Lovely!
I was waiting for something to come along to be a signature :D

Eh... yes and no.

Balance can be found and obtained without pushing into super car territory, or without sacrificing overall performance. Balance can be found at any performance level, high or low.

If you were take the FRS/BRZ, exactly how it is now but put the turbo charged version of the same engine making 280hp and a flat 250 ft/lbs torque curve in the car you *might* increase the curb weight by what 50lbs? Are you really going to sacrifice balance and handling just because it has more power? No.. you're not. Sure you will need some suspension tuning, increased mechanical grip, and better brakes, but nothing outrageous.

I had a great balance in my Supra when it was set up in road racing trim. It put 600hp to the tires, had a flat torque curve from 3000 rpm to 8000rpm and was an absolute joy to drive.

50 pounds if it's done by a private shop that doesn't design and test it to meet all worldwide emissions standards and to last 100,000+ miles of driving in numerous weather, conditions, and environments.

In reality, a turbocharger means more cooling (larger radiator, piping, oil cooler(s)), larger wheels and tires, transmission upgrades (synchros, input/output shafts, driveshaft), various suspension upgrades, many of which involve greater weight like half-shafts, calipers, rotors, larger master cylinder.

Then you have to meet low-speed impact requirements which may require additional reinforcement in the front to protect the additional hardware.

So now you have a 3200 pound car with 280 horsepower that is essentially another direct competitor to the 370Z in both price and size.

Hmmm hadn't thought of this before, I guess that's usually one of the problems with 4 cylinder engines...6 cylinder engines are noticably smoother.

It's been a while since I've been in a Subaru, but I remember that a 2002 WRX sounded very smooth at 7000rpm. Or maybe I was just really terrified of how fast the car was going :bellyroll: From the videos I don't think this car sounds too harsh at high rpm, but I question the noise pipe philosophy as it seems to make the car very loud...I think a lot of people will toss that thing out.

.

This discussion reminds me of an advertisement Porsche did for the 944 Turbo: http://944turbo.net/wp-content/uploa...ifferences.jpg

http://944turbo.net/wp-content/uploa...ifferences.jpg

I love the rear transmission on those.

i'm not saying balance can only be attained without a supercharger or turbocharger.

let me rephrase from my earlier post. this car is all about balance AND low cost. yes, you can add boost to this car and have a lot more torque and hp with minimal weight gains. and the car would cost $32k. not to mention all the added maintenance cost that boost demands. so what's the point, when there are so many other alternatives at that price point, like the 370z, genesis coupe, the domestic pony cars, etc etc.

no, the things that distinguish this car are awesome balance (as in low weight, compact dimensions, extreme low center of gravity) and inexpensive msrp (and a hardtop, to distinguish it from a miata).

Thanks for this. It just became a background pic for my computer. Nice looking ad!

bneale

2005 N/A Miata: 142hp, 2447 lb.
2005 turbo Miata: 178hp, 2529 lb.

No way a mildly turbo'd FR-S/BRZ would end up weighing 3200 lb. as suggested above.
I'd say that +50hp, +100 lb. wouldn't be unreasonable to expect. IMO, that'd be the way to go, they could have big strength/life margins on components, and we could easily tweak it to 300+hp at our own risk. That'd be FINE w/ me!

Yet look at Subaru's own lineup and the Impreza adds roughly 200 pounds from the standard car to the WRX and yet another couple hundred for the STi.

Take a look at the 911 lineup where a similarly equipped Turbo versus a C4S is generally 150 or so pounds heavier for another example.

Power almost always comes with the addition of weight.

I am suggesting that if they turbo it they go the MILD turbo route a-la Mazdaspeed Miata, and keep supporting mods as minimal as they can get away with at the ~250hp level, and resist the urge to make a ton of other changes to move it upmarket.

Anyway, if 150 lb. added to a C4S to make a turbo 911, that would scale down quite a bit for a smaller/lighter-weight/less-powerful FR-S, so call it 100-120 lb.:iono: Point is that adding a bit of power doesn't *have* to add hundreds and hundreds of pounds of weight.

this isnt fair though because the motor in the miata was meant to have a turbo. there wasnt alot of acquired weight because the car already had it when they decided to turbo the thing

with the exception of the camaro and mustang gt I would say your statement is inaccurate. Almost all of the other sports cars are about handling & power. We have yet to see a comparison of this car with anything else so while we know it is going to handle well no-one has said it will handle better than a 370z or even a boss mustang for that matter. Edit: within 5k of this price range.

as to the second item, the only other non muscle car available with 2 doors, rwd, and 4 seats is a genesis coupe so there aren't a lot of other choices.

50 pounds is about right. All of those items that need upgrading are all incremental weight increases. You don't need 2 of everything so the weight gain is minimal.

all of the extra weight you see on turbo models is usually due to them being better equipped models. A non-turbo similarly optioned would come in close to the same.

