2017 Toyota 86 Review: 5 Things It Missed For Perfection

About five years ago, Toyota and Subaru reintroduced the world to the world of affordable, lightweight, rear-wheel drive coupes. The Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ were extremely hyped, with enthusiasts believing that sports cars were making a comeback in a world dominated by crossovers.

However, when it hit showrooms, and the test drives were issued, the cars ended up polarizing car fans rather than uniting them.

There were two camps. Those that truly understood that a lightweight with pure, uncompromised driving experience equals a real sports car. And then there were those that thought that speed, power and torque is what a sports car is truly about. Those in the latter camp were really disappointed by the Toyobaru twins, arguing that with just 200 horsepower and 151 lb-ft of torque, the car was lacking the get-up feeling of bigger coupes like Ford Mustangs or hot hatches like the VW GTI.

Those in the former camp didn’t care about the specs. The lightweight car was a throwback to sports cars of yesteryear. It was fun, agile and affordable. These enthusiasts bought the car and sales were strong right out of the gate.

But in the years since, sales have really dwindled for the coupe. With Scion closing up shop, the FR-S became a Toyota, now dubbed the 86. A refresh came along with the new name and the chance for Toyota to make some changes to address the criticisms that stopped buyers from dropping the money for this car when it first debuted half a decade ago. They could have made this the perfect sports car.

Sadly, Toyota really botched that opportunity.

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

More Power? Not really…


One of the biggest complaint with the Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ was its lack of power. The new Toyota 86 (and the 2017 Subaru BRZ) have new power numbers, but it’s barely a bump, and not available to everyone.

There’s a redesigned intake and exhaust manifold design that results in a five horsepower boost that comes with five more pound-feet of torque. However, this change is only found on manual-transmission models. Another change for these self-shifting models includes a shorter final drive ratio that helps to marginally sort out another flaw from the earlier models: a noticeable lack of torque midway through the rev-range.

SEE MORE: 2017 Mazda MX-5 Miata RF Review

If you opt for an automatic model though, you get none of these changes. And nothing new. Read between the lines, and it seems like the manual model is the one to get, but the changes are so minuscule and don’t make a significant difference in the way the car drives. If you thought it was slow before, you’re not likely to have your mind changed in 2017.

Honestly, it’s a perception thing: the spec sheet says the car isn’t that powerful, but wind out the engine to its 7,400 RPM redline and it feels plenty quick. If you want to go fast you’ll need to shift gears often, which is more enjoyable with the manual transmission than the automatic.

Still lacks grip


On the flip side, the car’s light weight meant that it didn’t need a lot of power to be fun. The 2,700-2,800 lb curb weight also meant that the car was really a blast to throw around a track or winding road.

The suspension on the Toyota 86 has also been modified from its early days. The older setup involved softer front springs and stiff rear springs, but they’ve been revised to be a bit less harsh and prone to oversteer. The car is still responsive and fun to drive, but grip is lacking.

SEE MORE: 2016 MINI Cooper S Clubman vs Volkswagen Golf GTI

Still using the Michelin Primacy HP performance tires, this rubber features low rolling resistance, which makes them good on gas, but packs less grip as a result. This means the car can break grip and drift easily, which is fun, but not fast. As a result, it falls to the owner to swap out the tires for something stickier, which will also be quicker.

Exterior Personality


Swapping tires hasn’t been a big deal to owners of the old cars, and those passionate owners seem to be comfortable changing much more than just tires. Over the past five years, all kinds of visual modifications have been seen on the car, with funky headlights, taillights, body kits, spoilers and much more.

These changes should have inspired Toyota to get in on a piece of the add-on market, but they don’t offer any options, just the occasional special edition. Instead the car gets redesigned headlights and taillights, both of which feature flashy and bright LEDs. The wheels also have been redesigned with a more boisterous spoke design.

The front end also gets a new look, with a redesigned lower grille, but it comes across as a bit awkward, like a toothless animal or fish face. Calling it a mildly refreshed exterior is generous, as some critics previously thought the car wasn’t aggressive enough.

No Trims


As the Scion FR-S becomes a Toyota 86, there was the opportunity for the car to reach new audiences with different packaging. An interesting wrinkle from the Scion brand was that all of their vehicles came in one trim level. Instead, every year saw a special edition version of the car that included new features like automatic climate control, push-button start and heated seats. Instead of now offering a variety of features with the 86, Toyota carries on the mono-spec strategy from Scion, which is a bit of a let down since it could have made the car more upscale with more premium features like leather seats, or made the car more affordable by paring down the feature set.

Instead the car is still offered only one way, with the only option being the transmission choice. It still features manual HVAC controls (with unattractive knobs no less) but the cabin is slightly nicer than before with silver stitching in the seats and a suede-like material covering the dash.

More Expensive than Subaru


One final strange change to the car as it becomes the Toyota 86 is the pricing. When the Scion FR-S first debuted, it was $24,200 for a manual model. It was slightly cheaper than its Subaru twin, a car that featured a few slight exterior differences including LEDs and a different dash design. Now the car costs $27,120 despite really limited additions to the car. What’s more surprising is that the Subaru is $26,315, now making it the budget choice when it comes to fun, back-to-basics, rear-wheel-drive sports cars.

The Verdict: 2017 Toyota 86


Those complaints really are minor. The car is a bare bones sports car and one of the purest driving experiences you can get. There are really very few cars that deliver the raw feeling of driving joy that this car does.

