Do you pay for private insurance? We do. And if you make over $100k here you pay 28% to federal government, in CT its ~6% for state, then add ~4% for medicare and social security (which my generation won't ever see), then pay your private insurance and medical bills. I don't wanna hear it. Pharmacists at my work make about $100k and end up seeing about $1000 a week before medical insurance premiums are taken out.

I stop reading and listening on blogs and magazine a long time ago, I just listen to facts by offical toyota & subaru people, so far I seen toyota has been putting more miles in the nur ring than subaru and Tada has been more active on promoting and keeping the hype about this car. Didn't toyota raced the ft-86 just a week ago, what did subaru do?

EDIT: yea, these numbers seem fishy. hopefully get affirmation from TAS.

If you live in the province of Quebec, every dollar you make over $83000 is taxed at 53%. I'm not kidding.

Costs of health care is what kills us in America. I know families paying $1000 a month for insurance that has a $10k deductible, so basically catastrophic insurance only.

So offtopic!

Not sure about the specs. 19/27 isn't bad MPG, as long as it is on regular octane and not premium.

:slap: :fighting0040: FacePalm to specs (hell no on the buying front) and to the Subaru only statement, so were just gonna go ahead and forget what Toyota is capable of producing when they really put work into something. I dont believe it and subaru is the only one singing the we did it all song....

I will wait for final production specs to pass judgement, I am a Toyota guy myself always liked Subaru but this is just sad.

Very unlikely I'd imagine. I can't recall too many performance 4 cylinders that used regular octane. 200HP out of a 2.0 non turbo is going to require decent compression, and as such, higher octane IMO.

My first reaction to this article...
http://i653.photobucket.com/albums/u...mYn1qf9oxz.gif

I said it all along. Subaru is salty about how everyone think this is a toyota led car.

and yet ALL the evidence leads to toyota having a heavy hand in its design/engineering. its as simple as this: they say they did all the testing, and yet this past weekend who drove the car around the Nring? Gazoo racing is related to subaru and not toyota all of a sudden? :lol:

Do you remember the first prototype? It was a Subaru hack to together ugly monstrosity and it was driven by Subaru back then. Then we saw Toyota's version on the ring when it got an actual body with Toyota's engineers. Do the math and you will see that Subaru footed most of the moving parts.

Something i've been thinking about this evening.....

The Subaru is going to cost more than the Toyota - this is pretty much a given.

The new 2.0 boxer has been co-developed by both companies, so a lot of time and money has been spent. So both companies will want to use this engine. Neither will want to go and offer a different engine, especially as in Subaru's case they wont want to give this car enough power to take sales away from the Impreza STI.

So same car, same engine, but different prices. So perhaps there may be some truth to the whole story of the subaru getting more power.

I mean brand loyalty is one thing, but is your average Subaru fan going to hand over an extra 5k (25% of the Toyota) just to have the Subaru? - I dont think so. There has got to be something more to justify that price than just a nicer interior etc.

But as per the Autocar article i would say that any such difference in power is going to be purely ECU driven. Mechanically i would put money on them being 100% identical.

So lets say for arguments sake the Toyota is 200bhp and lets assume its mapped for regular 95ron unleaded - the cheap stuff - as after all with this kind of power and rpm there is no need for stronger fuel - your not getting into the NA detonation zone at only 7400rpm on a modern engine like this.

Now with the Subaru version lets assume we could be looking at a map for 99+ron fuel and Subaru explicitly tell owner that this car NEEDS 99 Ron or above. So it gets a noticeably more agressive map to take advantage of this fuel and advanced timing.

I dont know how direct injection works, but i would expect direct injection to be percentage wise more efficient the higher you go with the grade of fuel?

Assume adjusting the map and upping the power may naturally move the power band a lot higher up the rev range; which would require them to move the redline up along with the limiter. So lets be conservative and say another 500rpm. This could make a good 10-20bhp difference.

Using the ST205 as template (yes yes i know its comparing a Turbo car to a non-turbo, but stock for stock we're talking not too dissimmilar power to the FT86/BRZ), the UK Cars were rated at 239bhp (95ron unleaded) when they came out back in 1994 and the JDM version was 255bhp (100ron).

Thats a good 16bhp difference and i know for a fact that the ECU maps are the same but the ecu simply advances or retards the timing depending on the fuel you are putting in.

I've seen standard UK cars which simply run 99ron fuel and they dyno almost identical power to the JDM cars.

So what im getting at is I wonder if it'll be a simple case that the FT86 will be tuned for running on cheaper fuel, while the BRZ will be tuned for 99+Ron fuel?

