follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Moddiction
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Scion FR-S Forum | Subaru BRZ Forum | Toyota 86 GT 86 Forum | AS1 Forum - FT86CLUB > FT86CLUB Shared Forum > FR-S / BRZ vs....

FR-S / BRZ vs.... Area to discuss the FR-S/BRZ against its competitors [NO STREET RACING]

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-26-2013, 06:31 PM   #617
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,345
Thanks: 63
Thanked 485 Times in 297 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Parking a S2000 next to a MR2 certainly gives that impression. Especially being 600lbs lighter w/ more legroom and the engine behind your head.
Well, the two MR2's (1st gen and 3rd gen) that are smaller than the S2000, are certainly a lot uglier...

My only point was that the S2000 is a lot more svelte looking than the FR-S, if car "fatness" bothers you.

Quote:
That's why I said for a roadster. The 86 is a GT coupe and makes the rest of the class out there look like SUVs.
That am true!

Quote:
Personally I could give a rat's ass about stock power. You can make power in any car, that's the least on my worries when buying a car unless I'm not a wrench turner.
You brought up torque, I just pointed out that the 2.0 s2000 has as much as the FR-S, and the 2.2 has more. The FR-S has more low-end and midrange.

Quote:
Never said the S2000 is a bad car. I just dispute that it is a "better car in all respects" to the 86 which cost 35% less brand new. How much more love would the 86 get by 'enthusiasts' if it came w/ sticky 255 rubber in the back like the S2000 CR?
Personally, I think 215s all around was a good choice for stock rubber. It's the tire make/model they got wrong, not the size.

Quote:
Plus which S2000 are we talking about? The $35K 2900lb model or the $38k CR at 2750lb.
Never saw a tested weight as high as 2900. Non-CR AP2 weighed ~2850. I already mentioned that the '00/'01 also weighed ~2750 lb just like the CR, you don't have to spend $$$ to get the lightest-weight S2000.
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 07:14 PM   #618
Anaxilus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Drives: They have four wheels
Location: United States
Posts: 486
Thanks: 59
Thanked 196 Times in 113 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
Well, the two MR2's (1st gen and 3rd gen) that are smaller than the S2000, are certainly a lot uglier...

That's a matter of opinion. I prefer my blacked out, hardtop, face lifted Gen 3 to any of the 2000s. Plus the 2000 hardtop looks horrific by comparison IMHO.

My only point was that the S2000 is a lot more svelte looking than the FR-S, if car "fatness" bothers you.

It's a wider GT car w/ more space and room w/ similar to less actual weight. When I said 'fat' I was talking about weight as a roadster, not looks.

You brought up torque, I just pointed out that the 2.0 s2000 has as much as the FR-S, and the 2.2 has more. The FR-S has more low-end and midrange.

Right. You brought up power which was what I responded to. Plus people are always bitching about power. Just make your own.

Personally, I think 215s all around was a good choice for stock rubber. It's the tire make/model they got wrong, not the size.

I agree on the size, it was well calculated but at the cost of people not getting superior benchmark performance numbers flipping out and not understanding the choice. I disagree they got the model wrong for the same reason, it was very well thought out as a fuel saving, drift character tire. It wasn't a cheap decision either. Those tires are more expensive than some of the grippiest rubber out there.
.
Anaxilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 07:27 PM   #619
DarkSunrise
Senior Member
 
DarkSunrise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: FR-S | GTI mk6 | 350z 35th Anniv
Location: USA
Posts: 2,266
Thanks: 232
Thanked 985 Times in 558 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Except CoG, Chassis rigidity, track width, range, mileage, torque, weight. Apart from weight distribution and double wishbones, any other complaints about the 86 can be fixed or improved relative to the S2000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Never said the S2000 is a bad car. I just dispute that it is a "better car in all respects" to the 86 which cost 35% less brand new.
Yep. You could also mention steering feel and aero. And if you go by CSG Mike's track data, BRZ > S2k in cornering speeds with similar suspension mods/tires.

