I'm not willing to compromise on: it has to be a 4 door, it has to have a manual, and it has to have a decent amount of power. I'm not a speed demon but I like to have power on demand when I decide to make that call. I have a 45 minute commute and I want to spend that time in something fun and exciting.

*Nissan does not make anything that qualifies.
*Infiniti does not make anything that qualifies. *I would consider a used G if the mileage / price was right.*
*Toyota does not make anything that qualifies.
*Lexus does not make anything that qualifies. *I would consider a used LS 460 if the mileage / price was right.*
*Mazda doesn't currently make anything that qualifies. The Mazda 6 comes with a manual but my Speed3 has 100+ more hp and you can tell it. They have not confirmed another Speed3 for the future and the back seat isn't fabulous for passengers*
*Subaru nor VW have ever built anything I have any interest in owning.*
*Kia / Hyundai don't make anything that qualifies.*

To be fair, American car companies aren't building much that falls into those requirements either. You can get a Cadillac with a manual trans but I have an issue with paying more for a car than I did my first HOUSE. The European market has options but nothing in my price range with decent mileage.

Based on those options, I'm just going to take really good care of the Speed3 and hope that someone brilliant comes along and takes the market by storm within the next few years. I would say I'm not holding my breath, but truth is, I kinda am.

[skydragoness]

Aside from the FRS/BRZ/86, little from Japan interests me.
After decades of "rice cooker" jokes, Japanese cars, especially Nissans, have mostly become kitchen appliances.

The British, Swedish, Germans, and even the Americans have done a far superior job of making cars with personalities and appealing designs. Even the Australians for a while.

With the quality gap narrowing, "soul" matters more than ever.

I like the Toybaru and the ND(current) Miata. They have soul. Unfortunately, at their price point new, it's hard not to look at older models for the same price that bring more performance to the table (think older Corvette, 370z,etc). That being said, if I *had* to buy a new car. I'd get a BRZ with the sport handling package. It's like a brand-new 240sx essentially.

[frapjap]

The main appeal to 90's cars is the affordability and comparative simplicity, but there's more to a car than that. For perspective sake, when those old Rwd Corollas were new, they were NOT coveted by enthusiasts at all. In fact they were considered boring, underpowered, cheap economy cars. Sound familiar? Many years later after they fully depreciated and became become dirt cheap to buy, and the industry moved to Fwd, the old Rwd corollas got discovered by the younger set and suddenly it's a "hot" car. So as a baby boomer, I don't quite get when a young person reveres an AE86 Corolla and yet has comtempt for an FRS with twice the power and does everything so much better. Seems a bit off. Ok, I'll stop ranting.

Little late to the party, but you hit one of the many nails on the head in this roofing party. I feel like the mentality is based too highly on the 'bench racers' who never bother to actually get in the cars and take 'em for a spin. The other side of that coin is that some of those folks who revere an AE seem to think that just because its newer, the BRZ/FRS "should have more power because so much time has passed and its the new standard." I think they fail to realize that just about everything was making low numbers at the same time the AE was new, and they don't understand power:weight unless its in a Corvette.

This torque dip they yap about, really isn't all that bad or noticeable under most circumstances that aren't straight line acceleration from a dig- and even then, it'll only happen to you in first great. Its there, but the sensation is usually described as something WAY worse than it actually is. The feeling is more that the car flattens in acceleration for a brief moment then gets its nuts back again, unlike an inline that is more linear. Honestly, it isn't noticeable under part throttle application around town and isn't even a factor when you're pushing the car because you have a 3500-4k RPM to play with above the dip- kinda like how an S2000 doesn't get all that exciting until the 5500 mark; and then you're in speeding ticket zone. The limits of the BRZ are easier to get to and make the car more fun to drive more often.

That being said, if I *had* to buy a new car. I'd get a BRZ with the sport handling package. It's like a brand-new 240sx essentially.

Definitely! A better, newer, 240sx.

[float_6969]

I've heard similar things about that engine as well. That the torque dip isn't as bad as what everyone makes it out to be. And I also don't get the complaints about the power. It's a frigging 2.0L NA engine and makes 205hp. What the hell is everyone bitching about?!?!? When did an engine making 100hp/L NA become something to complain about? I remember when it was something considered amazing. Maybe it's more common now, but it's still an achievement.

[Bubba1]

The bitching indeed seems illogical, but then again logic does not necessarily apply when you add passion (and perhaps age to some extent) to the equation. Such is the nature of being an enthusiast.

[Desert Rat]

The torque dip from a dig in the 370Z is pretty awful too. It's my biggest gripe about the car. Once RPMs are past 3k, it's off like a rocket, but from a dig, just about every minivan with an automatic can get going faster. Its embarrassing. Yes, I could dump the clutch at higher RPM, but I prefer not to replace the clutch every 20k miles....

Very good points in this thread. Manual transmissions are going the way of the dodo, and I suspect in the next 10 years they'll be pretty much legislated out of existence as big brother starts mandating the accident avoidance features that really can't be pulled off with a manual.

These days are exciting times with the big 3 American makers coming up with their versions of "my d!ck is bigger than your d!ck" muscle cars with autos and manuals available across the board. If you would have told me in the 90s we'd see a muscle car revival with 600 and 700HP monsters available for about the cost of a loaded pickup truck, I'd have called BS, but here they are.

Nissan, Toyota, and Honda build appliances. I'm honestly shocked that Nissan still sells Z cars. If they weren't such a heritage marque I'd guess they'd have been dumped a long time ago due to low sales...then again, how can you expect robust sales when you've done nothing to refresh the car in a decade.....

[MinisterofDOOM]

When did an engine making 100hp/L NA become something to complain about? I remember when it was something considered amazing.

It's not that it isn't amazing. It's that hp/L is such a static metric. It doesn't really tell you much beyond the fact that that motor is very efficient. It doesn't tell you about how useful that power is, or what you can do with it.

But it's also the same thought process I come back to everywhere with modern cars: If you can do that with a tiny 4-banger, why aren't you doing it with a bigger motor? 100hp/L would be a lot more impressive in a 5 liter V8 than a 2 liter flat-four, because production cars have a realistic minimum weight. Power:Weight is everything, and when you reduce weight while reducing power, you gain nothing. Sure, you can have a lot of fun in a gutless car with magnificent handling characteristics. But you'll have more fun in a powerful car with magnificent handling characteristics. Contrary to many, I don't think it's always more fun to drive a slow car fast, and the reason for that is that if I own that car, I will quickly reach the limit of the capacity for my knowledge of the car's limits to grow with those limits. Give me a car that wants to kill me, and I'll ease into it while learning from mistakes. Give me a car that can't possibly kill me, and I'll get bored very fast.

As with anything at all: if you have too much, you can always choose to use less than you have. But if you don't have quite enough, there's not a damn thing you can do to change that. Even if I'm driving at 10/10ths, I want the capacity for 11/10ths out of the car. I don't want to be trapped by the car's engineering limitations; I want to be able to extend my ability as a driver as far as I can take it. Cars lacking in power do not allow for that. It's less rewarding and teaches less. This is why Corollas are boring. It's also why a car with lots of potential but no power is incredibly frustrating. That potential remains untapped, merely taunting you with what it could be if only we were working with more usable torque.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

There's a lot of things that go into making that high output efficient engine... many of which take up a lot of space and also produce a lot of heat. Its tough to scale that up, but it's certainly possible.