In which case, who cares if the Subaru has more power?

I'll have the cheaper Toyota, then i'll run it on higher grade fuel and use an Apexi S-AFC to re-map it. I may even get more power than the Subaru! :thumbup:

It's also possible that the Subaru will just come with more standard equipment, and that the Scion won't be as cheap as everyone on these boards thinks its going to be.

If those power/torque numbers are legit, 210 @ 6500 and 170 @ 4000 is pretty epic for a 2.0L NA.

Like really epic.


Edit: Impossibly epic maybe?

BMEP is ~210 psi (which is freakin' awesome) at both the torque peak and power peak. BMEP on NA motors is always highest at torque peak and then tapers down.

So there is some BS in the air...

Well i've re-read this article about the BRZ (you can see in the pictures too that its the Subaru and not the Toyota) and there is the mention of things like climate control and a space saver tyre. Plus there are spotlights/foglight in the bottom of the front bumper in the smaller picture on page2.

So if the Subaru has the full spec, is 2800lbs that bad? and is $28k that far off?

The base price Toyota version with no air conditioning, no stereo, no spotlights and a tire repair can rather than a spare this could well weigh in 2600lbs and cost around $20k

Im starting to believe this article......

:bellyroll: Guy. FR sports cars/ sport sedans/GTs. Toyota; 2000GT, Sport 800 (boxer rwd no less), T/RA2x-T/RA6x Celicas, 4 Generations of Supras, AE86 Corolla GT(s), Chaser Tourer V, Altezza/IS, Soarer/SC, Aristo/GS, LFmtherfkingA....

Subaru; um... hmmmm...

Yes. Makes complete sense that Subaru did everything but the styling.

So not trolling. Found the article this morning and was quite disgusted actually. These guys are behaving like spoiled fucking children, and ***if*** the journalism is accurate, they are downright lying. Even on the remote chance this were true, the version that the PROJECT's HEAD ENGINEER gave, was in no way damaging to subaru, they have no reason to be asses about it, and it befuddles me why they would chose to damage their relationship with the guys that own 17% of their company like that. ****s.

The last few weeks have been of the FML...nay... FMELL variety, so I really wasn't in the mood to say more.

Yeah. Fuck $28k. Better come with a turbo and the better side of 270hp for that price. Seriously.

Wow. Fuck working in Canada. That's some serious ass rape-age.

TAS = Tokyo Auto Salon, which is in January. You are looking for the Tokyo motor show there champ.

:word:

Yeah, those numbers are better than the s2000...

Well explain to me why most of the hardware is from Subaru? The engine, the platform, and the tweaked impreza suspension setup. Also tell me why the first prototype was a hacked together Subaru impreza and the only time we heard and seen the Toyota version was when it had the sexy body? the only thing I see personally that is Toyota is the D4-S addition to the engine and the sexy body that we both find attractive. Tell me something that I'm missing from this equation?

You meant the tq figures right?

Two Things:

1) There is no way that a modern-day, mainstream auto manufacturer would ever dream of shipping a car without a radio or air conditioning.

2) There is no way that this car will start at $20k. It's not 1995 anymore.

I meant both, if you look at the power the s2000 makes at 6500rpm, this car beats it. Looks like makes about 160 to the wheels at 6500rpm, and this car will likely make a bit more to the wheels if the 210hp @ 6500rpm is correct.

Haha, I was thinking the same, although I can still dream about it starting at $20k, but I am fully aware that it is a dream :bonk:

If that is true then I am in love with this engine. I could care less for that extra 1k rpms of flat power because I don't rev like a lunatic on public roads which is where I would drive this car 100% of the time.

If you see only in US, yes. If you look world wide, no.

It actually doesn't flatten out there. It continues to increase in power until about 8200rpm where it tops at 190-195hp at the wheels. So it still produces another 30+hp at the wheels, but at an additional 1.5-2k worth of rpm, is it worth it? I'd rather have more power at a lower RPM that is more useable for the kind of driving I do. And the tq isn't even close really, maxing out at 130-140ftlbs at the wheels at about 6500rpm. At 4000rpm, the s2000 has about 110ftlbs at the wheels.

I wasn't talking about the S2K. I was talking about the motor in the FT86. They said in the article it feels like it peaks earlier by 1k rpm.

Oh, gotcha. Well that's even better then for my use of this vehicle.