On the flipside, the S2k obviously has the sweeter engine with 9k redline, double-wishbones, and weight distribution. (Although I wonder whether the last two actually matter if the BRZ is cornering faster than the S2000 with similar mods.)

In the end, both cars have their pros and cons for track use.

It's interesting that stock v. stock in the hands of great drivers, the laptime difference between these two is quite small, less than 1 second, even with the S2000's 40 hp advantage and BRZ on touring tires. This is at MRLS too.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/laguna_lap/
__________________

Build Page
"I love this car. I think we wimped out when we didn't name it Best Driver's Car." -Randy Pobst on the BRZ
DarkSunrise is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:38 AM   #620
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Except CoG, Chassis rigidity, track width, range, mileage, torque, weight. Apart from weight distribution and double wishbones, any other complaints about the 86 can be fixed or improved relative to the S2000.

Don't forget, the S2000 cost around $40K in 2000 while the 86 is around $25K in 2013. Far superior accessibility and price performance ratio. When it was new I personally found it rather fat and overpriced for a roadster.

I'm not into comparing used versus new cars myself. If you want to compared used cars, why stop at Honda? Porsche and others have used cars too. The S2000 isn't the Holy Grail or anything.
A 2009 CR, the highest trim, with EVERY factory option MSRP'd for 37.9k.

Get your facts straight.

A current model used BRZ is worth less than my (now) 6 year old s2000. There must be a reason why the S2000 is holding value.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:41 AM   #621
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Parking a S2000 next to a MR2 certainly gives that impression. Especially being 600lbs lighter w/ more legroom and the engine behind your head.

That's why I said for a roadster. The 86 is a GT coupe and makes the rest of the class out there look like SUVs.

Personally I could give a rat's ass about stock power. You can make power in any car, that's the least on my worries when buying a car unless I'm not a wrench turner.

Never said the S2000 is a bad car. I just dispute that it is a "better car in all respects" to the 86 which cost 35% less brand new. How much more love would the 86 get by 'enthusiasts' if it came w/ sticky 255 rubber in the back like the S2000 CR?

Plus which S2000 are we talking about? The $35K 2900lb model or the $38k CR at 2750lb.
It wouldn't. It would just make the car slower.

I own a CR. The 86's weak points are VERY painfully obvious to me after just 8 months of tracking one.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:42 AM   #622
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayau View Post
I don't think anyone actually bought the CR at sticker price. I think your average buyer was turned off by the large chin lip and massive rear wing.

IMO, the CR is more of a collector's car. Throw in some aero, wheels/tires, and suspension, and you're already faster than a CR. Actually, if you look at used CRs, they're way more expensive than your average base S2000.
Throw in the same level of mods, beyond just suspension/rims/tires and the s2k runs away from the BRZ. It only gets more pronounced as you go FI. Only once you get to extreme levels of modding does the FR-S/BRZ take back the lead.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:44 AM   #623
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSunrise View Post
Yep. You could also mention steering feel and aero. And if you go by CSG Mike's track data, BRZ > S2k in cornering speeds with similar suspension mods/tires.

On the flipside, the S2k obviously has the sweeter engine with 9k redline, double-wishbones, and weight distribution. (Although I wonder whether the last two actually matter if the BRZ is cornering faster than the S2000 with similar mods.)

In the end, both cars have their pros and cons for track use.

It's interesting that stock v. stock in the hands of great drivers, the laptime difference between these two is quite small, less than 1 second, even with the S2000's 40 hp advantage and BRZ on touring tires. This is at MRLS too.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/laguna_lap/
The problem is, once you add aero, the S2k runs away from the BRZ...

Also, that Laguna lap is bunk. I lap FAR faster than that in a stock s2k, and I'm no pro.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 07:21 AM   #624
DarkSunrise
Senior Member
 
DarkSunrise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: FR-S | GTI mk6 | 350z 35th Anniv
Location: USA
Posts: 2,266
Thanks: 232
Thanked 985 Times in 558 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSG Mike View Post
The problem is, once you add aero, the S2k runs away from the BRZ...

