Next Gen BRZ/86!

[8RZ]

I volunteer as tribute!

[bkharmony]

OK, I’m going to ask a question/pose a thought that I will most certainly regret, but here goes:

Considering that “platform” does not mean “same chassis,” but rather a shared set of common design, engineering, and production efforts, as well as major components that allows a vehicle to be manufactured on a shared assembly line, is there any possibility the FT86 could be adapted to fit within the new Subaru shared platform for the 2nd gen?

In other words, perhaps the 2nd gen could retain it’s excellent chassis, but everything else could be modified during the re-design to fit within the new platform (the shared tooling, parts, assembly processes).

[ST185RC]

Originally Posted by bkharmony

OK, I’m going to ask a question/pose a thought that I will most certainly regret, but here goes:

Considering that “platform” does not mean “same chassis,” but rather a shared set of common design, engineering, and production efforts, as well as major components that allows a vehicle to be manufactured on a shared assembly line, is there any possibility the FT86 could be adapted to fit within the new Subaru shared platform for the 2nd gen?

In other words, perhaps the 2nd gen could retain it’s excellent chassis, but everything else could be modified during the re-design to fit within the new platform (the shared tooling, parts, assembly processes).

or you know, the 2017 with revised engine bits going forward is the AP2 of the 86 and the "platform" is already getting revisions and there won't be a true 2nd gen 86 coming. Maybe the Ts is the CR of the S2000.

Seems to me toyota and subaru are more than content with adding factory rice to their respective 86 lines, all with that YUUUUUGE 5hp bump to the MT option. They are more than happy with themselves for the praise they get on the handling, but couldn't care any less for the criticism on lack of power.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by bkharmony

OK, I’m going to ask a question/pose a thought that I will most certainly regret, but here goes:

Considering that “platform” does not mean “same chassis,” but rather a shared set of common design, engineering, and production efforts, as well as major components that allows a vehicle to be manufactured on a shared assembly line, is there any possibility the FT86 could be adapted to fit within the new Subaru shared platform for the 2nd gen?

In other words, perhaps the 2nd gen could retain it’s excellent chassis, but everything else could be modified during the re-design to fit within the new platform (the shared tooling, parts, assembly processes).

Short answer would be - Sort of.
The two platforms are very close so the manufacturing could likely be shared. The aspect that would be the most important would be if they could share the same line cradles (what holds the car as it moves and gets assembled). If they do not have to change them over which wastes time and money then most of the other equipment could be programed for any vehicle. Remember the plant that makes the BRZ/86 also makes the Forester and Legacy. They are probably on dedicated lines though and that is what they are trying to do away with by using a global platform.

[tomm.brz]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Well, I would buy a 4c if I wanted a show off car :b


You should read some old posts here. The cost of the car was kept low, but not on areas that could not be changed easily. Too bad some people don't understand what they have.


You can start from here:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...91&postcount=1

Oh come on, the 4c is a nice track with more than respectable car, even without manual transmission
and his chassis is superb


like superb is our chassis, i never said the contrary
didn't really wanted to criticize it or what you said, just that, if money wouldnt be a problem, they could do maybe a carbon fiber chassis and work around it to get in par with the performance of our car and even surpass it.. too bad the price would skyrocket

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

I must objectively disagree with everything you said on a theoretically fact-jective basis, due to the fact that you use an iphone and call yourself a car enthusiast.



Good day Sur.

oh noez, you hurt mah feelers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by tomm.brz

Oh come on, the 4c is a nice track with more than respectable car, even without manual transmission
and his chassis is superb


like superb is our chassis, i never said the contrary
didn't really wanted to criticize it or what you said, just that, if money wouldnt be a problem, they could do maybe a carbon fiber chassis and work around it to get in par with the performance of our car and even surpass it.. too bad the price would skyrocket

Yep. You are getting into supercar territory there.

[rvoll]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

1) The speculation that they could use the global platform was presented in the scenario that Toyota pulled out and left the whole thing up to Subaru. Nobody ever claimed that this was indeed what was happening.


2) The Global platform is reported by Subaru as being used in their full range of cars from "A subcompact hatchback to a seven passenger SUV". It is not theory that it will be a scalable platform. This is well documented and irrefutable.


3) You have expressed nothing but an "I have superior knowledge" attitude and dismissed every factual piece of evidence placed in front of you. Your frequent "Ask an engineer" statements fly out the window as soon as an engineer answers. Now they are "Ask an engineer that agrees with me only".


4) Toyota does not have to "bend to the will" of Subaru. They tasked Subaru with much of the original design. Much of that design and even some of the actual parts are used in the new platform. Subaru will play a major role in designing any new version. The Lead Engineer is exactly that the lead. There will be a large team that actually performs the work. That team will consist of both Toyota and Subaru employees. That is presuming that both companies stay involved.


