Car and Driver is F-ing Stupid

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Toroll

I think it is the reason why I got a Twin.. don't you think?

BTW, the twin is only safer if the TC is on. The spyder, believe it or not, because the engine weight is at the back, it has more traction and thus more predictive. It is more precise and the steering is razor sharp. (Mid engine power baby!.. there's a reason why exotic cars are mid engine... even F1 cars) . It is also more lighter thus stopping is easier. The previous Mr2 had snap oversteer... surprisingly, the spyder don't have this.
The thing is, the spyder has only 2 airbags so the Twin should make me feel safer.

Twin crash structure is 1239012 times better. Then there's the side impacts. And front-engine cars are much more predictable.

[Toroll]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

Twin crash structure is 1239012 times better. Then there's the side impacts. And front-engine cars are much more predictable.

As much as I love the Twin, the front crash test isn't even perfect. It is just acceptable. BTW, your understanding in car integrity is shallow. You see, it doesnt have to have an engine infront to be safer. You want to absorb the impact. The Spyder front frame is designed to do that. It is like a spring that folds preserving the cockpit from folding. Check out these pictures.. you don't even see the windshield breaking. The super light weight properties of the spyder also makes impact lesser.




Below is simply amazing. The driver seem to be still alive.



I can't find a picture of side impact accident but I am definitely giving that to the Twin since it got 5 star on that while the spyder doesn't even have side airbags.


Honestly, have you driven an Mr2 Spyder? I happen to have driven it more than the Twin. Like I said, the Spyders handling and rear traction is nothing to be compared to the Twin. The Twin without Traction control is tail happy and I think we all agree to that.. The Spyder will not do that.. it's simply like a go kart. But the Twin wins with Traction Control driving for me.

[why?]

Originally Posted by Hoahao

I checked out the ad posted for your $3200 2zz Spyder. This is what it said...

Giving up on my project as I don't have the time or space for it. It's a 2001 5 speed with about 115k miles on it. 1zz smokes badly and burns a quart every 200 miles. I'm the process of removing motor to replace with 80k mile 2zz from a 05 matrix. I have all swap parts necessary to complete swap. Goes as a package deal. $3200 obo. Much less then what I paid for everything. Located in Colorado Springs, CO.


Exterior has dings and dents but has never been in an accident. No rust. Top has a few small rips. Interior is decent. Comes with OEM embroidered floor mats. Leather seats. Comes with spare leather drivers seat. Black. Brand new tires on all 4.

Such a deal.

sounds perfect for someone who is looking for a track car. Someone who is mechanically inclined will probably talk him down to $2k for everything and be able to at least double his money when he puts it right and drops the 2zz in it.

[Hoahao]

Originally Posted by why?

sounds perfect for someone who is looking for a track car. Someone who is mechanically inclined will probably talk him down to $2k for everything and be able to at least double his money when he puts it right and drops the 2zz in it.

Myself, I think I'd rebuild that 80K engine before I stuck it in. Your probably right about the new buyer making money on a resale with a price cut. However, at the tender age of 64 I've wrenched more then a few cars and spent plenty of afternoons at friend's garages helping them put their projects together. Profit divided by time invested will probably equal to 4 bucks an hour; maybe less. These are Labors of Love for the most part.

[prj3ctm4yh3m]

Originally Posted by Hoahao

I checked out the ad posted for your $3200 2zz Spyder. This is what it said...

Giving up on my project as I don't have the time or space for it. It's a 2001 5 speed with about 115k miles on it. 1zz smokes badly and burns a quart every 200 miles. I'm the process of removing motor to replace with 80k mile 2zz from a 05 matrix.

Such a deal.

Those 1ZZs had issues with disintegrating Catalyzers getting sucked up into the cylinders and scoring the walls leading to terminal oil consumption.

ask me how i know...so much for Toyota reliability.

[lionbacker54]

i also don't understand the anger towards the article. the fact that subaru worked very hard to get 5hp increase shows that they think it needs more power. car and driver is arguing that the effort would have been better spent creating an STI option which is turbo charged. i think it's a good point.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by lionbacker54

i also don't understand the anger towards the article. the fact that subaru worked very hard to get 5hp increase shows that they think it needs more power. car and driver is arguing that the effort would have been better spent creating an STI option which is turbo charged. i think it's a good point.

I'd bet you $5 that the money Toyobaru spent on designing the facelift is 1/10th what it would cost to bring a quality "TRD/STI" trim to market.

[Toroll]

Originally Posted by prj3ctm4yh3m

Those 1ZZs had issues with disintegrating Catalyzers getting sucked up into the cylinders and scoring the walls leading to terminal oil consumption.

ask me how i know...so much for Toyota reliability.

Nope. That is not the reason son.

