Toyota Supra (A90)

  • Thread starter RocZX
  • 2,736 comments
  • 285,307 views
Whatever Toyota themselves offer as an official package, it'll likely be a lot cheaper in the aftermarket. A simple fuel system upgrade (pump+injectors) and tune will do a lot towards waking it up.
Waiting expectantly for the first people to try and extract far too much power from it only to blow it up and kick off rumours that it's a POS because it can't pointlessly handle 700bhp or whatever.

Was quite interesting watching Engineering Explained's youtube vid on the car that Toyota tore down the engine when they got hold of it and ran basically everything through Toyota quality control to ensure it meets their own standards. He did speculate that the relatively low output (though still, 60 in the low-fours...) was to ensure it comfortably clears Toyota's expectations for reliability.

Honestly, for me it's quick enough. I know that's a silly thing to say as people will always want more whether it's a Chiron or Supra or ride-on lawnmower, but I'd be much more inclined to fiddle with the character of the engine rather than the outright performance. Aftermarket induction, aftermarket exhaust, and it'd be just right and probably sound and feel a little less BMW-like in the powertrain. A manual gearbox would help separate it even more, but that's pretty much up to the car gods now...
 
The whole thing with removing the pieces that open the vents, are for additional cooling. If you are going to take it to the track, same removal to expose the vents requires someone to engineer ducting. That's something the person that buys the TRD kit, probably won't do anyway.

So why didn't TRD do that in the first place instead of be lazy about it?

"Tuning Package" is meant to talk performance, it's in the wording.
But it seems like it's more of a "Salon Package" the more we look into this...
 
I like the aluminium wheels.

This (see the white arrow on photo below) painted in the same colour as the car would look a lot better. The car looks wider with those CFRP inlets.

EDIT: forgot to post the photo. :embarrassed:

Toyota-GRSupra_TRD-pack-11-860x484.jpg
 
Last edited:
I feel around this day and age, the term "tuner" or "tuning" has become that of a very subjective term to use.

A car that is just given an appearance package can be considered a "tuner," while a car given upgrades can be considered such as well.
 
So why didn't TRD do that in the first place instead of be lazy about it?

"Tuning Package" is meant to talk performance, it's in the wording.
But it seems like it's more of a "Salon Package" the more we look into this...
Bold my last sentence in what you quoted. That's probably why.

Plus, listen to what Tada says about that in the video above. He says the car is balanced as is. They've left room for owners to tune the cars at will. It's not required to modify the car to enjoy it.
 
Waiting expectantly for the first people to try and extract far too much power from it only to blow it up and kick off rumours that it's a POS because it can't pointlessly handle 700bhp or whatever.



B58 650hp with a bigger turbo, bolt-ons, tune, and E50 mix on STOCK INTERNALS in this BMW M240i (B58 engine). That's twice the power with not that much done.
 
427lbs-ft of torque, at the wheels.

for reference, that's more than an R35 GTR

:eek:

Either Toyota severely, massively underrated the Supra or they sent 'round ringers for the press....that number is something like 30% higher than rated....
427 to the wheels? That's over 500 crank assuming 15% losses.
I wouldn't put too much stock in the validity of that test, I suspect some kind of error has been made. They're probably a bit under rated and they might have turned the dials to 11 on the press cars; it may well be putting out 339 hp to the wheels. But 427 tq?

Let's wait for further testing.
 
Because it's cool. ;)

Any word on overboost? I'm not sure of other makes, but the Falcon XR8(supercharged) is rated at 450hp but about 540hp on overboost.
 
Now i wonder if GT Sport will bump the power of the supra,because they are probably using the same info Toyota gave to the press.

The info Toyota has provided the press is 335hp and 369lbft of torque. Does GT Sport not match that?
 
I am guessing the press cars are slightly "hotter" , it wouldn't be the first time it's been done.
It happens occasionally, but it's not unknown for some cars just to make more power than they're quoted. There are a lot of variables, not least different dynos, and a lot of manufacturers will quote conservatively, partly because they'll test for average power during development and quote at the lower end, and partly to avoid customers getting cars independently measured and coming back to complain if their car is reading low.

There have been a few high-profile cases of tweaked press cars. The popularly-quoted one in the UK was the original Octavia vRS. It was supposed to have a 180bhp version of VW's 1.8-litre turbo engine, but turned in absolutely ridiculous 0-60 times when tested by magazines. General consensus was that it was running the 225bhp variant from the contemporary Audi TT...
 
These recent numbers are promising, hoping we see more examples hitting similar numbers. Not uncommon for any performance car to have some factory freaks leave the production line.
 
Dynojets are apparently considered to be on the generous side compared to other dynos, but I think it's still safe to say that these things are underrated by a good margin.
 
Those times are useless for comparison, airport runways are hardly the best grip sceniaro.
I disagree. Whatever the grip is of airport runways, it is probably more similar to the grip of roads we use daily. The World's greatest drag race is probably for show but it is still a drag race on asphalt which makes a good reference. I'm not saying that it is accurate but it is for sure a good reference.
I have no idea which track or road Car and Driver used for the 3.8 sec result but it could well have been on a race track with high grip or on a piece or a road, private or not, with similar grip to an airport runway or a road for daily driving.
 
I disagree. Whatever the grip is of airport runways, it is probably more similar to the grip of roads we use daily. The World's greatest drag race is probably for show but it is still a drag race on asphalt which makes a good reference. I'm not saying that it is accurate but it is for sure a good reference.
I have no idea which track or road Car and Driver used for the 3.8 sec result but it could well have been on a race track with high grip or on a piece or a road, private or not, with similar grip to an airport runway or a road for daily driving.
Surface matters more then anything, that's why when you get figures like 400m times they are usually done on a proper drag strip where the grip off the line is immense as they are rubbered with prep.

The car will eventually race it's competition and then we will get an idea of where it stands.
 
Surface matters more then anything, that's why when you get figures like 400m times they are usually done on a proper drag strip where the grip off the line is immense.
That is just it. It is not about the drag race but the circumstance they used to do the test and the results. Whatever asphalt you use, whatever the circumstances are, even the driver behind the wheel, the times are always going to be different, slightly. That is why these times are a reference. And I'm always using the word reference on purpose. I'm not saying that these times are accurate.

A couple of days ago, I saw a youtube clip of a 0 - 60 test with the Supra. The first time he got a 4.4 second, and when he tried again he got a 4.0. A quarter mile in 12.5 sec. And it was on a race track with loads of grip. So, if this was done on a runway, it would have been a slightly different result but still a reference with the times I posted earlier.





If the World's Greatest drag race was done a couple of time, the results would probably have been different as well, not much but different.
 
Back