FR-S vs Cayman

[Gardus@Supersprint]

On Teamspeed there's a guy who is building a Cayman with a GT3 engine stroked to 4l, you're looking at 500 hp...

[KatHawkDown]

Originally Posted by 86fanatic

For me, the Cayman is just too fast to be fun and it actually somewhat symbolizes a problem with modern performance oriented cars. They are just too fast. You put your foot to the floor in a Cayman and things get very illegal very quickly. It's very hard to enjoy that kind of power band in day to day driving.

Personally I can't justify a by-the-numbers-sports-car-on-paper. I don't live at the track. I just want something that is fun to drive everyday with a power band I actually get to use in the real world instead of bragging about online.

Talking about the real world - cars like the Cayman or only really exciting during the 1 or 2 seconds of highway on ramps, and if you feel like risking your license around some twisty roads by doing double to triple the speed limit.

Depends where you are driving. I have to affirm that a Cayman S on a back-country or mountain road is absolute bliss. It's honestly funny to me that people around here believe that the 86 platform will even come close to the experience of even a base Cayman. Indeed the 86 MAY have similar lateral responses due to it's incredibly low COG, but there is so much more to the Cayman than COG (which is incredibly low as well). Steering for one, suspension another, ENGINE NOISE, torque - all to say nothing of actual performance - will not compare.

I must totally agree with you though on the grounds of driving enjoyment relative to exploring the limits of a car. I've never come close to the limits while driving my father's Cayman S (I hate it when people talk about their dad's cars, I know) and that leaves something to be desired. There is incredible satisfaction in hitting redline after redline and knowing you are not yet at a velocity that would take your life upon impact. Same goes for reaching the limits of adhesion around a corner, and feeling the steering wheel give and grab back and forth as you try to keep the car composed and rotating through an apex. It's incredible. That's what really appeals to me about this car.

I'm not ever going to pretend my car is a Cayman fighter though. And in reality I will inevitably buy the Cayman from my dad at a steal in a few years and having an 86 in my garage will not tempt me away from it.

[86fanatic]

Absolutely, I don't view the FRS as a Cayman fighter at all. The Cayman is going to have better build quality, be faster, probably have tighter, better steering feel, and is just generally a monster.

But there in lies the problem for me, it's overbuilt for what I use a car for 99% of the time. Combined with the sky high cost of entry, sky high maintenance costs (unless nothing goes wrong, at which point it comes down to a level that's just "relatively expensive"), and virtually un-usable real world performance - I can't justify it for myself anymore (I actually had a Cayman for a few years from 2009-2011).

I can't justify buying and owning a by the numbers sports car which has otherworldly performance. The car becomes more of a piece of jewelry at that point then an actual fun to drive experience, and that's what makes me so excited about the FRS.

[Turbowned]

Originally Posted by KatHawkDown

It's honestly funny to me that people around here believe that the 86 platform will even come close to the experience of even a base Cayman. Indeed the 86 MAY have similar lateral responses due to it's incredibly low COG, but there is so much more to the Cayman than COG (which is incredibly low as well). Steering for one, suspension another, ENGINE NOISE, torque - all to say nothing of actual performance - will not compare.

Torque? What torque? The base Cayman doesn't feel like it has any. I think the BRZ/FR-S will give it a good run for it's money in the hands of a skilled driver - I can't wait to see a comparison.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Torque? What torque? The base Cayman doesn't feel like it has any. I think the BRZ/FR-S will give it a good run for it's money in the hands of a skilled driver - I can't wait to see a comparison.

Uh, 30% more power at around the same weight, naturally aspirated, more consistent torque, and similar rev range, base Cayman is definitely going to feel "torquier" (in the technically incorrect sense that most people use the term).

[Turbowned]

Torquier compared to the BRZ possibly, but still feels torqueless. I tried finding a 2.7 dyno plot; couldn't find one. The BRZ makes 90% of peak torque from 2k-6krpm; not sure how the Cayman's power delivery looks, but I just drove it yesterday and it felt not unlike my MR2 with 121lb/ft in the low rev range.

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by uspspro

The 2GRFE is actually an awesome engine when coupled with a MT, and allowed to breathe.

Evora guys are getting +25 rwhp with intake/exhaust. The power band is excellent and it loves to rev.

I have a 2GR swapped into my MR2 Spyder. With a lightweight FW, intake and exhaust, it makes 271 rwhp. The power never drops all the way through redline. I wish the ECU gave me another 1000 rpm.

And I'm sure it's awesome in a Mr2 Spyder, or Fiero, or MR-S..or any number of lightweight nimble cars that can host the engine.

