Jump to content

Talk:Toyota 86

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HereComesThePainTrain (talk | contribs) at 03:55, 16 February 2014 (→‎Automatic Transmission: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Subaru BRZ as primary article

The Toyota GT86 was developed and engineered by "Subaru" Fuji Heavy Industries (FHI), and is built in Subaru FHI's Gunma factory. The Toyota contribution is body styling and the direct injection system for the Subaru boxer engine, then Toyota marketing and sales volume. Subaru could easily have built the car without Toyota, but Toyota could never have built the car without Subaru. As the primary (90+%) development and all (100%) production is Subaru, the car should be noted as a Subaru, with "Toyota GT86" / "Toyota 86" redirecting to Subaru BRZ.

This is interesting, could you please provide sources? I'm asking this because several car reviewers stated almost the opposite, like Toyota developing the car and later asking Subaru to join in and bring a good engine. Pascalbrax (talk) 10:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that the article sources indicate that Toyota provided the bureaucratic "push" to proceed with the car -- but a substantial majority of the engineering work is clearly from Subaru, and all variants of the car are unquestionably built by Subaru. The Toyota and Scion variants of this vehicle are essentially rebadged variants of the Subaru, and I agree that the article title should be Subaru BRZ. Pitamakan (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And the Subaru is limited in production compared to the Toyota. Per WP:COMMONNAME, the Toyota 86 title is the name most commonly associated with the cars. Who built what is irrelevant. The359 (Talk) 16:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the defense that's going to be taken for this one, the article should probably be renamed Scion FR-S, since this is English-language Wikipedia and that's the name the greatest number of English-speakers will recognize. Pitamakan (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a defense, it is an explanation. There is no requirement for the commonality of the name to be English. Toyota 86 is the default used by media and owners to refer to the platform used by the car, it is the default used here.

Weight

There is no reference of the weight. According to http://www.toyota.co.uk/cgi-bin/toyota/bv/generic_editorial.jsp?navRoot=toyota_1024_root&fullwidth=true&noLeftMenu=true&forceText=%3cnone%3e&edname=CC-FT86II-landing&zone=Zone+Cars&id=CC-FT86II-landing weight is going to be 1180 kgs. Blokatos (talk) 00:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using other wikis as references.

There have been some attempts to use http://www.allcarwiki.com/wiki/Toyota_GT-86 as a reference. However, WP:LINKSTOAVOID (point 12) specifically says that open wikis (ie editable by the general public) are NOT allowed. The reason is that anybody can put wrong or misleading information onto that external wiki and then try to treat it as a source for here. For example, I could edit http://www.allcarwiki.com/wiki/Toyota_GT-86 to say that the engine will be a 2.3 litre V6, and then try to use it as a reference to put the same info on Wikipedia - not good! I'm as excited by this new car as anyone else but all information must be verifiable by reliable references such as articles by respected magazines/newspapers and manufacturer press releases (with due care to advertising hyperbole).  Stepho  talk  02:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mega merge

Recently a lot of information was merged from the Subaru BRZ Concept STI and Scion FR-S and those pages were converted to links to this page. There is also a lot of information at Toyota FT-86, Toyota FT-86 G Sports and Toyota FT-86 II. This car started as a concept car (FT-86) that went through a number of revisions (FT-86 G Sports, FT-86 II), splits (FR-S concept, Subaru BRZ Concept) and finally production (86, Scion FR-S, Subaru BRZ). Does it make more sense to make one large article that also includes the various concept cars and alternative brand names or does it make more sense to leave the concept cars at Toyota concept vehicles, 2000-2009 and Toyota concept vehicles, 2010-2019?

Advantages of a merged article is that the information is all in one place and there is less duplication. There will still have to be entries at Toyota concept vehicles, 2000-2009 and Toyota concept vehicles, 2010-2019 but they will be much reduced and merely point to this article for further details. This article will of course have to list each variation but it would be in the form of how it differed from the other variations.

