What should Toyota name the C-Pillar found on leaked production FT-86 photos and the 2000GT?

Over the weekend Teh Intarwebs was alight with photos of the production Toyota FT-86, seemingly leaked from a Japanese brochure on FT86club.com. While not as extreme in styling as the Scion FR-S concept, initial road tests say it delivers on everything promised, with handling like that of a Mazda MX-5. UPDATE: Specs leaked. 197 horsepower, 2662 pounds.

But the thing that caught our attention is a comparison to a sports car from Toyota’s past, and it’s not the AE86.

Look a the bottom left. Toyota’s saying that the FT-86 has a side greenhouse and roofline shaped like the legendary 1967 Toyota 2000GT‘s. We think this is a great practice for Toyota, as C-pillars have become a key styling cue forming a marque’s corporate identity. BMW has the Hofmeister kink, Toyota has… well, on the 2000GT they called it the “Chinese eye.” It was a different time.

What should Toyota name this feature in a more politically correct world? Our suggestion would be the “Nozaki arc,” after 2000GT designer Satoru Nozaki. Since the 2000GT is incorrectly yet constantly attributed to Albrecht von Goertz, that would give the shape a meaningful name while returning credit to its true creator.

What do JNCers think it should be called? Let us know in the comments below.

permalink.
This post is filed under: toyota and
tagged: , , , , , , , .

18 Responses to What should Toyota name the C-Pillar found on leaked production FT-86 photos and the 2000GT?

  1. Nigel said:

    Nozaki arc, sounds good to me.
    Now just give me the keys so I can test drive it.

  2. Tyler said:

    To me the point at the back is more important as a design element than the arc, so perhaps the Nozaki crease or something…

  3. TE72_sunny said:

    Nozaki Arc, definitely.

  4. Alan said:

    I’m seconding “Nozaki Arc”.

  5. $EX¥_HAMMER said:

    hmmm. i nominated “compressed turd” for the headlights. “wall-eyed carp” for the rear end. for the front fascia, “constipated meow,” or possibly “this is my angry face when people ask me if i like my new hyundai genesis coupe.” i think the overall design language should be something along the lines of “not what was originally promised.” no wonder they started subtly backing away from the 86 references. the only thing they have in common is the rear wheels are the ones doing the work, since technically front midship is different from FR.

    they need to call this a Celica, because by the time it actually hits US shores with a sticker Scion will be under.

    • Do you like your new genesis? said:

      Is it a coupe? I didn’t know they made those. Did you get it with the V8? Oh they don’t put the V8s in the coupes? Oh well.

  6. RotaryRocket said:

    The production car looks ok. My biggest turnoff is the rear part of the car, which looks like it was designed by a different person than the rest of the car. The busy, bottom-heavy rear diffuser/valence takes so much attention from the tiny taillights. Overall… an aggressive flowing front end, sweet sloping roof line, only to finish with a disappointing chunky rear end.

  7. pete240z said:

    how about “finally” or “it’s about time”…….

  8. cesariojpn said:

    The Fujiwara Sweep.

  9. Nigel said:

    Takumi and Bunta approved !

  10. kingtoy said:

    I will stick with my original term, “Abomination”!

  11. Drew3x said:

    I like “damn sexy” myself!

  12. TyFc3s said:

    “The sexy line stolen from the S30 z……. *fine print* Chinese eye…..”
    wow… that’s incredibly racist…

  13. dchil15 said:

    i think they should make it fr not midship make it more like the 86(angled body lines) and call it the new sprinter

  14. so… just curious… but what the hell have they done to this thing?! the concept went from near perfection, to one of the most repulsive cars i’ve ever seen.. they have RUINED this car (aesthetically)

    for example:
    -the tail lights are now almost straight of an imprezza (uleh..)
    -the front of the car has changed from beautifully aggressive, to being quite easily mistakable for a mazda 3. (or a mazda 2… or 6.. you get the point…)
    -it looks like an afterthought. like a family car that’s been re-released as a 2-door to appeal to more markets.

    the most anticipated car in decades. one of the most beautiful {concept} cars i have ever seen, and they went and did this to it. i no longer want one. i don’t care how well it preforms. this is UGLY.