FR-S/BRZ vs. Genesis Coupe

[SUB-FT86]

It's funny that you guys see the GC as a pony car when that term is really used for American cars only. The GC isn't design like them either.

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

It's funny that you guys see the GC as a pony car when that term is really used for American cars only. The GC isn't design like them either.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

And yet both the mustang, the camaro and probably even the challenger would wreck a GC around any track or on any straight you put them on. Not even in the same league, can barely contend with the v6 variants. How's that for stupid.

If all you care about is numbers, sure, those oversized/overweight behemoths are fine.

BTW, I never intended to put the GC out there as awesomer than anything else, just pointing out that its power/weight are more consistent with pony cars of yore. I.e., smaller and lighter-weight than the muscle cars, not necessarily faster.

As a matter of fact, find me another car that's CAPABLE of going 200mph like the GT500 or contain as much performance technology/can put up evil nurburgring times like the ZL1 and still keep a facory warranty for 55k. You do that and I'll turn lead into gold for you. You give enthusiasts a bad name hating on cars you've never even come close to driving before.

FWIW, I *could* afford a GT500/ZL1/SRT8 if I really wanted one, but I am genuinely not interested. I probably will get to drive them at the track at some point (track day driving instructor).

I think it's the numbers fanbois who give enthusiasts a bad name. The ones for whom a Miata is a "girl's car" and who will *never* appreciate what is *really* cool about genuine lightweight sports (or sporty) cars.

Of course numbers fanbois *greatly* outnumber true driving enthusiasts, so we get any number of ridiculous oversized/overweight beasts on the market and VERY few cool, minimalist, lightweight sports/sporty cars.

Yeah, CLEARLY weight is EVERYTHING and the absolute end all be all for vehicle performance,

Well, power/weight is, anyway.

that's why the Veyron SS is 4400lbs right? Because, slow. Clearly. Whatever, haters gonna hate.

The Veyron is an obscenity. Highly capable to be sure!
It's not a "hatas gon' hate" thing, I genuinely have a distaste for the big/heavy maximalist approach, although that approach certainly can be very effective in terms of outright performance numbers (though I'd put my money on a decades-old inferior power/weight McLaren F1 over the Veyron around most road courses).

But then I haven't been a numbers fanboi for a long time now...

Most of today's sports car "enthusiasts" will never genuinely appreciate true minimalist lightweight sports cars. A shame, and too bad for the few of us who do (sniff). Our numbers are just too small for the automakers to pay much attention to.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

It's funny that you guys see the GC as a pony car when that term is really used for American cars only. The GC isn't design like them either.

Just threw it out there is being about the closest thing to a modern equivalent.

The original Mustang, Camaro, and Barracuda "pony cars" were coupe versions of relatively small lightweight economy sedans (Falcon, ChevyII, Valiant), and thus were a lot smaller and lighter-weight than the bigger, heavier midsized muscle cars of the day. They were actually a lot slower, outright speed wasn't the point.

The modern Mustang/Camaro/Challenger are 2-door versions of massively oversized sedans, hence they're big, heavy, hulking monstrosities. Not consistent with the original pony car ideals at all.

At 3400 lb./345 hp, the GC is much closer to those ideals, to *me*. I just wish they'd targeted S13 240SX size/weight instead of the G35...

Ah well, FR-S/BRZ are on the way

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by switchlanez

sorry if repost

No biggie, but yep: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=295

Originally Posted by 7thgear

OHH NO YOU DIDN'T...

if anyone doesn't have the urge to get an Isuzu after watching this, well.. whatever.

Thanks for posting that. Might be the best of those old 1980s-car-stunts-in-formation videos.

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

I'll ask a solid question. When all is said and done and let's say for example we've got two heavily modded cars. A heavily modded GC and a heavily modded FRS. Is the 400-450lb difference in weight actually going to make a big enough difference in handling to put one of them far out of the others league? Probably not unless you're a seriously skilled professional driver.

Of course. But the point of the FT-86 is that a small, light (relatively) RWD car with low COG, low yaw moment, tight short throw, responsive throttle, sorted-out chassis, and great steering feel is a blast to flog.

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

But will the difference in horsepower put one out of the others league? On everything outside of a short track/AutoX, I'm going to subjectively say yes.

Again, of course. But again, I think that's not the point of the car. MX5s are popular to race not because they're the fastest around the track, but because they're fun, reliable, and cheap.

I wouldn't race a new car except for HPDE or autoX anyway.

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by ZDan

If all you care about is numbers, sure, those oversized/overweight behemoths are fine.

BTW, I never intended to put the GC out there as awesomer than anything else, just pointing out that its power/weight are more consistent with pony cars of yore. I.e., smaller and lighter-weight than the muscle cars, not necessarily faster.

