People keep thinking the high-spec model if super equipped...it's not.

In the leaked high-spec trim, you get a leather steering wheel, 17 inch rims, sport seats, push button start, aluminum pedals, hids, fog lights, automatic climate control.

You want all these options...if the price is going to be $24k
Where is leather seats, Bluetooth, radio, 18 inch rims, brembo brakes, navigation, sunroof, power seats with memory?

Personally I don't want any of that...i just want what is in the high-spec trim level.

Except for the hids and fog lights a 2012 scion tC release 7 comes better equipped.

Scion has to price this car higher than the tC. So figure $24k if we are lucky. Subaru has to price the BRZ less than the wrx...so figure $25k max.

We could be suprised and scion releases two trim levels. We will see next week.
This is a new car for both brands scion and Subaru...both don't have a rwd sports car.

Hey everything is speculation until final reveal in less than 3 days. We will have all our answers then.

I agree i faired very well in my 300zx and rx7 in the snow. and while AWD does provide additional traction, its spoiled peoples view of real safety during ill weather transport. AWD can be just as effective AND non-effective in ill weather as any 2wd vehicle.

Well I was referencing the Jack Hollis presentation when they showed the FR-S concept when he mentioned the LSD. Though I do think radio would be included for the FR-S.

Remind me what's the overall performance difference on 16" and 17" wheels. That 1 extra inch should give you more grip?

I honestly don't think so. I mean, for $2,000 - $3,000 more, you can get a v6 mustang with a bunch of power, and pretty nice interior.

Why would we pay more to have less power and less weight? Deep down i wish this would replace the tC and leave it the same price. For $23k, one can get a heavy GC, but the majority of people don't look at weight, they look at HP, so many will say oh wow i rather get a GC or a 'Stang because it's so much more powerful.

And as for the snow talk, man I am so glad I live in South FL, I watch on tv those under bad snow days and see it really does suck. Our rain is really bad too, cuz our dirt isn't really dirt, its like sand.

:thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks:

i second that Rwd in the snow is fine with the correct tires. i used winterforce tires on my factory 14 on my 85 ae86 and loved every minute. and used some all season tire one my s2000 and just took it easy and didn't drive in real deep stuff.. I'de take a rwd with good snow tires against any awd with shit tires in a race any day.

the torque being reported is as much as the ap1 s2k's (or close enough)

I'm in for the first gen.. i once said i wouldn't unless higher HP, but i can't afford more than 25k in the spring.. so it gives me and TRD/Sti time:)..

The extra inch on the wheels doesn't add any grip. That's the diameter dimension not the width. The larger rim just means a thinner tire sidewall and theoretically a less comfortable ride.

Unless anything drastic happens I'm also planning on being in for the first gen. I'm still undecided on BRZ vs. FR-S though, it will probably come down to colors and available trim levels.

... Wait... why would you want a thinner sidewall? I understand that tires aren't going to last forever, but ... well... how is thinner better? I hope that's not another excuse you can use for less weight...

Thinner can provide less lateral movement, but it isn't necessarily better. The thinner sidewall is just a result of the larger diameter rim.

hmmm that's interesting. I suppose you can get a more interesting look but for someone like me that's looking more at the FR-S/BRZ as a DD ... does it really matter for tire size?

As a daily driver there isn't going to be any difference between a set of 16's or 17's other than the way they look

Hmmm well guess tire size is irrelevant for me lol. I'm guessing a set of 16" might be cheaper than a set of 17" as well?

And to stay on topic.... uhm... erm... well don't think that's possible on this forum.

But for the height number, maybe its referring to the prototype version?

My guess is that this pic is real.

You gotta understand how print publications work, and press shots work.

Magazines usually require about a month lead time typically from final copy to mass printing. Which means they got these images at least a month or two prior. Studio shots of production cars can be taken months before an official unveiling. Renderings are often used along with studio photos for official photos.

It's very typical for print magazines get images of the cars a month or two they're unveiled. This is standard practice so that the issue that goes on newsstands coincides with the car shows/press unveilings. If say Car & Driver got the official images of the BRZ at the Tokyo Motor show, that'd take an additional 1-2 months to publish that in a magazine, and by then it'd be too late. Print is a totally different animal than online. They don't take press assets then turn them around in a couple days or a week. They get assets, editor writes it, copy editor looks at it, layout gets set (along with pagination), final proof, then it goes to the printer. It's a lengthy process, which is why mags get assets way ahead of time.

If this R&T issue was supposed to hit newstands at or around the time of Tokyo Auto show, then this pic is likely legit, whether it's a studio or rendering.