Scion FR-S / FT-86 / Subaru BRZ Specs and Options. 200hp / 151 lb-ft tq

[CyberFormula]

not hard...just think R spec coming

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by dalli

I like what i see, if this is all true ( not on some things)

I will get this car, im only 19 yr old and have 7k saved up ( i even loaned some to my dad!!)

Ill have 15k for this car when it comes out OH YE BABY

Wow, shocking to see a 19y/o with enough discipline to do that. Nice work!

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

Thanks Nardi. It's looking more and more like a rwd DC2 type R and that'a good thing

A very good thing. And it'll go into the parking spot next to my DC2R in the garage :P

[LionZoo]

Originally Posted by Aki

Granted, the rear brakes do a lot less of the work (30-40%?) so it's not that much of a surprise.

I'm gravitating toward the high-end spec, though it'd probably be like $28-30k, hmm.

That is true, but S2000s are known to overheat their rear brakes since they only have solids in the rear. Having vented rears would go a long way towards ensuring the car's track worthiness.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

^Both my S2000 and Integra GS-R have 50 liter tanks (13.2 gallons). I guess it is a pretty standard size. It's not that big, but it's enough for a full day at the track for a DE event (just barely)

Can someone please translate the brake information? I want to know how large the discs are, the type of caliper and how many pistons there are please.

LOL yeah basically all of my cars already have 13.2 gallon tanks so I'm good with that.

I'd LOVE to know the brake disc sizes (dia and width).

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by kuruma

I doubt this car will require premium.

After I slap on a turbo, it will.

Are the compression numbers stated? That'll tell you.

Personally I'd be shocked if it didn't require 91 octane.

[CyberFormula]

i noticed the base model has no fog lights, and top model has fog lights.

I am not talking about the LEDS...look at the fog light area.

In addition...we will be getting the Black Tachometer.


If i were to buy one i will get base model.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by iggyhop9

Ok, so the 400 lb heavier and FWD manual Scion TC does the 0-60 in 6.5 with 20 less HP. Are we looking at 6.0 here for the FT?

How many shifts does it take to get to 60 in a TC? This may require shifting to third which accounts for a bit of time.

[ryridesmotox]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

Are the compression numbers stated? That'll tell you.

Personally I'd be shocked if it didn't require 91 octane.

True stuff... Hopefully it will be less than 11.0:1 but seeing as they are trying to get 200+hp n/a out of the engine... I forsee that being closer to 12.5:1 which would be definitely pushing the knock resistance of 91/93 octane at anything above saaaay 8psi... unless you go ethanol or race gas.

[balance]

As for the rear brakes, my guess is that the scion version will have a single setup (vented rear-discs) and you can select the TRD big brake kit if you wish to upgrade.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by LionZoo

That is true, but S2000s are known to overheat their rear brakes since they only have solids in the rear. Having vented rears would go a long way towards ensuring the car's track worthiness.

I've never heard of someone with an S2000 overheating their rear brakes. However its well known that the OEM pads are not up to the task of track duty. While I wish my S2000 had ventilated rear rotors, it brakes just fine. In fact with Carbotech pads I've had 911 drivers remark to me how impressed they were at my late braking

[madfast]

ok if you do the math, this thing is making 150 ft lbs at 7000 rpm. incredible. if allowed to rev to 9000 rpm, im guessing this thing can make S2000 power.

also this car is 200 lbs lighter than the RSX-S, 11 ft lbs more at 6600 rpm and 10 ft lbs more at 7000. it makes about the same hp 800 rpm sooner.

i think there is still a LOT left on the table. the tq is holding flat close to redline. for fuel econ and reliability reasons, they probably set the redline at 7400...

[fred_boosted]

Originally Posted by ryridesmotox

True stuff... Hopefully it will be less than 11.0:1 but seeing as they are trying to get 200+hp n/a out of the engine... I forsee that being closer to 12.5:1 which would be definitely pushing the knock resistance of 91/93 octane at anything above saaaay 8psi... unless you go ethanol or race gas.

I never did a turbo build on a non turbo car.

People telling me if I want to do that I have to make it less than 10:1...

Which means I have to do an engine build, and this is the only one thing I don't want to...

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by CyberFormula

not hard...just think R spec coming

Maybe. There's no real evidence of that. Just magazine statement and we all know how accurate those have been.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it... but.. I'm not sure we ever will. Hell that so called R version may just be the "customize grade" or whatever, which I seriously doubt we'll ever see in the US at least.