Who is happy the engine will be Naturally Aspirated?

[BRZ]

Originally Posted by zoomzoomers

Heck! I'm just happy this car is finally being released. Fuggeddabbout a turbo!

Same here!

[EvoFanatic]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

cuz texas is the center of the fucking universe right?

When the hell did I mention anything about Texas vs.wherever? Never said anything about Texas being the best, but there are at least 5 amazing tracks within a reasonable distance of Fort Worth. Beside if you are going to hate on Texas maybe you should come visit and stay here a while. I bet you anything you will love it; but only if you can pull your arrogant and close-minded head out of your ass.

[EvoFanatic]

Originally Posted by Capt Canuck

I readily admit to not being a pro (with only 14 track days under my belt, I don't like autoX BTW), but I had a helluva fun time driving my NA 2L Honda Civic Type R on various circuits.

The stock engine/exhaust sounded great to me - and occasional passengers - especially when keeping it on the boil with the revs above 6k for entire laps. It was like driving a mini-touring car. Cracking fun that was and it didn't bore me at all!

What I mean is that if you are into any level of competitive tracking a NA 2.0L is not enough for anything except beating other NA 2.0L cars. Also, tracking in general (with any car, I have tracked a Winstar before and it was a blast), is mega funzies!!!!!

[Allch Chcar]

Now now children at least try to pretend to get along.

We don't have a members ride section yet. Probably one of the next things we need eh.

[toxicdrift]

im really excited about the car, though i miss my old diesel turbo tercel sometimes and if i can ditch my suzuki and manage to get the 86, itll be a helluva upgrade for me, turning at 60kmh+ will be good fun haahahaha i love N/A car's and getting a good handling car is bigger bonus then a high hp turbo car with bad handling.

[Levi]

Originally Posted by EvoFanatic

What I mean is that if you are into any level of competitive tracking a NA 2.0L is not enough for anything except beating other NA 2.0L cars. Also, tracking in general (with any car, I have tracked a Winstar before and it was a blast), is mega funzies!!!!!

Hahaha, clearly you are not a good driver. With my 120 PS car, FWD, 1280 kg, I am faster than many more than two times more powerful cars. No not on the autobahn, but on country roads. Being fast on a straight roads tells nothing aout the driver, just about his mney and his car, but on curvy roads you get to know he can't drive. 200 PS in a RWD 1230 kg car is so much enough. On open roads you'll even be faster tan 911 Turbos and Ferrari, they drive fast only on straight lines.

[EvoFanatic]

Originally Posted by Levi

Hahaha, clearly you are not a good driver. With my 120 PS car, FWD, 1280 kg, I am faster than many more than two times more powerful cars. No not on the autobahn, but on country roads. Being fast on a straight roads tells nothing aout the driver, just about his mney and his car, but on curvy roads you get to know he can't drive. 200 PS in a RWD 1230 kg car is so much enough. On open roads you'll even be faster tan 911 Turbos and Ferrari, they drive fast only on straight lines.

That's why the Miata is on top of the Top Gear lap times bored right?
Also, you are clearly the bad driver if actually you believe being fast in a straight line does not require skill. I challange you to go to a IHRA event and go head to head with an experienced driver with similar weight and power numbers. I bet he smokes you.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by EvoFanatic

What I mean is that if you are into any level of competitive tracking a NA 2.0L is not enough for anything except beating other NA 2.0L cars. Also, tracking in general (with any car, I have tracked a Winstar before and it was a blast), is mega funzies!!!!!

just like a turbo 2 is only good for beating other turbo 2s or huge v8s are only good enough for beating v8s. i get what you are saying but i dont understand why you are saying it.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by EvoFanatic

That's why the Miata is on top of the Top Gear lap times bored right?
Also, you are clearly the bad driver if actually you believe being fast in a straight line does not require skill. I challange you to go to a IHRA event and go head to head with an experienced driver with similar weight and power numbers. I bet he smokes you.

there it is. references top gear and loses all credibility. or if you want to act like that is a valid argument then im assuming you think the miata is the best brittish sports car

hes not saying being fast in a straight line doesnt take skill. hes saying that having a fast car doesnt take skill.

