BRZ comes last in EVO group test

[Ganthrithor]

Not surprised that the car got another negative review from "that guy" who did EVO's Nice --> UK BRZ video. He seemed to hate on the car the whole time for not being powerful enough, complaining that he couldn't pass people on highways etc.

I'd be curious to drive that Renault-- I'm absolutely shocked that they could prefer any kind of front-drive car to the BRZ. Sure, you could comment on how the BRZ is a little sterile at low speeds (Motortrend did an interesting comparison with the MX-5 along these lines), but a front-drive car? Really?

v0v

To each their own, I guess. Personally, having driven rear-drive cars with way more power/torque on tap than the 370Z I just don't agree with them that lack of torque is as big of a problem in the BRZ as they make it out to be. Yeah, if you wanted to go around doing great big Chris Harris-y skids (which-- notably-- Chris Harris manages to do in this car just fine) you might find that it's a little short on power: IE, you can't just punch the throttle and induce wheel spin. On the other hand, how often do you get the chance to drive sideways through corners on the street? Almost never.

I find the car has plenty of torque for playing with the car's balance in corners. Yeah, I might not be able to punch the gas and send the back end sideways whenever I feel like it, but there are plenty of awesome sportscars that don't have the oomph to induce wheel spin on command. I don't find myself shying away from the throttle while driving our 993 on the street, and that's a superbly entertaining vehicle. Much like the BRZ, the 993 can be driven into corners in ways that will let you hang the tail out, but it doesn't feel like a muscle car. That doesn't mean it's not a ton of fun to drive (and, IMHO the perfect road car).

I've also driven cars that do have the torque to kick the rear end out from a standing start in third gear, and guess what: while it's always fun to have the power on tap, you almost never, ever get to use it on the road. That, in my opinion, similarly frustrating to not having tons of power on tap in the first place: you can usually make up for lack of power with proper weight transfer, but you can't make up for a bad chassis with an oversupply of power. The car I have in mind here happens to have both a nicely sorted chassis/suspension and tons of power, so it's a lot of fun at most any speeds, but the car was nowhere near as fun with the stock suspension, where it felt like it had a lot of power that was sloppily applied and largely un-usable, which is pretty much what the 370Z sounds like from that EVEO review. I simply don't understand how you could rank a car like that above the BRZ.

I found Chris Harris' appraisal of the 86 much more accurate: slow, but with a really sweet chassis. I won't weigh in with a final verdict until I've finished break-in (150mi to go!) and run my BRZ on the same roads in California that I've driven extensively in other cars for a more direct comparison, but my initial reaction to the BRZ certainly isn't that it makes fun inaccessible. If anything, it reminds me a bit of the Lotus Elise: not wildly powerful, but superbly balanced and very communicative.

[Wonderbar]

First off, they fail by comparing a slushbox auto to manual cars. Automatic disadvantage.

Second, the brz looks better.

Third, miatas are for women, gay men or broke guys in a midlife crisis. (No offense)

Fourth point, penis envy.

Lastly, let me cost correct the brz to as much as I'd pay for a 370z and none of those cars could keep up enough to read the license plate.

[Sport-Tech]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

So this was actually my point when I said it wouldn't be like a BRZ with 100 lbs/ft more torque. I can't tell if that's your BRZ in your picture, but if you're thinking of switching to a GTI and expecting it to basically be like your BRZ with more torque, you'll be sorely disappointed IMO. Two different classes of cars, one being a lightweight RWD sports car and the other being a heavier FWD hot hatch. Ford (and now VW) are clearly striving for their new hot hatches to handle more like lightweight RWD sports cars, but obviously they're fighting the laws of physics.

Not sure why you felt the need to repeat yourself here, as you said I was basically agreeing with you. I'm not a current BRZ owner, I've driven an FRS a few times and it was a great experience, even if the car did feel a tiny bit heavy (it's about 200 lbs heavier than my Tiburon).

Fact is though that most of the Brit reviewers have raved about the Megane's handling, despite it being burdened with all the disadvantages you list and more - wrong wheel drive, height, weight. I'm agnostic on the commonly held supposition that "it [insert RWD sports car here] has to a priori be better because it's...", which is why I am tempted to wait until I can test both the Toyobaru and the GTI MK7 on the same day before dropping my cash down.

