New FR-S BRZ Technology Info! Engine specs, CoG, Drag Coefficient, Dimensions, etc.

[McCoder]

Originally Posted by Deslock

I found the ITR slightly harsher than the stock S2k. My '95 GSR was much softer than both.

Part of our differing opinions may be due to my probably being older than you, but even in my 20s I found the ITR too rough for a daily driver.

I dont think the ITR is too harsh for a daily driver, and i'm 44 yrs.

I'm on my second ITR, my first one was bought from new in 1998 and had 125k miles on the clock when it was totalled in 2008, R.I.P. Traded in my 2004 E46 M3 for the second ITR (and an Audi A3) in February.

I felt the M3 was harsher as a daily driver, even on longer trips

My hope is that the FT86 will feel like a rwd ITR, most cars i testdrive feel too heavy and detached, kinda like driving with boxing gloves and snow shooes on

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by McCoder

I dont think the ITR is too harsh for a daily driver, and i'm 44 yrs.

You guys talking about how it's fine as a daily driver are making me feel like a wimp

My experience with the ITR is limited, but it was a stock model... maybe it wasn't as bad I remembered? I do to like to feel the road... something in-between the GSR/MX5/RX8 and ITR (as I recall) would be perfect.

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

I'd hope its rated for more, but they've also changed the rating system so I'm not sure how to recalculate that. Probably easiest to just see what I get with both in 7? months or whatever ITR's original rating was 25/30.

According to fueleconomy.gov, by today's standard later model VTEC Integras would be rated at 22/28. That's obviously conservative, which is true for MPG ratings on many small-engine cars.

[McCoder]

Originally Posted by Deslock

You guys talking about how it's fine as a daily driver are making me feel like a wimp

to be fair i'm also a biker, i ride a lowered Yamaha RoadStar 1600cc (97,6ci) with almost no suspension and a 625cc KTM supermotard with a seat with almost no padding, both bikes have loud pipes, even a Formula 1 car would seem luxurious after those

one of the reasons ITR is such a fun car is that there is no electronics to nanny you except for the ABS, you can feel everything that happens, i SO hope that Toyota/Subaru understands that.

I want a nimble drivers car without having to buy an Elise/Exige. I've lost faith in Honda, the Crz is crap (imho) and the EDM Civic Type-R feels too heavy and detached from the road, at least compared to the ITR, and i'm affraid that the FT86 will be the last chance for that nimble drivers car.

Please Toyota/Subaru, don't let me down

[Tainen]

Hello all- first post here. I drive a modified WRX.

I want to respond to the guys talking about turbo'ing the BRZ... if you take a look at that nice engine pay pic someone posted, you'll see the intake manifold is reversed from WRX/STI motors. This is a trick a lot of the aftermarket guys do to get better piping routes on the FMICs- and I think this is hugely advantageous when you think about adding a turbo to this car. I understand the options are fairly limited with such a high compression ratio, but if someone were to attempt it, it really wouldn't be that hard from a space perspective, because of that intake being flipped around. There's not much space for a turbo to be in the stock location of an STI, in the rear of the motor- but, because of the flipped intake, it'd be super easy to drop a turbo in the front, where a lot of Hondas put it, because the headers are right there, easy to get to, and the intake is also right there. Boom, all the piping is within a foot of eachother. That would make for *extremely* lag free piping, something a lot of modified WRXs and STIs have trouble with, with 12+ ft of piping around the *entire* engine bay. So don't be too discouraged- the physical design actually might benefit a turbo setup, not hurt it.

On the flip side, it might make it harder to fit an EJ257 in there with it's stock turbo set up, since there would be minimal room behind the motor for that stock turbo design. You'd haveto flip the intake and move the turbo, like the design I mentioned above.

