Weight, fuel consumption and 0-100.

[Loki556]

So, I noticed there are some discrepancies between Toyota and Subaru websites regarding some measures, as well as a couple of things I don't know how to explain, so I would like to try to clear them up and actually get some accurate figures. Hopefully those lucky souls who already have their cars can assist.

PS: All data is for MT gearbox.

Sources:
http://www.toyota.com.au/86/compare-...leId=2190,2192
http://www.subaru-global.com/special/2012brz/index.html
Aus BRZ Brochure

Weight:
Aus Toyota site states the following weights:

GT: 1257
GTS: 1275

Yet GT comes with a steel spare which I imagine weights more. What is the weight without the spare?

Subaru BRZ:
Aus Brochure: Tare mass given at 1216kg

Not sure what definition Subaru Aus has for Tare Mass.

Global website gives kerb mass of BRZ premium at 1239kg.

I would also think that BRZ with cloth seats would weight just slightly less than GTS, as it doesn't have heated seats.

Fuel Consumption:

GT/GTS - 7.8
BRZ - 7.8

Interestingly , on the Subaru global website, fuel consumption for the basic spec BRZ (equivalent to GT) is given at 6.9 l/100km.

I would think GT consumption would be slightly lower than GTS due to weight.

Acceleration 0-100km:

GT/GTS:

Not given.

BRZ: 7.6sec (both website and brochure)

Once again, I would imagine GT would be slightly faster than the other two variants due to slightly lower weight. Removing that steel spare would further improve things. Would like to get the numbers.

Wheels and some US publications quoted acceleration time under 7 sec - how come?

Few nice to knows:

Weight of GT wheels vs GTS.
AUS BRZ weight measured in the same way as Toyota.
Do Aus cars come with the same diff ration as US cars? Any mechanical difference that could explain the slower 0-100?

Hopefully together we can get the answers

[shire1976]

Can't answer all your questions Loki, but on 0-100. Most publications clock their own times and wheels and other reviews I've read have clocked faster times than the official.

On fuel consumption, different countries use different measure to come up with the combined urban and highway driving, therefore that could account for the difference you've noticed.

[Nikkojoe]

0-100kph or 0-60mph... the two are different (by a factor of 2mph).

In the US, most care about 0-60mph. This actually benefits the time because you need to do one gear change for 60mph. 0-100kph is actually 0-62, and therefore you need to do an extra gear change into 3rd to hit that speed.

[st162celica]

7.6 for 0-100 is conservative. A time set with not a complete high rev clutch dump launch.

Depending on launch 0-100 can vary.

0-100kmh in aust =. 0-60mph in the u.s. (60mph = 97kmh)

The change into 3rd gear is right at that point between 96-99kmh I think.

Most (some ?) drivers don't know how to launch effectively. High rev Too much wheel spin or low rev, not enough wheel spin,bog down. Got to find that balance.

I'm not even going to think about fuel consumption. I don't speed much, but I'm a lead foot. I can't wait to see what the fuel consumption is.

[tibsy92]

My fuel consumption averages 11.4L per 100km.. which is ok for traffic, the I'm over traffic launch on a clear stretch to the limit of course, etc

[Fussy08X]

quite interested in this too. especially the weight of the GT and the weight of the wheels.

[Blue86]

With regards to the wheels.

The gt rims are 7.21kg but I don't know the weight with the Yokohama tyres on.

The gts wheel and tyre combo is 41.4lb and I know the tyre is 21lb of that. Therefore the rim is about 21.4lb (just under 10kg).

As for car weight difference between gt and gts... Not sure but the lighter gt may not be faster 0-100 stock if the Yokohama tyres don't grip as well as the primacy tyres on launch.

I'd hazard a guess at about 30kg weight difference between the gt and gts due to the wheels, brakes and heated seats etc

[ahausheer]

Manufacturers 0-100kph times are probably done starting at idle. Auto mags beat the hell out of the car and report the fastest launch the car is physically capable of, then they adjust for temp, humidity, air pressure etc etc and might even get creative with rounding. One of the American car mags reported 6.2 for 0-60mph. 0-60 is worthless unless you compare cars as reported by the same journalist/mag as different publications can easily vary by a second or more.

[UnLeasHer]

Originally Posted by Loki556

Weight:
Aus Toyota site states the following weights:

GT: 1257
GTS: 1275

This is from online rego of the car tare weight...

The GTS Auto is the ZN6-AKE7

Attachment 10500

[Xauterus]

I have done 1800 km and average fuel is 8.2 per 100 km

[DriftEightSix]

I have done 1060 Kms, lowest i have seen my fuel at was 8.2... but the last two tanks i can't get below 9.1 :S... (not aiming for fuel eco though).

[Blue86]

My commute from work today was 25km and I reset the l/100. Mixture of traffic and freeway driving etc and ended up on 8.2l/100

[ReppohC]

According to the Subaru website the kerb weight is 1256kg.

[Azzaboynt]

Weight is relative. I bet my stock 86 auto GTS (when it arrives) with my 60kg of meat driving will be faster in a straight line than anything Jeremy Clarkson in a stock 86 manual GT with all those cameras loading it down.

I wonder how much the Stig weighs.