Toyota S-FR Concept!!

[gymratter]

I wouldn't take too much from that article. Sounds more like guessing and speculation from the author.

[funwheeldrive]

I agree, the article is far from official, but I'm finding it hard to believe that this car will come to the states.

[DAEMANO]

I'd love to have an FS-R, but by the time it hits, my FR-S will move from DD to weekend fun/track car status. I guess if it doesn't come to North America that makes the decision for me. Still would love to see these lil guys buzzing around the streets and Auto-X.

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

I agree, the article is far from official, but I'm finding it hard to believe that this car will come to the states.

Agreed. It LOOKS like a Japanese market only car ie. kind of quirky and all out of proportion. However, I think that if Toyota is serious about getting a foothold in the younger market then they will be making a mistake by not bringing this to the US as a Scion with a reasonable, as in sub $23K, price tag on it. It is just goofy looking enough to appeal to those that might otherwise buy a Mini, Fiat 500 or something else like that.

Having said that and based on Toyota's past history, I am betting that we will never see this car in North America.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Rampage

Agreed. It LOOKS like a Japanese market only car ie. kind of quirky and all out of proportion. However, I think that if Toyota is serious about getting a foothold in the younger market then they will be making a mistake by not bringing this to the US as a Scion with a reasonable, as in sub $23K, price tag on it. It is just goofy looking enough to appeal to those that might otherwise buy a Mini, Fiat 500 or something else like that.

Having said that and based on Toyota's past history, I am betting that we will never see this car in North America.

These have been my thoughts almost to the letter.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

? O.o really? 50/50 ?How?

Yes, 50/50 static weight distribution is marketing material. If you go through and engineer the dynamics of a vehicle you want a weight distribution that's closer to 40/60 rear bias for maximum grip and responsiveness, and that's during movement so aero and power application begins to take effect so what the weight distribution while it's sitting still is a relevant, but small piece of the picture when it comes to handling.

The trick is that rear bias is better for handling purposes (look at an F1 car, all the current hyper cars, they're all 45/55 to 35-65, the pinacles of performance end up there and it's not a mistake or compromise, giant rear wings are used because of this as well, also a contributing factor for the 911's success, and this doesn't benefit FWD cars as much) and with most mass market cars you're stuck with the engine up front so any shift rearward is something to be celebrated by the few engineers who cared to put the work in (Mazda and BMW are the few still putting in the effort).

[daiheadjai]

Originally Posted by Rampage

Agreed. It LOOKS like a Japanese market only car ie. kind of quirky and all out of proportion. However, I think that if Toyota is serious about getting a foothold in the younger market then they will be making a mistake by not bringing this to the US as a Scion with a reasonable, as in sub $23K, price tag on it. It is just goofy looking enough to appeal to those that might otherwise buy a Mini, Fiat 500 or something else like that.

Having said that and based on Toyota's past history, I am betting that we will never see this car in North America.

With Akio Toyoda at the helm, I'm cautiously optimistic.
After all, based on Toyota's recent history, we shouldn't have gotten the LC 500, RC-F, or IS-F (hell, maybe not even the Twins) either.

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by daiheadjai

With Akio Toyoda at the helm, I'm cautiously optimistic.
After all, based on Toyota's recent history, we shouldn't have gotten the LC 500, RC-F, or IS-F (hell, maybe not even the Twins) either.

The LC500, RC-F and IS-F are all Americanized models. Big weight and Big horsepower. Young people may oh and aww over them but the majority of them cannot afford them. At least not new.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

? O.o really? 50/50 ?How?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I assume you are asking why I stated "BMW marketing" because I'm not sure what your question is.

In addition to @strat61caster's reply I shall quote myself:

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

50/50 weight distribution is something that the marketing department promotes. Especially BMW. Note that it is static weight distribution that is being promoted so maybe it improves handling when the vehicle is stationary. Also something that never gets mentioned in those adverts is where that mass is located; that is, having 40% of the mass in front of the front axles and 40% of the mass behind the rear axles is very different from having 80% of the mass between the two axles but both are 50/50 distributed.

That figure "50/50" is front/rear. There is never any mention in adverts about left/right balance which in road cars is kinda difficult unless one removes the driver. If one is serious about this one will get the car corner balanced but it depends on one's ability to make use of what I believe to be an incremental benefit.

Have a read of this:
https://oakmanonracing.wordpress.com...n-doesnt-work/
http://automotivethinker.com/chassis...s-not-optimal/

Also have a look at this and listen to the explanation about weight, braking and aero distribution:

In road cars the weight distribution is a minor statistic that is incorporated into the rest of the car's design.
I have never found an article, written by an engineer, explaining the benefits of 50/50 distribution though there are plenty of forum jockeys spreading the BMW faith.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Rampage

The LC500, RC-F and IS-F are all Americanized models. Big weight and Big horsepower. Young people may oh and aww over them but the majority of them cannot afford them. At least not new.

Even if I could afford them, why would I want to? They're not designed for fun like the SFR is.

This is like saying 'Chevy has an electric car, they're totally eco friendly!" *ignores 6L V8's in half their lineup*

[chaoskaze]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

I assume you are asking why I stated "BMW marketing" because I'm not sure what your question is.

In addition to @strat61caster's reply I shall quote myself:


In road cars the weight distribution is a minor statistic that is incorporated into the rest of the car's design.
I have never found an article, written by an engineer, explaining the benefits of 50/50 distribution though there are plenty of forum jockeys spreading the BMW faith.

Ya, I thought lots car company talked about being 50/50 with their cars but I don't know the history with BMW on this.

Mind shed a light over here?

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

Ya, I thought lots car company talked about being 50/50 with their cars but I don't know the history with BMW on this.

Mind shed a light over here?

I don't know where the 50/50 thing originated but I am guessing it has its roots back in the automotive dark ages.

I suspect BMW has painted themselves into a corner. That is, they have to maintain the charade.
"Well-balanced weight distribution is the basis for neutral self-steering properties, high agility and good traction even with heavy loads."
They are saying 50/50 is great but then you can go and stuff it up with heavy loads.
"Every kilo saved represents a measurable increase in agility and safety. You’ll feel it in every curve: evenly-distributed weight means increased driving pleasure." Given how heavy BMWs are now days this seems contradictory.
"This, combined with the Dynamic Stability Control (DSC),". But we will throw in electronic control just to be sure.
From http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/t...tribution.html

Weight distribution is one factor in a dynamic package. Steering geo, suspension layout, tyre width, aero considerations all affect handling dynamics. To say that weight distribution is the key element in design is just false.

[daiheadjai]

Good point on the F/R weight distribution.
I'm sure Lexus could make it 50/50 if they wanted to, but there's gotta be a reason why they don't see the need for it, and typically stop at 52/48.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

I assume you are asking why I stated "BMW marketing" because I'm not sure what your question is.

In addition to @strat61caster's reply I shall quote myself:


In road cars the weight distribution is a minor statistic that is incorporated into the rest of the car's design.
I have never found an article, written by an engineer, explaining the benefits of 50/50 distribution though there are plenty of forum jockeys spreading the BMW faith.

It has nothing to do with 50/50 being a magical number. It's really just the more towards the back the weight is in a RWD car, the better traction you have. However, there is a balance, because you also want the pivot around the center quickly to be able to change directions more easily.

50/50 to maybe 48/52 is just about the best most production front-engine cars can do due to the weight of the engine up in the front of the car. The real ideal weight distribution is something like 40/60 to 37/63 in a mid-engine car to get the most traction and best polar moment of inertia.