I seriously doubt the turbo Miata has the same engine as the non-turbo. For sure the compression ratio will be lower, it might have different (stronger) pistons, likely a different cam, etc. etc.

There's nothing MAGICAL about turboing an engine, even if it wasn't "meant to have a turbo". For a mild turbo applicaion, minor mods that don't impact weight. If you want to go 20+ psi boost and more than double the power, yeah there might be some issues to work out. But for lowish to medium boost levels, the major loads in the engine are inertial and not boost related.

Also, the NB came out in 1998, the turbo Mazdaspeed version didn't arrive until 2004. Are you suggesting that they all came with "turbo motors" but no turbo until the 2004 Mazdaspeed?

Anyway, a number of engines that weren't "meant to have turbos" have been turbo'd throughout automotive history, often with minimal weight impact.

the motor in the brz was already designed to have a turbo also. Its going into the wrx.

the turbo miata also had many features which weren't included in the base model and thus aren't included in the curb weight shown.

k20/k24 got great torque.
Mitsubishi lancer evos and subaru wrxs also got great torque outputs.

I wonder what engine would weight less? the wrx/sti motor ej, or the new frs motor?
Would a engine swap really be the best way to go. hmmm

Come on.. seriously? 500lbs? Not by a long shot... point and case...

2011 Subaru Impreza manual (base model, no options): 3075 lbs
2011 Subaru Impreza WRX manual: 3208 lbs

That is 133lbs difference with all the additional standard equipment....

So yes.. @50 lbs in a shop, and @100lbs if the OEM does it.

32k?.. the WRX is AWD, and turbo charged and is 26k MSRP; the 270hp Genesis Coupe 2.0T R spec is 26k MSRP....

Both are larger, more expensive cars to make than the BRZ/ FR-S. Subaru already have the engine developed. Adding the turbo motor and all the supporting components would likely only add ~$1000 to the production costs of the car.

In addition, If you look the maintenance schedules on the Impreza, and the WRX I am quite sure you will find they are exactly the same.

What would distinguish the BRZ/FRS would be that same balance in a 2900lbs, 280hp 250 ft/lbs package at a market competitive price of 25-27k...

Add another ~130lbs for the STI with larger brakes (weight mostly in the iron, not the caliper), beefier transmission, and beefier rear end. AWD and loads of torque don't play nice, hence the need for that awesome transmission (which I believe is where MOST of the weight differential comes from). The question with this car will not be whether or not it can take turbo, but rather how much turbo it can take before other components fail/need to upgraded as well.

A turbo brz will definitely come in close to or above $30k. They have been saying mid 20s all along for the base model so the extra upgrades in the turbo version will definitely add a few thousand to the limited price. An sti version would probably use the limited model as a starting point sans the leather and then add on suspension bits, etc from there.

This one is debatable. And I don't agree with you on this one.

That depends. The 2L WRX was not famous for its torque (certainly made more torque than your run of mill Japanese N/A 4 banger), but the 2.5L engines obviously made a whole lot more. Especially in 2009+ guise with the larger/redesigned turbochargers.

That is OK with me, I have nothing to prove to anyone, especially eWarriors on a scion forum. Those who want to listen to what I want to say are welcome to.. if not, oh well.

Then it would be radically overpriced, and only the die hard fan boys would buy it. Then again the base BRZ/FRS at 25k is already radically overpriced, the limited at 28k is laughable.

agreed completely, but I can't imagine such a small light weight car only making 300hp to need a whole lot more than 100lbs. It is a VERY tiny, and fairly light weight car... the stock camary or wrx brakes would likely be more than enough... but you have a bit of a point, given that we already know the stock brakes are barely enough for the car as it is, if you make it quick, it likely would need a substantial brake upgrade.


In other news... I saw that the new Chevy Malibu 4 cycl. is rated at 270hp, and the family 4 door sedan goes 0-60 in 6.3s....

That isn't entirely true. When I first began following the project it was aimed at low $20k range. It isn't until more recently the figure has inflated to $25k.

Says who? Stock brakes are more than enough for the stock car from what I have read.

Well the first thing that jumps to mind is the Chris Harris review, he reported brake fade after just a few laps on a very short, low speed circuit.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3639

If what he says is true, then High performance pads and some slotted rotors will allow the stock brakes to handle light track duty with a stock car, but if 100hp was added, and the average lap speed increased, the car would require a substantial brake upgrade was my only point.

Was not knocking the car at all. Stock brakes are 100% ok for street use.

That is what I was talking about. DD street car the brakes are more than ok. For track duties you would need to do pads and brake fluid. Might even need to do brake lines.

I've also seen several price jumps. Initially it was at 19, then 22, to 24, now it's 25.9 (what I heard from a dealer). If it is above 25 I'm done.

lower than that... when the first concept came out, Toyota said the car was going to be "fast tracked into production" and would be sub-20k", then jumped to just over 20k when the second concept came out, They first suggest 25k'ish for the something like the g-sports concept.