Toyota fixed this issue in mid 02 to 05 models and all other 1zz equipped vehicles from 02+ and later. The 02+ spyders don't have this issue yet they retained the pre-cat that you suspect that is causing the problem. The issue is that there's not enough drilled "oil return holes" on them pistons. So to fix this, drill additional 3-4 "oil return holes" on them pistons. However, the trouble of doing this is not worth it when 2zz's are only $1,200 per used engine or $2,500-3,000 brand new. Also, a 2zz is easier to drop and install than removing a 1zz, crack it open until you reach the pistons. Also, 2zz is far superior and reliable while still gets the same MPG (if you don't hit lift).

[Timmy_Jones]

Why Why Why did Subaru setup this rectangular LCD screen, which spreads across two circles. So incredibly ugly and just amateur looking.

[krayzie]

Originally Posted by Toroll

As much as I love the Twin, the front crash test isn't even perfect. It is just acceptable. BTW, your understanding in car integrity is shallow. You see, it doesnt have to have an engine infront to be safer. You want to absorb the impact. The Spyder front frame is designed to do that. It is like a spring that folds preserving the cockpit from folding. Check out these pictures.. you don't even see the windshield breaking. The super light weight properties of the spyder also makes impact lesser.




Below is simply amazing. The driver seem to be still alive.



I can't find a picture of side impact accident but I am definitely giving that to the Twin since it got 5 star on that while the spyder doesn't even have side airbags.


Honestly, have you driven an Mr2 Spyder? I happen to have driven it more than the Twin. Like I said, the Spyders handling and rear traction is nothing to be compared to the Twin. The Twin without Traction control is tail happy and I think we all agree to that.. The Spyder will not do that.. it's simply like a go kart. But the Twin wins with Traction Control driving for me.

Flip the MR-S and you are fucking dead.

[prj3ctm4yh3m]

Originally Posted by Toroll

Nope. That is not the reason son.

Toyota fixed this issue in mid 02 to 05 models and all other 1zz equipped vehicles from 02+ and later. The 02+ spyders don't have this issue yet they retained the pre-cat that you suspect that is causing the problem. The issue is that there's not enough drilled "oil return holes" on them pistons. So to fix this, drill additional 3-4 "oil return holes" on them pistons. However, the trouble of doing this is not worth it when 2zz's are only $1,200 per used engine or $2,500-3,000 brand new. Also, a 2zz is easier to drop and install than removing a 1zz, crack it open until you reach the pistons. Also, 2zz is far superior and reliable while still gets the same MPG (if you don't hit lift).

had an 02...it had that problem....oil return holes are a concurrent and arguably far less severe of an issue.

[prj3ctm4yh3m]

Originally Posted by Toroll

Nope. That is not the reason son.

The issue is that there's not enough drilled "oil return holes" on them pistons. So to fix this, drill additional 3-4 "oil return holes" on them pistons. However, the trouble of doing this is not worth it when 2zz's are only $1,200 per used engine or $2,500-3,000 brand new. Also, a 2zz is easier to drop and install than removing a 1zz, crack it open until you reach the pistons. Also, 2zz is far superior and reliable while still gets the same MPG (if you don't hit lift).

this is who i picture in my head when i read your posts:

[Toroll]

Originally Posted by krayzie

Flip the MR-S and you are fucking dead.

This is the problem when one becomes a car fanboy instead of car enthusiast and closes his mind to all other options. You only see our Twin as THE ONLY CAR!

Oh yeah, about an MR-S being flipped and driver dying...
Do you really think that TOYOTA who also made your car is stupid enough not to make the MR-S safe? Toyota will happily say "Shame on you, if you don't trust me, don't drive my cars".





You don't need a strong roof to support a gokart. The driver and passenger walked away with no harm.

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by venturaII

This is exactly like what happened when the Pontiac Fiero was released. GM specifically stated that they were making a stylish commuter car, targeted at someone similar to a single, mid-thirties female secretary-type who wanted something that was reliable and looked good, and who would be driving it back and forth to work. Meanwhile, every one of the car magazines latched onto the sporty styling and immediately stated complaining that the performance didn't live up to the looks, despite that being GM's intention from day one. It was only due to pressure from the media industry and the associated complaints from it's readers that GM completely revamped the Fiero's performance (the '88 model was actually a pretty damn good car for it's time), though they'd lost so much on the car already (no help from poor sales due to aforementioned 'bad' reviews) that they just decided to axe the entire project..

Negative. GM neutered the car and the last year was what the car should have been from the beginning. Typical parts bin and badge engineering garbage that got them to the brink of destruction. It used a FWD suspension setup flipped around...

