FR-S vs. 370z, end all be all of discussions

[whateatsrabbits]

Originally Posted by Kunzite

But I posted before that happened - and anyway, saying the handling is "on par" doesn't mean the car is the best ever built

Did I every say that this is the best car ever built???
I do think its the best handling car at its price point.

I think theres a lot of jealous people out there that envy our supercar like handling, And feel need to post garbage to make up for there numb,sloppy handling car. This car is not about all out speed,its about FUN to drive. I bet some minivans can beat it in a drag race. ALl I know is in a tight course where a 370z is going to be struggling to get the power down, Theres going to be a frs passing him mid corner.

[Turbowned]

Originally Posted by whateatsrabbits

I bet some minivans can beat it in a drag race.

You mean all minivans can beat it in a drag race

Do I care? I can make that poor bastard whose wife made him trade the sports car for the Sienna feel good when he can dust me at a stoplight, lol. Those things are fekkin' fast for minivans, too!

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Same tires because the BRZ and FR-S are fitted with low grip tires specifically so those who want to goof around and get sideways can do so, whereas most performance cars come with better summer performance tires. That the BRZ/FR-S post the numbers they do on the tires they have is impressive, and when switched to similar tires that the competition runs, are remarkably quicker.

In racing, cars have specific guidelines for tires in order to keep them from having an advantage in that area, so this is a similar idea. Those things being equal, then you can say it was the car that won and not the tires. I.E. if a dude beats me around an auto-x course by 2 seconds and he's on slicks vs. my street tires, I can't tell if the car/driver is faster or if it's just the tires. If we're both on slicks and he beats me by 2 seconds, I can attribute that to a better car/driver. If the same driver and same tires are used for both cars, we can properly attribute the win to the better car. Certain things should remain constant in order to make a proper comparison. Make sense?

the problem i have is that lap times dont indicate what is the better sports car, especially when we all know that racing classes (especially autox) are biased. i just dont see how you can make a logical case for tires being swapped for fairness and nothing else. if you can make a case for changing inferior tires in the interest of fairness, why cant we make a case for changing weight or motors in that same interest? accounts ive read, bigger, stickier tires hurt the "handling" of the car (although significantly reducing times). i think we can all agree that if it was numbers we were after, this wouldnt be the forum we go to

[Turbowned]

Because it takes less than an hour to change four tires which are a wear item and relatively inexpensive. Engines are not a wear item, and they cost a lot of money. Not something the average enthusiast will do to their brand new car.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Because it takes less than an hour to change four tires which are a wear item and relatively inexpensive. Engines are not a wear item, and they cost a lot of money. Not something the average enthusiast will do to their brand new car.

fine no engines. how about fuel, brake pads, shocks, and clutches? all wear and tear items

[Kunzite]

Originally Posted by whateatsrabbits

Did I every say that this is the best car ever built???
I do think its the best handling car at its price point.

No, and that was my point: that your post doesn't really fit crazyyankeefan's claims.

fatoni, you wouldn't run an athletic event wearing boots, just because that's what you happened to wear that day; you would change them to running shoes, as everyone else's.
Yes, tires are a wear item and in fact you're supposed to change them depending on the driving conditions (think winter/summer tires and, why not, race track). Judging a car's performance with under-performing tires is misleading, but maybe that's what you want?

[switchlanez]

Lol this thread should be re-titled "Circular argument for every little flaw that exists in the FR-S." Whenever I check in, I'm lost because the argument topic is always changing. If I read back a few posts I recognize the same base arguments being rephrased perpetually. A person who only loves apples will not love oranges. A person who only craves oranges will not be crave apples. If this car doesn't suit your tastes, you won't be happy with it. Let's just compare the cars stock-for-stock. If the FR-S is inferior, then it's inferior... TO YOU.

Somehow I feel like I've said this before in another way, shape, or form.

[Jordo!]

Originally Posted by whateatsrabbits

Heres my opinion. I believe the 86 could go around a corner faster than a 370z, I believe that this(86) is a sports car that focusing on one thing, handling. Handling on par with supercars. I want to see how it does against a rx-8, and all these comparos should be on the same tires.

There's actually pretty clear empirical data that says it doesn't.

[Zaggeron]

Originally Posted by whateatsrabbits

Heres my opinion. I believe the 86 could go around a corner faster than a 370z

That's a pretty meaningless claim. What corner? There's more than one you know and many of them are quite different.

