'17 Toyota 86 vs '17 Maza MX-5

[tanner]

Had a chance to test drive the new MX-5 RF GS and also a good look at it bumper-to-bumper tonight.

One thing for sure, this is a fair bit more $$$ than the 86 and it's pretty apparent why (some of it because it's a convertible). Just getting into the driver seat you can immediately see that the fit and finish is in another category compared to the 86. Sure the interior space is much less (little cubby holes here and there for storage for example, two seater only, truck space is pretty dismal) but it's nice, really nice actually. Recaro seats are supportive (yah for manual seats) and more comfortable IMO, at least the upper parts of the seats don't stick out into my shoulder. Quality of the switch gear, materials used, etc., very good tactile feel and quality. Seat/steering wheel position felt good, though anybody that's tall, this probably won't be an ideal car for you. Sitting in the car as a passenger, well, a little less room, the transmission tunnel bulges out a bit so there's a little less width for leg room.

Driving-wise, clutch pickup is very early, or maybe my clutch is getting a little worn out, don't know. Shifting isn't long or short, but it's precise, smoother than the one in the 86. Placement of the brake/gas pedals better for heel-toe IMO, and really liked the floor mounted gas pedal. Engine is smooth, stock exhaust note more pleasant than the FA20. Engine loves to rev also. Sure it's less power but the MX-5's curb weight also less by ~400 lbs.

All in all, it drove well on city roads and highway with the top down. Loved rowing through the gears, and downshifting and braking, felt second nature.

Overall, it's a great car, but not for me. Don't want a convertible even if it's a hard top. Maybe when I'm older and need something fun around the city, this would be a possible candidate. Would be a pain to take to the track and back due to the lack of storage, either take the stuff in a 2nd vehicle or put a hitch on it and pull a small trailer.

[Gforce]

Weight transfer (technically, load transfer) is not related to body roll.

Body roll results from suspension compliance and only suspension compliance. Go karts have no body roll and have the same load transfer as a sprung vehicle when generating the same lateral gforce.

Load transfer results from tire grip opposing inertial forces from the CG. Load transfer is the same regardless of body roll.

For best handling you need maximum workable suspension compliance and minimum workable camber change. These are opposing requirements.

The MX5 and the BRZ represent different solutions to the compromises these two factors require.

Put another way, the MX5 needs double wishbone/ multi link suspension in order to get the handling it gets with such soft springs.

The BRZ uses stiffer springs and can use McPherson strut/multi link suspension successfully.

If you stiffen up the springs on the MX5 enough to reduce body roll then the double wishbone front suspension is not necessary.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Gforce

If you stiffen up the springs on the MX5 enough to reduce body roll then the double wishbone front suspension is not necessary.

Are you running more front camber on your BRZ?

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by wparsons

Are you running more front camber on your BRZ?

Not yet. Doesn't seem to need anything more than stock.

I drive mine year round. Not interested in changing alignment with the seasons. Negative camber is not so good for winter.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Gforce

Not yet. Doesn't seem to need anything more than stock.

I drive mine year round. Not interested in changing alignment with the seasons. Negative camber is not so good for winter.

Which means you're not driving it that hard... anyone seeing any track time finds they need more front camber right away because of how much positive camber you end up with in corners.

As for not so good for winter, I run about -2.5* all year without issue.

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by wparsons

Which means you're not driving it that hard... anyone seeing any track time finds they need more front camber right away because of how much positive camber you end up with in corners.

As for not so good for winter, I run about -2.5* all year without issue.

I think I've been perfectly clear that I am optimizing my BRZ as a daily driver on the street. Once you drive a race car on track you tend to lose interest in driving any road car on track. Any car suitable to challenge your driving skills on track is awful on most roads outside of Germany.

If you are running 2.5 degrees static negative camber in winter at stock ride height you are definitely having issues. If you are running dropped then you will be unable to reduce negative camber to ideal for winter driving so you are having issues. Mind you running any drop in winter is pretty dumb.

The fact you think you do not have issues casts serious doubt on your claimed expertise.

[jvincent]

Originally Posted by Gforce

If you are running 2.5 degrees static negative camber in winter at stock ride height you are definitely having issues.

I'll bite, what issues does having that much negative camber in the winter pose?

The camber curve hasn't magically changed because it's winter. Sure, you can't corner as hard because there is generally less grip, but so what.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Gforce

I think I've been perfectly clear that I am optimizing my BRZ as a daily driver on the street. Once you drive a race car on track you tend to lose interest in driving any road car on track. Any car suitable to challenge your driving skills on track is awful on most roads outside of Germany.

