I Had A Go In One

[Uncle Buck]

Saw my first Gt86 on the road yesterday - in blue & driven by a 40's something lady. Probably quite a typical age group for the car as it's reasonably affordable (if not to me, lol). It looked nice, but I wouldn't have one w/out the supercharger for more torque.

[jwball]

I was always under the impression autos were worse on fuel due to the gearbox wasting energy to change the gears?

This hasn't been true of many modern autoboxes for several years now - often they have more gears which enables them to run more efficiently (e.g. Chrysler are getting ready to launch a 9-speed auto). & they tend to be dual clutch transmissions rather than using torque converters. Apparently the next BMW M5 won't even have a manual transmission as an option, they will all be autos.

I'm going from experience with a 2 year old C Class Kompressor Auto, the fuel economy is noticeably worse than the manual.

Nice to see technology improving though considerably.

[Red Yaris 54]

Modern Auto boxes have come on a long way from the old style "slush box" (As used by Mercedes Benz on the Auto C class) with the inefficient brake bands that did indeed use more fuel and drain power

The Modern Auto boxes actually improve both economy and emmisions

[Cyker]

Well they tried to go down the efficiency route with the MMT but made it horrible to drive and it still wasn't particularly efficient; The main source of loss is that most autos run the engine to higher RPMs than a manual driver would go to before shifting which is where the fuel waste occurs.

However, they do this for a good reason; If you don't do that you will hit situations where the engine can't deliver the power it needs without you forcing a kickdown which results in screaming engine sounds and jerkiness. We've had enough reports of this kind of problem from MMT owners who've tried to traverse a busy roundabout only for the car to pick entirely the wrong gear and been left hanging for a few agonizing and scary seconds.

That is in fact was what totally put me off the MMT when I tested one!

Torque converters don't have this problem, but they have pumping losses which can't really be fixed. MMTs can be tweaked in software and all mfgs at least try to but without any external knowledge being fed to the ECU, all they can do is improve it for one situation but make it worse for another.

I am curious about the CVT in the Yaris as I've not tried one and don't know anyoen who has one, but my prior experiences with belt-driven CVTs is that they are worse to drive, even 'tho in theory they should be better.

Supposedly they've fixed all the old CVT annoyances with this one but we already have one post about it making stupid gear choices when coasting down a hill and making the engine rev up to silly RPMs (We speculate it's a misguided attempt to increase engine braking.) so I'm hedging my bets on that...

The only exception I'll say is the HSD system; I think it is bar none the best autobox in the world right now; It has none of the problems of all the others - You can drive it gentle but if you floor it responds instantly. It's efficient but still very smooth. IMHO they should just sell manuals and HSDs; Throw the autoboxes out and put the R&D into making the HSDs cheaper! :D

[Uncle Buck]

Yep, have to say I totally agree Cyker.

[Red Yaris 54]

The GT 86 does not use an MMT box but utilises a modern CVT system that is totally removed from the old early DAF and Volvo belt driven cars

The modern CVT's give very smooth lurch free transmission and improve fuel consumption whilst lowering emmisions

They are stepless in gearchangeing and can be used "manually" via the paddle shifts

on the steering

Technology has certainly advanced......this IS the way forward IMO

[C_ED_99]

The GT 86 does not use an MMT box but utilises a modern CVT system that is totally removed from the old early DAF and Volvo belt driven cars

The modern CVT's give very smooth lurch free transmission and improve fuel consumption whilst lowering emmisions

They are stepless in gearchangeing and can be used "manually" via the paddle shifts

on the steering

Technology has certainly advanced......this IS the way forward IMO

I hate to tell you this but the auto in the GT86 is a slush box (torque converter), the reason that it gets better mpg is that it has longer ratios. Top gear in the six speed manual is lower than 5th gear in the auto box.

[Red Yaris 54]

The GT 86 does not use an MMT box but utilises a modern CVT system that is totally removed from the old early DAF and Volvo belt driven cars

The modern CVT's give very smooth lurch free transmission and improve fuel consumption whilst lowering emmisions

They are stepless in gearchangeing and can be used "manually" via the paddle shifts

on the steering

Technology has certainly advanced......this IS the way forward IMO

I hate to tell you this but the auto in the GT86 is a slush box (torque converter), the reason that it gets better mpg is that it has longer ratios. Top gear in the six speed manual is lower than 5th gear in the auto box.