Personally- I'd probably keep it NA, just because the darn thing already has 12.5:1 compression. It'd cost far more money to tear the motor open, re-do it to be low compression, fix the ECU, and manage all the aftermath of that, than it would be to just drop in a WRX/STI motor and call it a day. Easiest of all, of course, would be to just do simple bolt ons to the NA motor and be done with it, or get the rumored 2.5 liter STI version of this car and do some bolt ons to it and hope to reach 270+ hp.

(hope this was a good first post)

[old greg]

Originally Posted by Tainen

(hope this was a good first post)

Just so you know, I'm not trying to be mean. There's a whole sub-forum full of threads about turbos and engine swaps, you might want to try over there.

PS: welcome to the forum, from a fellow bugeye aficionado.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by McCoder

one of the reasons ITR is such a fun car is that there is no electronics to nanny you except for the ABS, you can feel everything that happens, i SO hope that Toyota/Subaru understands that.

Amen. Hell, my MX5 doesn't even have ABS, never mind TCS, DSC, launch control, rev matching, etc.

Originally Posted by McCoder

I want a nimble drivers car without having to buy an Elise/Exige. I've lost faith in Honda, the Crz is crap (imho) and the EDM Civic Type-R feels too heavy and detached from the road, at least compared to the ITR, and i'm affraid that the FT86 will be the last chance for that nimble drivers car.

Please Toyota/Subaru, don't let me down

I'm hopeful that the FT will be the jack-of-all-trades car I've been waiting for: classic sports car feel in a (somewhat) practical body style. Even before the recently leaked specifications, these direct quotes from Tetsuya Tada (Chief Engineer) had me optimistic:

"We did a lot of research. We talked to owners, fanatics, real buyers of sports cars around the world. They told us: Speed isn’t everything. If it’s just an incredibly fast car, they don’t really want it. What they want is a sports car that is small, compact, light, and that handles just the way they want it to handle.”

“From the beginning, the concept was to put the driver back in the driver’s seat, and to eliminate computers as much as possible today. Powerful sports cars use a lot of computer technology so that anyone can drive and handle them. We decided not to go down that road.”

[Buggy51]

Originally Posted by BobbyBalaz

Sounds really promising! Thanks for the info Buggy51. Certainly do hope that the IS-F transmission tech trickles down into the FT86, heard that the shift times on that particular gearbox hits 200miliseconds, which is astonishing for an Auto.

Originally Posted by madfast

it probably means rev matching?

anyways the best case scenario for the AT is a 6 speed version of the ISF's tranny. more realistically it is a version of the IS 6AT, but hopefully they used some of the ISF tech to "sport" it up a bit. you expect smooth shifts in a lexus, but for this car? you can make it shift faster at the expense of smoothness and call it part of the driving experience that's what they did on the LF-A. they went with a single clutch auto-manual with intentional shift shock for the "experience"...

Huh odd, another magazine, Autopista, referenced the IS-F when talking about the automatic transmission.

Link to the particular translation: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=81
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...5&postcount=83

Quote from MatadorRacing F1: "It has two types of transmission. The one I tried was equipped with a 6 speed manual. They assured me that there would be two possibibilties of development, following the country [market] that it will go to or the taste of the customer (lolwtfbbqwaffles?!?!?! Implying perhaps different ratios between hi spec and low spec or different gear ratios/final drives for different markets). The other option is a torque converter automatic exactly the same as mounted in the IS F."

So it sounds promising if the final version is similar or a modified version of the IS-F. As stated by madfast, its most likely a modified version of the IS though, but some of the ones that drove the automatic Subaru enjoyed it.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by McCoder

one of the reasons ITR is such a fun car is that there is no electronics to nanny you except for the ABS, you can feel everything that happens, i SO hope that Toyota/Subaru understands that.

Too bad you are too far away to come to the ITR Expo Although we used to have a brit fly over every year for a couple of years :P

Deslock: I drove the ITR for a few hours yesterday to a wedding, it's not harsh at all, man up

[madfast]

Originally Posted by Buggy51

Huh odd, another magazine, Autopista, referenced the IS-F when talking about the automatic transmission.

