13-16 vs 17 BRZ impressions after 2 weeks of ownership

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by curiosul

Background before the questions:
For about 7 years I'm using 55W HIDs on my cars and recently I found some nice 75W sets (true 75W).
I recently bought a new car (Ford Transit Connect Wagon) that comes with halogens in a reflective enclosure.
Stock bulbs were acceptable on dry pavement but like non existing on wet.
As soon as I switched to HIDs, it's like night and day. A friend of mine even told me that if there's anything he likes about that car it's the lights.
Now, because the new BRZ/86 has LEDs, it means no upgrading without changing the whole headlight which, in turn, means NO UPGRADING (settling basically).
I don't care about color, just light output on wet roads.

Questions:

How much worse is it (compared to the HIDs)?
Is it a strain to drive at night in the rain?
Also, from the pictures, it looks like the high beam is the same bulb that turns upwards. Is that the case?
Do you know of any (relatively cheap) upgrade method?

P.S. I've had the 75W set for almost a month and I was never flashed by incoming traffic. But that might also be because the headlights on the Transit Connect are way higher than on the BRZ therefore they are angled lower (for the same distance) therefore they need a higher deviation to bother people in the incoming lane

Actual lumen output is ~17% lower per my friend's measurement thing (I have no idea what it's called).
I had no issues driving in the rain compared to the dry, with the LED headlights.
The high beam is similar in function to a "bixenon"; the shield flips up.
My solution will probably be to retrofit a 13-16 HID assembly, or a RS1.0/2.0/Release series headlight.

[prj3ctm4yh3m]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Actual lumen output is ~17% lower per my friend's measurement thing (I have no idea what it's called).
I had no issues driving in the rain compared to the dry, with the LED headlights.
The high beam is similar in function to a "bixenon"; the shield flips up.
My solution will probably be to retrofit a 13-16 HID assembly, or a RS1.0/2.0/Release series headlight.

FWIW, in the cycling world, LED headlights revolutionized the Lumen game. battery size/carrying capacity may be a determining factor for how much HID one could carry, but you can now get 1800 Lumens out of single lense CREE headlight that blow away what was being done with HIDs just 5 years prior, at a much greater runtime.

that said, the 2017 Twin projectors look pretty cloudy/opaque; not sure if by design...

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by prj3ctm4yh3m

FWIW, in the cycling world, LED headlights revolutionized the Lumen game. battery size/carrying capacity may be a determining factor for how much HID one could carry, but you can now get 1800 Lumens out of single lense CREE headlight that blow away what was being done with HIDs just 5 years prior, at a much greater runtime.

that said, the 2017 Twin projectors look pretty cloudy/opaque; not sure if by design...

Great anecdotal data, and I agree; my LED surefires output far more than what my 60 minute runtime 60 lumen halogen surefire would 15 years ago.

Cars, however, do not have a capacity/weight limitation, in the headlight dept...

The LEDs are disappointing.

[~el~jefe~]

sucks how a thread always goes to things like light bulbs. Flashlight modding is the rage though. hm.

[10series2015]

Did they fix the issues with the engine chirp, and the sound system, is it any better?

[mjanmohammad]

Originally Posted by 10series2015

Did they fix the issues with the engine chirp, and the sound system, is it any better?

After a month, I've heard no chirping. two other 17 brz owners in dallas that have had their cars longer also confirm there is no chirping.


Sound system is still mediocre. IIRC its the same as the 2016 model

[Gforce]

But did Subaru really increase rear roll stiffness relative to the front?

They fitted a 1 mm thicker rear bar but took 10-15% out of the spring rate, according to various journalists. I've not seen any confirmed numbers anywhere as yet. Front spring rates went up. Nobody seems to know by how much.

Our Australian friends were told 10% stiffer front and 15% softer rear forints:

https://www.motormag.com.au/reviews/...yota-86-review

The comments about the LSD (still Torsen) are interesting. What did Subaru (Toyota actually as this is a Lexus unit) do there I wonder? Just btw, a Torsen LSD cannot chatter, there's nothing inside that can do that. The tires can and do alternately grip and slip across the axle under high differential loading caused by hard launches with lots of grip or by hard slow tight cornering in first gear.

Objectively, reducing rear spring rates and increasing front spring rates should increase the tendency to understeer. It should also make it easier to get power down to the road, an Achilles heel for this car from 2013 and not addressed until now. I wonder if this makes the LSD feel less active because it is due to more chassis grip at the rear axle, not because of any internal changes.

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by unhappymeal

That sounds consistent (softer and better damping) with the early impressions from the press event at Fuji Raceway. I imagine the new dampers would bolt right up to the 2013-16's?

Yup, they sure do. The springs fit (I know, I fit the rears to my car) so the dampers must. Ride height is unchanged. Rear springs are softer but the same loaded height, more coils. Front springs would have to match height so use less coil, same height.

Single best mod you can do to 2013-16 cars is fit 2017 rear springs. Then fit the dampers or Bilstein B6. Then decide on 2017 front springs or just a stiffer front bar. Finally, decide on the 2017 rear bar, 1mm isn't much of an increase but it is real.

Biggest improvement for 2017 is the ride which is now better by far than the Boxster/Cayman. Better than the slightly bouncy stiff ride on the 2013-16 cars also.

[imnotsureaboutbrz]

I love this thread... I'm gonna go for a drive during my lunch break.

[bcj]

Bumpy stiff ride 4 lyf yo!

[tawheed]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Original post in the build journal here:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...=111506&page=6


After a few weeks of driving the car around, here are my thoughts.