Don't you find it odd that Evo trashed the BRZ-auto in their initial review, basically saying they couldn't get the rear end to rotate and come out to play, when in reality, the rear rotates just fine? Every other reviewer has basically stated and demonstrated that, including Harris who btw loves the twins (and I believe is former Evo). Evo later tried to backtrack with a more positive review of a GT86 manual, saying that the manual tranny and the GT86 suspension tuning made an enormous difference, but you can tell they're worried about preserving the credibility of that initial BRZ bashing they did.

I haven't waded into the long history of Evo's relationship to the car so I can't speak to that. But going from this review I would not say they are issuing an unqualified negative on the car. Sure these other reviewers can get the BRZ to slide at 10/10ths on a track or closed road. Evo's point was that on the street the car's relative lack of torque doesn't allow one to easily get the rear end waggling, and its lack of pull reduces the excitement of driving it at less than 10/10ths. Others have made a similar point, Evo is not unique here.

BTW, I don't think there's much credibility to the argument that the staff of Evo are simply better drivers than everyone else. I can guarantee you Randy Pobst (former 4x SCCA World Challenge GT champ) and Jonathan Palmer (F1/LeMans/BTCC driver) have more experience with fast cars than the entire Evo staff combined, and both loved the twins. So the better drivers thing doesn't really explain the Evo bias either.

I was actually playing devil's advocate a bit with that argument, as I was aware of these tests (and in fact have cited the Pobst drives in a few threads here debating BRZ vs GT86 handling) and I do find some of Evo's conclusions to be anomalous data points in the Toyobaru review continuum, which makes them a bit suspect. It could be argued though that both Pobst and Palmer were driving the car on relatively high-speed (for the car) racetracks at 11/10ths, not simply trying to have a bit of fun on public roads, so the applicability of their conclusions to real-world driving may not be as strong as the Evo test's conclusions, given that Evo's testing was conducted on those self-same roads.

Sure you can probably break the rear end out a bit in the twins through most corners by using the "momentum" method of riding the edge of grip through the apex and then stomping on it, but let's face it - for most drivers in most conditions that's a pretty dangerous way to be cornering on public roads. It would be far safer if you could go through the corner at 7/10ths and then get the rear end to slide a bit on exit with a deeper nudge of the gas pedal (maybe leaving your TC in sport mode to protect yourself should you overcook things).

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Fact is though that most of the Brit reviewers have raved about the Megane's handling, despite it being burdened with all the disadvantages you list and more - wrong wheel drive, height, weight. I'm agnostic on the commonly held supposition that "it [insert RWD sports car here] has to a priori be better because it's...", which is why I am tempted to wait until I can test both the Toyobaru and the GTI MK7 on the same day before dropping my cash down.

Yeah I agree certain FWD hatches can probably be setup to be fun despite their disadvantages, but I haven't driven any production models here in the US sold that way. I used to have a DC5 Integra/RSX that I modified with coilovers and thick rear sway bar, and while that could rotate if you chucked it into a corner, it wasn't as fun or controllable or composed in a slide as driving my FR-S. Maybe a drive in a Focus ST or mk7 GTI would change my mind, but I'm doubtful. Part of the problem I suspect is that it's far more intuitive for me to use the throttle to induce oversteer, not understeer as you would in a FWD hot hatch.

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

I haven't waded into the long history of Evo's relationship to the car so I can't speak to that. But going from this review I would not say they are issuing an unqualified negative on the car. Sure these other reviewers can get the BRZ to slide at 10/10ths on a track or closed road. Evo's point was that on the street the car's relative lack of torque doesn't allow one to easily get the rear end waggling, and its lack of pull reduces the excitement of driving it at less than 10/10ths. Others have made a similar point, Evo is not unique here.

I was actually playing devil's advocate a bit with that argument, as I was aware of these tests (and in fact have cited the Pobst drives in a few threads here debating BRZ vs GT86 handling) and I do find some of Evo's conclusions to be anomalous data points in the Toyobaru review continuum, which makes them a bit suspect. It could be argued though that both Pobst and Palmer were driving the car on relatively high-speed (for the car) racetracks at 11/10ths, not simply trying to have a bit of fun on public roads, so the applicability of their conclusions to real-world driving may not be as strong as the Evo test's conclusions, given that Evo's testing was conducted on those self-same roads.

