Notices
Scion tC 1G Owners Lounge
2005-2010 [ANT10]

Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-31-2007, 05:19 AM
  #21  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
RnB180's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Smallville, Kent farm
Posts: 1,803
Default

Originally Posted by Chrisb319
Watch them come out with a nicer looking car than ours that has RWD, 6speed, 6cyl sport coupe that everyone always wanted. I'll be ____ed.

I just got my car, and if they come out with a better version next year, Id be ____ed too.
unless they make it weaker
RnB180 is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 06:31 AM
  #22  
Junior Member
 
junki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 25
Default

mm yea not looking forward to the day when my car becomes an old model
junki is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 06:41 AM
  #23  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
TongMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 1,919
Default

If there is the new gen Celica...I'd rather get that...6-speed, 200 hp stock, and 2800 lbs.
TongMan is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 06:45 AM
  #24  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Scikotics
SL Member
 
jamessicat25's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,375
Default

if its a next gen scion tc..

just make the five axis lipkit with center exhaust and trd supercharger standard.

thats a good 2009 scion tC2 for me
jamessicat25 is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 06:49 AM
  #25  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
Club One
SL Member
 
captainlaziness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Team Sharpie
Posts: 10,213
Default Re: Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation

Originally Posted by jschneideriii
...with a strong c-pillar, deep tumblehome and strong rear fenders spicing up the car....
What the heck is a tumblehome?
captainlaziness is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 10:46 AM
  #26  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
monkeysauce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milltown, NJ
Posts: 550
Default

Come on guys, it's Toyota. The next tC will be bigger and heavier, with a bigger engine. Have they ever made a new revision of a car smaller and lighter?
monkeysauce is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 11:05 AM
  #27  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Premium Member
iTrader: (4)
 
davedavetC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,411
Default

lol
davedavetC is offline  
Old 10-31-2007, 01:41 PM
  #28  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
HunterGreene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chagrin Falls, Ohio
Posts: 160
Default

Originally Posted by cwayne
I think Christ will come again before we get another RWD Corolla.


And like the other guy said, I choose not to believe anyone who claims to have worked for Scion. some people are such attention ******...
HunterGreene is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 05:13 PM
  #29  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CarbonXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,646
Default Re: Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation

Originally Posted by captainlaziness
Originally Posted by jschneideriii
...with a strong c-pillar, deep tumblehome and strong rear fenders spicing up the car....
What the heck is a tumblehome?
Tumblehome is the narrowing of a ship's hull with greater distance above the water-line. Expressed more technically, it is present when the beam at the uppermost deck is less than the maximum beam of the vessel. It can be seen well in steel constructed warships of the early 1880's when the United States and most European navies began building steel warships. France was predominately strong in promoting the tumblehome design in their warships, and sold their newly constructed pre-dreadnought battleship Tsesarevich to the Russian Imperial Navy in time for it to fight as Admiral Wilgelm Vitgeft's flagship at the Battle of the Yellow Sea on 10 August 1904. However, the five follow-on Tumblehome designed Borodino-class battleships, which had been built in Russian yards to Tsesarevich's basic design, fought the only decisive steel battleship fleet action in naval history on 27 May 1905 at Tsushima. The fact that three of the four (the fifth battleship, the Slava was not completed in time) 'tumblehome' Borodino class battleships were lost in this battle, resulted in the discontinuing of the tumblehome design in future warships for nearly all navies.

A small amount of tumblehome is normal in many designs in order to allow any small projections at deck level to clear wharves (Pursey p. 21. One of the reasons it was originally used was to make boarding more difficult. It also reduces the beam of the main deck, so reducing its weight and increasing stability. It was abandoned for nearly a century in large warships, as the angle of the hull increased the likelihood of penetration by shells, compared with vertical sides. It has recently been reintroduced for the United States' DDG-1000 class destroyer.