If you are running 2.5 degrees static negative camber in winter at stock ride height you are definitely having issues. If you are running dropped then you will be unable to reduce negative camber to ideal for winter driving so you are having issues. Mind you running any drop in winter is pretty dumb.

The fact you think you do not have issues casts serious doubt on your claimed expertise.

You're an idiot. Plain and simple. This whole derailed thread has been about how double wishbone/multi link is a huge benefit for cars that see street and track time because they don't have to run as much static camber as a compromise. You've either been skipping most of the posts, or simply can't read.

Since you're the expert, what issues should I be having? The car is on swift springs and has been for 4 winters. I've only been stuck once, and ironically that was at stock height (in over a foot of snow). Maybe me not having issues casts serious doubt on your claimed expertise? Why would being lowered affect my ability to reduce camber??

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by jvincent

I'll bite, what issues does having that much negative camber in the winter pose?

The camber curve hasn't magically changed because it's winter. Sure, you can't corner as hard because there is generally less grip, but so what.

You answered your own question.

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by wparsons

You're an idiot. Plain and simple. This whole derailed thread has been about how double wishbone/multi link is a huge benefit for cars that see street and track time because they don't have to run as much static camber as a compromise. You've either been skipping most of the posts, or simply can't read.

Since you're the expert, what issues should I be having? The car is on swift springs and has been for 4 winters. I've only been stuck once, and ironically that was at stock height (in over a foot of snow). Maybe me not having issues casts serious doubt on your claimed expertise? Why would being lowered affect my ability to reduce camber??

Your discussion always seems to degenerate into ad hominem attacks. That is a certain indication that you have run out of reasonable arguments.

I notice also that you cling to your own opinions with a dogmatic ferocity which beggars belief. I believe you are wrong about several things and this topic is one of them. I won't call you an idiot. Your postings are evidence enough for any reasonably well informed person to draw their own conclusions.

Camber is undesirable relative to the road surface. The lower the grip avalable the bigger the undesirable effects become. A relatively small amount of camber relative to the road surface improves lateral grip due to camber thrust effects, same idea as motorcycle tire grip. However, any amount of camber relative to the road reduces braking and traction grip.

In winter, the most important grip you need is for braking.

QED.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Gforce

Your discussion always seems to degenerate into ad hominem attacks. That is a certain indication that you have run out of reasonable arguments.

Go back and see who started slinging insults first... hint, wasn't me.

Originally Posted by Gforce

I notice also that you cling to your own opinions with a dogmatic ferocity which beggars belief. I believe you are wrong about several things and this topic is one of them. I won't call you an idiot. Your postings are evidence enough for any reasonably well informed person to draw their own conclusions.

And what's your backup? You have nothing but your own opinion. Once again you're claiming to be more knowledgeable than actual experts (suspension engineers, race car designers/builders, etc).

Originally Posted by Gforce

Camber is undesirable relative to the road surface. The lower the grip avalable the bigger the undesirable effects become. A relatively small amount of camber relative to the road surface improves lateral grip due to camber thrust effects, same idea as motorcycle tire grip. However, any amount of camber relative to the road reduces braking and traction grip.

Annnnnnnd, you've argued yourself in a circle. You took the bait and gave the answer I was hoping you would.. Glad you're finally seeing the light as to why a good camber curve from double wishbones/multi link suspension is beneficial. Less static camber is good for braking and acceleration, and keeping the tire flat with negative camber under lateral load is good for cornering grip.

Originally Posted by Gforce

In winter, the most important grip you need is for braking.

QED.

5 winters on the car, 4 lowered with more camber, zero close calls and I can outbrake other cars on comparable snow tires. Want video next winter with measurements? What will you argue then?


You'd probably be shocked how little body roll it takes on our cars to push the front tires well into the positive camber range. This is the stock alignment, the tire is easily into the 4*+ positive range. It's not scientific, but you can also clearly see how much more vertical the rear tire is under the same lateral load.

[Canehda]

This is painful to read, @wparsons has used sources to back up his explanation as well as another member adding and supporting that side and yet gforce still continues this, it's not opinions vs opinion, it's opinions with evidence/support vs opinion....

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Canehda

This is painful to read, @wparsons has used sources to back up his explanation as well as another member adding and supporting that side and yet gforce still continues this, it's not opinions vs opinion, it's opinions with evidence/support vs opinion....

Yeah, but he's a lawyer and knows everything about everything. We're just lucky to have him in our presence.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Gforce

In winter, the most important grip you need is for braking.

In winter you don't need wide tires. In fact thinner tires are more optimal in rainy or snow conditions. So, camber helps even in this case for braking.