Quote:
Originally Posted by Aki
Nobody is arguing that weight gain can't be offset from a stronger engine. The key issue is offsetting weight gain costs $$$. A FR-S can always be lighter if it had a carbon fiber monocoque shell, carbon ceramic brakes, titanium exhaust, etc. Losing weight isn't the issue--losing it while still keeping it affordable, is. If they listened to all the forum people wanting turbo + better brakes + the kitchen sink, you're looking at a $32,000+ car.
I'd prefer a similar route to the MMC of the S2000, a minor increase in displacement (say 2.0 to 2.2) with a better torque curve.
If anything that's bolstering the argument that the FA20 is a boring engine. 7k and up is what makes the Si engine (8th-gen K20Z3) fun. That hiccup in horsepower/torque was intentionally programmed into the ECU to make the cam profile switch more noticeable, and it works.
I've said it before, but the FA20 has adequate power. The problem is the *sensation* of the power. That torque dead spot from 4-5k is what's irksome. And I'm tired of the knee-jerk, "needs boost" line. Once upon a time 200hp was considered a lot--you don't hear people with E30 M3s saying "needs boost." The whole point of a FR-S was that it's enjoyable while being (relatively) slow. There are lots of nice, fast RWD options, like a 370Z, or 135is.
|
I totally agree. All it needs is a little displacement increase (2.2-2.5L) and a smoothed out torque band. That will give it the much needed "sensation" of power in the mid-range and a little bit of extra speed without increasing much cost or weight and lowering reliability or fuel economy.
I wish they would have just done this from the start. I know Japan loves 2.0 liters and they try to make it under that tax bracket but to heck with all that - it definitely needs more displacement to be a properly fun car! Let's just hope that's what they do for next year.