follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Speed By Design
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > FT86CLUB Shared Forum > FR-S / BRZ vs....

FR-S / BRZ vs.... Area to discuss the FR-S/BRZ against its competitors [NO STREET RACING]


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-05-2012, 10:18 PM   #1121
Deslock
Senior Member
 
Deslock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Drives: 2013 DZE/01 (sold for MX5 ND1)
Location: western MA
Posts: 871
Thanks: 265
Thanked 269 Times in 133 Posts
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUB-FT86 View Post
So it sounds like you might like a first generation Miata better than a FR-S? Because someone who owns one could say the very same thing that you have been saying about heavier cars than the FR-S. By your logic the Miata should be way more fun.
That wasn't directed at me, but I expect the Miata to be more fun (though not *way* more fun, as you put it). I'm getting an FT86 because I need 3 seats.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
weight is pretty much everything isn't it?
No.

To me, mass (in terms of not only total amount but also COG and yaw moment) is the most important aspect. That doesn't mean every lighter car is more fun than every heavier car. Or more succinctly:

saying weight is most important != saying weight is everything

Read this bmwblog article (originally posted in the E30 thread). Though it's obviously too soon to declare the FT86 the E30 M3's true successor and I disagree with a couple things in the article, for the most part it's spot on.
Deslock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 10:33 PM   #1122
vq37
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Opel Kadett
Location: US
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deslock View Post
That wasn't directed at me, but I expect the Miata to be more fun (though not *way* more fun, as you put it). I'm getting an FT86 because I need 3 seats.


No.

To me, mass (in terms of not only total amount but also COG and yaw moment) is the most important aspect. That doesn't mean every lighter car is more fun than every heavier car. Or more succinctly:

saying weight is most important != saying weight is everything

Read this bmwblog article (originally posted in the E30 thread). Though it's obviously too soon to declare the FT86 the E30 M3's true successor and I disagree with a couple things in the article, for the most part it's spot on.
If you re-read my post, you will see that I was being sarcastic since the guy I was responding to was over emphasizing the importance of weight.
vq37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 11:06 PM   #1123
Want.FR-S
Senior Member
 
Want.FR-S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Drives: 4 Wheels Auto
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,191
Thanks: 251
Thanked 274 Times in 187 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark View Post
I sometimes run my IS250 on regular gas( when the gas station I go in runs out of premium), and it has D4S. When you run regular, power will be downgraded.
Thanks for the reply. So D4S can work with regular but with a power downgrade. Aren't all cars like that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exage View Post
???

Of course it has variable valve timing implemented. Dual AVCS is most likely.
I know WRX/STI comes with AVCS. Can you show me the spec of FR-S/BR-Z that indicates it comes with AVCS? Somehow I got the impression that there is no variable valve timing in this engine.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winding Road FR-S review
What is astonishing about the FR-S is that it combines the cruising comportment and function of the 128i with the dynamics of the Cayman, or Boxster, or S2000.
Want.FR-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 01:00 AM   #1124
OrbitalEllipses
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Attitude
Location: MD
Posts: 10,046
Thanks: 884
Thanked 4,889 Times in 2,902 Posts
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
JDM BRZ website said DAVCS.
OrbitalEllipses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 01:59 AM   #1125
Exage
GL 86!
 
Exage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Drives: Maybe FR-S... maybe not
Location: NA
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Want.FR-S View Post
I know WRX/STI comes with AVCS. Can you show me the spec of FR-S/BR-Z that indicates it comes with AVCS? Somehow I got the impression that there is no variable valve timing in this engine.
To be honest, finding a brand new engine without some sort of variable valve timing is very very unlikely given the emission and fuel economy standards. Maybe China or India, but I think they've caught up...

http://www.subaru.jp/brz/brz/spec/ecology.html

http://translate.google.com/translat...y.html&act=url

Under Engine you will find Type

DOHC 16-valve horizontally opposed 4-cylinder Dual AVCS 2.0 ℓ

http://translate.google.com/translat...ec%2Fspec.html

1/2 way down the page is the engine, note the fuel type has a asterisk.

