Drove a Turbo BRZ today

[milanojess]

I’d agree on checking out a supercharged one. It isn’t 100% NA feel but it’s prob 99%.

I also come from decades of driving NA and this was my first FI experience (JRSC carb) and a positive one.

[Sapphireho]

Fun factor went up for me when I JRSC'ed my car. To each his own.

[stlgrym3]

i'm perfectly happy with my NA BRZ with ACE 350 header, Delicious FFK and tune. imo, this car is meant to be a nimble sports car rather than a dragster monster like Supra or other American muscle cars. 200whp for this baby while maintaining all the NA characteristics is what i was looking for.

[Lantanafrs2]

I'm looking for instant gratification lol. And please don't tell me to buy a mustang. I don't need more payments right now.

[DarkPira7e]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

I'm looking for instant gratification lol. And please don't tell me to buy a mustang. I don't need more payments right now.

NOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[falcon_wizard]

For what it’s worth, I can share my experience, after owning my Brz for 6years (100k km) and 2 years (35k km) with a Lachute Performance turbo setup at 270rwhp, driving all year long with Quebec winters.

Does the car need FI to be fun ? For me No, because I like gradual acceleration. Would I install my turbo setup again When I need to change mine ? Yes, because it makes it a lot more responsive and provide acceleration on demand, while staying very linear and predictable. The tune and chosen turbo makes it very linear and smooth, unless one would go Wot from a dead stop. The chassis is so balanced that the extra power does not upset it at all, even with stock tires and suspension. It does however require a higher level of maintenance (more frequent oil changes and higher grade oil to account for higher temps), so that comes with the responsibility of having more power. For street use and responsible driving habits, besides an eventual clutch upgrade, it’s really the main thing that really needed with FI from my experience. For track use or very heavy load driving there are things such as oil coolers, but that’d be true even with NA. The rest really depends on what people want.

On the low boost map, someone not familiar wth the car may not realize there is a turbo installed, but the car will just be more responsive. On High boost, the pedal is a lot more “loose” and responsive, but again very smooth once you’ve learned how it drives, since the driver controls how much load to put on the turbo, you control the acceleration curve depending on how you push the throttle. But it takes some time to learn it and adapt your driving a bit to it to get most out of it, the same way we adap our driving on Na to work around the torque dip.

So no wrong option in my mind, this car is fun to drive in any of its forms. The turbo just gives more of the same flavor you have NA when tuned (and driven) right. For those that like a big kick, well they can wot the car and get it as well, but that’s not how I drive mine.

Cheers

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by evoto86

Im used to the Response of the NA motor when driving backroads and when I was driving this BRZ I had to change how I drive the car, maybe I just needed more seat time and it would have grown on me, but first impression's it doesn't justify the cost of going turbo in my mind. Perhaps this Brz wasn't a good example but it was a greddy bolt on which is similar to a lot of Turbo kits for this car.

You mean the response of pushing down the pedal and getting nothing? That type of stock response?

Just kidding. I probably would have done header, e85 with a tune and lightweight mods if I was going with a base SC or turbo. I’m at E85 with 13psi SC, so any weight changes and balance changes is nullified by the power difference.

[falcon_wizard]

I’d be curious to hear about people with different setups, but basically the simplest way I can describe in words the difference in user experience of NA versus my current setup is that with the turbo I can have the feeling of the chassis being «*alive*» I used to get NA when driving on backroads at 4000+ rpms in a broader range of conditions, down to about 3000rpms, including when cruising on the highway (at normal speeds) or even low speed city driving. As I was reflecting on this, I noticed that my dynoed max torque at 3000rpm now is about the same as the overall peak torque NA, so this seems to coincide with what my Butt Dyno is telling me...

And the fact that the torque dip is gone makes the accelaration/throttle response more linear throughout the power band from 3000rpms up. From 2500 rpm and down, there is not much difference with NA, unless you really load the turbo, but then you get to 3000 rpm pretty quick. This actually allows for more predictability under rainy, icy or snowy conditions, so that is a low torque power band that is important to me as an all year daily driver.

I had considered just putting a Header and tune, but at the time, if I was going to void my warranty, I figured I’d make the jump for FI instead. Now Lachute Performance offers a factory warrantied turbo BRZ (called LP Turbo) when buying a new RS model, so I would just get that if I was to buy new now, it’s the same setup I have, but with the RS upgrades on top.

[evoto86]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

You mean the response of pushing down the pedal and getting nothing? That type of stock response?

Just kidding. I probably would have done header, e85 with a tune and lightweight mods if I was going with a base SC or turbo. I’m at E85 with 13psi SC, so any weight changes and balance changes is nullified by the power difference.