Sure you can probably break the rear end out a bit in the twins through most corners by using the "momentum" method of riding the edge of grip through the apex and then stomping on it, but let's face it - for most drivers in most conditions that's a pretty dangerous way to be cornering on public roads. It would be far safer if you could go through the corner at 7/10ths and then get the rear end to slide a bit on exit with a deeper nudge of the gas pedal (maybe leaving your TC in sport mode to protect yourself should you overcook things).

I've autocrossed my FR-S on stock tires, and you can definitely get that bit of tail wag while in a corner at 7/10ths (or maybe 8/10ths) by burying the throttle at apex in the right gear. Today I actually just came back from autocrossing on a bit stickier summer tires (though not as sticky as SS Z2's or RS3's), and it's still possible to get the tail to wag at 7 or 8/10ths, it's just the limits of the tires are a bit higher so it means 7/10ths is now faster than it used to be. And as you said, at 10/10ths, it's downright easy and controllable.

But putting aside my disagreement with Evo's assessment, perhaps the greater point is, why are the BRZ/GT86 being criticized by Evo for that when neither the Megane nor the mk7 GTI are able to throttle-oversteer at 7/10ths in a corner either? In the twins, punching the throttle at 7-8/10ths will at least get you a bit of tail wag. In the Megane or mk7 GTI or Focus ST (or insert FWD hot hatch here), you would simply induce copious amounts of understeer. Again, seems like a biased perspective by Evo to try to hold that against the twins.

[Sport-Tech]

Interesting to hear your experience on the autoX track!

From what I've read in the early reviews of the MK7, the new LSD is trick enough that you can't really induce on-throttle understeer. Of course we are all familiar with "junket review disorder" in which initially rosy reviews based on flyaway junkets get moderated or outright contradicted in later testing (especially comparison tests), so we'll have to wait a bit longer for more definitive commentaries on the new GTI's handling.

Some other reviewers are now souring a bit on the BRZ - this from R&T's long-term test:

But no car is perfect, and after a few months, the BRZ’s shortcomings began to grate. Forget the horrendous radio/nav system; that’s easily fixed with an aftermarket unit. The hiccups are the overstarched suspension and buzzy engine. A touch more ride compliance and a taller sixth gear—we routinely brush 4000 rpm on the highway—would go a long way toward making the BRZ the dream car we want it to be.

As the summer turned to fall, our enthusiasm wilted. We wondered, a bit horrified, if maybe the solution was some time apart.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Interesting to hear your experience on the autoX track!

From what I've read in the early reviews of the MK7, the new LSD is trick enough that you can't really induce on-throttle understeer. Of course we are all familiar with "junket review disorder" in which initially rosy reviews based on flyaway junkets get moderated or outright contradicted in later testing (especially comparison tests), so we'll have to wait a bit longer for more definitive commentaries on the new GTI's handling.

Honestly, I would be seriously amazed if the mk7 does not have power-on understeer. From a physics perspective, it doesn't seem possible (asking the front tires to steer and pull, while unloading them under accel), but I will admit, I was surprised by the trick rear differential of the Evo X when I drove it, and this sounds like a similar concept except in a FWD layout. So, fair point, I guess I will withhold judgment until I get to drive the mk7.

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Some other reviewers are now souring a bit on the BRZ - this from R&T's long-term test:

Yeah I liked that BRZ review (and other long-term reviews) because I don't think the twins make as much sense if you're not into track or autocross, or at least frequent spirited drives on backroads. As pure daily drivers, there are more commuter-friendly options. To me, that's where the GTI's forte lies because it does have that element of refinement. Also under 7/10ths driving, a lot of the blemishes in its driving dynamics stay hidden.

[sho220]

Originally Posted by Ganthrithor

If anything, it reminds me a bit of the Lotus Elise: not wildly powerful, but superbly balanced and very communicative.

The Lotus may not be wildly powerful, but it'll blow the doors off the twins. Not even through break-in? You're still in the honeymoon phase...give it another 6 months of slugging around and you may find that you're not as happy about the power (or lack thereof) as you thought you were...

