The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

Would it be cheaper to build? Material cost isn’t what drives cost, it’s time on the assembly line first and foremost. Bolting in the rear seat belts and seats probably didn’t take any longer than installing all the behind the seats trim panels and cubbies you have in a 2-seater. The Miata is a lot smaller than the twins, but it definitely isn’t cheaper.

Also the Supra isn’t more expensive because it says BMW under the hood, it’s cheaper because of it. The extra cost vs the twins comes from the fact that that turbos, better brakes, better suspension, fancier diff, etc. all add cost.

The Supra also isn’t heavy, in fact it’s lighter than any BMW by about 3-400 lbs. if you added a turbo I-6 with a strong enough drivetrain, brakes, and suspension to a twin from the factory, with wide wheels and tires it would weigh about the same as the Supra I’d wager.
Everything that transfers power or stops it, or reacts it into the chassis, now needs ~70% more surface area at minimum to meet the same margins. (It’s an approximation 385/228=1.69) Probably more for chassis sections that react drivetrain load, since they’re likely in bending and getting more section modulus from sheet metal is not trivial.

It'll be a little slower than my e85 FR-S or an AP2 S2000. For context, in 5-90 mph pulls, my E85 FR-S is:

1) Even with a stock AP2 S2000
2) 1 car length behind an AP2 S2000 with HFC, VTEC lowered to 5500 RPM, and LWFW.

My car is probably making around 190 whp (OFT e85 tune, stock header/exhaust) and should weigh around 2700 lbs. Power-to weight wise:

1) Stock AP2 = 2850 lbs / 240 hp = 11.9 lbs/hp
2) My FR-S = 2700 lbs / 224 hp = 12.1 lbs/hp

The gen 2 BRZ manual should be 2815 lbs / 228 hp = 12.3 lbs/hp

So a touch slower.

I mean, the whole idea is it wouldn't be exactly the same car, and if it had the same name (as Z and ZX 2-seater and 2+2 versions did) or a different name, makes no difference to me. I have driven enough different cars, smaller and larger, lighter and heavier, shorter- and longer-wheelbase, on the road and at the track, to have a good idea of what I like. Sacrifice of +2 seats and some utility (space) for shorter-wheelbase, better weight distribution, and slightly lighter weight would be "better" for me.

I'm going to reach a little but this is what I have to compare the Gen2 BRZ to:

2007 BMW E92 328i
230 hp @ 6500 rpm
200 lb-ft @ 2750 rpm
0-60 in 6.3 secs
Weight: 3340


2022 BRZ
228 hp @ 7000 rpm
184 lb-ft @ 3700 rpm
0-60 in 6.3 secs
Weight: 2815 lbs


I was happy with the performance of the BMW so I expect that I'll like the performance of the Gen2. Even more so than I did with my test drive of the Gen1.

Though as a general, this can be a good way to compare vehicles, I would bet on the the new BRZ to be a touch faster than yours with its updated engine and a much improved torque curve over the previous gen. When lbs/hp comes that close, a lot of other aspects can make a difference, and a smooth torque curve is definitely one of those as there is no dip in power in that region. Not starting arguments here, purely speculation :)

Yep point taken, we're all just guessing until these cars are released!

I'll be pleasantly surprised if the new car is faster than my e85 FR-S (or basically a stock AP2 S2000), but you're right, it should have a favorable torque curve compared to both. No waiting to get through the torque dip or hit VTEC.

The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

The current car already does 6.2 seconds to 60:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...l-test-review/


I expect the GR86BRZ to drop into the 5's, matching the S2000 would require a significant 0.8s improvement to 60. Toyota does claim 1s improvement so it's not that unlikely car and driver can thrash one hard enough to get there. To match the AP2 S2000 in the quarter it needs 0.7s and only 2mph. Beating the trap speed seems easy at this point. Looks like the twins suffer more at the launch than anything. Hopefully the PS4s are going to help here, maybe not enough to match the 245 widths the S2000 has to work with.



S2000: 5.4 to 60 and 14.1 @ 97mph in the quarter:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15133774/honda-s2000-short-take-road-test/

Sounds like the GT3 needs a driver mod.

All equal, it's going to be slightly cheaper and lighter to not have 2 rear seats IMO, but not a big thing either way... I'm OK calling it "same cost to build".

From the get-go, I knew that partnering with BMW would mean the new Supra would be A. expensive and B. heavy.

4-cyl Supra is lighter by 200 lb. vs. M30i Z4, 6-cyl Supra is lighter by "only" 150 lb. vs. M40i Z4.

Anyway, at 3200 lb. for the 4-cyl and 3400 lb. for the 6, it's too heavy for *me*.

But you wouldn't do that, super-long I-6 into a platform designed for a super-short flat-4? Terrible idea that would never work. You'd just use the n.a. 2.4 flat-4, and have similar power/weight vs. 4-cylinder Supra. Good enough for me... But you could also *consider* turboing the 4 or transplanting in a compact N.A. V6 for 300hp and power/weight comparable to the 6-cyl. Supra. Woohooo....

God knows the Brembos on the 1st gen are *plenty* capable of handling 300+hp.

It is trivial. Road loads are way way WAY more significant to chassis stiffness and strength requirements. And again you'd be working with a lot less power required to achieve same power/weight anyway...

In the end, the Z4/Supra are luxury "sports cars" built from luxury sedan parts and pieces. it's the modern BMW approach. I wish they could remember how to build small/lightweight fun cars like the 2002, and E30 M3...

BMW always measure time from launch control.

Toyota measure from idle.

So, I hope that from launch gr86 will take only 5.7 seconds from 0-100.

On PS4

TBH I don't remember the car/driver, could be his car wasn't maxed out on points for the class he ran. For sure to be in T80 (only 2 classes up from me) it must have been a 996 or 997 GT-3 running 200tw or slower tires. I was on Hoosier A7s in T60, maxed out on points for the class. No doubt a good driver on the best tires allowable for that car in that class would have been a lot quicker...

Dan the rear seats are usually there in sports car for a lower insurance premium and broader marketability....honey its totally practical, see it has rear seats, the kids can fit back there no problem!

IIRC Toyota approached Porsche first, and I would absolutely love to have a Porsche NA 4 in that car.

The whole lower insurance with a back seat" thing is a myth. Ask any insurance company anyplace and they will tell you the number of seats has zero impact in the calculation.
Two seat cars just cost more because they are usually more expensive, costly to repair and have worse accident rates than 4 seaters.
The manufacturers are not "fooling" the insurance companies with fake back seats.

https://www.autotrader.com/car-news/...company-266842

The back seats are perfectly useable.
My kids fit absolutely no problem, and adults can go for short trips. I’m glad they’re there, they *do* make the car a lot more practical than a Supra/Z/Miata