5) The new platform and any other platform can be used with any form of drive train. This has been done hundreds of times on the same model car over the decades. Because it is primarily designed for one drive system does not automatically rule it out for all others.


6) All of the speculation (no theory has been presented) has been based upon "delineated facts". Just because you disagree with or don't understand those facts does not mean that the logic is wrong.

1) The scenario that Toyota pulls out is not a fact stated anywhere. So you're saying your argument is based upon a false premise?

2) Is the Toyota 86/BRZ included in the "full range of Subaru cars"? Subaru's announcements all say that every model will specifically get the SGP with the exception of the 86/BRZ in which they say it will just be upgraded. No mention of the SGP and the BRZ can be specifically found.

3) What "factual" evidence SPECIFICALLY STATED BY SUBARU DIRECTLY, have I disregarded? If it is not specifically stated by Subaru, it is just theory, not evidence. Trying to say that VW did it, so it is fact, is ludicrous. Believing that you know what Subaru will do better than Subaru itself is demonstrating a false, "superior knowledge".

4) So if the lead engineer on a project comes from Toyota, is that factual evidence that they will follow Subaru's dictates? You can falsely make up a story that Subaru "might" take the lead, but does that make sense when the lead engineer belongs to a different company? That's trying to rationalize a POV rather than logically deducting a result.

5) You say that any platform can be used for any type of platform. Again, trying to rationalize facts that are not there. Nowhere does Subaru say the SGP will be used for RWD cars. Yet, they specifically say that AWD is part of the SGP. Why do you disregard what Subaru actually says?

6) Again, you present absolutely no substantiated facts -- only how you can rationalize a BRZ is based upon the SGP. I've been a little harsh on you guys by calling it "fake news". But what else do you call made up theories based upon no substantiated facts?

It's been fun going back and forth on this, on a couple of accounts. First, I have learned a bit more about the SGP because I've had to review much of what Subaru has specifically said about the subject. Secondly, learning about the VW platform was interesting even if there is no association with what Subaru is doing. Lastly, it is an interesting psychological study seeing how brand/car bias affects deductive reasoning. Perhaps it is a function of how tied people are to their cars. I really like the BRZ, or I would not have bought one. But I am not brand loyal, nor do I wish to significantly modify the car from stock. I think some of the stuff you guys do to your cars that are going to be used for the street just doesn't make sense like extra wide wheels and tires, significant lowering, headers, etc. The only one that does make some sense are turbos because an argument can be made that at this time of high hp cars, a boost in hp makes sense.

None of us really knows what the next generation of BRZ will be like. Perhaps like Ford who is getting rid of most of its sedans, the BRZ will eventually disappear. It seems that the only profitable cars left are SUV's and trucks. The Subaru Global Platform will certainly help if that's the way they go. That said, I have my BRZ and it is a blast to drive. I plan to keep it for several years until I get so old my children take my keys away from me. If I had to guess about the direction of the industry based on current trends, the hot cars of the future will be SUV's. They are a much better platform for safety, passenger packaging, providing the room for blown engines, and, dare I say, scalability.

The key factor, long term, for any developmental pattern is the associated economics. And I don't see the economics of the BRZ to FHI being significant in any way. Sales of mass sports cars continue to drop and at some time, sales volume will lower profitability. That said, I've always had sports cars my entire life and irrationally, I will continue to have them.

No more posts on this subject for me. Enjoy....

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

1) The speculation that they could use the global platform was presented in the scenario that Toyota pulled out and left the whole thing up to Subaru. Nobody ever claimed that this was indeed what was happening.

Originally Posted by rvoll

1) The scenario that Toyota pulls out is not a fact stated anywhere. So you're saying your argument is based upon a false premise?

@rvoll; you clearly do not grasp the meaning of the word 'speculation', among several others.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

@rvoll; you clearly do not grasp the meaning of the word 'speculation', among several others.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much this^ lol. Guy is way too emotional.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

@rvoll; you clearly do not grasp the meaning of the word 'speculation', among several others.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And still hooked on the definition of the word 'platform'. I wonder if this argument would have existed if Subaru used the term "New Global Architecture" that Toyota has gone with? It at least removes the mistaken picture of one standard sized chassis that the term 'platform' seems to bring to people.

[8RZ]

Just Google Image the word platform, you'll see everything from shoes to beds to boats lol.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by 8RZ

Just Google Image the word platform, you'll see everything from shoes to beds to boats lol.

[Azzudien]

Please take a break on this thread, I ran out of