FT-86 weight distribution? - Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community

tranzformer · 04-01-2011, 01:06 AM

Anyone read or hear anything regarding the weight distribution of it yet? I'm curious if the FT will be similar to a 370z at 54/46 or if Toyota will aim more for 50/50 ala S2000. I guess it will be a bit different since the S2000 is only a 2 seater (also 370z) and the FT is 2+2. Any thoughts on this?

Oh and by the way, been lurking awhile and decided I would join. So hi everyone.

OldSkoolToys · 04-01-2011, 01:47 AM

Welcome....and I remember Tada-san talking about the weight distribution being purposely off total balance for exceptional drifting.

I think he said 52/48.

tranzformer · 04-01-2011, 02:03 AM

With the boxer engine's lower center of mass (and if they place it behind the front axle) I would be happy if they ended up with a 52/48 split.

NESW20 · 04-01-2011, 03:25 AM

they said it's not going to be 50/50, but it's on purpose.

tranzformer · 04-01-2011, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NESW20

they said it's not going to be 50/50, but it's on purpose.

I hadn't read anything about the distribution, so thanks for sharing. I'm sure they are taking everything into consideration as this has been a work in progress. Can't wait!

Snaps · 04-01-2011, 06:43 PM

IIRC 50/50 gives good turn-in, quick direction change, etc., but is generally a bit more unstable than having more weight in the front. 52/48 is supposed to be pretty much perfect for a FR car.

As an example: the LFA; we all know it was designed to have pretty much the best driving feel possible, and guess what weight distribution it has? 52/48

NESW20 · 04-01-2011, 07:19 PM

snaps, you have that backwards. the LFA has 48F/52R weight distribution.

edit: car and driver reports nearly balanced, but they're the first place i've seen where they claim any different from the 48/52. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

Snaps · 04-01-2011, 10:18 PM

My apologies

Matador · 04-02-2011, 09:39 AM

Yeah, LFA is 48/52. AS for the FT, Tada said that the static weight distribution is not important to him, rather how the distribution is when the car is in motion.

ichitaka05 · 04-02-2011, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Yeah, LFA is 48/52. AS for the FT, Tada said that the static weight distribution is not important to him, rather how the distribution is when the car is in motion.

Seriously, Gotta love Tada-san.

I'll love him more if he show us the real FT86 in action

proj3ct_run@bout · 04-03-2011, 11:05 AM

optimum weight distribution is closer to 45f/55r for a rwd vehicle. you want the rear tires to stick a little better so that you limit oversteer. that and braking is better with more rwd weight. as you brake the weight transfers forward to the front and this is why ~75-80% of braking is up front. being front heavy is only good for fwd cars and even then, you don't want very much front heavy. this is why the mr2 brakes so good. i tested mine to 104 ft 60-0.

a lower center of gravity is very helpful because in a corner, being as low and centered weight will help with traction. weight up high makes body roll in cornering.

enc0re · 04-03-2011, 12:32 PM

Mine is 50/50 and I just like the way it feels. It's like the car rotates right under your ass.

tranzformer · 04-03-2011, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proj3ct_run@bout

this is why the mr2 brakes so good. i tested mine to 104 ft 60-0.

Weight also plays a big part of that.

Calais · 04-04-2011, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proj3ct_run@bout

optimum weight distribution is closer to 45f/55r for a rwd vehicle. you want the rear tires to stick a little better so that you limit oversteer. that and braking is better with more rwd weight. as you brake the weight transfers forward to the front and this is why ~75-80% of braking is up front. being front heavy is only good for fwd cars and even then, you don't want very much front heavy. this is why the mr2 brakes so good. i tested mine to 104 ft 60-0.

a lower center of gravity is very helpful because in a corner, being as low and centered weight will help with traction. weight up high makes body roll in cornering.

um this car is MEANT to oversteer, if you read through this forum you whould know tada-san said this car will not be 50/50 because that is not optimal for drifting...

04-01-2011, 01:06 AM	#1
tranzformer Delights in pure handling Join Date: Apr 2011 Drives: Zoom Zoom Location: KS Posts: 4,854 Thanks: 0 Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts Mentioned: 1 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	FT-86 weight distribution? Anyone read or hear anything regarding the weight distribution of it yet? I'm curious if the FT will be similar to a 370z at 54/46 or if Toyota will aim more for 50/50 ala S2000. I guess it will be a bit different since the S2000 is only a 2 seater (also 370z) and the FT is 2+2. Any thoughts on this? Oh and by the way, been lurking awhile and decided I would join. So hi everyone.