* 2: When unleaded premium gasoline is not available, you can also use regular unleaded gasoline, but engine performance will decrease.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses View Post
JDM BRZ website said DAVCS.
Winner Winner, Chicken Dinner!

Last edited by Exage; 02-06-2012 at 02:10 AM. Reason: Found Gasoline Type
Exage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 03:20 AM   #1126
serialk11r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Drives: '06 AM V8V Coupe
Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,279
Thanks: 285
Thanked 1,074 Times in 759 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Want.FR-S View Post
Thanks for the reply. So D4S can work with regular but with a power downgrade. Aren't all cars like that?
Just putting regular in and letting it knock and then adjust timing is not a very good idea...as I said, adjust the valve timing ahead of time to limit your torque electronically, and you'll be okay.
serialk11r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 03:45 AM   #1127
Dark
Elite Padawan
 
Dark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Drives: '15 WRX, 15 GLA250, and 2 feet
Location: Shoreline, WA
Posts: 3,498
Thanks: 197
Thanked 250 Times in 159 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Want.FR-S View Post
Thanks for the reply. So D4S can work with regular but with a power downgrade. Aren't all cars like that?



I know WRX/STI comes with AVCS. Can you show me the spec of FR-S/BR-Z that indicates it comes with AVCS? Somehow I got the impression that there is no variable valve timing in this engine.
Don't know for sure about other cars, but all Lexus with DI are like that.

Edit: My engine is D4 not D4S. It has DI but not Port Injection. D4-S in IS350 has both DI and PI.
__________________
Dark

Last edited by Dark; 02-06-2012 at 05:33 AM.
Dark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 06:24 AM   #1128
Deslock
Senior Member
 
Deslock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Drives: 2013 DZE/01 (sold for MX5 ND1)
Location: western MA
Posts: 871
Thanks: 265
Thanked 269 Times in 133 Posts
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
If you re-read my post, you will see that I was being sarcastic since the guy I was responding to was over emphasizing the importance of weight.
If you reread my post, you'll see that I agree with him (except that I might've used the word "generally" rather than "inherently").

You brought up how most people think and what most people will buy. The truth is that most people buy a FWD car or an AWD/4WD SUV/truck.

You wrote that the FT86 "probably has better road feel, likely more balanced and might feel better through the corners" and the GC "wins at everything else". When I look at the 2013 GC, I think to myself: it'll have better acceleration, top speed, grip, warranty, room, and a more upscale interior, but the FT-86 will likely better at everything else.

So we simply have different priorities in a car.
Deslock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 06:45 AM   #1129
vq37
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Opel Kadett
Location: US
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deslock View Post
If you reread my post, you'll see that I agree with him (except that I might've used the word "generally" rather than "inherently").

You brought up how most people think and what most people will buy. The truth is that most people buy a FWD car or an AWD/4WD SUV/truck.

You wrote that the FT86 "probably has better road feel, likely more balanced and might feel better through the corners" and the GC "wins at everything else". When I look at the 2013 GC, I think to myself: it'll have better acceleration, top speed, grip, warranty, room, and a more upscale interior, but the FT-86 will likely better at everything else.

So we simply have different priorities in a car.

Yes most people buy a FWD car, SUV or truck because they are far more practical cars or achieve their needs as a point A to point B car at a much lower cost than a RWD coupe. Most people don't buy the cars we are interested in because they arn't even in the market for a 2 door sports cars.

But within the RWD coupe market, I'm quite confident that the average buyer will be fairly superficial when buying a car. They will place heavy weight on looks (and I think the GC 2013 will typically lose there), the HP/TQ and straight line acceleration will probably be important too along with interior. The people who really value proper driving dynamics, perfect balance, etc are really a very small minority.

