Goodbye, Toyota...gone to the Dark Side...

I sold the Tercel to buy the Supra. Still have the Supra.

Doesn't quite get to 44 MPG, however...:D

The Scion has electric everything. EVERYTHING.

Last summer the sunroof, wide open, decided it wasn't going to close when a deluge started. I looked around for the handle insert to close the roof.

Nope. Gone. Roof sticks open, you're STUCK. Period.

Trunk. Only a push-button switch. I've already worked out how to add a lock that will open it when it finally stops opening with the button.

If this car had been built in 1988, I'd start worrying right about now. It was built in 2005 and I started worrying 2 years ago.

At least they kept the old-school door locks.

Absolutely I do!

And you're on goddamn drugs. ;-)

El 14/11/14 a las 04:35, Your Name escribió:

Agree. They get 100 horse power by a liter without turbo.

Most of the consumers, will do the way back. Weight, consumption, and poor driving performance (inertia, center of gravity).

'Sup, Hach? I still have my 98 Supra, too. I recently bought a second Toyota (Lexus IS350) to join it in my garage.

I gotta have RWD.

You mean for under $30k? And if you don't mind a tiny, rock-hard-riding sports car?

If you have that kind of money, there's many great choices, and Aston Martin would not be high on the list.

There's even some great cars for well under $100k.

More expensive, yes, but well under $100k, well under Aston Martin money.

Just because the Toyota is the cheapest "sports car" doesn't make it "the only one remotely worth buying", obviously.

The Cayman and Boxster are mid, not rear, engined, and are probably the finest driver's cars available on the market today.

Far inferior to MANY German cars, most of which are more practical in addition be being better/higher-performing cars.

Nope. I'd rather have a Mustang, which is st least as practical. Even the Corvette could be considered about as practical, while being far higher performing.

Like Ferraris and such, and far from "rear-engined utter crap".

Perfectly balanced, actually.

The rest of your idiocy snipped, unread.

Some cheap Toyota "about the only thing out there these days remotely worth buying".

What a dipshit.

*plonk*

Ya know, I believe it!

We were discussing cars in the barber shop, and the guy getting his hiarcut next to me says, "All cars have PW and PDL now. It's standard equipment!"

Uh..no! It's still an option on some cars!

Nah...I had to give them up...finally!

Oh...I see...for buying a HYUNDAI!!!

Hey...ya gotta give the underdog a chance sometimes. So far it's been a good car, but nowhere near the fuel economy I would have expected.

I miss mine as well. But it was either sell it or no Supra.

I had the LHS and a Celica as well, and they both ran well.

Yeah! I'd like a BRZ/FR-s...or maybe a Genesis coupe!

What i hate are those glass rooves. Bloody dangerous in a roll over, and they costing thousands. Can't get the options i want unless i buy those dambed glass rooves.

The damb suv, all have tiny side windows at the back unless you buy a bmw.

Its like they are moving all the glass to the roof.. Its ridiculas and they all the same.

Look at the chevy traverse, the santa fe, all tiny windows. and the rouges .

Subaru forester is the only one bucking the trend, but the prices are for the rich folk.

So stay>El 14/11/14 a las 04:35, Your Name escribió:

The toyota 2004-2005 3.3 liter is 10% more efficient that the 3.5 that started in 2006 onward.

Not by any means.

I use it for work. 8,000 miles since July.

It WAS getting good gas mileage, but today I came up with 22 MPG! WTF?!?!?!

Maybe I did it wrong, but I don't think so.

1.6L...my Tercel 1.5L managed at least 38 MPG, usually 42-44...

And, put better tires on it. I changed to 185/70-14 winter tires, and it handles a LOT better. The Mazda is on the way out, so I'll put the

185/65-14's on it in the spring. The stock 175/70-14's are too tall and squishy...