You surprise me with that statement as at the UK launch (Goodwood Festival of Speed) I was informed that the Auto used the CVT system

I will hopefully get chance to check this out soon and will post the findings :)

[C_ED_99]

I think it tells you in the brochure, though I have recycled mine so can't check...

Certainly the autocar review mentions that it's a torque converter.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/toyota/gt-86/first-drives/toyota-gt-86-automatic

[Cyker]

I must admit I find the autocar article a bit suspect; It talks about the system blipping the engine to match revs during downshifts and shifting within a fifth of a second but then talks about losing pull to the torque converter.

That doesn't make any sense! Gear shifts on CVTs and torque converters are seamless and practically instantaneous - You're either in one gear or another; there is no delay, and as they are seamless shifts the engine wouldn't need to be blipped to match revs because the gears are always engaged!

The only time you need to rev-match is on semi-autos like MMT and DSG because the transmission shafts get disconnected during gear changes and they lose sync. With CVT and Torque autos, that never happens!

Hmm, I wonder if we'd ever see a GT86 HSD, but set up for power, not mpg?

[Lancaster Rayleigh]

Hmm, I wonder if we'd ever see a GT86 HSD, but set up for power, not mpg?

A very interesting notion Cyker, I like your thinking! :D

[Parts-King]

It does have a torque convertor, would have to look up the full technical spec for a complete answer, no good looking at me for techno info

Will look it up when I have time

Kingo

[PhilGee]

I was lucky enough to take our demo home for the night after it was thought that us technicians never get to take new models home. Took the missus and my 4 year old son out. Safe to say they enjoyed it. Not as much as me though. Ended up putting more fuel in and spending most of the night driving round in it. My wife thought i'd crashed or something i was out that long. Hand on heart i would buy one with my own money. Yeah, could be quicker/more power but in real day to day driving theres plenty of power and the drive/handling is just awesome. I just need a pay rise now

[Cyker]

Any employee discount?

[PhilGee]

Yeah, but not enough! One day it will be mine

[emin-j]

I PDI Toyota's for a living so get the chance to drive all Toyota/Lexus models and the GT86 is a favourite of mine and my PDI'r colleagues,the Auto version is rapid and feels quicker than the manual

Although the 86 feels a little underpowered the torquey engine still gives an exciting drive and the car is very comfortable.

The interior is quite a clever mix of retro/modern design.

Although the car is not high on BHP it doesn't weigh a lot either which makes it quite an exciting drive

[lordgrover]

I'm a bit confused by some of the comments about a perceived lack of power/torque.

You could say it's also a bit crap at being an estate car. Not too clever as a people carrier either.

More power is a trivial issue, if it were the intention the combined might of Toyota and Subaru would've produced a 250+/300+/500+ BHP monster, but they didn't - because that is not what was called for. They decided a small, (comparatively) light-weight 2+2 with modest power, limited grip and excellent handling was what they wanted, and that is what we got.

I've done the loadsapowr thang with the TVR and to some extent the 350Z, but this is delivering exactly what I, and I suspect many others want.

Cheap, reliable motoring with a bit of fun thrown in.

If I want full-on, traffic-light drag racing, expensive to run/insure slaaag I'd look at a GTR or M-car - this is not it. Nor is it meant to be.

[Parts-King]

You have hit the nail on the head Lordgrover. A moderate sports car for only 25K that ticks the boxes for customers AND the company line (low emissions, good looking, head turning, auto press raving etc) They are capable of producing great big turbo charged lumps but in todays modern world, that car sells in very limited numbers. This one will sell very well indeed for the small price tag

Kingo

[CPN]

I'm a bit confused by some of the comments about a perceived lack of power/torque.

You could say it's also a bit crap at being an estate car. Not too clever as a people carrier either.

More power is a trivial issue, if it were the intention the combined might of Toyota and Subaru would've produced a 250+/300+/500+ BHP monster, but they didn't - because that is not what was called for. They decided a small, (comparatively) light-weight 2+2 with modest power, limited grip and excellent handling was what they wanted, and that is what we got.

