FR-S/BRZ vs. Genesis Coupe

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by er1c

i meant i could see myself in the FR-S if it's priced where I would like to see it.

But why do you consider FI to be bad?

I didn't say "FI" was bad, I said turbo [and I implied gasoline] was a negative. At this point in my life I'm not interested in entertaining boost threshold or lag. This is discussed ad-nauseam in the engine sub-forum.

Also, I sat in the refreshed GC at NAIAS. I'm still not impressed. Hyundai's interiors are much better in every other car but the GC. Nevertheless, the car checks too many negative boxes, the most egregious being its size.

[fatoni]

its hard to understand anybodies point of view because of how little consitancy is in this thread. are we talking about what car is going to be more fun or what car is going to be faster? i would imagine the gc is faster but the frs seems like it could be more fun

[er1c]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

I didn't say "FI" was bad, I said turbo [and I implied gasoline] was a negative. At this point in my life I'm not interested in entertaining boost threshold or lag. This is discussed ad-nauseam in the engine sub-forum.

Also, I sat in the refreshed GC at NAIAS. I'm still not impressed. Hyundai's interiors are much better in every other car but the GC. Nevertheless, the car checks too many negative boxes, the most egregious being its size.

you'll be happy to hear hyundai is going with a twin-scroll design for virtually no lag...

[Ryephile]

I appreciate your enthusiasm. I've owned several OEM twin-scroll turbo setups. Turbo designs are becoming nicely optimized, however that isn't going to sway my current preference.

Different strokes for different folks. The GC and 86 don't appear to have much overlap in that regard.

[cassidy0998]

Originally Posted by fatoni

its hard to understand anybodies point of view because of how little consitancy is in this thread. are we talking about what car is going to be more fun or what car is going to be faster? i would imagine the gc is faster but the frs seems like it could be more fun

All in all I believe we are all trying to look at the big picture. Price, quality, performance, looks etc.


People leaning more towards the FR-S are mainly going off of looks and hype, as we have no idea how much this car will cost yet or how well it will really perform - the light weight does appeal to those who favor Miata type performance. People leaning towards the 2013 GC have realized how much Hyundai has stepped up their game. And that the 2.0T (and possibly even 3.8) may very well come in at a cheaper (or similar price) to the FR-S while possibly performing better.

However, keep in mind that we do not yet know how much the 2013 GC will cost. Some guesses are based off of the 2012 model, and others are rumors that the base 2.0T will be in the $22k neighborhood, which is quite a punch for a 274hp rwd 2+2 turbocharged sports car with a 100,000k mile warranty.

[SUB-FT86]

Nobody in this thread should speak on the GC interior. The FRS interior is cheap nasty plastics. I could understand if this was a BMW forum but c'mon guys?

Also Ryephile you own a 65k sports car with one of the worst build quality interiors even though I still love it. But still 65k for a shitty interior? The GC's base price is 22k so it makes sense to not have a top of the line interior.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

Nobody in this thread should speak on the GC interior. The FRS interior is cheap nasty plastics. I could understand if this was a BMW forum but c'mon guys?

Also Ryephile you own a 65k sports car with one of the worst build quality interiors even though I still love it. But still 65k for a shitty interior? The GC's base price is 22k so it makes sense to not have a top of the line interior.

You meant to say "very cheap plastics, designed well", not "worst build quality". Those are two very different things. The way you phrase things is very misleading. You can have low-cost materials used in an application where their composition is irrelevant and they contribute positively to the environment. Conversely, expensive and exotic materials can be used poorly and clash the themes intent.

Both the GC and FRS use very cheap interior materials. Since virtually none of us have actually been inside the FRS to feel it's switchgear and touchpoints, we cannot effectively compare them.

Ironic you mention BMW. Their new 3-er interior is a big step backwards versus the E90 chassis. The materials are very expensive, however the design is poor and the implementation is amateur. Poseurs will be thrilled they're finally owning the blue and white propeller badge, but intelligent consumers will know better.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

You meant to say "very cheap plastics, designed well", not "worst build quality". Those are two very different things. The way you phrase things is very misleading. You can have low-cost materials used in an application where their composition is irrelevant and they contribute positively to the environment. Conversely, expensive and exotic materials can be used poorly and clash the themes intent.

Both the GC and FRS use very cheap interior materials. Since virtually none of us have actually been inside the FRS to feel it's switchgear and touchpoints, we cannot effectively compare them.

Ironic you mention BMW. Their new 3-er interior is a big step backwards versus the E90 chassis. The materials are very expensive, however the design is poor and the implementation is amateur. Poseurs will be thrilled they're finally owning the blue and white propeller badge, but intelligent consumers will know better.

I have heard about Lotus owners having interior build quality issues. Also reviews have mentioned the FR-S interior feeling and looking cheap.

[Ryephile]

You've heard? LOL! Oh ok, that must override my actual experiences as a 2-time owner. Think about what you're typing. The Elise & Exige have virtually no interior. Seats bolt to chassis. Dash panel clips into bulkhead. Side sills screw into chassis. Floor mats screw to chassis. That's about it. What do you propose the "build quality" problems would be?

I get it, you're trying your hardest to discount my track toy to improve your argument for the GC. It's not relevant; it's not going to work. Let's get back to discussing how the cheap plastics in the GC are comparable to the cheap plastics in the FRS with primarily the design being the differentiation factor.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

You've heard? LOL! Oh ok, that must override my actual experiences as a 2-time owner. Think about what you're typing. The Elise & Exige have virtually no interior. Seats bolt to chassis. Dash panel clips into bulkhead. Side sills screw into chassis. Floor mats screw to chassis. That's about it. What do you propose the "build quality" problems would be?

So you've never heard anything from other Lotus owners? I can't believe that.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

You've heard? LOL! Oh ok, that must override my actual experiences as a 2-time owner. Think about what you're typing. The Elise & Exige have virtually no interior. Seats bolt to chassis. Dash panel clips into bulkhead. Side sills screw into chassis. Floor mats screw to chassis. That's about it. What do you propose the "build quality" problems would be?

I get it, you're trying your hardest to discount my track toy to improve your argument for the GC. It's not relevant; it's not going to work. Let's get back to discussing how the cheap plastics in the GC are comparable to the cheap plastics in the FRS with primarily the design being the differentiation factor.

It's relevant because you sound like a snob expecting a 22k car to come with high end materials and such when your 65k car is no better. It's 3x more expensive and you still don't get the point.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

So you've never heard anything from other Lotus owners? I can't believe that.

Wait, someone expected a de-contented, as lightweight as possible and completely performance oriented track car to have a good interior? I was surprised to even see 4 cabin air vents. The car basically has no purpose but to be on the track, it shouldn't even have an interior.

[er1c]

^yup and the fr-s is more like a weekend car/track toy. essentially a really stripped down, dated interior, and with back seats which are there just so you can look at them.

for the average enthusiast looking for a dd with potential the GC is a no brainer...

[Mr.Jay]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

It's relevant because you sound like a snob expecting a 22k car to come with high end materials and such when your 65k car is no better. It's 3x more expensive and you still don't get the point.

Sorry but this is very laughable of a statement

I would very much so expect a 22K car that is built as a cheap alternate for a bmws and infinitis to have a much better interior than a track focus car whom focal point is on weight savings and lightness

Especially when one car was design to be kind of lux while the other is a no thrills

BTW if anyone sounds like a snob its you especially how you trash other opinions when they don't like the GC by calling them a fanboy when really its more like hey the GC doesn't fit what I'm looking for