There’s no doubt that the Toyota 86 is a blast to drive. But we’ve known that for the past five years. While Toyota didn’t stray from the original formula for the FR-S, it would have been interesting to see them attempt to address the criticisms of the original car, but they simply didn’t.



Duke Woolworth says:

At its start, it was 200-300# heavier than the MX-5. It’s now 500# heavier. The Mazda is still by definition the sports car.

Jonny_Vancouver says:

I’d still rather have one over the Mazda. The MX-5 doesn’t even have a real roof. The Toyota and Subaru have better balance and 2 extra seats for practicality so it’s reasonable to own either one as a daily driver, can’t say that for the Mazda. And weight isn’t everything either, it’s actually a small part of the equation when you take everything else into account. Anything car can look good on paper, on the road, and every day is what matters.

Alex says:

I don’t fit in the MX-5 (I’m only 5’10) so the FR-S was my only option for a RWD Japanese sports car.

Jonny_Vancouver says:

This too.

fred macmurray says:

That seems hard to imagine. I am 6’2″ and 220 lbs and have no problem fitting in a Miata. It’s a little tighter than my MKII MR2 Turbo but still not uncomfortable.

Tar Patel says:

Sami, are you saying that the new intake and header reduced the torque dip based on butt dyno or actual dyno?

Sami Haj-Assaad says:

Butt dyno – we don’t have a dyno to test these things on, but I also believe the revised gear ratios are also a significant part in smoothing out that torque dip.

Cody Beisel says:

I believe it was road and track that did an actual dyno test and the torque dip has been significantly reduced but still exists

Jeff T says:

Comments on the factory Michelin tires but then show a picture of Bridgestone winter shoes on….

Sami Haj-Assaad says:

This was explained in the video, the car is responsibly equipped with winter tires, but that doesn’t change the fact that the stock tires are still those low grip Michelins.

Jeff T says:

Hi Sami, Thank you for clearing that up. Sorry I really only read the articles. I am old school.

Alastair Stell says:

No. Completely wrong. The 86 is seriously under-powered and a more powerful version should’ve been offered. It is especially irritating when you discover that Subaru has not one but two cars with the same engine and a supercharger for almost another 100hp! it would be easy to trim weight off the 86 so the power would not entail weight sacrifice – use a TVS system and you don’t even need an intercooler!

The car is also a massive fail in respect of the rear two seats which are completely useless. I used to own a Toyota Sprinter / AE86 and had no problem squeezing a couple of adults into the back seats. But not with the 86. With my normal driving position the back seats are unusable. So this car is not an MR2 Mark 2 Turbo, yet in practical terms can move only 2 people.

The styling is indeed instantly forgettable and the exterior details are not up to the exquisite finish for which Toyota was once renowned. In a word, the car looks cheap and does not scream “sportscar” in the way the new Miata manages.

As for the interior, far from premium features like heated seats, leather trim etc, I want an interior option for a “stripped-down” version. This would include performance, light-weight bucket seats, shorter shift transmission, no backseats, modified bracing to accommodate a 5 point harness and, at most, a fast-release 2 speaker sound system.

As for grip, you book a set of Star Spec 2 tires onto the car, reduce the wheel size by 2 inches, drop the suspension by an inch, use better brake pads, and the car is simply superb. Toyota should’ve offered a “track day capable” option for this car. They didn’t.

So who is this car supposed to appeal to? Certainly not a track day enthusiast. Or a family man who wants a fun drive. It’s too bland and underpowered to turn heads. In other words, the car is nondescript, bland and really quite useless. I am praying, literally, that Toyota employs a sports car enthusiast to oversee design of a new MR2. But knowing Toyota… they’ll mess that up too.

Tim Engel says:

When the FR-S/ BRZ first came out, I was enthusiastic about it being an alternative for my MR2 Mk-1 Supercharged, but with two back seats so I could take some grand kids along. When I first butt-tested one, the seat had to be all the way back before I could fit comfortably (6 ft, 195 lbs). At that point there was zero rear leg room in the back, and even kids couldn’t fit. Bummer. Without a functional +2 feature, the MR2 remained my first choice.

The Lotus Evora is a 2+2 GT. I’ve had two full-size male adults in the back on more than one occasion. That was okay for a quick trip across town, but would be inhumane for a long trip. Despite more rear seat functionality than the FR-S/ BRZ, I still prefer the Evora’s available ‘Rear Seat Delete’ option. It replaces the rear seats with a nicely functional cargo space. That plus the rear boot (trunk) gives the car plenty of luggage space for two adult travelers.

IMHO, a ‘Rear Seat Delete’ option for the FR-S/ BRZ would be a big plus. In some countries, a 4-seater is taxed at a lower rate, and is less expensive to insure than a two-seater. That’s why a 911 has rear seats a lap dog can’t use. Maybe that tax-insurance cost-break is what the FR-S/ BRZ’s useless rear seats are all about; but pushing rear seats as a perk that fails to deliver isn’t making buyers happy. As long as they’re effectively two-seaters anyway, a little extra utility with an optimized cargo space might make the cars more attractive to some.


Tim Engel says:

I’m an autocrosser, not a drifter. An ‘AX’ version, or maybe a ‘Turbo STi’ version, tuned for sticky-tire optimal grip and low lap times would be very interesting… without the dead weight of useless rear seats. I can understand how Subaru might not want the in-house competitor for it’s successful Impreza WRX STi… but I’d like it. What’s wrong with two winners in the same family?