Because 3600lbs qualifies as a behemoth. Look at the safety standards that exist today. Producing anything with a reasonable amount of creature comforts that comfortably sits four people UNDER 3000lbs is impossible. You're lacking in brain cells if you think otherwise. That or you're stuck in the 90's.

FWIW, I could pay cash for a GT500/ZL1/SRT8, but I am genuinely not interested. I probably will get to drive them at the track at some point (track day driving instructor).

I think it's the numbers fanbois who give enthusiasts a bad name. The ones for whom a Miata is a "girl's car" and who will *never* appreciate what is *really* cool about genuine lightweight sports (or sporty) cars.

It's "fanbois" like yourself that give real enthusiasts that approach any vehicle without bias a "bad name".Throwing hate at a certain car because of it's weight / power / interior / exterior / rim size / how X matches up against Y is rediculous. I don't care what you can afford or when you'll get to drive it, the fact is that you HAVEN'T and you're speaking as though you've experienced all there is to experience from the cars and found that you dislike them. Maybe they're not your style, maybe you genuenly hate large vehicles but you use words like "I consider" and "in my subjective opinion" when you call them names like "behemoth" and "stupid". Learn to give credit where credit is due. Those PONY CARS deserve every ounce of credit thrown their way because they've come a long way from what they used to be. Not to mention they'll borderline sodomize the vast majority of vehicles in their price bracket regardless of weight or power.
P.S. Look at the car I drive. I could grab a 335i from my dealer lot tomorrow if I felt like it, but I'm waiting for either the GC 2.0T or the FRS cause they're more my style. Hell I happen to love smaller light weight cars which is why I'm part of this forum, but at the same time I don't go around tossing insults at larger cars because they're large. They've got SPACE and COMFORT that smaller cars can't offer and fanbois them ostracize for that. "The ones for whom a Mustang is a "behemoth of car" and who will *never* appreciate what is *really* cool about MIDWEIGHT Pony car."
See what I did there?

Of course numbers fanbois *greatly* outnumber true driving enthusiasts, so we get any number of ridiculous oversized/overweight beasts on the market and VERY few cool, minimalist, lightweight sports/sporty cars.

So according to you a true driving enthusiast needs to favor lightweight sports car. Everyone else is a fanboi. Yeah, you aren't a hypocrit or anything.

Well, power/weight is, anyway.

It's a large factor but it isn't and will never be the end all be all deciding factor for performance/enjoyment someone can recieve from a vehicle. Or have you not noticed by now being a "Track day driving instructor" that not everyones tastes are the same or even remotely similar.

The Veyron is an obscenity. Highly capable to be sure!
It's not a "hatas gon' hate" thing, I genuinely have a distaste for the big/heavy maximalist approach, although that approach certainly can be very effective in terms of outright performance numbers (though I'd put my money on a decades-old inferior power/weight McLaren F1 over the Veyron around most road courses).

And there you go again calling something an "obscenity" when to a lot of ENTHUSIASTS the Veyron is a work of art; whether they've driven one, own one, or simply know everything about the car and haven't had the opportunity to step foot in it. They appreciate the car and it might not even be their type of vehicle, hell not many people can consider a 4400lb 1183bhp hypercar their type of car.

But then I haven't been a numbers fanboi for a long time now...

You're right, you aren't. Now you're a power:weight fanboi, but a fanboi nontheless.

Most of today's sports car "enthusiasts" will never genuinely appreciate true minimalist lightweight sports cars. A shame, and too bad for the few of us who do (sniff). Our numbers are just too small for the automakers to pay much attention to.

That's why this car was made right? There have always been a number of small performance cars. You just don't consider them minimalist vehicles because they're FWD. A shame, too bad there aren't as many true enthusiasts that can approach a vehicle with a mind like a blank canvas and base their decisions on how they feel about it after they've seen all the facts or driven it. Too many of you, "it's too fat" "it's too ugly" "it's too expensive" "it's too cheap" "the interior is too plasticy" "it's not RWD/FWD/AWD" "It's a (insert franchise name here)" fanboi's.

[zoomzoomers]

since the thread is off topic anyway...

Sometimes I'm amazed how fast regular cars have become. Just a decade or so ago Ferrari's and Lambos were doing the 0 - 60 in the 5 second ranges. Now we got Camry's doing it and sports cars doing it under 4's. IIRC, a magazine did an article a long time ago stating that or road cars you really couldn't go faster than the 2 second range due to traction issues. I mean F1 cars do it in that time range.

So what next right? The last decade saw the horsepower wars and, although it was a great time to be an enthusiast, it got boring fairly quick. Now with cars like the FRS/BRZ we're seeing a resurgence of light weight type of cars.

