Autocar: Toyota GT86 vs Porsche Cayman

[kuhlka]

This makes me think an 'STI' model might simply be upgraded brakes, wheels, and other body bits rather than a boosted version of the BRZ. Don't get your hopes up kids and you won't be disappointed next year.

[ZetaVI]

Pleasant reading material.

[mit_peid]

I have no problem losing in a close comparison to the Cayman (or even the S2000 for that matter), but I didn't like that FRS vs Miata comparison where the Miate edged out the twin:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

[Sonolin]

Originally Posted by mit_peid

I have no problem losing in a close comparison to the Cayman (or even the S2000 for that matter), but I didn't like that FRS vs Miata comparison where the Miate edged out the twin:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

I think their comparison was pretty spot on.

Originally Posted by motortrend

Ultimately, the FR-S is the better driver's tool, while the Miata is the better driver's toy.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by mit_peid

I have no problem losing in a close comparison to the Cayman (or even the S2000 for that matter), but I didn't like that FRS vs Miata comparison where the Miate edged out the twin:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

why not? if youre happy with your car it shouldnt really matter what other people think of other cars in comparison.

i think its super cool that they finally compared the car to the non s but i think the lack of a diff is a little bit confusing, especially if this is a comparison about feel and behavior.

[SUB-FT86]

I think the base Cayman's engine is what I wish the FR-S had standard. Between 2.5-3.0 liters would be perfect!

[stevo_12v]

They should have tested a 'base' GT-saving 20-30kg(if the UK version gets it there) with wider(235) and stickier tyres and some lightweight(RPF1) wheels instead of getting that TRD crap :P

[quik1987]

nvm

[Porsche]

There are a few suspicious numbers on the data chart. I wonder if they mixed up data from the automatic FR-S and included it here in a test with the manual gearbox car.

They claim:

0-62 (100 km/hr): 7.7 seconds

34.9 mpg (combined) fuel economy

The 0-62 looks about right for the AUTOMATIC model, but not the manual. The consensus for the manual seems to be around 6.3 seconds for 0-60. Note that's 60 mi/hr, not 100 km/hr.

Fuel economy? Combined, no less? Not a chance in the manual gearbox car. 34 MPG number is quoted for the US model AUTOMATIC on the highway, 30 MPG for the manual. Combined is much less, of course in the USA.

I'd ignore these two figures in an otherwise superb article. Good writing and an excellent evaluation by people who are clearly experienced motoring journalists.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Porsche

I'd ignore these two figures in an otherwise superb article. Good writing and an excellent evaluation by people who are clearly experienced motoring journalists.

They're in the U.K. they use imperial m.p.g. which comes out higher than standard m.p.g.

Their numbers are accurate.

[ReVoiD]

Originally Posted by Porsche

There are a few suspicious numbers on the data chart. I wonder if they mixed up data from the automatic FR-S and included it here in a test with the manual gearbox car.

They claim:

0-62 (100 km/hr): 7.7 seconds

34.9 mpg (combined) fuel economy

The 0-62 looks about right for the AUTOMATIC model, but not the manual. The consensus for the manual seems to be around 6.3 seconds for 0-60. Note that's 60 mi/hr, not 100 km/hr.

Fuel economy? Combined, no less? Not a chance in the manual gearbox car. 34 MPG number is quoted for the US model AUTOMATIC on the highway, 30 MPG for the manual. Combined is much less, of course in the USA.

I'd ignore these two figures in an otherwise superb article. Good writing and an excellent evaluation by people who are clearly experienced motoring journalists.

1 L ≈ 0.21997 gallon Imperial 1 gallon ≡ 4.54609 L
1 L ≈ 0.2641720523 liquid gallon U.S. 1 liquid gallon ≡ 3.785411784 L

english gallon and us gallons are diffrent. you know whats the same all over the world? liters ;-)

[ft_sjo]

For an all-round drivers car, I don't think many people would be insane enough to pick an '86 over a Cayman if they were both offered on a plate.

Value for money, though, the '86 wins.

[Porsche]

Originally Posted by ReVoiD

1 L ≈ 0.21997 gallon Imperial 1 gallon ≡ 4.54609 L
1 L ≈ 0.2641720523 liquid gallon U.S. 1 liquid gallon ≡ 3.785411784 L

Ahh, yes, of course. That explains that figure.

you know whats the same all over the world? liters ;-)

Heh. Yes.

Many decades ago the USA was supposed to convert to the metric system. Alas, they failed to do so. Metric is so much easier to use. And I'm so old, now, that there's not much hope I'll see it in my lifetime.

Thank you for the correction, my good friend from Sweden.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by mit_peid

I have no problem losing in a close comparison to the Cayman (or even the S2000 for that matter), but I didn't like that FRS vs Miata comparison where the Miate edged out the twin:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

FYI, that motortrend Miata vs FRS article and video are from February. From the thread about it:

Originally Posted by Deslock

I owned an NB and have driven many NAs, NBs, and NCs. This article is spot on.

I adore my BRZ. It makes me smile on every drive, being virtually as fun as the MX5 while having fold-flat rear-seats (small, but still useful), a larger trunk, quieter cruising, and lower fuel consumption. But if I didn't need the extra utility, I would've kept my MX5. Its shorter wheelbase made it slightly more engaging at low speeds, and top down it was always a blast.

The MX5 was so awesome that I contemplated keeping it along with the BRZ. I ultimately decided that I don't drive enough miles to own two cars that are so similar. I could've kept the MX5 and bought a larger, even more practical second vehicle instead of the BRZ, but then most of the time I'd be driving something boring. That's the genius of the FT86: I can use it for everything except long family road trips.