Also, no doubt lighter cars are "generally" nicer to drive, no one is disagreeing with that, but to endless obsess about weight just doesn't make sense. You need to look at more than just weight. Why don't we just all drive around in stripped out NA Miatas? Its lighter than the FRS/BRZ. You can't judge a car by just its weight and I feel many members here are just endless going on and on about the weight of the FRS/BRZ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deslock View Post

When I look at the 2013 GC, I think to myself: it'll have better acceleration, top speed, grip, warranty, room, and a more upscale interior, but the FT-86 will likely better at everything else.

So we simply have different priorities in a car.

Indeed we have different priorities, to each his own. My point though is that my view will apply to far more buyers of coupes, its just how the average consumer sees things. I'm not bashing your view or anything, there is nothing wrong if you really have to have the lighter and more balanced car (at the cost of interior, space, power, etc), its just less common. Its not hard to see that when you look at how many 3000lbs+ large genesis like coupes are out there and how many FRS/BRZ type coupes are on the market and roads.
vq37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 07:23 AM   #1130
Deslock
Senior Member
 
Deslock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Drives: 2013 DZE/01 (sold for MX5 ND1)
Location: western MA
Posts: 871
Thanks: 265
Thanked 269 Times in 133 Posts
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
The people who really value proper driving dynamics, perfect balance, etc are really a very small minority.
Yes we are, and that's why cars like the FT86 are so rare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
Also, no doubt lighter cars are "generally" nicer to drive, no one is disagreeing with that, but to endless obsess about weight just doesn't make sense. You need to look at more than just weight. Why don't we just all drive around in stripped out NA Miatas? Its lighter than the FRS/BRZ. You can't judge a car by just its weight and I feel many members here are just endless going on and on about the weight of the FRS/BRZ.
I don't view it as an endless obsession, and I haven't seen anyone in this thread suggest that you should look only at curb weight when judging a car. But there is a point where it prevents a car from being poised. To me, even the recent rumor of 2762 pounds for the BRZ is a bit much, but it might be OK given the COG and yaw-moment.

It's a question of emphasis, priority, and compromise. And again, I'm interested in the FT86 rather than the even smaller/lighter MX5 because I need 3 seats.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
Indeed we have different priorities, to each his own.
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=223

Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
My point though is that my view will apply to far more buyers of coupes, its just how the average consumer sees things. I'm not bashing your view or anything, there is nothing wrong if you really have to have the lighter and more balanced car (at the cost of interior, space, power, etc), its just less common. Its not hard to see that when you look at how many 3000lbs+ large genesis like coupes are out there and how many FRS/BRZ type coupes are on the market and roads.
I don't think anyone is disputing that.

If you haven't yet, read that bmwblog article I linked to.

Last edited by Deslock; 02-06-2012 at 09:19 AM.
Deslock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 07:57 AM   #1131
ZDan
Senior Member
 
ZDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,576
Thanks: 1,373
Thanked 3,882 Times in 2,026 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vq37 View Post
Light weight is nice, but the obsession about it is really getting out of hand in this place.
Then again, if some people weren't a bit obsessed about light weight, we wouldn't be having this discussion because there wouldn't be an FR-S/BRZ coming out.

Quote:
The Nissan GTR is 3900+ lbs, the 911 turbo is 3500 lbs despite being a 2 seater. Do you really think they make boring daily drivers? Even the ZR1 is 3329 lbs, I guess the FR-S/BRZ must be much more fun than that too because weight is pretty much everything isn't it?
I've driven a GTR and Corvettes (Z51 and Z06, not ZR1), and I'll say that the FR-S should make a more fun and engaging daily driver. The Corvette actually feels bigger than it is, while the GTR feels like a driving a bank vault. Highly capable supercars and of course a hoot to drive superfast, but for daily driving and general driving around, a Miata or (I'll bet) FR-S is going to be more fun.

Quote:
The GC for being a 2+2 GT car is actually fairly light compared to its competition. Most people who want a comfortable fun daily driver are gonna have to take a 3000+ lbs car or risk losing a lot of features/comforts and practicality.
I'm not much of a features/creature comforts guy, but typically these don't really add a ton of weight. Bigness is usually the culprit.

