Why would more power ruin the car??

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by SCQTT

Tcoat, my day job is product development. Your assessment is spot on. I'm not certain if everyone considers that Subaru and Toyota are in this for profit. They need a return on their investment, very seldom are projects done to simply to scratch an inch or to appease enthusiasts. Even SEMA and autoshow budgets, while often massive, are justified by consumer feedback and brand exposure.

One only needs to look at the death of the successful (and much better selling than the 86) FJ Cruiser to see that Toyota has little patience for low volume models, NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY ARE LOVED.

The twins are circling the drain.

I have worked in management for Teir One auto parts manufacturers for almost 30 years and see what happens in the background. It can take 6 to 10 people, hundreds of hours of work each, spread over a year period, just to get all the different countries to approve a slight change in the type of coating on a brake rotor. It isn't as simple as saying "this is what we are going to do" and doing it.
Toyota and Subaru went into this project knowing it would be a very low volume and margin vehicle. We are not privy to their business plan but they are not the fools that people seem to think and knew exactly what they were doing. It was done more as an exposure and buzz creator then to capture sales. They don't care if they sell high volumes since that is what their appliance vehicles are for. If there is a second gen that I highly doubt it will be greatly changed from what it is now. If they decide they want to make it a high volume sales vehicle than we can kiss what we have now goodbye.

[venturaII]

Perhaps Subaru would choose to continue production since 98% of the car is really their stuff anyways, and already made at one of their plants. I'm sure the Toyota-related technology could be licensed/purchased. Subaru would seem to benefit more from a niche model than Toyota would, and certainly is no stranger to them.

[guybo]

A unicorn in the back seat would be neat too! How about Mario Kart banana peels from the back bumper and 18 gears like on the Fast and Curious?

-adding a lot of power means that the brakes need to be bigger
-the suspension needs to be beefier
-how do you increase power, keep it legal and not shove a bigger engine in the thing?
-anything other than a boxer engine will have a higher COG
-more chassis bracing is needed
-oh yeah, in order to be the same car, it can't be $100,000 so CF is out.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Perhaps Subaru would choose to continue production since 98% of the car is really their stuff anyways, and already made at one of their plants. I'm sure the Toyota-related technology could be licensed/purchased. Subaru would seem to benefit more from a niche model than Toyota would, and certainly is no stranger to them.

Pretty sure there was a article about the production of the car, and how it isn't more a Subaru than Toyota, or vise versa.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Perhaps Subaru would choose to continue production since 98% of the car is really their stuff anyways, and already made at one of their plants. I'm sure the Toyota-related technology could be licensed/purchased. Subaru would seem to benefit more from a niche model than Toyota would, and certainly is no stranger to them.

It isn't even close to 98% Subaru content but yes they could either buy similar parts or swing a deal to use the Toyota stuff. Don't see it ever becoming a one pony show though since that would drive production costs through the roof. Their other niche cars were all built on appliance platforms so the costs could be off set.


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71898

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Pretty sure there was a article about the production of the car, and how it isn't more a Subaru than Toyota, or vise versa.

I'd seriously love to read that, because just about everything I lay my eyes on in my FR-S has 'Subaru' stamped on it, or is clearly from a Subaru parts bin. My understanding is that it's basically just the direct injection technology, transmission, and rear diff that are not Subaru stuff - the rest is Subaru sourced, or shared within the platform.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

It isn't even close to 98% Subaru content but yes they could either buy similar parts or swing a deal to use the Toyota stuff. Don't see it ever becoming a one pony show though since that would drive production costs through the roof. Their other niche cars were all built on appliance platforms so the costs could be off set.


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71898

98% is an exaggeration, but the Toyota list isn't very long, as I understand it. Could be wrong though. And I don't see how production costs would rise much since there's currently only one location and it's a Subaru plant. The car has already been developed and there's basically zero retooling etc. required to maintain that. Naturally total sales would probably drop, but Subaru as a brand actually might see an increase on paper...they might be able to spin that into enough 'profit' to maintain it. Again, I think Subaru would be able to benefit far more from having a niche offering than Toyota, so the worth of that market increases somewhat. Not saying I'd want it, but they could easily milk this current platform for another 8-10 years with just minor updates to keep it selling, even if no longer competitive in it's current market.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by venturaII

I'd seriously love to read that, because just about everything I lay my eyes on in my FR-S has 'Subaru' stamped on it, or is clearly from a Subaru parts bin. My understanding is that it's basically just the direct injection technology, transmission, and rear diff that are not Subaru stuff.