I'm approaching a year of ownership, still love the car, but it's underpowered imo...

[regal]

Originally Posted by sho220

The Lotus may not be wildly powerful, but it'll blow the doors off the twins. Not even through break-in? You're still in the honeymoon phase...give it another 6 months of slugging around and you may find that you're not as happy about the power (or lack thereof) as you thought you were...

I'm approaching a year of ownership, still love the car, but it's underpowered imo...

DD a Lotus?

People compare the twins to the E30 BMW's but its chassis is better. This car has a chassis that matches a E24 BMW with 600 lbs less weight. A new E24 cost $40k thirty years ago ($100k today.) It was an unsung Autobahn super-car that had amazing handling for its weight. The FR-S is faster in the quarter and 0-60 than that old $100k BMW supercar.

Cars have taken a huge dramatic turn for the worse as far as chassis in the last 30 years, Heavy, FWD, Unibodies. appliances. Some with turboed torque but still appliances.

As far as HP/Torque, the main revolutional "advancement" for torque/HP came with intercooled turbo charging engines, popularied with the '86 Regal/GN. The Buick engineers pioneered electroni FI + intercooler + turbo. Those cars had frames. Drag race solid axel cars. Slap the same concept into a FWD unibody econobox with 300 ft-lbs of torque is not a drivers car no matter how much weight they add to "tighten" the chassis and make it meet safety regs..

This Toyobaru car has the same price (inflation) adjusted as a the 1994 Civic Si from 20 years ago. A car that would have never become hugely popular/satisfying were it not for the double wishbone front which helped offset the wrong wheel drive matched with its bullet-proof under-powered engine.

This Toyobaru has the COG so low as to not need DWB up front. The chassis is a blank canvas to add as much motor as one wishes over the next 20 years of ownership. If you buy cars and trade them in every 2 years, find something else. This car is a keeper, meant to be owned, personalized, upgraded. And I bet this 100hp/L low torque motor is as bullet proof as the old Honda motors proved to be. Its as revolutionary as the 54 vet or 64 stang. Not a debut magazine queen.

On the roads I drive I ask what good more HP/Torque would give me? Less downshifting, thats it. Driving the same roads FWD I always get that rollercoaster pit in the gut WTF nausea, thats uncurable. Adding torque is very curable, unless you trade in every 2 years.

[JPFr-s]

Terrible review.. Automatic BRZ against a bunch of manuals? I'd rather drive a manual Corolla than an Auto BRZ/FR-S. Give them a manual with a good ECUTEK tune and a $500 set of good tires. Still way cheaper than buying a 370 and much more fun. I agree with the dude that said Miatas are for chicks and old broke guys trying to look cool. Oh, a FRENCH car? Come on now. That's just stupid to begin with.

[Ganthrithor]

Originally Posted by sho220

The Lotus may not be wildly powerful, but it'll blow the doors off the twins. Not even through break-in? You're still in the honeymoon phase...give it another 6 months of slugging around and you may find that you're not as happy about the power (or lack thereof) as you thought you were...

I'm approaching a year of ownership, still love the car, but it's underpowered imo...

Yeah, the Lotus is more powerful, but not by a ton. It's certainly no monster though, which seemed to be EVO's complaint about the BRZ. My point is just that you don't hop into a Lotus and go around kicking the tail out with the throttle-- it's another "momentum" car. Yet I somehow doubt the same reviewer would jump in an Elise and call it boring...

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Interesting to hear your experience on the autoX track!

From what I've read in the early reviews of the MK7, the new LSD is trick enough that you can't really induce on-throttle understeer. Of course we are all familiar with "junket review disorder" in which initially rosy reviews based on flyaway junkets get moderated or outright contradicted in later testing (especially comparison tests), so we'll have to wait a bit longer for more definitive commentaries on the new GTI's handling.

Some other reviewers are now souring a bit on the BRZ - this from R&T's long-term test:
Quote:
But no car is perfect, and after a few months, the BRZ’s shortcomings began to grate. Forget the horrendous radio/nav system; that’s easily fixed with an aftermarket unit. The hiccups are the overstarched suspension and buzzy engine. A touch more ride compliance and a taller sixth gear—we routinely brush 4000 rpm on the highway—would go a long way toward making the BRZ the dream car we want it to be.

