Just for the sake of argument, a FWD drivetrain has significantly less drivetrain loss, less weight, less complexity and is easier to maintenance than a RWD. In a race car application, a FWD would spin less, as well as making emergency engine swaps a breeze.

Right in most cases.

FWD would spin less? I think that depends on the driver moreso.

Fair enough about the engine swaps.

Either way - all else the same - the forces a tyre in a FWD car is exerted to (keep in mind the tyres should be the SINGLE contact point between the car and the road) are MUCH less evenly distributed than a RWD, and for a performance car that is a very unwanted thing, as much so as high weight or low power.

Personally, I really don't understand the desire for an AWD version of this car and I wouldn't even remotely consider owning this car if it were AWD instead of RWD. The whole concept of the BRZ/FRS was to build a car that focuses on maximizing driver enjoyment rather than to build a car that focuses on maximizing vehicle performance. Squeezing the most performance out of a car = AWD. Squeezing the most fun out of a car = RWD. That's my 2 cents.

Most spins I've seen are caused from corner exit acceleration on cold tires... as in, powering over. So a fwd wouldn't have those problems.
In practice, FWD is very competitive in track racing, and it seems that this advantage is only significant when dealing with high HP and inadequate tires.

Each choice has it's ups and downs. However, FWD shouldn't just be dismissed as blatantly inferior, especially in the real world.

You just know these will soon be popping up everywhere with EJ swaps, I'm sure a few will chop it up to fit the whole WRX drive train in there as well. Not my thing either but you just know it'll happen. :iono:

I believe FWD is only good for small, lightweight hot hatches like the Renault Clio 182 Cup and Peugeot 205 GTI. The kinda things you can get in and with little experience or fear you can drive flat out on track days without worrying about getting into too much trouble.

RWD is the most balanced and rewarding layout, whether this be FR or MR or (for the insaine) RR.

AWD is best for situations where traction is an issue. This may be due to the surface you are racing on (Like Rallying), because you have excessive weight (Lexus LS600, Bentley GT) or you have excessive power which would otherwise just be unable to get all the power through just two wheels (GT-R, Most Lambo's, Veyron). But unless you need it there is extra weight and you loose more power through the drivetrain.

I've owned many RWD car (Supra's, BMW's and the occational Lotus Esprit) and AWD Cars (3 ST205's and and Evo) but unlike AWD the problem i found with RWD was that i never had the confidence to drive at 100% if you get what i mean. This isnt a fault of RWD, but more my own fault for having too much of an agressive driving style.

Going sideways has never been an issue for me, but with RWD if i was at somewhere like the Nurburgring i couldnt go flat out around a bend like i can with AWD as in the back of my mind i fear getting past the limit of the grip and loosing it.

In the case of the FT86 though (even though i'd love to see a new GT-Four), it makes no sense at all for them to make an AWD version unless they are going to take it into Rallying (in which case it'll have to be at the very least 300bhp). Adding the extra weight of AWD takes it away from the vision of a modern day AE86 and defeats all their efforts to make the car as light as possible and on a tight budget.

Exactly - driver error in applying too much power at the wrong time. When both a FWD and RWD have cold tires you can apply more power in the RWD while still keeping the same line (ie. without getting under or oversteer), because the FWD is using the tire grip to both corner and accelerate, you have less grip available for both at the same time..

In most cases it is inferior, because most high-level racing isn't done with low power levels or poor tires, they're done with high HP and slicks... Where a RWD car would best a FWD car.

I'm not disagreeing that FWD's are fine for low-level/"fun" trackdays, I'm just saying they're not as good as others for the more serious stuff.

One of the key items you track rats are missing is this is not a race car, and although you may have valid points for a race car, they do not apply to the FT-86.

As a sports car, RWD is more fun and adjustable when keeping a budget.

Yet the point still stands, that FWDs would not spin under power, providing less driver error and therefore less time lost as well as a safer ride in less than ideal conditions, ie rain or cold tires. And it's very hard to correct in a RWD, it's called "snap" oversteer for a reason lol

Then you agree that in low-level racing FWD would be very competitive? Where street tires are mandated and power levels are restricted... like I said, FWD can be very competitive in a real world scenario, where limited budgets come into play. On BMI there are many examples of a Civic TR besting an S2000.

Comparing that is not really relivant, as its just a matter of money invested into any platform. You cannot compare a street car to a track car. With money you could make any FWD race car waste any RWD street car.

Yes FWD racing is affordable. No it means nothing related to how fun RWD street cars are.

the problem with AWD in the FT-86 isn't that its impossible...

Its that this car was built for RWD.

Don't worry your little heads Subbie boys, your WRX coupe will be coming soon.