Also, that Laguna lap is bunk. I lap FAR faster than that in a stock s2k, and I'm no pro.
Actually I think you could come close to (or beat possibly) a pro in a car you own and have hundreds of laps in with vs. him borrowing and having 5 laps in. Not talking most people, but you specifically.

Re. the S2000 vs. BRZ comparison on equal tires, it sounds like what you're saying is the S2000 has a large power advantage, and the BRZ chips away at that with aero and to a lesser degree cornering speed. The S2000 will still have the advantage on most tracks, but the difference isn't as large as the 40hp spread might lead you to believe.

Personally, I would have gone with a used S2000 for the engine, price & track-proven reliability, but what it came down to is I didn't want to daily drive a car with a roll bar, which I'd have needed to track the car. Some of the clubs I run with don't even allow convertibles, which is a big drawback for me.

Honda, why no S2000 coupe?
__________________

Build Page
"I love this car. I think we wimped out when we didn't name it Best Driver's Car." -Randy Pobst on the BRZ
DarkSunrise is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 07:42 AM   #625
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,345
Thanks: 63
Thanked 485 Times in 297 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSunrise View Post
Honda, why no S2000 coupe?

That woulda been perfect
I got the S2k in spite of its being a convertible. *Almost* got an RX-8, but the mileage was too abysmal for my 70 mile/day commute.

They should take the FR-S/BRZ platform and shove the engine/trans/firewall/windshield/front-seaters aft about 20" or so to make a modern 2000GT with 50/50 weight distribution at 2600-2700 lb, for less than $30k (totally doable). With optional 300hp turbo or 3.0 H-6
Nah, makes too much sense, they'll never do it
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 07:59 AM   #626
DarkSunrise
Senior Member
 
DarkSunrise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: FR-S | GTI mk6 | 350z 35th Anniv
Location: USA
Posts: 2,266
Thanks: 232
Thanked 985 Times in 558 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
That woulda been perfect
I got the S2k in spite of its being a convertible. *Almost* got an RX-8, but the mileage was too abysmal for my 70 mile/day commute.

They should take the FR-S/BRZ platform and shove the engine/trans/firewall/windshield/front-seaters aft about 20" or so to make a modern 2000GT with 50/50 weight distribution at 2600-2700 lb, for less than $30k (totally doable). With optional 300hp turbo or 3.0 H-6
Nah, makes too much sense, they'll never do it
Haha yeah, that would be awesome though.

I think something along those lines will come out in the next 2-3 years. Might not check all of those boxes, but will come close. With the number of people who almost bought the BRZ/FR-S but didn't because of the lack of power, I think manufacturers are on notice. Whether it's the 2015 update to the Twins, the new lighter Mustang GT, 4th gen RX7, or new lighter Z car, one of those has to come close.
__________________

Build Page
"I love this car. I think we wimped out when we didn't name it Best Driver's Car." -Randy Pobst on the BRZ
DarkSunrise is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 08:12 AM   #627
448hpsti
In Test:Oil Fed SC
 
448hpsti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: Vortech Prototype Test Car
Location: Hotter than where you are
Posts: 356
Thanks: 156
Thanked 137 Times in 88 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSG Mike View Post
I own a CR. The 86's weak points are VERY painfully obvious to me after just 8 months of tracking one.
@CSG Mike can you elaborate at a more granular level?
448hpsti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:18 AM   #628
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSunrise View Post
Actually I think you could come close to (or beat possibly) a pro in a car you own and have hundreds of laps in with vs. him borrowing and having 5 laps in. Not talking most people, but you specifically.

Re. the S2000 vs. BRZ comparison on equal tires, it sounds like what you're saying is the S2000 has a large power advantage, and the BRZ chips away at that with aero and to a lesser degree cornering speed. The S2000 will still have the advantage on most tracks, but the difference isn't as large as the 40hp spread might lead you to believe.

