Why would more power ruin the car??

[Harey]

Toyota, Subaru and others say that more power would ruin the twins. With the below caveats I dont understand this??

- additional power/torque stays mostly linear (ignoring torque dip)
- additional power does not add weight (or perhaps very little and that little weight is counterbalanced at the rear of the car)
- additional power is OEM engineered (not wanting to discuss the reliability of aftermarket modifications)

I understand it was not the goal of the car, but I dont understand why it would ruin the car. Yes a turbo with a big rush of torque or a big heavy engine would ruin the handling agreed. But if the additional power/torque remains linear and there is minimal extra weight I dont see how it would ruin the car?

Im not saying necessarily that the twins should have come with more power (separate discussion) I am just questioning the statement that the car would be ruined. Is there something I am missing?

[Cal3000]

You are not missing anything. If you have a linear power band in the car, it only makes the car better. The car on stock suspension still reacts and responds the same way. My SC added 60 lbs to the front and I took out the spare tire in the rear and can barely feel the difference going around corners.
You have a good platform and adding power to it just makes it a lot better.
So I conclude, no, the car is not perfect as it is stock.

[nikitopo]

Check here:

[wbradley]

The current power level is what the majority of buyers will prefer and pay for as determined by the decision makers at Toyota and Subaru. Big corporations make very educated decisions in most cases and spend significant amounts of money to find out what the market demand will be for. That for example would be the reason for steering wheel controls on the update of their original "pure sports car". They can sell the most units this way and optimize profit/maximize their objectives. Subaru already has more powerful models that many twin owners will transition to if they enjoyed their twins. The volume cannot justify multiple engine choices at this point in time. Dont rule out any upgrade being offered except more power. The manufacturers have made it clear this is as much power they want to sell the model with. Fortunately if you want more, the aftermarket is very developed on this vehicle. Depending on fuel consumption and CO2 objectives, I believe they could use the FA24 na on the 2nd gen. Or a 1.6 turbo except the issue of rapid onset of torque especially FI is something Toyobaru seem to want no part of for these cars. Insurance rates do affect potential sales on a model targeting youth. And of course finally a light hybrid version though Toyota would likely lead the powertrain development for this and at the present weight not sure this model needs that much powertrain development.

In the 90's the displacement increase would have been more likely for USDM models. Not so sure now based on trends.

Oh, and in response to OP, more power definitely doesn't hurt these vehicles although there are other things that will then need to be upgraded to support this. Think STI. Or think ts plus added FI.

[PetrolioBenzina]

Like the video pointed out, no amount of HP will make you a better driver. If your idea of fun is a curvy road, the stock car is more than capable.

[Harey]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Check here:

Interesting review but not related to the question.

Im not saying the car needs more power, Im not saying Im a perfect driver, Im not saying increasing power is the best bang for buck, Im saying why would more linear power ruin the car?

[wbradley]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

Like the video pointed out, no amount of HP will make you a better driver. If your idea of fun is a curvy road, the stock car is more than capable.

True, but the vehicle they loosely modeled this car after was the Porshce Cayman. That car handles twisties plus has impressive acceleration. So, if you add more power you tick another box if that is something you really want.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Harey

Interesting review but not related to the question.

Im not saying the car needs more power, Im not saying Im a perfect driver, Im not saying increasing power is the best bang for buck, Im saying why would more linear power ruin the car?

If you are talking about more linear power, then it will not ruin the car anywhere. The only thing is to upgrade to better tires to keep the balance. My own car feels of an equivalent 250-260hp car and I don't think it has been ruined somewhere. Same if you install a good supercharger and go up to 280hp. it will feel like you have a larger displacement engine. The issue is with the turbos, where you'll get an instant torque increase and there the balance is ruined.

[86 South Africa]

Originally Posted by Harey

Interesting review but not related to the question.

Im not saying the car needs more power, Im not saying Im a perfect driver, Im not saying increasing power is the best bang for buck, Im saying why would more linear power ruin the car?

It doesn’t. Simple.