Originally Posted by FX86

yeah they need to let it go...they kept the price the same which is higher than it's competitors but offered nothing new to compete against them..the new nismo goes for $45K which is absurd and not worth the price tag

Damn straight when a GT Mustang is $10K cheaper and it's a nicer car (can't believe I'm saying that, but the new Mustangs are leaps and bounds above the old models). Nissan in general doesn't ever come off as "good", maybe it's because their engineering is so different from Toyota/Honda/Subaru. Just IMHO.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Yep that tenth of a second pause while plowing past the 500 rpm range of the dip really ruins the experience.

That's assuming you're only hitting it in first gear. If you're cruising around at 2K RPM and hit the gas, it'll move pretty quickly... until of course the torque dip. It's a quirk of the car that we all live with, but if we could have a linear powerband I think we all would...

Originally Posted by Toroll

My N/A 2zz Spyder is lighter (2200 lbs), cheaper (~$8k to build), faster (183whp), revs at 8300 rpm, it sounds so awesome, it handles like a go kart... and wait.. it also gets 35+mpg. Sorry, I didn't just pick two.


Back to topic. Our Twins does really need more oooooommmmphh to be honest. Let's not be angry and get but hurt and overreact for some articles like this.. If you open your mind or think about it, this article is for us (unless you are the type of guy who doesn't want a better version of the Twin). This article should help us deliver the message to Toyota/Subaru so they give us more options. If Toyota/Subaru sells a force fed version of the twin, o heck I would trade mine in an instant.

Let's be honest here, our car is slow for what it is. Almost every new car out there can now go 0-60 in ~6 seconds... to name a few: RAV4 v6, Accord v6, Camry v6, Tundra, Ford F150 ecoboost, O heck even your momma's Sienna 2017 (this gets 27 mpg too) is now at the border of 6-7secs. I didn't even mention luxury cars like BMW, Mercedes etc. Many electric cars can also run at 6 secs 0-60. But of course our argument to make ourselves feel better is, our Twins are faster on twisties...... I'd say, it feels way better if our car is fast on twisties and also straight line. Getting your grandma beat on her sienna won't make you feel any better.


Is there still a room for improvement for the Twins? Yes there is.. that is the message of the article.

Comparing an old ass car that can't meet current emission or crash safety ratings to a new car with a full warranty and that meets all those standards is, frankly, absurd. It's the same argument that's played out for years about a twin vs S2000. Not to mention the MR-S is the least practical car out there that actually has a roof. After seeing the storage on that car I laughed and stopped looking at them as they're simply not usable. You know though, the real irony of all this is that 0-60 is cut down a LOT with the rev limit raised to hit 60 at the top of second instead of taking 2 shifts.

Also to bring in minivans... I remember an article years ago where they pit a minivan against a Porsche 356. The minivan handily beat it at ALL tests metrics: 0-60, 60-0, slalom, skid pad, etc. Not to mention the V6 Camry is one of the best selling sleepers of all time. Want to see 3rd and 4th gen Mustang owners cry? Stomp them in a V6 Camry.

The simple point of the matter is that I've never had any situations where I couldn't get by someone if I wanted to. Momentum is a bitch and unless you have Corvette level power, it's not happening. From a dig, 99% of people won't full throttle.

Mentioning electric cars is funny since they have torque at 0 RPM. Even the EV-1 stomped all over stuff because of that. If you're talking modern, I feel giddy watching a Tesla go off like a ballistic missile.

Originally Posted by Twinz

...at JUST the right moment.

I love this car, and the dip itself isn't a big issue to me, but it would be nice if the penalty for shifting a little too soon or a little too late were not so binary.

There is a 400rpm window flanked by the "Your call is very important to us, please hold for the next available horse power" torque dip and the "Go sit in corner and think about what you've done" rev limiter.

I get that doing something "just right" should be faster and like it that way, but a speed-holding rev-limmiter and a torque dip that ended 500rpms lower would be very helpful.

Heck, something as simple as a shift buzzer that's at least as loud as the crickets might make hitting the narrow shift window while on track a bit easier.

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

This is a sports car, not a race car.

By definition, a sports car is a car that can be used in sports e.g. racing...

Originally Posted by Toroll

Son, since I am also an owner of a 2zz Spyder and I am also the one who did the swap in my garage let me tell you something. When you are swapping a 1zz to a 2zz you are basically just adding 50 more horses, 2000 more rpm, and extending the flat torque line to 7800rpm. It is adding another cam profile that will make it possible to hit LIFT (aka Toyota's own form of VTEC if you haven't heard that yet). The engine size is still the same tiny 1.8L but makes as much as our 2.0 boxer with no torque dip. A 2zz spyder almost retains everything. Heck even the axles, AC compressor, coolant hoses, engine mounts, shift linkages, intake, engine wire harness, and exhaust can all be reused.

BRB, gonna go buy a Supra and spank your MR-S... You see this can go on forever, right?

One cannot compare new cars with full warranties to old cars. It's the very definition of moving goalposts...