2015 WRX vs. FR-S/BRZ

[thill]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Everybody talks like RWD are some weird, exotic thing. You guys realize that your mothers, grandmothers and probably great grandmothers drove RWD exclusively right? There is no secret methods or special skills required to drive RWD.
Hell, I remember when FWD started to appear and nobody wanted to drive them because they were "deathtraps that don't corner well or handle properly". Now people talk like RWD is something new and you have to be a specially trained driver just to manage them.

For some people the FR-S/BRZ is their first car and first RWD car and the characteristics of the car can get you in trouble if you don't understand them. The Primacy tires are not really made for grip, and if you turn off the nannies and hit some slick pavement the rear end will slide out from you. If you know how to handle it, your fine, but there are plenty of examples here on this forum of people who have no idea how to handle some of these situations. Including driving in snow.

The point being made that speed is not the only reason to take driving lessons if you are looking to push your car. People in slower cars wreck them all the time.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by thill

For some people the FR-S/BRZ is their first car and first RWD car and the characteristics of the car can get you in trouble if you don't understand them. The Primacy tires are not really made for grip, and if you turn off the nannies and hit some slick pavement the rear end will slide out from you. If you know how to handle it, your fine, but there are plenty of examples here on this forum of people who have no idea how to handle some of these situations. Including driving in snow.

The point being made that speed is not the only reason to take driving lessons if you are looking to push your car. People in slower cars wreck them all the time.

I agree with every word there in respect to these cars but I guess my point is that it is not just because of RWD.

[thill]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I agree with every word there in respect to these cars but I guess my point is that it is not just because of RWD.

Fair enough We can agree to agree.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by thill

Fair enough We can agree to agree.

Oh crap, we must have screwed up somewhere 'cuz there can never be agreement on these Vs. threads!!!!!

[Frost]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Everybody talks like RWD are some weird, exotic thing. You guys realize that your mothers, grandmothers and probably great grandmothers drove RWD exclusively right? There is no secret methods or special skills required to drive RWD.
Hell, I remember when FWD started to appear and nobody wanted to drive them because they were "deathtraps that don't corner well or handle properly". Now people talk like RWD is something new and you have to be a specially trained driver just to manage them.

This is only true to some degree - the cars of old that were all RWD were also boats (relatively speaking to todays RWDs which tend to be sportier on average) and lost control far easier than they do nowadays.

The problem with comparing technology (yes, cars involve tech) from old to new is that various standards keep evolving including the baseline.

Case and point: We drive much faster on average these days. Most cars these days also get up to speed much faster. This means less tolerance for driver stupidity. There is much tighter reaction time bracket if you do screw up.

Dont get me wrong, I agree RWD isn't new but there were tons of crappy RWD cars in the past with some real gems. The drive train type in itself doesn't equate to the entire car. You could wind up comparing a bus (RWD) to the Toybaru twins in that case.

FWD evolved into the market because they tend to understeer and in their studies, that mean colliding head onto the object they were trying to steer around. RWD in the same situation could have fishtailed and hit the car onto the object on its SIDE. Front full on impact (as opposed to partial front as per new collision standards) is FAR easier to design safety around versus side impact.

Thus FWD was deemed "safer". It inherently relied on passive systems to save the vehicle occupants lives. RWD in the same situation depends on how well the driver could control it.

So what wound up happening is that you have a few generations of drivers that the car managed to negate some life or death situations. So when RWD makes a comeback in cheap sports cars, you have people wrapping them on trees all over again.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Frost

FWD evolved into the market because they tend to understeer and in their studies,

...

So what wound up happening is that you have a few generations of drivers that the car managed to negate some life or death situations. So when RWD makes a comeback in cheap sports cars, you have people wrapping them on trees all over again.

I thought FWD was cheaper, lighter, easier to assemble, leading to a more efficient overall vehicle, driving dynamics for mass market vehicles are usually pretty far down on the list of considerations. Easy sell in the post gas-crisis economy.

RWD makes a comeback? The Mustang and Miata have been in continuous production for 50+ and 25+ years respectively and both have outsold the Toyobaru many times over (well, the NC hasn't). Not to mention technically the RX-8 was being sold right up until the Toyobaru launched:
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

[Frost]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I thought FWD was cheaper, lighter, easier to assemble, leading to a more efficient overall vehicle, driving dynamics for mass market vehicles are usually pretty far down on the list of considerations. Easy sell in the post gas-crisis economy.

RWD makes a comeback? The Mustang and Miata have been in continuous production for 50+ and 25+ years respectively and both have outsold the Toyobaru many times over (well, the NC hasn't). Not to mention technically the RX-8 was being sold right up until the Toyobaru launched:
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

You are correct - it was more cost effective, lighter (no driveshaft), roomier (no driveshaft) and inherently 'safer'. Quadruple win for the car manufacturers! And thus markets got slammed with platforms being switched to FWD.

RWD is making a comeback in a sense that we are starting to see considerably more offerings to the general public after the FWD madness. For a while there, most sports cars disappeared off the face of the earth by the major manufacturers with the exception of the steadfast MX5/Miata and the Mustang and Corvette to name a few regulars. The RX8 got reborn (and died), same with the MR2 and the S2000 came and went. Now we have the Genesis Sedan and Coupe, BRZ, FRS, MX5, Camaro, Challenger, etc.

