I totally agree with you WingsofWar. The only time a N/A engine feels more energetic and torquey in the low to mid range is when the displacement is really good or else you'll want to go F/I. Generally a 2.0 liter will make 140 lb of torque but when it's available high and linked to 2700 or 2800 lbs of curb weight the car will feel like an economy car in most DD situations. A 2.5 would've been much better IMHO.

True, but now you're missing the plot. This is where so many people seem to go all short-sighted and get confused. This sort of sports car isn't going to be about lap times or uber PWNage in forum bench-racing. The car is all about driver emotion, it will not be bothered with proving itself in some irrelevant statistical contest.

As all the Toyota representatives [designers, testers, and execs] keep saying, the car will be about balance and the connection between driver and machine. A sweet sounding and reacting N/A engine is a fantastic foundation for such a balanced machine.

One thing that would liven a 4cyl is a nice close ratio 6spd to multiply that TQ if you don't plan on going over 140mph that is.

I can't even think of a situation in which I would need to go over 140. I certainly don't expect to be hitting any super speedways with this car.

Preach on brotha!

This is true, this car is just about that but how are those emotions gonna feel when a ford focus blows by their sports car and can't get out of it's own way. I with you guys about the whole n/a thing and the sensation of driving this car, I've owned lots of Hondas, Rx7s, and many other vehicles I know about torqueless wonders.

Now although I do prefer turbo, if it can put down the same hp as the 2010 Civic Si, give a similar engine sound and weighs less than the civic, then I will say this car will do well. I had a 08' Fiji Blue Civic Si as a loaner car, and it's quick for a 4 door, very tight chassis and responsive engine.

I think the faith in the Subaru boxer producing an efficient 200hp with room to adapt to mods is the question at hand. Subaru mills are not known for their high revs or n/a configs, big displacement and turbo is what they do at best. Yamaha can only do so much to the limit of that block.

I know doing 140mph in this car is not like 140 in my Cobra, my car is about 50" tall, wide stance and has sticky 275width NT05 tires, lol Light car and short wheelbase with 215s is not a good combination for high speed, too twitchy but it'll get your blood pumping.

Again, you're missing the point. If you're that worried about what other people are doing, then stick to a car that compensates for your tiny Johnson.


Your Mustang has a 101.3" wheelbase. The FT-86 concept has a 101.2" wheel base. Yea, LOL, "short". You nailed it again. The FT-86 probably won't even go 140 MPH with 200 HP, so your point is not only moot, but misguided.

It only takes 115HP to maintain 140MPH, I bet it will have a higher top speed than that! The RX-8 can go 155MPH with only 30(?) more BHP.

And I'd choose a good N/A over turbo for fun driving but I'm just a newb to this conversation :bonk:.

The bottom line is this is to be a sports/performance car, I dont know how much emotion I can get out of it if it cant get out of its own way. I guess what I mean to say is that most things this car can offer as an N/A can be enhance with a turbo.

Derp! thats not nice...some of the most fun-to-drive vehicles iv had the pleasure of driving were underpowered cars. Granted they had a light chassy. my all time favorite cars that gave me the most sense of driving was a 88 RX7 TII and a 89 Honda CRX stock block with basic bolt ons/coilovers and some weight shavings...

Your right though, Subaru engines have never been hardcore performers in general. Just by slapping on a big turbo on the STIs EJ255/EJ257, didn't make the engine marvelous by design. They were still pretty basic EJ25s. Which could have seen some factory improvements.

If Toyota, Yamaha & Subaru did come together to make a performer N/A, they have to do much much more than a reworked head and a high C/R.

Don't get me wrong, your talking to someone who has owned 1 86crx si, 3 crx 2 hatches of the 88-81 era, 1 fb rx7, 2 fc rx7 GTU and T2, many swapped or boosted 2200lb civics and integra.. I could go on with the newer cars like G35, Subarus, Nissan and VW all 02'+

The problem with those cars are they're old, I just feel in 2012 a RWD sports car that I'm going to pay $25k for should outshine those cars in stock form.

The FB series although new was formed from the Tribeca H6. They started the asymmetric rod deal in Subarus line up. History would say Subaru are not good n/a performers.. The celica was bumped from 130s to 189hp with the help of Yamaha but that engine did not respond well to mods, not like a Hondas bseries and kseries. You could easily dropped $1500 on quality i/h/e in that mill and it would get what? 15rwhp and the power curves would be screwy.

So that's why subaru + yamaha causes skepticism for people like me, although most people are getting hyped.

Not worried about compensation here my man, I Race and have co-driven multiple cars of different power and weights. FWIW on June 4-5 Dover Speedway, MD I'll be doing the SCCA Autocross National Tour(hopefully in a Miata if not then my prepped Cobra). Then on June 17-19 I will be racing in 24 hour of LeMons at Summit Point, WV in acaged out 97' ACR DOHC 420A Neon, so like I said I don't have anything to make up for buddy. Try not to always demean someone who shares a difference in opinion next time.


You're also choosing to pick part what I said, again I basically said my car is wider, heavier and stuffed with 275s to keep it planted. Although it's the same wheelbase like you mentioned(woops) the overall length is not, which can play with aero, keeping it steady and planted in high speed straights.

Gosh you guys, he specifically asked to keep this topic non-turbo.
Attachment 1922

200PS is plenty of power to get out of it's way :bellyroll: :slap: but you might have to down shift to put it in it's power band.