The civic is anything but lightweight anymore. :p

I drive a 06 Passat 3.6 4Motion (chipped) - 310hp and 290lbft. It gives 5.8sec to 100
The jetta is stage-2 Unitronic, exhaust and tiny upgrades which gives around 250hp. It faster in straight line and sounds better, but obviously doesn't handle like FRS.
FRS feels light ton its feet.

You don't go above 4000rpm...lol
I guy at toyota dealership who went for test drive with me told me to rev the shit of the car (1 day old car), turn off traction control and give it a slide..hahahaha:thumbup:

compared to other cars of TODAY it is. my 07 si is 2850lbs. the frs is only about 100lbs lighter.

I don't think it will compare to that nice VTECH feel and the civic has so many options for additional performance. The question is, what is the BRZ/FR-S performance options going to be down the road. And, do you want your front two tires smoking with torque steer or your two rear tires, better CoG, lower ride, etc. Give it a test drive first.

+1 as is mine and my 2011 Si is fairly neutral, no understeer.

I would think the FR-S and BRZ would feel as fast as an 8th Civic SI. Tested results through various sites like Motortrend and Edmunds show acceleration being very close if not in favor of the FR-S. Like the Vtec engines, max torque is not reached until the higher rev areas so it should feel similar I would think. A drive will let you know pretty fast.

This is why I believe in the Goldilock ways when it comes to everything including power and torque.My favorite engines is 6 cylinders since they typically aren't torqueless or overpowered. I still think the FRS deserved a 2.3-2.5 flat four.

I got the car before anyone else got to drive it, so it wan't run hard. I like to go by what the manual suggests for the break in being I plan on keeping this car for a long time.

See this I have never understood. How will it be 'slow' in your daily commute? You are governed by speed limit and traffic flow and since this car can attain at least 120km/h there should be no roads it can travel on in Canada for which it is too slow.

Your daily commute doesn't include Calabogie race circuit, does it? ;)

I love it when you say my commute has a race trace..lolol
sometimes you want to overtake cars or need to speed up quickly, power helps!!! with this low torque, i needs to be revved to 6000.
Personally, i like to have lot of power. Im sure FRS owners will be happy if they looking for nimble car.

On other hand, if you drive that car in winter while wearing a jacket, good luck fitting in those bucket seats (unless you are skinny) They are very snug.

Many buyers will look for exhaust upgrade as well, because it doesn't sound any sporty

Yeah, same. NA 6 cylinders are the sweet spot. And yeah, I still think they would have been better off with a higher displacement but at least it didn't disappoint me on first impression.

BTW, did you ever get to drive it? If so, what did you think?

The nice thing is that the 86 gets above 4K quickly and loves living there. Honestly, that is part of the reason I so excited about the FR-S and its mates. You GET to run it at the edge in traffic without immediately endangering your license to drive. It's why I loved the MK1 MR2 so much.

I love speed/power/torque too, the second car on my shopping list was a Camaro ZL1. I would NEVER have gotten to drive the ZL1 like I drive the FR-S.

Just food for thought, everybody has different wants/desires/needs. That's why all cars are not built equal.

One advantage though, for me anyway, is that low-torque cars can be easier to navigate around in tight, slow spaces like parking lots. Keep the revs low, and the car is very docile, easier (for me anyway) to manuever around.

With high-torque cars I'm always on edge, worried that the slightest tap of the pedal will cause it to go forward too fast.

Handy during snow driving too, as keeping the revs low reduces the chances of accidental wheel spin from all that torque.

So I actually like that split-personality of low-torque, high-revving cars :)