- The 2017 is a HUGE improvement over the 2013-2016 car. The core of the car hasn't changed, but this is a more mature, better dialed in version of the car. Overall, this is what the car should have been, in 2013. Driving this and a 13-16 back to back, I can tell the original car was rushed, and not quite what it could have been.

- I much prefer the output of the 2013's HIDs, to the 17's LEDs. The HIDs could be leveled manually, whereas the LEDs are fixed height. The factory aim is legal, but on the high side, and regularly blinds drivers on the other side of the road. I've quite frequently been high-beamed by a driver at an opposing stoplight, who thinks I have my high beams on. Additionally, the older HIDs output a much broader spectrum of light, versus the LEDs, which put out a lot of blue, but very little yellow or green. As a result, green/white highway signs are almost black/white at night, and yellow center lines are a very pale highlighter yellow instead of a very rich orange/cheese yellow. High beam output and spread are about similar.

- The balance of the 17 is far, far superior to the 13. The 13 was an understeering pig, that only kicked the rear end out if you forced it, or made a grievous driving error (contrary to what the press would like you to believe). The 17 is much more balanced with changed spring rates and a stiffer rear sway bar (how many of you have seen me preach a stiffer rear sway on stock suspension for years now?), and I have, literally, not had VSC intervene once, while driving the car around. Even going around corners, WOT, at what I would consider somewhat questionable speeds, the VSC does not intervene, because the car is not losing control. I can get a nice bit of throttle steer around corners with the stock output, but the output is not enough to actually kick the rear out.

- The only time I've had VSC intervene, is when I've intentionally done something to see when it would kick in.

- The OEM Primacys are excellently matched to the stock output. Yes, there could be more grip. Yes, there could be faster response. No, more grip and response wouldn't make for a better stock car. Think Miata. The new Miata is intentionally designed for driver enjoyment, rather than pure performance. I believe that's why these tires were chosen. That, and MPG. The OEM tires also make a nice, audible white noise under cornering, that changes to a screeching when you start approaching, and then exceeding the limit.

- I've averaged around 30-31 MPG combined. That's taking into account a stop-and-go traffic, some light canyoning, the occasional redline sprint, and commuting on the highway. I fully expect this to drop 20-25% once I put on a stickier, non-low-rolling-resistance tire.

- I like the diameter of the steering wheel versus the older steering wheel. I don't, however, like the new material. Even though it's technically "nicer", it feels cheap. I also don't like how the back of the wheel, at the connecting points of the "T", stick out.

- The steering wheel controls are convenient, but that's about it. The Mute button is nice. Every car needs a mute button. My s2000 has one, and my 3000GT VR4 had one.

- The LSD tuning is different. This one is less harsh, or at least it seems to engage less harshly. In a 13, I would hear it chatter making u-turns when cold. This one seems to chatter less. Maybe it's a function of the 4.3 final drive, or the factory fluid, vs the thicker stuff I normally use.

- The torque dip is much narrower now. The car is much friendlier to drive around in traffic, since the powerband extends up to 4k instead of 3k like before. Coming out of the torque dip is, literally, like hitting Vtec in the s2k. You will feel it, and hear it. If you're in the torque dip, it's worse than before.

- The car seems much friendlier on 91 than before. Race gas saw virtually zero power gains. The car attempted to advance timing, failed, and decremented the IAM, temporarily losing power.

- The car wants to dump fuel at high RPMs much more aggressively, to protect the cat. Anytime you want to redline, you may need to do a few pulls to actually get full power, at least on the stock tune.

- The new leather touches in the interior look nice, especially the dash piece.

- I'm not a fan of the "piano black" bezel on the new head unit. It will scratch very easily.

- The new head unit "lags". By that, I mean the bluetooth input has a delay of about a second, whereas the 13/14 head unit does not. The Pandora integration is nice, but because the head unit is slow, trying to scroll through radio stations to find one is annoying.

Thanks for the impressions! I picked up a 2017 86 over the weekend, my fifth overall BRS/FRS/86 / whatever. I too found the suspension to be so much better than the older ones I had. However, am already toying with the idea of lowering it, thoughts on the Tein Flex Z on the 17+ cars?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by tawheed

Thanks for the impressions! I picked up a 2017 86 over the weekend, my fifth overall BRS/FRS/86 / whatever. I too found the suspension to be so much better than the older ones I had. However, am already toying with the idea of lowering it, thoughts on the Tein Flex Z on the 17+ cars?

I prefer Flex A over the Z. Is your goal *just* to lower the car? What's the long term plan? IMO better to do it right the first time.

[tawheed]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

I prefer Flex A over the Z. Is your goal *just* to lower the car? What's the long term plan? IMO better to do it right the first time.

We have a local track that I *may* hit up at some point. Really, would just be looking for slightly better handling, and some aesthetics - but I also don't want to take away from the playful nature of the car, as I don't plan on really adding any power and enjoy the low speed shenanigans.

The car will also be driven year round through the brutal Canadian winter, so that will also need to be a consideration. My last BRZ S/C'd with KWV3 and they felt great around town, minus the odd clunk here and there.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by tawheed

We have a local track that I *may* hit up at some point. Really, would just be looking for slightly better handling, and some aesthetics - but I also don't want to take away from the playful nature of the car, as I don't plan on really adding any power and enjoy the low speed shenanigans.

The car will also be driven year round through the brutal Canadian winter, so that will also need to be a consideration. My last BRZ S/C'd with KWV3 and they felt great around town, minus the odd clunk here and there.

FLZ will be just fine for that