new MR2, Lotus?

[2cams70]

First generation MR2 was a blatant knock off by Toyota of the Fiat X1/9. 4AGE engine was a blatant knock off of the Cosworth BDA (many of the key internal dimensions are the same).
Second generation MR2 (I've driven these over an extended period) is nothing to get too excited about either. Engine feels and sounds like something out of a Camry. I was happy to give it back after a week or so worth of driving. Toyota 2000GT. The styling was contracted out and so was the engine. Too heavy and a pretty ordinary performer that didn't win any races.

[661]

Just saying...

[Mazzini]

First generation MR2 was a blatant knock off by Toyota of the Fiat X1/9. 4AGE engine was a blatant knock off of the Cosworth BDA (many of the key internal dimensions are the same).
Second generation MR2 (I've driven these over an extended period) is nothing to get too excited about either. Engine feels and sounds like something out of a Camry. I was happy to give it back after a week or so worth of driving. Toyota 2000GT. The styling was contracted out and so was the engine. Too heavy and a pretty ordinary performer that didn't win any races.

I am pretty sure the MR2 Mk1 was designed by Lotus for Toyota when they owned a significant shareholding in Lotus. I had one in the mid to late 80's - it was tremendous fun and very Lotus like

After the two companies parted ways, Lotus breached the Non Disclosure Agreement about the design work. I remember Mike Kimberley saying that he could show the design work to prove that it was their work.

The Mk2 MR2 was all Toyota and not a patch on the original and had a reputation for swapping ends for no apparent reason.

[Mazzini]

The attachment 660-toyota-2000gt-1-624x416.jpg is no longer available

Just saying...

Indeed

[2cams70]

Have a google of the Fiat X1/9 and tell me Toyota didn't copy it for the original MR2 just like Mazda copied the Elan for the original MX5.

Have a look at the chassis of the 2000GT and tell me they didn't copy Lotus.

I've seen the original IS200 benchmarked against the E36 BMW in minute detail. Copied almost exactly.

I guess plagiarism is the best form of flattery though. Toyota hardly ever do anything original.

[Mazzini]

At the time Toyota owned 21% of Lotus and I can remember Mike Kimberley's comments in Motor magazine, it would have been about 1988. He said Toyota claimed that that they designed the car, but he could show the project files for the car, there was a big Lotus input in that car.

Look at the other concept cars that Lotus and other manufacturers kicked about in the mid 80's, they all looked very similar - they are all of their age - wedges.

I posted the 2000GT chassis photo, I am fully aware it's copied from the Elan, which is why I posted it. If you have a close look at the car, it's an identikit of English and European sports car manufacturers of the time. About ten years ago I saw one in the flesh in Tokyo, it maybe a bit of this and a bit of that, but it still made people stop and look.

As a former MR2 Mk1 owner I can put my hand on my heart and say that it was a great car, it's Lotus roots were very apparent.

Toyota made a big thing about the Mr 2 Mk 2 being an all Toyota design, my brother in law had on, it was uninspired and it handled poorly.

[rgh0]

All cars have some aspect of "copying" of other cars that have gone before. It is just some more than others. At the time the Mk1 MR2 was launched in Australia it was advertised as suspension design by Lotus so it was no secret that Lotus had a hand in the car.

While Toyota copy aspects of other manufacturers designs like all manufacturers they have a tendency to execute it much better with resultant better reliability and maintainability.

cheers
Rohan

[h20hamelan]

And thats what progress is, but. Everything looks the same now.

[2cams70]

All cars have some aspect of "copying" of other cars that have gone before. It is just some more than others. At the time the Mk1 MR2 was launched in Australia it was advertised as suspension design by Lotus so it was no secret that Lotus had a hand in the car.

While Toyota copy aspects of other manufacturers designs like all manufacturers they have a tendency to execute it much better with resultant better reliability and maintainability.

Yes but Toyota have historically copied and used the good ideas of others far more than most other manufacturers. Don't get me wrong - it's a very successful formula for them and they are highly profitable but I for one appreciate more those that innovate rather than copy.

No decision by them is ever made on emotion or gut instinct. Everything is based on data and calculation with profit being the main target. I know from industry experience how they operate.

If you just want something with "suspension tuned by Lotus" there's always the Malaysian Proton Satria !

[h20hamelan]

[Elan45]

But not a single word about the AE 86 or the RWD Corola GTS. Great little car and as dependable as aToyota, probably because it was a Toyota. I still have mine!

Roger

[h20hamelan]

I have had mega fun in both, rolled a GTS in a rally in 1989. Hammered out fine, and drove on.
One of my 7’s has a 4age and 5 speed, good stuff.

[2cams70]

But not a single word about the AE 86 or the RWD Corola GTS. Great little car and as dependable as aToyota, probably because it was a Toyota. I still have mine!

Yes - But have you ever driven a properly sorted Ford Escort!!

Those Toyotas with 4AGE engines were only good because Toyota copied the engine design from the Cosworth BDA. When Toyota went from belt drive DOHC to chain drive DOHC they made a big deal the "scissor gears" driving one camshaft directly from the other but again this was a Cosworth innovation from the DFV. See attached.

If you want a historically innovative Japanese car company it's Honda - certainly not Toyota. In fact it was competition from Honda in F2 racing in the 60's that prompted Cosworth to develop the DOHC gear driven cam 16 valve FVA racing engine on the Cortina block. This engine was further developed into the DOHC belt driven cam BDA in 1967.
Cosworth's SOHC SCA racing engine was not good enough to match the Honda back then. Quite an interesting engine Honda had at that time. The valve springs were torsion bars rather than coils!

[rgh0]

The arguments are simplistic and there are many many more issues in engine design than a journalistic comparison of bore and stroke and port shapes. To say the 4AGE is a simplistic copy of the BDA is a trivial comparison. The 4AGE is a great engine in its own right just as the BDA is a great engine with a long history of engines it was developed from as you have highlight ( and some you have not)

Its like saying the Datsun L16 engine is a simple copy of the Ford bottom end and Mercedes top end as that is some of the sources of their design and why an L16 crank drops into a twin cam with a little machining. The L16 is a great engine in its own right The fact that an L16 crank is as good a the purpose machined racing cranks shows it was not a simplistic copy of the crude value engineered to death Ford cast iron crank.

cheers
Rohan

always happy to discuss engine design

[2cams70]

The fundamental aspects of an

The arguments are simplistic and there are many many more issues in engine design than a journalistic comparison of bore and stroke and port shapes. To say the 4AGE is a simplistic copy of the BDA is a trivial comparison.

The bore and stroke of the 4AGE engine are exactly the same as the BDA
The valve sizes of the 4AGE engine are the same as the BDA
The port and combustion chamber shapes are very similar.

These are the main factors that determine the gas pressure that can be produced in the combustion chamber.
Other secondary areas:
Cams and ignition - well you can vary that as you wish
Maximum RPM - well you can just make the things that go up and down and round and round lighter and stronger

The BDA was developed in 1967. The 4AGE in 1985/6?? So who copied who.

That article was extracted from a webpage devoted to how to modify the 4AGE for racing and not from some journalist by the way (I can't post a link here because I know links get deleted).