But not in a 70-80,000 dollar "sports car"..

at 60,000 I can get a car with a brand new power/sport/race oriented 4.0L V8 with a 8400rpm redline and great powerband in a host of configurations manual/smg etc with plenty of space for upgrade-ability....yet at 75,000 I get a Camry motor that needs to be upgraded to feel "right"

[uspspro]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

And I'm sure it's awesome in a Mr2 Spyder, or Fiero, or MR-S..or any number of lightweight nimble cars that can host the engine.

But not in a 70-80,000 dollar "sports car"..

at 60,000 I can get a car with a brand new power/sport/race oriented 4.0L V8 with a 8400rpm redline and great powerband in a host of configurations manual/smg etc with plenty of space for upgrade-ability....yet at 75,000 I get a Camry motor that needs to be upgraded to feel "right"

It's a good engine regardless of cost and negative stigma associated with it coming out of a Camry.

It makes around 310-320 hp at the crank with all 3 cats, with just minor bolt-ons (my 271 rwhp dyno). With headers and a tune around 340-350 hp (MWR 295 rwhp dyno in their swapped Exige)

It's lame that Toyota and Lotus did not let it breathe, and it's really lame that owners of expensive Evoras have to get a few bolt-ons considering how much they paid. BUT the engine itself is excellent. I know the engine inside and out, it is HUGELY underrated. The engine itself is worthy of being in a $60,000 sports car if it had the "full-package" engineered to go with it.

The 2GRFE actually has the highest valve lift and the biggest valves of any previous Toyota engine (including 3SG, 2JZ and 2ZZ).

2GR-FE/FSE
Intake valve diameter: 38.0 mm
Exhaust valve diameter: 32.0 mm
Intake valve lift: 10.9 mm
Exhaust valve lift: 10.7 mm
Overall intake valve length: 105.85 mm
Overall exhaust valve lenth: 110.4 mm
Valve stem diameter: 5.5 mm

For example the 2ZZ has pretty big valves, but still are smaller than the 2GR valves (2zz Int = 34mm and Exh = 29mm).

Since you brought up the M3 engine (which is awesome, but look here, pretty close and actually smaller than the 2GR valves)
2008 E92 M3 S65 Intake valve:
diameter: 35.7 mm
stem: 4.97 mm

All an Evora needs is a Radium Intake and a Cat back, and it's good to go.

It can also take a beating.... Here's one in a dune buggy that makes 800HP
http://www.peterkittlemotorsports.com.au/buggyspec.htm



Not saying that Toyota/Lotus didn't screw up on their applications of the 2GR. Just saying the 2GR is more awesome than people know.

[86fanatic]

If someone is writing off the Evora because the engine is from a Camry I would say it's not worth getting into an argument about. In my opinion that is pretty much the definition of a bench racing car snob.

Is anyone going to question whether a Honda engine belongs in an Ariel Atom and that it's inclusion makes the Atom some kind of lesser sports car?

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Torquier compared to the BRZ possibly, but still feels torqueless. I tried finding a 2.7 dyno plot; couldn't find one. The BRZ makes 90% of peak torque from 2k-6krpm; not sure how the Cayman's power delivery looks, but I just drove it yesterday and it felt not unlike my MR2 with 121lb/ft in the low rev range.

The FA20 is the more primitive engine, and it definitely does not make 90% of peak torque from 2-6k, very far from it actually. At 2k the torque is below 80% of peak, and the "dip" in the mid rpm range is a little under 90% of peak torque or around that much.

Porsche has dual profile cams, so before 2500rpm the torque delivery is almost certainly better, and since it's Porsche you'd expect them to give it a slightly greater performance emphasis unlike Honda which tries to save fuel on the low end, which dyno charts for the 3.4L engines seem to suggest (I am having trouble finding 2.7 dyno plots as well). Obviously not going to be like a low A/R turbo, on NA engines the torque is going to be much more consistent with the exception of the very low rpm range.

At any rate you're talking 20% greater power at any time in a car that has <10% more mass.

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by uspspro

It's a good engine regardless of cost and negative stigma associated with it coming out of a Camry.

Yes, so are plenty of engines...But the source/quality of the engine remains from a basal sedan produced in milkweed like quantities. So you're dealing with a car that is priced sky high, simply because it CAN be.

It makes around 310-320 hp at the crank with all 3 cats, with just minor bolt-ons (my 271 rwhp dyno). With headers and a tune around 340-350 hp (MWR 295 rwhp dyno in their swapped Exige)

It's lame that Toyota and Lotus did not let it breathe, and it's really lame that owners of expensive Evoras have to get a few bolt-ons considering how much they paid. BUT the engine itself is excellent. I know the engine inside and out, it is HUGELY underrated. The engine itself is worthy of being in a $60,000 sports car if it had the "full-package" engineered to go with it.

The 2GRFE actually has the highest valve lift and the biggest valves of any previous Toyota engine (including 3SG, 2JZ and 2ZZ).