A degree of tumblehome also facilitates paddling in a canoe or kayak (Mather, 1885), while a greater degree of flare (its opposite) accommodates more cargo (Vaillancourt).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumblehome
CarbonXe is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 05:30 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Scion Evolution
 
bBlover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,564
Default

Originally Posted by cwayne
Originally Posted by sddykstr
That's what you call aiming too high. Bah, 3.5L. Set your goals low and your bound to succeed. :p
I don't care if the front is as heavy as if that fat whale from the tv show The Parkers were to sit on the hood.
okay that comment was uncalled for!!
bBlover is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 05:43 PM
  #31  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
cwayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Remember 911
Posts: 674
Default

Originally Posted by bBlover
Originally Posted by cwayne
Originally Posted by sddykstr
That's what you call aiming too high. Bah, 3.5L. Set your goals low and your bound to succeed. :p
I don't care if the front is as heavy as if that fat whale from the tv show The Parkers were to sit on the hood.
okay that comment was uncalled for!!
Just think how good it'll do on the dyno!
cwayne is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 07:20 PM
  #32  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
Club One
SL Member
 
captainlaziness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Team Sharpie
Posts: 10,213
Default Re: Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Originally Posted by captainlaziness
Originally Posted by jschneideriii
...with a strong c-pillar, deep tumblehome and strong rear fenders spicing up the car....
What the heck is a tumblehome?
Tumblehome is the narrowing of a ship's hull with greater distance above the water-line. Expressed more technically, it is present when the beam at the uppermost deck is less than the maximum beam of the vessel. It can be seen well in steel constructed warships of the early 1880's when the United States and most European navies began building steel warships. France was predominately strong in promoting the tumblehome design in their warships, and sold their newly constructed pre-dreadnought battleship Tsesarevich to the Russian Imperial Navy in time for it to fight as Admiral Wilgelm Vitgeft's flagship at the Battle of the Yellow Sea on 10 August 1904. However, the five follow-on Tumblehome designed Borodino-class battleships, which had been built in Russian yards to Tsesarevich's basic design, fought the only decisive steel battleship fleet action in naval history on 27 May 1905 at Tsushima. The fact that three of the four (the fifth battleship, the Slava was not completed in time) 'tumblehome' Borodino class battleships were lost in this battle, resulted in the discontinuing of the tumblehome design in future warships for nearly all navies.

A small amount of tumblehome is normal in many designs in order to allow any small projections at deck level to clear wharves (Pursey p. 21. One of the reasons it was originally used was to make boarding more difficult. It also reduces the beam of the main deck, so reducing its weight and increasing stability. It was abandoned for nearly a century in large warships, as the angle of the hull increased the likelihood of penetration by shells, compared with vertical sides. It has recently been reintroduced for the United States' DDG-1000 class destroyer.

A degree of tumblehome also facilitates paddling in a canoe or kayak (Mather, 1885), while a greater degree of flare (its opposite) accommodates more cargo (Vaillancourt).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumblehome
:scratches head:
I'm way more confused than before...so, the Fuse is a boat?
captainlaziness is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 07:23 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CarbonXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,646
Default Re: Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation

Originally Posted by captainlaziness
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Originally Posted by captainlaziness
Originally Posted by jschneideriii
...with a strong c-pillar, deep tumblehome and strong rear fenders spicing up the car....
What the heck is a tumblehome?
Tumblehome is the narrowing of a ship's hull with greater distance above the water-line. Expressed more technically, it is present when the beam at the uppermost deck is less than the maximum beam of the vessel. It can be seen well in steel constructed warships of the early 1880's when the United States and most European navies began building steel warships. France was predominately strong in promoting the tumblehome design in their warships, and sold their newly constructed pre-dreadnought battleship Tsesarevich to the Russian Imperial Navy in time for it to fight as Admiral Wilgelm Vitgeft's flagship at the Battle of the Yellow Sea on 10 August 1904. However, the five follow-on Tumblehome designed Borodino-class battleships, which had been built in Russian yards to Tsesarevich's basic design, fought the only decisive steel battleship fleet action in naval history on 27 May 1905 at Tsushima. The fact that three of the four (the fifth battleship, the Slava was not completed in time) 'tumblehome' Borodino class battleships were lost in this battle, resulted in the discontinuing of the tumblehome design in future warships for nearly all navies.