As the summer turned to fall, our enthusiasm wilted. We wondered, a bit horrified, if maybe the solution was some time apart.

I fully agree with the radio/nav system, it drives me crazy. But their complaints about a short 6th gear, and "routinely" brushing 4000 rpm on the highway???? 4000 rpm in 6th gear is over 90 mph. Them complaining about such a thing is ridiculous.

[86'd]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

-marginally bigger brakes cost the manufacturer...close to nothing
-wheels 1-1.5" wider cost the manufacturer...close to nothing
-more performance based tires cost the manufacturer...not much

Beefing up the transmission and all related forced induction equipment costs money yes, but not much more in the long run. A Porsche Cayman S costs roughly $10k more than a base Cayman. And for that $10k you're getting considerably upgraded brakes, suspension, a larger engine, different transmission and a few other options. Porsche has ridiculous amounts of profit built into their pricing and yet you're telling me that Subaru can't pull off an upgrade for less than $10-15k...even more than what Porsche does?

You gotta be kidding me.

If by long run you mean economy of scale, then maybe, but I'll take this conversation without the condescension, thank you.

Even if I'm wrong and it costs Subaru $5k to add all of this stuff (on their end), my original point is that a 300hp FR-S/BRZ will be much closer to 40K MSRP than anything else.

Why? For four reasons:

1. They can, because it would be very comparable (if not better) than a Cayman S at (still) 10k+ less.

2. It costs WAY more than you think to add a turbo (at this point in the development stage). Even if they add the DIT 2.0 from the Legacy GT, they still have to (again) make sure it passes emissions here, balance the car, strengthen/add parts (larger exhaust), provide a warranty, etc./in short you're paying for R/D time; at this point it would be an almost entirely different car.

3. It will most likely be an STI version.
3b. They wouldn't want to cannibalize other sales so they'd have to price the car at a premium.

---

When I wrote this post last year I'll provide some context:

In the beginning here people were all, "Oh the FRS/BRZ is going to be in the low 20's! There's nothing here that will make the car close to 30k"

And obviously the car is selling for what it is now and people dropped like flies because they couldn't afford it. And very generally my point was that people think that more power is easily reliable and obtainable on the cheap, it isn't. The only way to "cheat" is to go aftermarket. And even then a Stage 1 kit + ECM + Tune + any extras (exhaust, wheels, tires, brakes) = 7k+. But we already covered this.

Over time the cost of things like development will go down, and the longer the BRZ is in development the cheaper adding more power will be, however when that time comes (if ever) the car Subaru comes out with will most likely be an STI version which will be 10k+.

So either way my ultimate point stands.

TL;DR

It's not cheap to add power, especially if it's reliable. And even if it's cheap for Subaru to do, they're still going to charge a premium for it.

[Sport-Tech]

They can, because it would be very comparable (if not better) than a Cayman S at (still) 10k+ less.

That's highly debatable. Even if the two do match on power to weight, Porsche has had so many years and spent so much money to refine every detail of their suspension and engines--money and time Subaru certainly won't lavish on a tubo'ed BRZ. Yes Chris Harris relished the 86 but his recent Cayman review was a lovefest to what he called IIRC "the best sports car in the world". Hell the interior alone makes the Cayman worth an extra 10K over the BRZ- and that's before factoring in the external design, engine and drivetrain refinements, etc. that no turbo'ed BRZ is going to get close to.

[Ganthrithor]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

That's highly debatable. Even if the two do match on power to weight, Porsche has had so many years and spent so much money to refine every detail of their suspension and engines--money and time Subaru certainly won't lavish on a tubo'ed BRZ. Yes Chris Harris relished the 86 but his recent Cayman review was a lovefest to what he called IIRC "the best sports car in the world". Hell the interior alone makes the Cayman worth an extra 10K over the BRZ- and that's before factoring in the external design, engine and drivetrain refinements, etc. that no turbo'ed BRZ is going to get close to.

And the Porsche does it all without a turbo. Mmmm, NA throttle response.

On another note, I went and carved some canyon roads today and realized that the BRZ reminds me a lot of the first-gen, base-level Boxster. After trying to sort out what car the BRZ reminds me of the most, I think I might have found the answer.