Personally, I would have gone with a used S2000 for the engine, price & track-proven reliability, but what it came down to is I didn't want to daily drive a car with a roll bar, which I'd have needed to track the car. Some of the clubs I run with don't even allow convertibles, which is a big drawback for me.

Honda, why no S2000 coupe?
I'd break it down like this.

- The S2k has a power advantage at certain speeds. 20-85, 125+ Between 90 and 120, it's a wash. This is due to the BRZ's inherant "slipperyness" (it's more aerodynamic).

- The BRZ has much better aerodynamic balance stock, compared to the S2k. The S2k makes a ton of rear lift, and a good amount of front downforce, stock, whereas the BRZ is zero lift (with factory aero). This is also why the BRZ gives the S2k such a good fight on mid-speed tracks, but it's also why the S2k simply decimates the BRZ once aero is added (just a rear wing).

- Coupe... well... if there was one, I'd have one, but I suppose that's why I have an OEM hardtop. Surprisingly, I discovered that going topless is pretty fcking awesome. I would have never though I'd like a topless car before I tried it.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:35 AM   #629
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 448hpsti View Post
@CSG Mike can you elaborate at a more granular level?
Axles will wear out quick
Wheel bearings go out quick (also an issue on the s2k)
Transmission is weak (cannot add more than bolt-on FI if you hope for the trans to last)
Bushings wear out somewhat quickly
No stock oil cooler
Original factory tune was bad
Throttle response is lacking
Power is lacking
While the potential to grow the platform is there, the car doesn't respond well to more than basic bolt-ons.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:55 AM   #630
Anaxilus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Drives: They have four wheels
Location: United States
Posts: 486
Thanks: 59
Thanked 196 Times in 113 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSG Mike View Post
A 2009 CR, the highest trim, with EVERY factory option MSRP'd for 37.9k.

Get your facts straight.

A current model used BRZ is worth less than my (now) 6 year old s2000. There must be a reason why the S2000 is holding value.
Yeah, read further where I said $38K. Oh sorry, $38K is sooo far off 37.9k. Which both to me is basically a $40K car. Straight enough for me.

Yeah, the reason is called economics, supply and demand. 86 is current production and produced sold at a higher rate than the S2000 ever knew. Performance has very little to do w/ that. The 86 has sold almost 30,000 units it's first year which is almost half what the S2000 did in 10 years.

Of course, you've compared the S2K w/ a wing to the 86 w/ aero right? The Griffon seems to respond well to aero on the stock motor. I'm not sure how valuable comparing a stock car to one with aero add-ons is.
Anaxilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:56 AM   #631
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,345
Thanks: 63
Thanked 485 Times in 297 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSG Mike View Post
- The S2k has a power advantage at certain speeds. 20-85, 125+ Between 90 and 120, it's a wash. This is due to the BRZ's inherant "slipperyness" (it's more aerodynamic).
The S2000 should have an acceleration advantage everywhere, at all speeds. If the BRZ being more aerodynamic was enough to give it an advantage at higher speeds, it would have a higher maximum speed. It doesn't. At FR-S/BRZ maximum speed (~147?), the S2000 still has the advantage, and continues accelerating to over 150.

Quote:
- The BRZ has much better aerodynamic balance stock, compared to the S2k. The S2k makes a ton of rear lift, and a good amount of front downforce, stock, whereas the BRZ is zero lift (with factory aero). This is also why the BRZ gives the S2k such a good fight on mid-speed tracks, but it's also why the S2k simply decimates the BRZ once aero is added (just a rear wing).
Does the FR-S/BRZ really have zero lift? I'd be very surprised...
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 11:05 AM   #632
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,345
Thanks: 63
Thanked 485 Times in 297 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Yeah, read further where I said $38K. Oh sorry, $38K is sooo far off 37.9k. Which both to me is basically a $40K car. Straight enough for me.
You said the 2000 model year S2000 was $40k. It wasn't. The most recent non-CR S2000 was $35k in 2009. The CR was a special model aimed at a very small segment of an already limited portion of the market, I don't know why you'd even compare it other than to try to exaggerate the expensiveness of the S2000.
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 11:33 AM   #633
Anaxilus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Drives: They have four wheels
Location: United States
Posts: 486
Thanks: 59
Thanked 196 Times in 113 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
You said the 2000 model year S2000 was $40k. It wasn't. The most recent non-CR S2000 was $35k in 2009. The CR was a special model aimed at a very small segment of an already limited portion of the market, I don't know why you'd even compare it other than to try to exaggerate the expensiveness of the S2000.
Because when I was looking at roadsters in 2005, I remembered the S2000 approaching 40k while the MR-S was under 30k during cross shopping. Two very different price brackets in my mind. I'm not building a space rocket or cooking a Souffle here. If a 35-38k means it's a $30k car to you, then so be it. We won't agree. The 86 is not what I'd consider a $20K car. Nitpicking a couple grand isn't making any argument worth of note except as a red herring.