Just? Those are some pretty important pieces. I mean, if you're considering all the metal and plastic they use, then creation of the twins in a Subaru plant to skew your opinion on who made more of the car, then yeah it's a Subaru.

You make it seem like the engine is the only important piece and equates to 90% of the car because boxer.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Just? Those are some pretty important pieces. I mean, if you're considering all the metal and plastic they use, then creation of the twins in a Subaru plant to skew your opinion on who made more of the car, then yeah it's a Subaru.

You make it seem like the engine is the only important piece and equates to 90% of the car because boxer.

Never said the car would go down the road without them, but if there are more that those sourced from Toyota, I'd like to hear about it. I could give fuck-all about the engine. Contemporary boxers are a pretty stupid layout, frankly, and this motor is anything but inspiring. It's adequate, nothing more.

[Veloist]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

@Veloist: I don't think his argument is "needs more power". It is more about "if more power ruins the balance of the car".

Correct that’s one way to look at it, but OP started with “Toyota, Subaru, and others mentioned that more power would ruin the twins.”

Well...

Toyota, Subaru, and others will only say that if you bring up the “needs more power” topic up to them.

—-

Besides, the answers to “why would more power ruin the [balance of the] car?” will eventually lead to “then increase the power and make the suitable changes to the chassis and suspension” and then “well they (Toyota and Subaru) should’ve made the car like that from the start.” Nothing new from the arguments back in 2012, 2013.

The people who have done the deed of increasing their car’s power themselves will chime in and point out that the car should’ve came like theirs stock, but when you’re mass producing it, then you’ll need an entirely different perspective.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Never said the car would go down the road without them, but if there are more that those sourced from Toyota, I'd like to hear about it. I could give fuck-all about the engine. Boxers are a pretty stupid layout, frankly, and this motor is anything but inspiring. It's adequate, nothing more.

Have a look at the thread Tcoat listed, it's pretty interesting.

I think the layout of the engine is cool, but that's bias because I'm obsessed with the car. If they could've managed this car with an I4 I still would've been very interested, the dream would've been a MR car like the MR2 though.

Honest question though, where do you get the evidence/opinion that Subaru was much more involved than Toyota with the creation of this car? When I first started looking into it, I basically thought it was a Subaru and Toyota just re-branded the car, but had nothing to go off of other than it was made in a Subaru plant and they contained boxers made by Subaru(I blame marketing).

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Have a look at the thread Tcoat listed, it's pretty interesting.

I think the layout of the engine is cool, but that's bias because I'm obsessed with the car. If they could've managed this car with an I4 I still would've been very interested, the dream would've been a MR car like the MR2 though.

Honest question though, where do you get the evidence/opinion that Subaru was much more involved than Toyota with the creation of this car? When I first started looking into it, I basically thought it was a Subaru and Toyota just re-branded the car, but had nothing to go off of other than it was made in a Subaru plant and they contained boxers made by Subaru(I blame marketing).

Suspension, brakes, interior, materials, etc. are mostly either Subaru parts bin, or jointly developed for the car. Like I said, it seems like very few things were sourced specifically from Toyota (importance aside).

And the boxer layout is heavy and large, and despite having a clean sheet of paper, they still shoved the motor far forward of the front wheels. There's been countless discussions regarding better overall packaging and weight savings of an I4. Yeah, CoG is slightly lower for a bare motor, but once you start factoring all the accessory componentry being located up high, that advantage mostly goes away. I do like the accessiblity of said components. Spark plugs could have easily been made far simpler to service. And 2x the complexity of valvetrain really doesn't make a strong argument for a boxer of any type. Back when they were pushrod motors, a boxer had a lot more appeal in terms of packaging. Subaru is hanging on to them because it's how they market themselves as different from the other manufacturers...there's certainly no practical advantage to them.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Veloist

The people who have done the deed of increasing their car’s power themselves will chime in and point out that the car should’ve came like theirs stock...

That's not always true. I'm too lazy to go looking for the threads, but there have been several people on this board who built out for power and then either took their cars back to stock, rebuilt for a less powerful setup or just got rid of the car. They usually pop up in the "should I turbo" threads, telling people to forego the turbo or supercharger and stick with a header and tune or just leave it stock and enjoy it like it is. Or they simply no longer post here because they no longer have the car.

[bkharmony]

Sorry to go OT, but does anyone have a link to a definitive "What part did Toyota/Subaru make" thread? I've searched for this in the past with no luck.