A small amount of tumblehome is normal in many designs in order to allow any small projections at deck level to clear wharves (Pursey p. 21. One of the reasons it was originally used was to make boarding more difficult. It also reduces the beam of the main deck, so reducing its weight and increasing stability. It was abandoned for nearly a century in large warships, as the angle of the hull increased the likelihood of penetration by shells, compared with vertical sides. It has recently been reintroduced for the United States' DDG-1000 class destroyer.

A degree of tumblehome also facilitates paddling in a canoe or kayak (Mather, 1885), while a greater degree of flare (its opposite) accommodates more cargo (Vaillancourt).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumblehome
:scratches head:
I'm way more confused than before...so, the Fuse is a boat?
Lmao, I actually stratched my head and said "ugh...wtf" when that Wiki page loaded up.
CarbonXe is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 07:27 PM
  #34  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
Club One
SL Member
 
captainlaziness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Team Sharpie
Posts: 10,213
Default

Yeah, I'm not seeing the connection to the car at all. Oh well...
captainlaziness is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 07:30 PM
  #35  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CarbonXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,646
Default

Originally Posted by captainlaziness
Yeah, I'm not seeing the connection to the car at all. Oh well...
Well, you're not alone .
CarbonXe is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 08:31 PM
  #36  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
THE_DON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,170
Default

Originally Posted by monkeysauce
Come on guys, it's Toyota. The next tC will be bigger and heavier, with a bigger engine. Have they ever made a new revision of a car smaller and lighter?
So true.

If they keep the name "tC" expect it to get bigger and heavier.

I'd prefer a next gen AE86 with the 1.8 and RWD. Drop the tC and just call it a tE

-THE DON
THE_DON is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 08:39 PM
  #37  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CarbonXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,646
Default

Originally Posted by THE_DON
Originally Posted by monkeysauce
Come on guys, it's Toyota. The next tC will be bigger and heavier, with a bigger engine. Have they ever made a new revision of a car smaller and lighter?
So true.

If they keep the name "tC" expect it to get bigger and heavier.

I'd prefer a next gen AE86 with the 1.8 and RWD. Drop the tC and just call it a tE

-THE DON
They should just call it the aE then.
CarbonXe is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 09:13 PM
  #38  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
THE_DON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,170
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Originally Posted by THE_DON
Originally Posted by monkeysauce
Come on guys, it's Toyota. The next tC will be bigger and heavier, with a bigger engine. Have they ever made a new revision of a car smaller and lighter?
So true.

If they keep the name "tC" expect it to get bigger and heavier.

I'd prefer a next gen AE86 with the 1.8 and RWD. Drop the tC and just call it a tE

-THE DON
They should just call it the aE then.
Yup!!

-THE DON
THE_DON is offline  
Old 11-02-2007, 10:09 PM
  #39  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
straightsilver21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 154
Default

i may just be the only one who doesn't really like the new fuse concept... its just not my taste.
so if scion goes that direction styling wise for the next gen. tC ill be fine with it.

that'll mean only one year of the 08' in production. therefore less of em on the road.
straightsilver21 is offline  
Old 11-04-2007, 06:38 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
06CStC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,063
Default

I'm thinking 2010 remodel, sold in 2009. As far as specs, I have no guess or much perfernece at that, but lets just keep the pricing in mind as well. Cant have everything if the price is to be under..say...20k-ish?
06CStC is offline  


Quick Reply: Preliminary clues: 2009 tC/Second generation



All times are GMT. The time now is 10:29 PM.