Are people seriously taking the estimated figures seriously? As I pointed out in a previous thread, 170ft-lb of torque is almost as good as a Ferrari, and this is not going to be possible in a car where they actually care about emissions, noise, and economy, nevermind cost. For reasons I've described already, I think by over 200hp they mean barely over, not even 210. Again, with a 7.5k redline, the most you can hope for is maybe a bit over 200.

I wonder how they "estimated" the power peak to be at 6500rpm just by driving it...I don't think you can quantify differences in acceleration that accurately just by "feeling" it. The estimated specs are obviously full of shit.

+1

Here in the UK you can pretty much get any car of this price range without Airconditioning. Plus even if the base model does come with a stereo, we'll be talking a basic CD headunit weighing less than 1/2kg and costing Toyota less than £10 to make. And im sure it will take all of 5mins for me to take out. So no big deal if there is a stereo as standard.

Toyota have always be saying that they wanted to start this car around the 20k mark... they are still saying it now.... so thats what im expecting.

Size/engine/spec wise its closest competitor on the road at the moment is the latest MX-5. And you can buy the 2.0 litre (160bhp) engine version of this with an LSD for just over 19k. So it looks like it doesnt need to be 1995....

To answer your question, no, I don't take these numbers seriously at all. No way a car like this has 170ft-lb of torque. But it's fun to play with the numbers when you have nothing else to talk about haha

I thought it was confirmed the engine is called the FA20

20K in '95 is about 29,775 in '11 with a 48.9% inflation rate

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


Power might sound good but 28K and 2,800 lbs doesn't. Shame on Subaru for trying to take all the glory. :thumbdown:

Because Toyota knows how to make use of it's resources better than anybody else? The engine is suited to the application, why else do you think they are using it? It's also a unique chassis now, so have fun arguing that "it's a subaru". Lastly, Do you really think that Subaru was gonna pick up one day and say... "you know what? let's build a rwd sports coupe"...mmm yeah. Okay. Seriously though, whatever dude. Believe what you want to, I don't really care. At the end of the day, I'm here for a car that drives like a descendant of a classic Toyota sports icon, not a diff locked Impreza, so take that however you want. If it does in fact weigh 2800lbs, it better drive like a 200hp LFA. Don't know how Subaru is gonna manage that. I also don't plan to pay $28k for it either, so ya know.... enjoy.

Well, they are pushing a £20,000.00+ price in the UK

20,000.00 GBP = 31,593.14 USD (going off todays conversion rate on www.xe.com/ucc)

If it comes out at US$20k then I'm moving to America! I can live with a Scion badge, it's still a Toyota (Toyobaru/Subaru)

:thanks:

Not sure how much credibility should be given to this article, but "28K and 2800lb" is an oxymoron. If the final production model comes out with such spec, I'm out.:thumbdown:

28K for a base model?! Thats fine as long as all the other info is wrong. Otherwise plenty of better options.

Sorry but I think the article is 100% bunk. I don't care if it came from Subaru.

Engine technology isn't plug and play. Toyota doesn't just hand over D4-S like a piece of lego, and tell Subaru "okay guys stick it into your engine and update us on the progress." Subaru would need to collaborate on how to integrate D4-S into its own engine architecture, understand tolerances, etc. For Subaru to insist it did all the work is ridiculous. Did the majority, maybe. But to say Toyota only skinned the BYZ into their own version is laughable.

Think it's rather immature for C&D to say this "couldn't have been engineered by Toyota." I'm saying this as a Honda guy who's hated on Toyotas for the past decade. But gimme a break, Toyota can't engineer sports cars? What about the freaking Lexus LF-A? Editor also has no clue what he's talking about when he says "plebian steel." Guess he's never heard of high-tensile strength steel?

$28k is a rip-off, and it's a pretty terrible estimate from C&D. Seeing the comparable alternatives (Genesis 2.0T coupe, Mustang V6) we're likely looking at $24k, $25k at the most. Also think there's no way in hell this is getting 170 ft-lbs of torque. Think 200 hp, 150 ft-lbs is the likely ballpark. 2800 lbs would also be epic fail given how small this car is.

GBP price never comes close to USD. Taxes, tariffs make cars expensive in UK. So conversions mean nothing.

all i got to say is this:

http://cdn2.worldcarfans.co/2011/10/...1884626549.jpg

yeah right subaru developed this car all by themselves...

SOA blog would probably say they had Akio Toyoda tied to a leash during his runs, and had him polish SOA exec's shoes.

Subaru SVX had a similar fuel eccommy as this... Its 3.3L flat 6 auto 4wd and weighs atleast 1609kgs.

I dont beleave it would only get that in the BRZ.