I used 2000 to accentuate the price difference between a car produced new in 2000 versus another new car produced in 2012. Use whatever figure makes you comfortable, the point is the same. The S2K was and is a much more expensive car to produce.

Now excuse me, I'm going to go back to the new Miata versus used Cayman S thread now. Thx guys.
Anaxilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 11:47 AM   #634
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,345
Thanks: 63
Thanked 485 Times in 297 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Because when I was looking at roadsters in 2005, I remembered the S2000 approaching 40k while the MR-S was under 30k during cross shopping. Two very different price brackets in my mind. I'm not building a space rocket or cooking a Souffle here. If a 35-38k
Stop right there. You were not looking at a 38k sticker in 2005. 38k was sticker on the CR that didn't come out until 2008. It was a limited-run special model with a higher MSRP, if you want to compare it to any FR-S on price, it should be the series 10. The S2000 was more expensive than the FR-S. It was not a $40k car, it was $35k.

Quote:
means it's a $30k car to you, then so be it. We won't agree.
$35k is $35k. Who ever said it was a $30k car?

Quote:
The 86 is not what I'd consider a $20K car.
Of course not. $25k is $25k.

Quote:
Nitpicking a couple grand isn't making any argument worth of note except as a red herring.
$40k-$35k is not "a couple grand", it's 5,000 dollars.

Quote:
I used 2000 to accentuate the price difference between a car produced new in 2000 versus another new car produced in 2012. Use whatever figure makes you comfortable, the point is the same. The S2K was and is a much more expensive car to produce.
Yes it was. It just was never a $40k car.
ZDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:06 PM   #635
DarkSunrise
Senior Member
 
DarkSunrise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: FR-S | GTI mk6 | 350z 35th Anniv
Location: USA
Posts: 2,266
Thanks: 232
Thanked 985 Times in 558 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSG Mike View Post
I'd break it down like this.

- The S2k has a power advantage at certain speeds. 20-85, 125+ Between 90 and 120, it's a wash. This is due to the BRZ's inherant "slipperyness" (it's more aerodynamic).

- The BRZ has much better aerodynamic balance stock, compared to the S2k. The S2k makes a ton of rear lift, and a good amount of front downforce, stock, whereas the BRZ is zero lift (with factory aero). This is also why the BRZ gives the S2k such a good fight on mid-speed tracks, but it's also why the S2k simply decimates the BRZ once aero is added (just a rear wing).

- Coupe... well... if there was one, I'd have one, but I suppose that's why I have an OEM hardtop. Surprisingly, I discovered that going topless is pretty fcking awesome. I would have never though I'd like a topless car before I tried it.
Nice write-up. A couple of my good friends used to own convertibles (S2000, Miatas). On the right days, top-down motoring was awesome. I can only imagine how nice a convertible would be out in gorgeous southern Cal.
__________________

Build Page
"I love this car. I think we wimped out when we didn't name it Best Driver's Car." -Randy Pobst on the BRZ
DarkSunrise is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:09 PM   #636
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post
Yeah, read further where I said $38K. Oh sorry, $38K is sooo far off 37.9k. Which both to me is basically a $40K car. Straight enough for me.