That is why I said when I began following the car.

It is been a long haul....

I just hope they keep the pricing down, and bring out a production version of the "G" concept....

Agree with you on this one.

This puts the malibu in line with a v6 mazda 6 and nissan altima. I've said it before that this car will get soundly beaten by many 4 door family sedans. The 260 ft-lb of torque on that malibu are available from 1700 rpm so you'll be looking even more silly when you do your clutch drop at 6000 rpm to launch this car and still get beat by the family sedan.

What cars do you think aren't overpriced? $28k is the going rate for cars equipped like this one whether you like it or not. You are never going to fill your gas tank for $25 again and you aren't going to be getting cars with independent suspensions, touchscreen radios, leather interiors, and HID headlights for much under $30k.



Nothing official was ever released that said they were shooting for under $20k for a rwd sports coupe. If you actually believed that they would hit a price that low you are crazy. You can't even do a B segment performance car for a price that low. People need to wake up to the reality of the world today. Things are much more expensive than they were even 10 years ago and the dollar is not nearly as strong as it used to be. To top it off, this horrible economy has prices going up much faster than your salary so your taking it from both ends. You are never going to fill your gas tank for $25 again nor will you buy a gallon of milk for $1.

Also, the only place the $25k figure is being stated is on this forum. There is no evidence to suggest that the FR-S will be that expensive.

The FR-S will probably come in somewhere between $23-24.5k + destination.

And there-in lies the problem with why you can't get a great car at a good price today, and what initially attracted me to the FR-S's promise of being a "basic" sports car. With the exception of the suspension, I don't consider any of this a necessity.

Heck, if I could get it with no TCS, manual windows and no radio, I would! Everybody says they want a back-to-basics car, but from what I can tell very few of us really do want it. Every gadget in a car costs money, whether its there because we want it, the government mandates it or the car company insists on it.

OK, climbing down off my soapbox now. Somebody get me a beer....

Sounds like you want an FR-S then. I was replying to the previous comment that $28k for the limited trim was crazy.

You are one of a very very small group of people that would want a car with no radio and crank windows so you are always going to be SOL. I can understand not wanting the other features, but it is just a fact of life that your desires are pretty uncommon and therefore are going to fall on deaf ears.

You are correct though. The car manufacturers more than ever are forcing you to take options you don't want to get ones that you do. Honda started this a long time ago by not offering any options (just trim levels) and the latest company to jump into that game is VW. You used to be able to order a VW any way you wanted, but now if you want a sunroof you need navigation. If you don't want vinyl seats you need a sunroof which requires navigation...and the trend continues. All of a sudden you are looking at $6k in options to not get vinyl seats (it's no mistake they don't offer cloth either). It sucks from the consumer standpoint since we aren't really seeing the decrease in pricing that supposedly comes along with the streamlining of their production. The mfr is keeping it all as profit.

i wish i could see the world with rose colored glasses like you do. 300hp sports cars at $26k for everyone! if it were that easy then don't you think everyone would have done that already? why would nissan even bother to sell the z?

the logic you are using with the 2 cars you mentioned only look at the cost of parts and completely ignore economics. oh, hyundai can build a turbo sports car for 26k msrp, surely toyota can! lol knee grow please! you're talking about a korean car company! you can't compare korean car prices to japanese car prices at all, the korean won has a much more favorable exchange rate compared to the japanese yen and labor costs are still far lower than they are in japan. that's why hyundai and kia can offer similar content in cars at a lower price than the competition. concerning the impreza, hello economies of scale? the impreza is subaru's bread and butter compact sedan! it's not a low volume sports car. economies of scale state that the more units you sell of something, the lower each unit will cost to make. because pretty much most of the car aside from the turbo equipment are shared between the wrx and the impreza, the sheer volume of units sold allows them to lower the cost of each unit, even though it has awd and a turbo.

if the corolla was awd, and toyota decided to sell a turbo 260hp version of the corolla, i'm sure they'd be able to sell it for 26k. but a 26k turbo frs? when the assumption is the standard frs will be 25k? i wish i could be as optimistic as you but that just sounds damn naive.

and by the way, i have already made these exact same arguments multiple times on this forum. i'm really tired of new members coming on here every 3-4 months and hearing the exact same argument and giving the exact same info back every single time. it may be a new discussion to you but i've argued the SAME thing about the SAME 2 CARS several times with several different members. it's a extremely dead horse that you guys are beating. and btw the moar powah crowd are the ones that started it this time.

a turbo in reality would only cost them a grand to produce in materials, but cut the cost of ever making the internals for the NA engine and make forged internals instead, add a turbo, subie has plenty of them, add a few sensors and an intercooler and you're good to go

in reality they can do all that themselves for about $1200 then mark the car up another 3800 to make a profit