For me, I grew up with the CRX's/Preludes/Integras/Civics/etc. There are other reasons, but that's why I really love this car. Why I "want" to love this car. It takes me back to when I was young and truely was into something. When turning a wrench and breaking a friends arm with a spring was fun (see my other thread on car and friends LOL). I'm sure there are plenty of people here like me who could afford more expensive cars, but for me it just wouldn't be the same. It just wouldn't feel like when I was a kid. I guess this is sorts what those old guys driving around in old muscle cars feel as they restore and drive those cars from the 60's & 70's feel.

In a nut shell, I'm truely excited about this car and to be involved in a forum like this one! :happy0180:

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

Because 3600lbs qualifies as a behemoth. Look at the safety standards that exist today. Producing anything with a reasonable amount of creature comforts that comfortably sits four people UNDER 3000lbs is impossible. You're lacking in brain cells if you think otherwise. That or you're stuck in the 90's.

It's not impossible, in fact there are sub-3000 lb. cars on the market today that comfortably seat 4 adults, Mazda3 to name one.

Safety standards tend to drive weight up, improved design/analysis and manufacturing methods act to keep weight in check. PROGRESS is doing MORE with LESS.

Cars got heavier and heavier every year after 1987 for two reasons: CAFE quit going up every year, and most people apparently LIKE oversized/overweight vehicles for some reason (SUV boom, WTF!).

Consider that the FR-S is going to be the same size and weight and at the same price point as a 1989 240SX. Increased safety standards haven't added anything to weight since then that improved design and manufacturing can't take care of.

A modern Corvette weighs the same as a 1968 small-block, quite a bit lighter than a big-block. Same relative performance and price points, no weight gain.

There are reasons why cars are bigger and heavier, but it *is* possible to build pony cars that meet all modern standards while not being as gigantic and massive as the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger are.

What if they'd build the original Mustang/Camaro/Barracuda on Galaxie/Impala/Fury platforms? That's essentially what the new ones are. DOH!

It's "fanbois" like yourself that give real enthusiasts that approach any vehicle without bias a "bad name".Throwing hate at a certain car because of it's weight / power / interior / exterior / rim size / how X matches up against Y is rediculous.

I don't think it's ridiculous to discuss pros/cons of these cars.
I will admit to some hyperbole on my part. I don't *really* hate them. I just don't like the fact that very few manufacturers are trying to build lighter-weight more minimalist vehicles.

I don't care what you can afford or when you'll get to drive it, the fact is that you HAVEN'T and you're speaking as though you've experienced all there is to experience from the cars and found that you dislike them.

My bad, your saying "haters gonna hate" sounded to me like my disapproval of these cars was a case of sour grapes.
I see what you meant now, and it's a valid point. I have driven a few '05+ Mustangs, and for me, they're too big and heavy. Really.

Maybe they're not your style, maybe you genuenly hate large vehicles but you use words like "I consider" and "in my subjective opinion" when you call them names like "behemoth" and "stupid".

That they're overweight behemoths is a fact. That they are stupid is my subjective opinion.

Learn to give credit where credit is due. Those PONY CARS deserve every ounce of credit thrown their way because they've come a long way from what they used to be.

In the size and weight departments, they've come a LONG way indeed! Too far, in fact!

These cars already get a ton of credit from the cheerleading automags. I'm here to provide my dissenting opinion.

Not to mention they'll borderline sodomize the vast majority of vehicles in their price bracket regardless of weight or power.

Hmmm, ooohkaayyyyy...

Again, if it's all about performance numbers (or compensation), these cars have a lot going for them.

P.S. Look at the car I drive. I could grab a 335i from my dealer lot tomorrow if I felt like it, but I'm waiting for either the GC 2.0T or the FRS cause they're more my style. Hell I happen to love smaller light weight cars which is why I'm part of this forum, but at the same time I don't go around tossing insults at larger cars because they're large.

They're just metal and plastic, I'm not gonna hurt their feelings.

They've got SPACE and COMFORT that smaller cars can't offer and fanbois ostracize for that.

Wait, these cars are spacious and comfortable? Imo, for their size and weight, space and comfort aren't a strong point. I'm not gonna look up the numbers, but I'd bet a Mazda3 is more spacious, probably more comfortable too.

"The ones for whom a Mustang is a "behemoth of car" and who will *never* appreciate what is *really* cool about MIDWEIGHT Pony car."
See what I did there?

Not exactly. I fully appreciate middleweight pony cars. We just haven't had a real one on the market for some time now.

Ford produced a 3200 lb. V8 Mustang and Chevy produced a 3400 lb. V8 Camaro for years, and they *could* do it again if the will was there.

So according to you a true driving enthusiast needs to favor lightweight sports car. Everyone else is a fanboi. Yeah, you aren't a hypocrit or anything.

Exactly!

It's a large factor but it isn't and will never be the end all be all deciding factor for performance/enjoyment someone can recieve from a vehicle.

There's no doubt about it. Most people, even those who consider themselves enthusiasts, couldn't care less.