We are seeing a bit of a resurgence of the RWD drivetrain and whole generation is starting to get used to it again thanks to more offerings (other than just luxury and exotics). I for one am happy that there is a slight more balance to market for those of us who are the niche RWD sports car drivers.

Besides, the point of my post was that inherently RWD drivers of old don't necessarily make them better RWD drivers of today.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Frost

This is only true to some degree - the cars of old that were all RWD were also boats (relatively speaking to todays RWDs which tend to be sportier on average) and lost control far easier than they do nowadays.

The problem with comparing technology (yes, cars involve tech) from old to new is that various standards keep evolving including the baseline.

Case and point: We drive much faster on average these days. Most cars these days also get up to speed much faster. This means less tolerance for driver stupidity. There is much tighter reaction time bracket if you do screw up.

Dont get me wrong, I agree RWD isn't new but there were tons of crappy RWD cars in the past with some real gems. The drive train type in itself doesn't equate to the entire car. You could wind up comparing a bus (RWD) to the Toybaru twins in that case.

FWD evolved into the market because they tend to understeer and in their studies, that mean colliding head onto the object they were trying to steer around. RWD in the same situation could have fishtailed and hit the car onto the object on its SIDE. Front full on impact (as opposed to partial front as per new collision standards) is FAR easier to design safety around versus side impact.

Thus FWD was deemed "safer". It inherently relied on passive systems to save the vehicle occupants lives. RWD in the same situation depends on how well the driver could control it.

So what wound up happening is that you have a few generations of drivers that the car managed to negate some life or death situations. So when RWD makes a comeback in cheap sports cars, you have people wrapping them on trees all over again.

Highlighted above is my point! With some relatively simple suspension changes and different tires even the 86 can be made to under steer at exactly the same level as any FWD (and with the 15s they are already headed down the road of making those changes stock). It is the whole platform that creates the issues with some people not simply that it is RWD.

[Twin4Life]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Highlighted above is my point! With some relatively simple suspension changes and different tires even the 86 can be made to under steer at exactly the same level as any FWD (and with the 15s they are already headed down the road of making those changes stock). It is the whole platform that creates the issues with some people not simply that it is RWD.

The last 30 years cars have been with FWD in mind exactly what was stated. Its simply cheaper. So unless youre over 50, or have a budget for a niche car like a RWD 86, Z, Camaro, Stang, Porsche, etc people just dont have the experience actually driving one until well, they drive one.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

The last 30 years cars have been with FWD in mind exactly what was stated. Its simply cheaper. So unless youre over 50, or have a budget for a niche car like a RWD 86, Z, Camaro, Stang, Porsche, etc people just dont have the experience actually driving one until well, they drive one.

No argument there.
I guess it is the whole RWD elitist, need special skills, not everybody can drive them like me, they are so much better at everything then any other drive mindset that sets me off (sort of like your aversion to the "86 can whip anything" comments).
Not just this thread but all the ones that just seem to speak like RWD is a wild new thing that only a select few people can handle well. In reality any person should be able to jump into a RWD car and drive perfectly fine.
Like has been said several times now it isn't just the RWD that makes sportcars different it is the vehicle as a whole package.

[ScoobsMcGee]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No argument there.
I guess it is the whole RWD elitist, need special skills, not everybody can drive them like me, they are so much better at everything then any other drive mindset that sets me off (sort of like your aversion to the "86 can whip anything" comments).
Not just this thread but all the ones that just seem to speak like RWD is a wild new thing that only a select few people can handle well. In reality any person should be able to jump into a RWD car and drive perfectly fine.
Like has been said several times now it isn't just the RWD that makes sportcars different it is the vehicle as a whole package.

The sentiment expressed here made me think of the below article:

http://jalopnik.com/no-your-city-doe...ers-1686341844

Take statistical studies for what they are, but even a fudged 80% of drivers thinking they're better than average doesn't surprise me. RWD elitism could just be considered an extension of an "I'm great and everyone else is awful" mentality.

Almost back on topic; I did trade in a 2012 WRX for a BRZ back in August. While the BRZ is significantly more fun for how I drive, I do miss the WRX at times. Despite the old engine and less precise handling, it was a more compliant DD for mucking about town or driving to work, while not being dull. If you can only have one car, need to do anything beyond flogging it on a back road, but still want to have some fun -- between these two I would suggest a WRX. Save the BRZ for a weekend or track toy, which I believe is pretty much what it is intended to be.

[ayau]

If money wasn't a factor, I think AWD is ultimately the best drivetrain for the consumer.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No argument there.
I guess it is the whole RWD elitist, need special skills, not everybody can drive them like me, they are so much better at everything then any other drive mindset that sets me off (sort of like your aversion to the "86 can whip anything" comments).
Not just this thread but all the ones that just seem to speak like RWD is a wild new thing that only a select few people can handle well. In reality any person should be able to jump into a RWD car and drive perfectly fine.
Like has been said several times now it isn't just the RWD that makes sportcars different it is the vehicle as a whole package.

Yeah you could even make the argument that RWD cars are easier to drive now more than ever with federally-mandated TC/VSC systems.

[TylerLieberman]

I'm about to do this.

I'm in the process of parting mine out right now.

The WRX will hold me over until I finish school and get everything set for an M3 or GTR.