Your not pushing hard enough if your not getting anything don't have E85 anywhere close unfortunately otherwise a flex fuel kit would probably be next. I'm going to do weight saving mods and focus on suspension. I plan to keep this car for a long time so maybe an engine swap is not out of the question but it will have to be a Toyota engine this time. If only this car had an extra 20-30kw of NA engine tuning potential.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by falcon_wizard

I’d be curious to hear about people with different setups, but basically the simplest way I can describe in words the difference in user experience of NA versus my current setup is that with the turbo I can have the feeling of the chassis being «*alive*» I used to get NA when driving on backroads at 4000+ rpms in a broader range of conditions, down to about 3000rpms, including when cruising on the highway (at normal speeds) or even low speed city driving. As I was reflecting on this, I noticed that my dynoed max torque at 3000rpm now is about the same as the overall peak torque NA, so this seems to coincide with what my Butt Dyno is telling me...

And the fact that the torque dip is gone makes the accelaration/throttle response more linear throughout the power band from 3000rpms up. From 2500 rpm and down, there is not much difference with NA, unless you really load the turbo, but then you get to 3000 rpm pretty quick. This actually allows for more predictability under rainy, icy or snowy conditions, so that is a low torque power band that is important to me as an all year daily driver.

I had considered just putting a Header and tune, but at the time, if I was going to void my warranty, I figured I’d make the jump for FI instead. Now Lachute Performance offers a factory warrantied turbo BRZ (called LP Turbo) when buying a new RS model, so I would just get that if I was to buy new now, it’s the same setup I have, but with the RS upgrades on top.

Originally Posted by evoto86

Your not pushing hard enough if your not getting anything don't have E85 anywhere close unfortunately otherwise a flex fuel kit would probably be next. I'm going to do weight saving mods and focus on suspension. I plan to keep this car for a long time so maybe an engine swap is not out of the question but it will have to be a Toyota engine this time. If only this car had an extra 20-30kw of NA engine tuning potential.

Also consider a lower final drive if you haven't done that yet.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by evoto86

Your not pushing hard enough if your not getting anything don't have E85 anywhere close unfortunately otherwise a flex fuel kit would probably be next. I'm going to do weight saving mods and focus on suspension. I plan to keep this car for a long time so maybe an engine swap is not out of the question but it will have to be a Toyota engine this time. If only this car had an extra 20-30kw of NA engine tuning potential.

The car is pretty slow by most metrics (0-60, quarter mile, rolling mile, acceleration mid rpm or transient acceleration). Push all you want, but there isn’t much there.

It is a momentum car. It seems fast because it is possible to carry more speed in turns and late brake, because it is light and bounces around making it feel fast at speed, and because the drivers tend to drive faster than the average driver. The reality is that it is slower than many SUVs in acceleration.

[evoto86]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

The car is pretty slow by most metrics (0-60, quarter mile, rolling mile, acceleration mid rpm or transient acceleration). Push all you want, but there isn’t much there.

It is a momentum car. It seems fast because it is possible to carry more speed in turns and late brake, because it is light and bounces around making it feel fast at speed, and because the drivers tend to drive faster than the average driver. The reality is that it is slower than many SUVs in acceleration.

True but like you say this car was designed for Canyon like roads and that's where I base its abilities on, and that's where you can push it. how many people are actually using the car for what it was built for rather than trying to make it a 0-60 hero.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by evoto86

True but like you say this car was designed for Canyon like roads and that's where I base its abilities on, and that's where you can push it. how many people are actually using the car for what it was built for rather than trying to make it a 0-60 hero.

Yea, I get that. Pushing the car in the canyons is where it feels fast, but that doesn't mean it has acceleration. And that was my point, that I wasn't lacking ability to extract acceleration; the car just doesn't have any.

For the streets, the power may be fine for the canyons. Exit velocity is high, even if acceleration doesn't exist, yet acceleration doesn't matter if the speeds need to be reasonable (not greatly exceeding the speed limit). The car becomes pretty pathetic in any straight away, and this is particularly apparent at any high speed track, as well as, during daily driving situations where acceleration and transient changes are needed, such as when getting on an on-ramp or when trying to pass. The lack of torque is painful if the car needs to negotiate hills during a canyon run. Can we say it may be the worst stock sports car for Pikes Peak? Well, bad, but not the worst.

[Ultramaroon]

I can drive fast but I mostly like fucking around to see what it can do. I've driven twins with both PD and centrifugal superchargers and am annoyed by the extra inertia. Turbos are interesting but at the end of the day, neither help me nail a corner.