|
Neither one of us is knowledgeable enough to know how much money it would cost for Toyota to make a decent MR2 (or at least I admit I'm not knowledgeable enough) Lotus has other factors that we are probably overlooking so I'm not in the position to argue there.
|
I know enough about production costs of cars to tell you with 100 percent certainty that there is a significant cost premium for mr cars.
|
The fast is Toyota has done it in the past with the MR2 mkII, and with modern technology it can do it in the present. All it needs to do is bring a good design in the same package as good performance.
|
Yet again.. that mr2 wasnt cost competitive back then either. It was way more expensive then most cars.. and they didnt sell too well.
|
If making a mid engine car is as horribly terrifyingly expensive as you seem to indicate constantly then Toyota would have never made a 20-25k current MR2!
|
They made a 20-25k mid engine girl car.. as you pointed out.. The same car in front engine form, as is obvious from its direct competitors (miata), would have been in the teens. The premium is visible even in the last gen car, you just dont want to see it. If it was cheaper someone, anyone, would have stayed in this market. Car manufactuers are out to make money.. Hell BMW is out to fill every niche imaginable.. Theres a reason they havent filled this one.. its because its a niche with almost no one in it at a viable price point.
You see the 15 year old mr2.. and think its a bargain. I see the 15 year old mr2 and remember it cost 17000 for a base with a supercharger in 1988. By comparison a new vette only cost 29k, a 300zx with a turbo was only 24k. Both of those cars were a whole other league to the mr2. The mr2 was never a bargain