[EvoFanatic]

Originally Posted by fatoni

there it is. references top gear and loses all credibility. or if you want to act like that is a valid argument then im assuming you think the miata is the best brittish sports car

hes not saying being fast in a straight line doesnt take skill. hes saying that having a fast car doesnt take skill.

You are unbelievably dense.
1. a 2.0 Turbo can easily beat a big V8 in many track situations.
2. Top Gear reference is actually very credible because they use professional drivers testing car v. car on the same track and also use relatively large sample sizes. If you believe the stig is always the same driver then you really have a more creditable source.
3. The point is miata = nowhere near as fast as a Supercar around a track (even if its a giant corner)
4. I am talking about competitive or semi-competitive tracking and I bet you will never see a 2L NA v. anything else but other other 2L Na because it wouldn't be fast enough.

[Capt Canuck]

Originally Posted by EvoFanatic

What I mean is that if you are into any level of competitive tracking a NA 2.0L is not enough for anything except beating other NA 2.0L cars. Also, tracking in general (with any car, I have tracked a Winstar before and it was a blast), is mega funzies!!!!!

OK, if you are talking about a racing series that is something else.
I could care less, I am interested in enjoying myself, in whatever I happen to own, at the limits.
I cannot say for certain, but I am pretty sure I enjoyed myself as much, if not more, in my little NA four banger, than someone in a WRX STi plowing through corners in a real heavy, intert, turbo :-)

[Levi]

Originally Posted by EvoFanatic

That's why the Miata is on top of the Top Gear lap times bored right?
Also, you are clearly the bad driver if actually you believe being fast in a straight line does not require skill. I challange you to go to a IHRA event and go head to head with an experienced driver with similar weight and power numbers. I bet he smokes you.

You must have missunderstood. I am not saying straight line (launch or high-speed) does not require skill. Just that in the right hand a less powerful car can be faster than a powerful car in the "wrong" hands. But, however bad the driver of a 335i maybe, even you being a good driver will never be able to be faster than it on straight line. Not a question of skil but of car.

Power is nothing witout control, but this driver is skilled, and also a bit lucky.

[u2b]N82XfCwoL8[/u2b]

[AshWilliams]

The lack of power in this car is what's the deal breaker for me and why I didn't want to pre-order one without driving it first. I have the current generation WRX and several Subarus before that and remember how Subaru was reluctant at first to introduce turbo cars in the States--and how big of a deal the WRX was when it finally arrived with "only" 200 bhp. Then we'd kept getting escalations until you can walk in to your local dealer and hand over 32-35 grand and drive off in a STi.

No one buys a sports car and praises it for being underpowered and applauds the manufacturer for putting in the smallest engine, especially Subaru who has several turbo boxer fours and a boxer six that'd be readily interchangeable with this car.

If Toyota dealers don't want to work on turbos, that's fine. Then just save the STi model for the BRZ. I don't understand the reluctance to make a powerful version of this car. Toyota asked Subaru to do the engineering, but apparently told them not to do what they do best--give small well-handling cars tremendous horsepower and AWD to better put it to the road. These days you can even get a Ford pickup with a turbo, so the reluctance of making the 86 platform a serious contender is questionable.

There is no good reason this car can't generate 300-350 hp and at least 250-270 torque with a hi-revving turbo boxer. AWD would sweeten the deal. And a turbo/intercooler system from the manufacturer will be much better than some aftermarket bolt-on in terms of reliability and warranty.

If/when the car gets a significant power boost, I wonder how many people will be clamoring to buy the NA underpowered version.

I'd even argue who'd walk into their local Subaru dealership, past the WRX (which has more power, better acceleration, AWD, more cargo space, costs the same OR LESS) and then demands the small NA sports car.

[Levi]

I don't know how is it possible to get more power from it without increasing displacement or a bigger engine, like H6/V6 or even V8/H8. FI? No, not for such kind of cars. If somebody wants more power there are so many other cars: WRX, EVO, GTR, Mustang, Corvette, Camaro,...