Link to the particular translation: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=81
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...5&postcount=83

Quote from MatadorRacing F1: "It has two types of transmission. The one I tried was equipped with a 6 speed manual. They assured me that there would be two possibibilties of development, following the country [market] that it will go to or the taste of the customer (lolwtfbbqwaffles?!?!?! Implying perhaps different ratios between hi spec and low spec or different gear ratios/final drives for different markets). The other option is a torque converter automatic exactly the same as mounted in the IS F."

So it sounds promising if the final version is similar or a modified version of the IS-F. As stated by madfast, its most likely a modified version of the IS though, but some of the ones that drove the automatic Subaru enjoyed it.

the ISF has an 8 speed, so there is no way its the same tranny. if he got this wrong, or if he glossed over this fact, then we have to take everything he says with a grain of salt.

another thing is that both motor trend and C&D drove the AT version and both said it was good. BUT if it does have the ISF's 0.1 sec shifts and direct responses, dont you think they would talk more about it? or is that info embargoed?

lastly, the Sport/Snow button has got me VERY intrigued. does it have to do with the AT shift mapping? or is it a general Sport/Snow mode that affects the throttle and EPS on both AT and MT cars? curiously, both interior pics from CAR and Autopista were cropped such that you are not able to see if the Sport/Snow button is equipped on the MT car that they tested. is it possible that you hit that Sport button and the car comes alive? like the vaunted M-button on BMW M cars?

[mokinbird87]

from my previous experiences of the snow/sport button on my dad's GS it seems to do NOTHING... maybe a bit of difference in throttle responce but very very minimal difference.

[madfast]

Originally Posted by mokinbird87

from my previous experiences of the snow/sport button on my dad's GS it seems to do NOTHING... maybe a bit of difference in throttle responce but very very minimal difference.

some cars in Snow mode, start in second gear. if that's the case in the FT, then that button is for the AT only. other cars in Snow mode dampen the throttle.

i cant make out if the MT has this button from the brochure pics.



however one clue is in the close up of the AT. you can see a bar dividing the Sport and Snow. so that button is perhaps actually 2 buttons on the AT. the Sport button is for the AT shift mapping, and the Snow button is for both the AT and MT.

last but not least is the VSC OFF and VSC Sport buttons. some cars have it such that if you press the VSC OFF button, you simply turn off the TC or engine cut portion of the VSC. then if you hold the button down for 3+ sec you turn the VSC completely off. we know from the magazines that VSC can be completely turned off. so the question is what is VSC Sport? is it simply the same thing as TC off? or is it yet another mode somewhere in between?

[old greg]

Originally Posted by madfast

the Sport/Snow button has got me VERY intrigued. does it have to do with the AT shift mapping? or is it a general Sport/Snow mode that affects the throttle and EPS on both AT and MT cars?

I suspect that "snow mode" softens up the throttle mapping, makes the traction control and stability control more aggressive, and perhaps changes the ABS calibration.

[acro]

Originally Posted by old greg

I suspect that "snow mode" softens up the throttle mapping, makes the traction control and stability control more aggressive, and perhaps changes the ABS calibration.

I have a toyota with the same "two" buttons.

They are only found in the automatic version of the car

"Snow" when pushed results in a more sluggish throttle response and maximum revs are limited

"Sport" throttle response appears sharper and shifts more aggressive

[Gardus@Supersprint]

Originally Posted by Dimman

(And as for the torque peak of a 2.0L motor, keep in mind that Yamaha squeezed 159 lb-ft from the 3SGE BEAMS motor at 11.5:1 CR without direct injection. Also 86mm X 86mm by the way...)

We can go back from the 210 psi to 170 lb-ft of peak torque, but we don't know where it peaks in the rev range.

Peak torque of 170 lb-ft @ 5300 rpm (from the reviews throwing the 170 lb-ft number around plus an improvement over Yamaha's previous best, the BEAMS)

Where did you find the 170 lb-ft value? I've read 150 everywhere...