Or have you not noticed by now being a "Track day driving instructor" that not everyones tastes are the same or even remotely similar.

That's for sure.

And there you go again calling something an "obscenity" when to a lot of ENTHUSIASTS the Veyron is a work of art;

Gaudy as hell, overwrought and overweight, it's an obscenity!

I'd still LOVE to be able to drive one

You're right, you aren't. Now you're a power:weight fanboi, but a fanboi nontheless.

For performance (outside of a high-speed test facility), power/weight is hugely important. WAY more important than just power or just weight. This is just a brute fact. But I'm not a power/weight fanboi. I'd rather have an inferior power/weight FR-S than any number of way more powerful but much heavier cars that have far superior power/weight.

That's why this car was made right? There have always been a number of small performance cars.

Not really. This is the first sub-3000 lb rwd 2+2 coupe since the 240SX left in 1998.

You just don't consider them minimalist vehicles because they're FWD.

??? There are quite a few at least somewhat minimalist fwd vehicles on the market. Mini, Smart, Veloster, Yaris, etc. Why wouldn't I consider cars minimalist because they're fwd? Unfortunately nothing on the market like the original Mini or the original CRX, though...

[ A shame, too bad there aren't as many true enthusiasts that can approach a vehicle with a mind like a blank canvas and base their decisions on how they feel about it after they've seen all the facts

I think I have all the pertinent facts on the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger.

or driven it. Too many of you, "it's too fat" "it's too ugly" "it's too expensive" "it's too cheap" "the interior is too plasticy" "it's not RWD/FWD/AWD" "It's a (insert franchise name here)" fanboi's.

God forbid anyone should know enough about cars to have a pretty good idea of what they like and what they don't like beforehand!

I've driven enough different types of cars to know that I like relatively small, lightweight, rwd cars. I'm not going to waste my time trying to like 3600/3800/4000 lb. behemoths.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

This is the first sub-3000 lb rwd 2+2 coupe since the 240SX left in 1998.

A minor quibble, but the RX8's 3029 pounds (3065 pounds for later years) listed on the mazdausa site was for the loaded model; the base 6MT was a under 3000 pounds (the JDM RX8 started at ~2890 pounds).

BTW, I was impressed by the conciliatory nature of your reply to SVTSHC. Seldom do I see someone admit to a bit of hyperbole and then continue with a rational discussion (rather than getting insulting and/or defensive).

Less message-forum bravado + more even keeled posts like yours = more constructive discussions

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Deslock

A minor quibble, but the RX8's 3029 pounds (3065 pounds for later years) listed on the mazdausa site was for the loaded model; the base 6MT was a under 3000 pounds (the JDM RX8 started at ~2890 pounds).

Oh yeah... RX-8 *definitely* counts. I was this close ->||<- to buying one (a beautiful purple w/ light tan leather special edition), but the mileage killed it for me. I would have preferred +2 utility and a fixed roof for DD duty, but I decided to "settle" on the S2000 for the gas mileage! Oh, and it's faster, too

BTW, I was impressed by the conciliatory nature of your reply to SVTSHC. Seldom do I see someone admit to a bit of hyperbole and then continue with a rational discussion (rather than getting insulting and/or defensive).
Less message-forum bravado + more even keeled posts like yours = more constructive discussions

Thanks, man!

[Exage]

Originally Posted by chulooz

So muscle cars to you are sedans? Now thats a whack definition.

The mustang and camaro are pony cars, but they will always have heritage of muscle; no need to discredit them.

What part of reading closest interpretation did you not understand?

So the CL65 AMG and SL65 AMG aren't 2 doors? I was also under the belief that the CTS-V could be had in a 2 door model. Guess I'm just a whack guy, what can I say... Dodge must be disgraced for calling a 4 door (, A 4 DOOR!!!) a Charger. I'm grabbing my pitchfork and heading to Michigan after I type this!
(Sarcasm)

[cassidy0998]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Oh yeah... RX-8 *definitely* counts. I was this close ->||<- to buying one (a beautiful purple w/ light tan leather special edition), but the mileage killed it for me.

I did the exact same thing. Test drove the dark purple (Black cherry i think it was?) and tan interior. Liked it a good bit, but the mpg was worse than my truck. And the power wasn't impressive for that kind of fuel economy.

[SUB-FT86]

I remember on family guy when Peter was working for the Patriots and he sang this song for a commercial couple years back. " At Wilkins Hyundai and Subaru, we have Hyundai's and Subaru's" It was funny to me back then since I disliked both brands prior to the GC/FRS/BRZ. Now in the present day both automakers including Toyota have thoroughly impressed me with there sports coupes and I could care less about every other sporty coupe out there.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by Dimman

My source was a C&D test that measured 56/44 with the V6 Track package.

And, um FR-S 55/45? 53/47.

Only 53/47 with TWO passengers in the front.