Quote:
If having a single purpose track car is fine for you, then maybe FR-S/BRZ will work, and it might work for me too if its priced low enough.
I don't see the FR-S as anything like a "single-purpose track car". For me, it's a small, relatively lightweight rwd 2+2 daily driver street car. That will also be a lot of fun as a backup track day car.

Quote:
Despite the lower weight, the FRS/BRZ will be a tough sell if its priced above 25k, most people will just see the 348 HP 3.8 (the 2.0T) R-SPEC Genesis coupe for near the same price and go with that
Sad but true...

Quote:
A lot more standard features, much nicer interior, a lot better warranty, wider tires,
The FR-S actually has more tire width per weight! But very few people will realize this.

Quote:
etc. It may seem superficial but I can assure you, that's how most people will think.
No doubt about it.

Quote:
The FRS/BRZ is lighter, probably has better road feel, likely more balanced and might feel better through the corners, and while that's an important advantage, it just isn't enough unless its priced noticeable lower because the GC wins at everything else.
In that case, it's doomed, because I don't think it's going to be priced much lower than the GC.

Quote:
You can't really even fix the problem of low torque and HP
For 99% usage, the power is going to be FINE. I never get my S2000 into VTEC on the street. The way I drive it, it's essentially a 150hp/2750 lb. car. And it's a HUGELY fun daily driver. At the track, yeah, I can't get enough power/weight. On the street, I normally just don't need or use that much.

Quote:
on the FRS/BRZ due to the high compression ratio, so I doubt it would make a good tuner/turbo car either.
Thicker head gaskets, roots-type blower, maybe? That'd be pretty cool...
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 09:14 AM   #1132
SUB-FT86
86 Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Drives: 2013 Toyota 86 2.0T (Asphalt)
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 3,129
Thanks: 126
Thanked 527 Times in 296 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
I still cant believe Hyundai screwed up the front end. But good thing the 2010-2012 models exist in case I dont get the FRS.
SUB-FT86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 10:48 AM   #1133
Want.FR-S
Senior Member
 
Want.FR-S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Drives: 4 Wheels Auto
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,191
Thanks: 251
Thanked 274 Times in 187 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exage View Post
To be honest, finding a brand new engine without some sort of variable valve timing is very very unlikely given the emission and fuel economy standards. Maybe China or India, but I think they've caught up...

http://www.subaru.jp/brz/brz/spec/ecology.html

http://translate.google.com/translat...y.html&act=url

Under Engine you will find Type

DOHC 16-valve horizontally opposed 4-cylinder Dual AVCS 2.0 ℓ

http://translate.google.com/translat...ec%2Fspec.html

1/2 way down the page is the engine, note the fuel type has a asterisk.

* 2: When unleaded premium gasoline is not available, you can also use regular unleaded gasoline, but engine performance will decrease.
!
Yes indeed. Thanks for the link and reply.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winding Road FR-S review
What is astonishing about the FR-S is that it combines the cruising comportment and function of the 128i with the dynamics of the Cayman, or Boxster, or S2000.
Want.FR-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 10:57 AM   #1134
Dimman
Kuruma Otaku
 
Dimman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Drives: Mk3 Supra with Semi-built 7MGTE
Location: Greater Vancouver (New West)
Posts: 6,854
Thanks: 2,398
Thanked 2,265 Times in 1,234 Posts
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUB-FT86 View Post
I still cant believe Hyundai screwed up the front end. But good thing the 2010-2012 models exist in case I dont get the FRS.
I agree.
__________________


Because titanium.
Dimman is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FT-86 / FR-S size dimensions compared to Genesis, Civic, Sction tC, etc JDMinc FR-S / BRZ vs.... 559 05-15-2014 07:50 PM
FR-S/Subie Coupe fantasy Maxim Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum 23 06-10-2011 01:25 PM
new Kia coupe Ground N Pound Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 22 12-29-2009 02:04 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.