FRS/BRZ Extreme racing or Traditional racing for success?

[old greg]

Originally Posted by DuMa

boring as shit right now. its too predictable. same thing for other road racing.

You're watching it wrong.

[u2b]94_9qO19z-0[/u2b]
[u2b]kgIriiLVJSs[/u2b]
[u2b]YYv1kVX-QcY[/u2b]

[2fast4you]

Originally Posted by old greg

You're watching it wrong.

[LexusFman]

"Extreme" racing is better for promoting a car than traditional racing is. If you look at it from a automotive culture standpoint extreme racing is closer to automotive culture than "traditional racing" is. Even so, I think that a manufacturer should do both, why not?

[Matador]

Originally Posted by old greg

Extreme racing? WTF?

Drifting is not racing, it's automotive figure skating. And drag racing and time trials are very much "traditional".

[/thread]

[LexusFman]

Also, 2 more things
1. What's wrong with drifting? I mean calling it racing is a stretch but it's definitely motorsport.

2. Traditional racing is super important too (or atleast it was) because car companies make cars to compete. We would have never got the Skyline GT-R, Evo, STi, AE86, and many more great cars if it wasn't for racing but now most companies just convert their shit-boxes into race cars for an insane amount of money and pretty much say fuck you to their consumers. Oh well.

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by LexusFman

Also, 2 more things
1. What's wrong with drifting? I mean calling it racing is a stretch but it's definitely motorsport.

2. Traditional racing is super important too (or atleast it was) because car companies make cars to compete. We would have never got the Skyline GT-R, Evo, STi, AE86, and many more great cars if it wasn't for racing but now most companies just convert their shit-boxes into race cars for an insane amount of money and pretty much say fuck you to their consumers. Oh well.

well at least the gt-86 wasnt a "fuck you consumers" car

[Longhorn248]

Originally Posted by LexusFman

Also, 2 more things
1. What's wrong with drifting? I mean calling it racing is a stretch but it's definitely motorsport.

2. Traditional racing is super important too (or atleast it was) because car companies make cars to compete. We would have never got the Skyline GT-R, Evo, STi, AE86, and many more great cars if it wasn't for racing but now most companies just convert their shit-boxes into race cars for an insane amount of money and pretty much say fuck you to their consumers. Oh well.

There's nothing wrong with drifting, it just isn't racing. When it doesn't matter who crosses the line first then it's just a competition and not a race.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

The roots of the AE86 was road racing. Is Scion going to rely on formula drift to market this car. Is that all that the younger generation cares about now? Why not just go back to the roots and do road racing with the FRS. It just seems like Scion is trying too hard to be cool. What is Toyota going to be doing for the rest of the world markets with the GT86/86 and motorsports?

The thing is, Europe and Japan will probably road race the shit out of the 86. Super Taikyu, One make series etc. etc. I would hope Scion does more than just drift (I doubt the FR-S will replace the tC everywhere....), I hope they put some more of those marketing dollars where it counts.

Originally Posted by old greg

Why won't the FIA bring back ground effects?

Because they suck.

Originally Posted by DuMa

honestly F1 is boring as shit right now.

Blame the FIA

Originally Posted by LexusFman

Even so, I think that a manufacturer should do both, why not?

This.

[ucla bruin]

I think very generally speaking:

Scion audience: young, wants a low cost car that looks nice and looks cool fixed up.

Subaru audience: potentially more enthusiasts that are more race and track oriented. Wants a driver's car that handles.


I don't want to say it's show vs go, but it's sort of like image vs performance. Not to say that FR-S people don't care about performance, but Subaru has embedded itself more with its rallying roots. And each brand's following is a little different.


So FRS and BRZ makes it interesting because it's a blend of both of those targets. What's gonna happen!? Dun dun dun.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by old greg

You're watching it wrong.

you have to admit, super sticky tires, the rear diffusers and sequential shifters have taken 90% of the allure from f1. they say you need to be about 3 seconds a lap faster to actually pass...and best final lap ever probably has to go to these guys

[WingsofWar]

EXTREME KAYAKING!!!



ITS FUCKING EXTREEEEMMMEE!!!

[old greg]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

EXTREME KAYAKING!!!

Uhh... I think this is a little more my speed:

[blur]

Originally Posted by ucla bruin

Subaru audience: potentially more enthusiasts that are more race and track oriented. Wants a driver's car that handles.

LOL

Subaru's fans are boost addicts. Nothing more.

[ryude]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

Just disregard the definitions and focus more on the different approaches the two companies are taking. Scion's approach really hasn't helped them increase their sales or popularity in America. Will things change if they keep doing the same thing? Or should Scion change their approach and do something else?

Scion's marketing works, their cars just suck. The FR-S will be the first car they have that people actually want.