Do you mean faster around the Corkscrew at Laguna Seca or the Bus Stop at Watkins Glen. How far before corner entry do you start the timer and how far after exit do you stop it. From a standing or rolling start. What's the approach speed in your test? It's pointless to make such generalizations.

Just say the 86 corners well and leave it at that.

[crazyyankeefan]

Originally Posted by Zaggeron

That's a pretty meaningless claim. What corner? There's more than one you know and many of them are quite different.

Do you mean faster around the Corkscrew at Laguna Seca or the Bus Stop at Watkins Glen. How far before corner entry do you start the timer and how far after exit do you stop it. From a standing or rolling start. What's the approach speed in your test? It's pointless to make such generalizations.

Just say the 86 corners well and leave it at that.

True. Not to mention whether to drift thru the corner or just drive thru it. Although 86 would probably drift better.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Kunzite

No, and that was my point: that your post doesn't really fit crazyyankeefan's claims.

fatoni, you wouldn't run an athletic event wearing boots, just because that's what you happened to wear that day; you would change them to running shoes, as everyone else's.
Yes, tires are a wear item and in fact you're supposed to change them depending on the driving conditions (think winter/summer tires and, why not, race track). Judging a car's performance with under-performing tires is misleading, but maybe that's what you want?

uh thats a cool analogy except it has nothing to do with what im talking about. im not talking about using the car in an event. events have rules that we dont have to live by. the miata is going to win more autox races than the nsx. does that make it a better car? i would go to a driving event on stock tires before stock pads.

when you change things, things are changed. thats not fair. i understand using the same tires as a tool for evaluation, its just not fair to compare a modified car to a stock car. and if people seem to care so much about numbers i urge you to go buy the mustang gt as that thing is both cheaper and murders the frs in just about every type of performance driving.

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i also really hate this same tires argument. why not same price? same engine? same suspension?

Because tires are a changeable wear item like brake pads. Change the tires, change the pads and you don't alter the "car". Change the suspension, change the engine and the car now holistically different.

I feel like I'm having deja vu?

The wheel width and size is part of the car design holistically and as such changing tires should take into account stock wheel size/width. However the amount of "sticky" a tire has should be equal among all vehicles being compared otherwise, you're not doing a vehicle comparison, you're doing a tire test.

If I wanted to compare the batting strength between two baseball players would I give one a metal bat and one a wooden bat and then compare the person? No, make the equipment equal so you can accurately compare the batter.

Make the tire equal (brand/compound) so you can accurately compare the "Car".

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by Jordo!

There's actually pretty clear empirical data that says it doesn't.

What are the independent, dependent and controlled variables in those tests that produce this "empirical data"? Link to data?

If you don't create a common variable between all three cars 370/rx8/FRS then the resulting information is misleading, at best.

Subjects in testing:
If I take a the RX8, 370z and FRS right off the show room floor and do skid pad tests to measure lateral g-force do you really know what I'm testing? Nothing. Why, because nothing about those cars is equal except for the fact they burn gasoline.

You need each subject to have something in common that relates to what you're testing otherwise you're not actually testing anything.. you're just playing with yourself.

The point of the test matters: What your testing matters!

Are you testing top speed? Then tire compound isn't that important, but a speed governor is! So to test top speed between the 3 cars would you disable the governor? Of course you would.

Are you testing lateral G's? Then tire compound is directly related (and speed governor not so) and thus the 3 subjects should be on the same compound for the sake of comparing "the car".

In Racing:
I race against an identically prepped CRX in ITA. If I go out on track on Toyo RA1's and he goes out on Hoosier R6's he will be consistently 1-2 seconds per lap faster than me at the very limit. Let's say (and this actually happened) he then makes huge changes to his suspension: Changes/removes sway bars, changes spring rates and changes shock settings.. He has actually now "changed the car". These changes to the car may have helped him with corner entry, apex speed or consistency but when we both go out because he's still on the R6 and I'm still on the RA1; he is still 1-2 seconds faster. The tire is THAT important. If I wanted to test my "setup" to his "setup" then we would need to be on equal tires. Ask NASA how well the first satellite to Mars worked out when one group did the measurements in Miles and the other group did the measurements in Kilometers? So why measure one car with 320 treadwear tires and another with 200 treadwear tires?

Doing vehicle comparison tests where braking, accelerating or corning is part of the test and the equivalency of the tire are unaccounted for are a complete waste of time.

[Turbowned]

Finally, a voice of reason!!

By the way, anyone seen how the FR-S stacks up against the Z and RX-8 in C-stock auto-x? Yes, that's right, all three of these cars are in the same auto-x class. So let's all just be friends.