The advantages of each concept car having its full details at Toyota concept vehicles, 2000-2009 or Toyota concept vehicles, 2010-2019 is that it puts each concept car in its spot in history and avoids having lots of stub entries that say nothing more than 'follow this link for details'. The main 86 article would of course have a development section which would have very brief details and link to the various concept cars.

It can often be a coin toss whether concept cars that make it into production should have the concept cars details on the main concept pages or if the details should be on the production car page. Both solutions have advantages and disadvantages. If we say that the concept car details should always be with the production car then we are left with the concept vehicle pages having many gaps (ie only containing concept cars that did not make production). But having the concept car details with the production car details is very attractive when the reader is thinking of the development history of the production car. On the other hand, if we always put the concept car details on the concept vehicle pages then the history of the development of the production car is less obvious.

Any thoughts?  Stepho  talk  03:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support the mega merge by Donnie Park (althout not mentionin the sources of the text in the edit description is a serious mistake). In general I prefer production-close concept cars (like here) to be described in the same article as the production model. --NaBUru38 (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone upload a picture for the Scion FR-S

Can somebody upload an image for the Scion FR-S concept ? Please get a picture from: http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1058694_scion-fr-s-live-from-the-new-york-auto-show This is the email saying that we are allowed to use one of their pictures as long as a link is given:

"Hi *****, do you know this photo is of the FR-S concept? If that works in context, the usage is fine so long as there is a link back to the page where you saw it.


On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:05 PM, <*****************@gmail.com> wrote:


Name : ***************** E-mail : *****************@gmail.com Feedback : Hi, I was wondering if you will allow me to use one picture from "Scion FR-S: Live from the New York Auto Show, Gallery 1" to upload onto Wikipedia. Thanks, *****



This message was sent to you by *****************@gmail.com via The MotorAuthority ----- " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.27.103 (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but the text above could have been easily faked, so it is not authoritative. WP:Photos explains it.  Stepho  talk  22:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Official sites listed by country

In the external links section we have a list of countries taking the reader to the official websites for each country. Should this list be:

  1. Exhaustive. If Toyota maintains a website in that country then it gets listed. Might be long but the list is shown in compact form.
  2. A handful of representative countries. Typically US, Canada, UK and Australia as major English speaking countries. Sure makes the rest of the world feel a bit second class.
  3. US only - obviously the world's biggest car buying economy is more important than everyone else. Sarcasm by me but a view held by many Americans.
  4. Deleted - let the reader find things by themselves.

The trigger for this discussion is over whether Jamaica should be in the list or not. Since this could affect many other automotive articles, I'll make a mention on the automobile project page as well so that others can comment for or against it.  Stepho  talk  06:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. Minimize the number of official links to one, possibly more than one in some exceptional cases. Further, we are not a buyers guide, we don't need links to every country out there. To simplify things, I think we really only need two website: Subaru Global's page on the BRZ, and Toyota Global's page on the 86. The359 (Talk) 09:07, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly agree with the general thrust of WP:ELMINOFFICIAL - why present multiple pages when one or two will do the same job. And that BRZ page certainly offers a lot of material. However, that Toyota page is just a gallery and offers almost no concrete information. I think that market specific pages are still preferable because each market has different specifications. What is offered in Australia can be quite different to what is offered in the US. These links used to take up a whole line each, but now that they are all compressed to a single line, they don't take up much room at all.  Stepho  talk  22:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But we are not a shopping guide. Specific trim levels for every single country are not what we are here for. The variance between countries is, quite honestly, minimal. The space they take up has no bearing on the fact that it is overlinking. The359 (Talk) 22:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chassis code for article

I noticed while reading the article that the chassis code (ZN6) for the 86 isn't listed anywhere on here even though it used to be. Can anyone explain why or was there a reason for not including it? 98.198.212.110 (talk) 08:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strange, it used to be there. Feel free to add it back in.  Stepho  talk  00:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic Transmission

The automatic transmission in the GT86 and all other variants is definitively not derived from the IS-F as the article currently states. The transmission is derived from the IS250. Both cars feature the A960E transmission, with the GT86 featuring updated components and programming.