So highest valve lift, thusly most risk of valve float along with.......industry avg power rating means it's worth of a 75,000 dollar sports car.

The engine found it's way into over 20 different toyota vehicles...Meaning the engine was anything but difficult to source/use/introduce. so the 75,000 price tag OBVIOUSLY isn't for the engine, so therein the REST of the car must be worth that high price tag which is far from the case.

-------
It's a Lotus that's bigger than an Elise, still mid engined....and has more power..
-------

^^That idea is what a majority of that 75,000 price tag comes from. The "Idea"/"Principle" of the car,

As for the hard info you gave, it is impressive that you looked for it or knew it whichever it is I am not assuming, however OEM Valve diameter on an engine is just about the most insignificant comparative fact i've EVER seen be used..

It can also take a beating.... Here's one in a dune buggy that makes 800HP
://www.peterkittlemotorsports.com.au/buggyspec.htm

That's awesome, so that shows when you throw a huge amount of money at it, it can produce some good figures. But that doesn't really hold much of a candle in favor of the oem application of it...

Ex. The honda 1.5L LEA engine with IMA....when combined with a wheelbarrow filled with money can produce this.




That's a 500HP turbocharged 1.5L LEA engine, capable of returning over 45MPG as a result of the Honda IMA Hybrid assist system still being fully functional.

That doesn't mean I should expect to see the 1.5L LEA in the next S2000/NSX car simply because it can be beat on and makes about as much power as every other car in this cars class...

Not saying that Toyota/Lotus didn't screw up on their applications of the 2GR. Just saying the 2GR is more awesome than people know.

That I can agree with..It is usually an under-rated under-appreciated engine..Much like the GM3800 etc found in Chevrolet Lumina's and other FWD fat boat mobiles of the 90's...But that's where they shine...In their originally intended application, if GM decided to put that in some mid engined corvette people would think they were OUT of their mind, regardless of how "under-appreciated" the engine was.

Yeah the 2GR makes some numbers, but so does the VQ35, the VQ37, the Honda J35 and J37, the Mercedes 3.5L, the Chryco 3.6L Penta-star v6, the Ford duratec 3.7L, the GM LLT 3.6L..etc etc..

All of those engines produce ~300+hp and 250-280Ftlbs.....This engine is the definition of "average" by power production standards in this day and age.

Originally Posted by 86fanatic

If someone is writing off the Evora because the engine is from a Camry I would say it's not worth getting into an argument about. In my opinion that is pretty much the definition of a bench racing car snob.

Is anyone going to question whether a Honda engine belongs in an Ariel Atom and that it's inclusion makes the Atom some kind of lesser sports car?

And I'm writing off the Evora because not only is it extremely high priced in it's category, it's high priced yet designed around a parts bin drivetrain and a chassis' that's epoxy bonded.

The Atom is a lesser "sports car"...It's fast yes, no one is denying it's speed..but to say it's the same caliber of vehicle as a Porsche/Ferrari etc is silly... Speed =/= quality.

I love the atom, similarly I love the Hulme and Radicals and Westfields etc etc...but I'm not delusional.

"Bench racing snob"? Try intelligent objectivity vs "This car soo fast and it's s'pensive so it R g00d"

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

And I'm writing off the Evora because not only is it extremely high priced in it's category, it's high priced yet designed around a parts bin drivetrain and a chassis' that's epoxy bonded.

I agree with everything you said, minus this small detail. Epoxy bonding is a very good not to mention labor intensive way of joining aluminum. Airplane fuselages are for the most part held together by the epoxy, not the rivets.

As far as value goes Lotus is certainly lacking...the reason people don't like the 2GR in there is not because it's not a good engine, but because for the money, they expect at least some work done to it, which Lotus hasn't bothered to do. It shows in resale.

[Dimman]

I think shitty resale is a Lotus tradition. So is taking shit for their motor choice (4 banger turbo Esprit positioned to compete with V8 Magnum PI Ferrari).

Btw are they still in business?

[KatHawkDown]

Originally Posted by 86fanatic

Absolutely, I don't view the FRS as a Cayman fighter at all. The Cayman is going to have better build quality, be faster, probably have tighter, better steering feel, and is just generally a monster.

But there in lies the problem for me, it's overbuilt for what I use a car for 99% of the time. Combined with the sky high cost of entry, sky high maintenance costs (unless nothing goes wrong, at which point it comes down to a level that's just "relatively expensive"), and virtually un-usable real world performance - I can't justify it for myself anymore (I actually had a Cayman for a few years from 2009-2011).

I can't justify buying and owning a by the numbers sports car which has otherworldly performance. The car becomes more of a piece of jewelry at that point then an actual fun to drive experience, and that's what makes me so excited about the FRS.

Dude I must say I really respect this choice and the reasoning behind it.