04-01-2011, 03:25 AM	#4
NESW20 2.1L 3SGTE Join Date: Oct 2009 Drives: MR2 Turbo & Tacoma Location: Columbus, IN Posts: 1,248 Thanks: 29 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	they said it's not going to be 50/50, but it's on purpose. __________________ 1991 MR2 Turbo - 2.1L high compression stroker 3SGTE 2006 Tacoma 4x4 TRD Off Road - All-Pro front bumper, Old Man Emu shocks, Old Man Emu HD front coils, All-Pro leafs 1990 240SX Coupe - sold 2008 Civic Si Sedan

04-01-2011, 06:43 PM	#6
Snaps Supra Owner Join Date: Sep 2010 Drives: 1995 Toyota Supra UK Spec Location: New Zealand Posts: 440 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	IIRC 50/50 gives good turn-in, quick direction change, etc., but is generally a bit more unstable than having more weight in the front. 52/48 is supposed to be pretty much perfect for a FR car. As an example: the LFA; we all know it was designed to have pretty much the best driving feel possible, and guess what weight distribution it has? 52/48 __________________

04-01-2011, 07:19 PM	#7
NESW20 2.1L 3SGTE Join Date: Oct 2009 Drives: MR2 Turbo & Tacoma Location: Columbus, IN Posts: 1,248 Thanks: 29 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	snaps, you have that backwards. the LFA has 48F/52R weight distribution. edit: car and driver reports nearly balanced, but they're the first place i've seen where they claim any different from the 48/52. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test __________________ 1991 MR2 Turbo - 2.1L high compression stroker 3SGTE 2006 Tacoma 4x4 TRD Off Road - All-Pro front bumper, Old Man Emu shocks, Old Man Emu HD front coils, All-Pro leafs 1990 240SX Coupe - sold 2008 Civic Si Sedan

04-01-2011, 10:18 PM	#8
Snaps Supra Owner Join Date: Sep 2010 Drives: 1995 Toyota Supra UK Spec Location: New Zealand Posts: 440 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	My apologies __________________

04-01-2011, 02:03 AM	#3
tranzformer Delights in pure handling Join Date: Apr 2011 Drives: Zoom Zoom Location: KS Posts: 4,854 Thanks: 0 Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts Mentioned: 1 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	With the boxer engine's lower center of mass (and if they place it behind the front axle) I would be happy if they ended up with a 52/48 split.

04-02-2011, 09:39 AM	#9
Matador hashiryu Join Date: Nov 2009 Drives: Mk4 Supra Location: Probably mucking around in an engine bay Posts: 2,567 Thanks: 18 Thanked 37 Times in 20 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Yeah, LFA is 48/52. AS for the FT, Tada said that the static weight distribution is not important to him, rather how the distribution is when the car is in motion.

04-03-2011, 11:05 AM	#11
proj3ct_run@bout enthusiast Join Date: Apr 2011 Drives: mr2 turbo Location: STL Posts: 2 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	optimum weight distribution is closer to 45f/55r for a rwd vehicle. you want the rear tires to stick a little better so that you limit oversteer. that and braking is better with more rwd weight. as you brake the weight transfers forward to the front and this is why ~75-80% of braking is up front. being front heavy is only good for fwd cars and even then, you don't want very much front heavy. this is why the mr2 brakes so good. i tested mine to 104 ft 60-0. a lower center of gravity is very helpful because in a corner, being as low and centered weight will help with traction. weight up high makes body roll in cornering.

04-03-2011, 12:32 PM	#12
enc0re Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Drives: BMW 325i (E46) Location: Michigan Posts: 258 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Mine is 50/50 and I just like the way it feels. It's like the car rotates right under your ass.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FT86 weight speculation anyone?	Ground N Pound	Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum	54	09-07-2013 08:14 PM
Project Engineer hints at weight of roughly 2700lbs	zigzagz94	Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum	50	03-09-2011 05:20 AM
Toyota FT-86 weight -- take your guesses	JDMinc	Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum	51	03-24-2010 06:57 PM
GTR World FT-86 article (speculates on weight of 2,645 pounds)	Axel	Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum	10	01-12-2010 04:31 PM

User Name		Remember Me?
Password