Yeah, the reason is called economics, supply and demand. 86 is current production and produced sold at a higher rate than the S2000 ever knew. Performance has very little to do w/ that. The 86 has sold almost 30,000 units it's first year which is almost half what the S2000 did in 10 years.

Of course, you've compared the S2K w/ a wing to the 86 w/ aero right? The Griffon seems to respond well to aero on the stock motor. I'm not sure how valuable comparing a stock car to one with aero add-ons is.
38k in 2009 dollars is nowhere near 40k in 1999/2000 dollars.

The Griffon GT86 can be replicated... for about 120k + a car. Apples to oranges. I'm talking a S2k with a $800 bolt-on wing, and nothing more.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:12 PM   #637
CSG Mike
Driving Junkie
 
CSG Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Drives: S2000 CR
Location: Orange County
Posts: 4,646
Thanks: 1,988
Thanked 3,679 Times in 1,752 Posts
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
The S2000 should have an acceleration advantage everywhere, at all speeds. If the BRZ being more aerodynamic was enough to give it an advantage at higher speeds, it would have a higher maximum speed. It doesn't. At FR-S/BRZ maximum speed (~147?), the S2000 still has the advantage, and continues accelerating to over 150.

Does the FR-S/BRZ really have zero lift? I'd be very surprised...
Remember that power output is linear, while aerodynamic drag is exponential.

90-120 is the "sweet spot" where the FRS/BRZ has a superior power/drag ratio over the s2k.


The published number, IIRC, was zero lift on the BRZ with both the "diffuser" and wing. It also reduces Cd by 0.02.
__________________

I won't tell you what you want to hear; I'll say it how it is. My posts, comments, and statements are my own views, opinions, and beliefs, and do not represent the thoughts of CSG or anyone else I drive for.
"Pedal Dance" testing CSG Youtube CSG Facebook CSG 2014 BRZ build thread
CSG Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 12:14 PM   #638
regal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Drives: Scion FR-S/Toyota Yaris
Location: PA
Posts: 1,287
Thanks: 19
Thanked 290 Times in 212 Posts
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
You said the 2000 model year S2000 was $40k. It wasn't. The most recent non-CR S2000 was $35k in 2009. The CR was a special model aimed at a very small segment of an already limited portion of the market, I don't know why you'd even compare it other than to try to exaggerate the expensiveness of the S2000.


And Honda lost money on every S2k they sold. Its obviously over-engineered (good) and an has more money invested in nearly every part of the car from the engine to the suspension. IMHO It did weigh too much for a pure" sports car roadster." I think the base Elise did every thing the S2k did, better. And in 2005 they were priced very close.

The S2k is not a Gran Tourer. The FRS is a GT in the spirit of GTs before they became 4k lb behemoths but with some roadster like traits. The FRS just doesn't have the go-cart feel of a true sports car like the Elise or Toyotas sports car the (MRS.) But it does great on sweeping highways and interstates. I'd much rather take a 10 hour drive on the interstate with the FRS than an S2k or Elise.

For a little GT it has very sports car like handling on flat roads/tracks.
But driving on really twisty hilly roads it becomes apparent that the handling isn't roadster like, I'm not the only one to report a rear wheel lift on a tight downhill turn. I don't think track guys would ever notice this. But this car is not a top class handling car on turns with sharp elevation changes . It may just be the silly soft springs upfront, it may just need better struts.

A guess the point is we are comparing apples and oranges.
__________________


2013 FRS Argento Silver 6MT 16"wrx alloys/winter tires, otherwise stock
regal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to regal For This Useful Post:
Anaxilus (09-27-2013)
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FR-S vs S2000 vang FR-S / BRZ vs.... 436 09-19-2012 03:52 PM
E36 M3 vs FR-S vs S2000 (for me) RearDrive FR-S / BRZ vs.... 48 07-02-2012 09:46 PM
S2000 or MX-5 balance Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 10 11-01-2011 01:01 AM
S2000 from hell CyberFormula Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 13 07-09-2010 08:05 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.