I hear you, but then what's the difference between this and versions of cars like the M3?
The OG E30 M3 was a bare-bones 4 cylinder 2,600lb car. Often referred to as God's Chariot, the 220 hp E30 is not even in the same class as something like the 425 hp 3,600lb tech-filled F80 M3 that's currently out. Even the V8 that was used in the E90/2's was considered blasphemy from the "purists."
2 differences, I suppose.
1. There's been a continuous (ish) chain of evolutionary upgrades/updates throughout time, or, there's never been a loooooong gap without an M3 like there was without a Supra.
2. They never released a new version of the M3 replacing an iconic powerplant with a Camry engine.
I agree with you that the new one is not the same as the MKIV Supra, but I feel like people would hate on the car unless Toyota just fired up the assembly line to start making more MKIVs. Shouldn't there be room for a manufacturer to evolve?
I mean, it is what it is. I think that the long gap between mkvi and current model caused the legend of the mkvi to grow, so that when one finally comes out it's a combination of too different from the original supra and too similar to a Z4, so it's just another modern meh car with nothing exceptionally exciting about it. Personally, I never much cared for Supras, but I *loved* 70's Celicas - super fun to drive and hoon around in. And a lot cheaper to pick up than a 240z
I'm too tall for both the new Supra and the Z4, so it's a moot point anyways, but I tend to shy away from a lot of newer cars that are flush with electronics. Just not my preference - but I can see the perspective of people that *hate* the new Supra. It's not an evolution of the old Supra, it's a totally new car with tenuous similarities. Toyota could've called it a bunch of different names and had a hit, but choosing to call it a Supra created an uphill battle for themselves.