BRZ/FR-S vs 2015 Mustang

[Weasel Soup]

Who is this Pat Devereux guy?

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/n...ear-2014-09-17

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by cdrazic93

It's so unfortunate that Ford was not able to keep the weight off. It would literally need to shrink for it to loose weight, and it won't. It will always be heavier than most sports cars (not grand tourers) because it's supposed to be a big coupe with a V8. To make it affordable, it can't have spaceage carbon fiber or excess amounts of aluminum in it. As said before me, for a well equipped ecoboost mustang @ 35k, you could do ALOT to a GT86 with that price difference...

But you'd think they'd take notice and look at other sports cars and the advantages of dropping a few pounds.

[BobDigi5060]

My bad, I apologize for that

For that price the Ecoboost (A/T) outshines the twins in every performance test carried out by Motor Trend. This goes beyond acceleration, is all I'm saying.

As far as weight gain, 50-100 pounds across the board. MT clocks 1/10th slower through the 1/4 mile, but with a higher trap speed for the GT. There may be a weight gain, but everyone whose driven it so far agrees that that this is a much nicer, more composed, and refined ride. I've yet to see a review where weight is as much of an issue as it's made out to be here which is a little annoying, but after all this is ft86!

[BobDigi5060]

Originally Posted by FRSBRZGT86FAN

But you'd think they'd take notice and look at other sports cars and the advantages of dropping a few pounds.

I expect Chevy to take full advantage of this and hopefully the next gen Camaro comes in 100 pounds lighter. Putting new metal and an IRS underneath an old platform may not be enough to win the next Pony War... We shall see.

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by BobDigi5060

For that price the Ecoboost (A/T) outshines the twins in every performance test carried out by Motor Trend. This goes beyond acceleration, is all I'm saying.

Sure, but wasn't that the case with the last gen V6 Mustang with the performance pack too? I seem to remember it was quite a bit faster around a road course than the FR-S.

[BobDigi5060]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Sure, but wasn't that the case with the last gen V6 Mustang with the performance pack too? I seem to remember it was quite a bit faster around a road course than the FR-S.

Not that much of a discrepancy, about what you would expect from two cars that cost about the same.

As far as BRZ/FR-S vs Mustang... You better drive and decide first whether or not you want a pony car or a cruiser like the Challenger.... Or a compact like the twins. Each is an acquired taste and it seems like thread starters would compare the twins to a shopping cart if it had wheels and a motor attached to it.

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by Weasel Soup

Who is this Pat Devereux guy?

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/n...ear-2014-09-17

Budding automotive journalist

[swpbrz]

Originally Posted by BobDigi5060

My bad, I apologize for that

For that price the Ecoboost (A/T) outshines the twins in every performance test carried out by Motor Trend. This goes beyond acceleration, is all I'm saying.

As far as weight gain, 50-100 pounds across the board. MT clocks 1/10th slower through the 1/4 mile, but with a higher trap speed for the GT. There may be a weight gain, but everyone whose driven it so far agrees that that this is a much nicer, more composed, and refined ride. I've yet to see a review where weight is as much of an issue as it's made out to be here which is a little annoying, but after all this is ft86!

Did it win in the light go cart steering feel department? That's the nice surprise about frs every now and then the squirlyness reminds me of a go cart.

[Grip Ronin]

I gotta test a 2.3t track pack. With a tune, exhaust and slicks it ran a 12.56. Wtf same price. I hate the looks of it tho

[tahdizzle]

Everyone knows that the twins with sticky rubber, and just sticky rubber, is much faster around a track than a base twin.

I have no idea why people have to throw in "etc etc with a track pack, performance pack, mopar pack, fudge pack" whatever pack you want to throw on it, is faster than a base Twin.

[totopo]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

Everyone knows that the twins with sticky rubber, and just sticky rubber, is much faster around a track than a base twin.

I have no idea why people have to throw in "etc etc with a track pack, performance pack, mopar pack, fudge pack" whatever pack you want to throw on it, is faster than a base Twin.

errr, the twins don't really have enough hp to really make good use of sticky tires.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSqWD5BSeoY"]Testing Tires with Subaru BRZ, Ford Mustang & BMW 328i! The Downshift Ep. 65 - YouTube[/ame]

the old v6 mustang on max performance tires (michelin PSS, 1:30) beats the brz times on extreme performance tires (bridgetstone re-11, 1:31.5), and pretty handily beats down the brz on similar max performance tires (potenza s-04, 1:33.4). The new eco-boost looks like it is a little bit faster than the old v6 mustang so I am pretty sure that given equal tires, the eco-boost will smack down the brz on a track in times.

[Grip Ronin]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

Everyone knows that the twins with sticky rubber, and just sticky rubber, is much faster around a track than a base twin.

I have no idea why people have to throw in "etc etc with a track pack, performance pack, mopar pack, fudge pack" whatever pack you want to throw on it, is faster than a base Twin.

I track this car quite a bit with all the na power and grip i can get, hell i cant even power slide anymore because of the traction. Its slow as hell on straights lol m3s, z's, ap2 s2ks can almost hang on turns but i cant make up enough distance away from them that they wont catch me on straights. This car really needed to be a larger displacement. 2.5 fa20 woulda pulled a premium 1 week before release.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by totopo

errr, the twins don't really have enough hp to really make good use of sticky tires.

the old v6 mustang on max performance tires (michelin PSS, 1:30) beats the brz times on extreme performance tires (bridgetstone re-11, 1:31.5), and pretty handily beats down the brz on similar max performance tires (potenza s-04, 1:33.4). The new eco-boost looks like it is a little bit faster than the old v6 mustang so I am pretty sure that given equal tires, the eco-boost will smack down the brz on a track in times.

Potenza's are not good tires. That downshift episode was just a tirerack commercial. The video has been discussed.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by Grip Ronin

I track this car quite a bit with all the na power and grip i can get, hell i cant even power slide anymore because of the traction. Its slow as hell on straights lol m3s, z's, ap2 s2ks can almost hang on turns but i cant make up enough distance away from them that they wont catch me on straights. This car really needed to be a larger displacement. 2.5 fa20 woulda pulled a premium 1 week before release.

So.. You are saying that stickier tires on a stock Twin is pointless and not faster. Because m3s, z's, and 2nd gen s2000s can "almost hang on turns"?

The only comparison I made was: a twin with stickier tires is MUCH faster than a twin without sticky tires.

And its laughable when people compare track times between a base twin and whatever vehicle with some sort of track package. (track pack mustang, HFP civic) whatever.