I've done the loadsapowr thang with the TVR and to some extent the 350Z, but this is delivering exactly what I, and I suspect many others want.

Cheap, reliable motoring with a bit of fun thrown in.

If I want full-on, traffic-light drag racing, expensive to run/insure slaaag I'd look at a GTR or M-car - this is not it. Nor is it meant to be.

As a new GT86 owner, I would totally agree with all of your assertions; especially the last paragraph...

I too have experienced motoring's power extremes during my life and this car is a great example of how to produce a well balanced true "sports" car without going over the top in any particular direction. There have been a few examples of such a car during my lifetime and I would suggest that the GT86 will join those ranks as a "stand out" example of this generation... I feel sure that in years to come, it will become a classic like those of similar ilk that it follows...

[hedleyf]

I must admit I find the autocar article a bit suspect; It talks about the system blipping the engine to match revs during downshifts and shifting within a fifth of a second but then talks about losing pull to the torque converter.

That doesn't make any sense! Gear shifts on CVTs and torque converters are seamless and practically instantaneous - You're either in one gear or another; there is no delay, and as they are seamless shifts the engine wouldn't need to be blipped to match revs because the gears are always engaged!

The only time you need to rev-match is on semi-autos like MMT and DSG because the transmission shafts get disconnected during gear changes and they lose sync. With CVT and Torque autos, that never happens!

Hmm, I wonder if we'd ever see a GT86 HSD, but set up for power, not mpg?

[hedleyf]

Hi,

The Lexus Isf has a state of the art auto box and at the time of of its launch was the fastest changing box in production,this car blips the throttle on downshift, technical informed me that it was for sport sound reasons only and has nothing to do with syncing the gears as the engine is actually disconnected from tha box for a split second whilst this happens,the gear is already selected before the blip, all this takes place in I think off the top of my memeroy one thousands of a second,could be one hundreds of a second? Anyway quicker than you can blink.

[Cyker]

The IS-F has a very nice locking torque converter autobox. I read the '86's one is derived from it, but minus a couple of gears. :)

They should use that in all their cars instead of the MMT or CVT IMHO!

[CPN]

this car blips the throttle on downshift, technical informed me that it was for sport sound reasons only and has nothing to do with syncing the gears as the engine is actually disconnected from tha box for a split second whilst this happens,the gear is already selected before the blip, all this takes place in I think off the top of my memeroy one thousands of a second,could be one hundreds of a second? Anyway quicker than you can blink.

I would disagree with "technical" on this as, from direct experience of other (not so good) locking torque converters, I would think there is also a degree of "comfort" involved aswell. For example, try changing down (manually) in a Hyundai Coupe's HMatic Auto box from 3rd to 2nd when decelerating and there is an awful jerky surge of braking as the slowing engine grabs hold of the drive shafts... It is quite amateurish in its implementation and not smooth at all... (4th to 3rd is not quite so bad...) ...

The IS-F has a very nice locking torque converter autobox. I read the '86's one is derived from it, but minus a couple of gears. :)

They should use that in all their cars instead of the MMT or CVT IMHO!

The GT86 auto, on the other hand, makes a much better and smoother job of it precisely because of those throttle blips on change down matching the engine speed more closely to what it should be when the new ratio is finally connected. It may well "sound" better but it also feels better and more comfortable in use for both the driver and passenger; especially if approaching a junction rapidly and needing to bleed of the speed smoothly but quickly without having to make heavy applications on the brakes... Add to all that the rapid manual changes possible by using either the stick or paddles and for me, you have a winning combination for an automatic car in the GT86.

I would totally agree with your last sentence Cyker although I'm sure a lot of manual purists (of which I used to be one!) would probably disagree... ;)

Colin

[hedleyf]

Hi,

I think on your lines here as the gear is selected and engaged when the engine is still on the throttle blip,this happens so quick the engine must be still be down revving when it's all locked back up ,I think this helps for a more comfortable change, On the MMT front I can,t think how the department of transport ever passed these for road use as I find them very unsafe and unsure,you just don,t feel you have the same control over it.

[CPN]

Sorry but "MMT" stands for what on this occasion?