[Borchert97]

Originally Posted by wbradley

The current power level is what the majority of buyers will prefer and pay for as determined by the decision makers at Toyota and Subaru.

And why can't this be an Impreza/WRX/STI deal, where higher trim levels also have higher power output setups? For the regular folks, they have the Impreza, for the affordable sportiness, you get a WRX, for even more sportiness, you have the less affordable STI. I see no reason why the current engine can't be the "base" engine, and that a 2.0L turbo or 2.4L turbo can't be the "STI/TRD" version.

You'd still have that "current power level the majority of buyers will prefer", and then you'd have the car for the people more like us, and that can also afford it, to go a step further than the average twin buyer.

And yes, I understand the reasoning of not adding a turbocharger so as to not negatively affect balance, which a supercharger wouldn't do, so supercharge the damn thing then.

Or get that GR-HV concept out to the public, that thing looked sick.

[Harey]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

Like the video pointed out, no amount of HP will make you a better driver. If your idea of fun is a curvy road, the stock car is more than capable.

Perhaps you could read the thread before commenting

[Spuds]

Because it would necessarily add weight and cost and change the character of the car from a fun car to a fast car, which isn't necessarily the same thing. See demonstration image below.

There are other reasons, but it's late and I'm sleepy now...

[Veloist]

I normally don’t comment on the “needs more power” threads (I’ve seen/heard it for 6 years) but I’m pretty bored.

Long story short is this topic is rarely viewed from the perspective of engineers who need to follow a high standard of quality that both brands are known for meeting.

Toyota and Subaru (for the most part cough cough mid-late 2000 head gaskets) are known for long lasting daily drivers. Toyota & Subaru nailed the target market for this car—car enthusiasts who want a fun daily driver. If you don’t believe me, go make a poll asking “Who daily drives their twin?” I bet at least 80% of people will say that they do.

So if you’re going to make a daily driver and target it to young adults you need to have a reputation for reliability/dependability and longevity. Apart from that you need economical benefits like good gas mileage and low maintenance. You will probably want to be safe everyday too in your daily driver so safety is important also. Finally, you have to squeeze this car into a price range that is reasonable for the target market.

So if you break down the most important aspects here...

Reliability
Fuel Economy
Safety
Price

...and ask yourself, can we increase power in this car, and still keep a sweet spot in all 4 aspects?

And if you’re thinking “YES, YOU CAN” then you have to ask yourself, “OK, but can I do this and still have a car comparable or better than the competition? (Competition= Miata, Genesis, 370z, Mustang, Camaro). And finally “can I still do this and follow transportation certifications and emissions requirement around the world?”

There are so many factors as to why power remains modest in these cars. I bet the engineering and development team knew this car would be better with more power back when they were testing it in 09/10. We may never know all the things that limited the car from getting a more powerful engine, but we do know the car is still fun to drive, and not to mention a pretty cool daily driver!

[extrashaky]

Take an extreme example. Quirt Crawford said the 500+ HP motor he built took the BRZ from a car he would drive at 110% all the time to a car he never took above 20% as a daily driver. He said it wasn't as fun to drive at that point because you simply couldn't use the power. To me that sounds boring for a daily driver, and I really have no interest in drag racing.

Backing off from that extreme, if you're using it as a daily, adding a little more power might make it a little more fun, but there's a curve on which at some point adding power starts to make it less predictable and more of a chore to hold back. Where that point is for you really depends on how you drive it, whether you track it, whether you race and are trying to wring out more power for wins, what your other mods are, etc. A few years ago when people were still experimenting to see what they could pull out of these cars, there were several members here who built for power and then weren't really happy with the result because it dampened what they felt when they first drove the car.

Could the manufacturer give us more power? Sure. Do they need to? No. The car stands on its own. If you want more power, build it yourself.

For me, it comes down to this: If I had wanted a Corvette or a Porsche, I would have bought a Corvette or a Porsche. I wanted an inexpensive entry level sports car that would put a smile on my face as my daily driver, and that's what I got. It seems to me the people who complain about lack of power really just bought the wrong car.