BRZ or LFX RX8 or R53 MCS
 

Like plenty of other people that stop here I'm in the market for a lighter sporty car. One of my first cars when I was younger was an original AE86 Corolla so when they announced this platform coming I've had my eye on it since, unfortunately the subaru engine part never excited me. IMO it should have had a 2ZZ or something that behaved like that, some excitement. I've had several fast cars, last one was a tuned 135i with all M3 suspension pieces. I loved the car but it went around turns with such ease I was just along for the ride and couldn't give it any gas with a car of that much torque.

I drove a TRD GT86 the other day but the sales guy came and killed most of the fun as he was about 400 lb. It was a nice driving car, minus the torque dip that really sucks but I really didn't get the feel of it was anything special it was just solid and never put that smile on my face I was hoping for. Ideally I'd be looking at a used 17 BRZ with the PP add a header, tune, flywheel and bushings to try to get the engine to feel like it should.

Or I can pick up a dirt cheap RX8 in nice shape, swap the rotary for a 320HP Camaro LFX V6 and have a balanced car with medium torque and decent HP. But I keep hearing stories of how fun it is to blast downt he back roads in a supercharged go kart like R53 MCS. This reminds me of the days of my MR2 and CRX cars that were little POS but were a blast to actually drive.

Any other suggestions that I might not have thought of would also be helpfull. So far looked at an ND Miata and was too small, S2000 wasn't very confortable. I'm a hair over 6' at about 200lb. The thought of just going an getting an 09 Cayman S and a warranty has also crossed my mind but I'm really trying to stay away from german junk (still bad taste from the alst mercedes I lost $$$ on)

I'd get the Cayman/Boxster S tbh, or Mustang.. Camaro. It already sounds like you'd be willing to spend the extra money on other cars in the form of adding power, so why not get a car that has the power stock, just requires some maintenance $$. You're also not focused on handling?¿

A good header and tune will make the car feel like it should have from the factory. Its a drivers car about handling and agility, not acceleration. If you like the look and want a light weight RWD car, this may be the car for you. However because of how the car looks you expect it to be faster and that feeling never really leaves.

The 86 is an awesome platform to start a build from. At the very least you would want header/tune but honestly, that will only make you craving more. However you can run about 7-9psi very reliably on a cheap turbo setup for a DD for about $4200 if you self install (3k turbo kit 1k tuning, $150 oem oil cooler but for track you'll want a real oil cooler) and that should make the car feel fast and be even more of a blast to drive. 250whp / 300crank makes this car an awesome DD.

The aftermarket for this car is huge almost endless possibilities for what you can do. only limitation is money and your imagination.

Moral of the story buy this car if you like the look/style/handling and are willing to spend at least $5,000 on mods to get the speed you expect.
If you want a car that is how you want it straight from the factory and don't want to bother with mods then this isn't the car for you.

This is not the car you're looking for.


LFX RX8 sounds miserable BTW. There are so many more LSx swap kits and dialed in setups, doesn't sound worth it for the relatively "new" swaps. Especially with the size of the engine bay on an RX8.

A biased misleading statement.

What if I wanted 86/BRZ handling, but Prius MPG and torque dip daily driving. That's how it should've come from factory.

R53 MCS is a really fun car. Definitely worth a test-drive (but look into reliability concerns as well).

ND2 Miata is also worth test-driving if you can fit.

Then why buy an awesome looking RWD sports car? and who would intentionally want a torque dip right in the daily driving rpm range?

Based on personally experience and 90% of the comments from people on this forum, and the dozens of reviews from car enthusiast, and car magazines etc... this car has no balls. Great style and handling. but lacking power. And the first comment almost every person says who drives stock then drives tuned+header is "this is how the car should have came from the factory" then they drive a low boost 86 and say "this is really how it should have come from the factory"

Also FYI most people see an increase in MPG when getting tuned+header as they can lean out fuel trims a little in low/midrange and don't need to rev as high/hard to accelerate when DDing.

It only takes $15 to solve that particular issue...

https://trucknutz.com

Though I am a bit concerned about the 10% that seem to have found the cars balls :iono:

A lot, and I mean A LOT of people buy cars simply for the look and disregard performance all together. Some even compromise performance for look. Additionally the torque dip is more of a blessing in daily traffic if you ask me, especially for passengers so it doesn't feel like at ever stop and go I'm hammering the gas trying to break necks.

Based on personal experience and 10% of the comments I've read on this forum, dozens of reviews from "car enthusiast" I haven't watched/read, and car magazines I haven't flipped through, this car doesn't need balls. The people who also drove stock then went to a header/tune or FI will obviously say that's how it should've came from factory, because that's what they wanted it to do from factory.

I'd really like to see some results on tune+header cars getting MPG and just being overall more efficient, because this is likely something I'd do in the future so it would be a nice plus.

If your "breaking necks" with a header/tune you must not be driving well. Even supercharged the car is perfectly smooth when i want it to be.

Plus if you read the OPs post he is looking at performance and comparing it to other cars that have performance in mind. and really made no comments about looks or mpg.

Seems like hes looking for a sports car in its truest form, performance included. and in order to get that from this platform you need at the bare minimum header/tune. Who wants a beautiful sports car that looks like it should be fast but gets pulled on by minivans at every stop light. Doesn't make sense.

a lot of forums on here discussing and people testing seeing mpg increase with header/tune.

You seem to misconstrue what I mean by break necks.

Yikes, your opinion is bloated. You don't need to do anything to this platform for it to feel and be great besides drive it. Being pulled on by a minivan really has nothing to do with being a sporty car lol. Like I said earlier, people sacrifice performance for looks all the time, you seem to think and spout otherwise though.

What exactly is a sportscar in its true form?

Breaking necks. Jerky, or sudden changes in speed causing your neck to “break”
This car drives as smooth as a baby’s backside when you want it to. With or without header/tune or FI

Well by the literal definition of a sports car “a car designed for performance at high speed”. And you generally expect the car to be able to get to that high speed relatively quickly.

And again the OP is comparing much faster less driver oriented cars to this car. So I’m assuming he cares about acceleration. So being slower then a minivan is pretty disappointing. But for a few grand that issue can be resolved and you can have it all. 35k out the door for a 250whp/300crank. Now that makes it a sports
Car.

Let me understand, by this logic “a car designed for performance at high speed”, the 86 is a sportscar, but then by this logic "250whp/300crank. Now that makes it a sportsCar." the 86 is not a sportscar. So you mean to tell me that a 90's NSX is not a sports car? A base 2015 Cayman is also not a sportscar? Etc. Which is it?

Oh and what minivans are the twins slower than?

the literal definition is "a car designed for performance at high speed" the 86 can handle well at higher speeds, but it can not get to higher speeds to begin with at least not in any reasonable time frame . Adding 100HP to the 86 however makes it able to hit high speeds and at a reasonable rate. The 250whp/300crank was specifically in reference to the 86 platform. Not a universal number for all platforms to need to be classified as a true sports car.

Comparing a car from the early 90s, to a car in 2010+ is not very reasonable, the standard for speed has slowly dropped over the years as performance has gotten better and more attainable to more people. for example a 0-60 in the 7s in early 90s was considered fast, now you need to be in the low 5s. Which btw both a 2015 cayman and a 1991 nsx can do. so i am not really following anything your saying.

and Toyota Sienna and Dodge Caravan to name two, and if you look at 0-40mph the list would include a lot more. The point is a lot of minivans, compact suvs, and especially sedans. can keep up with a 86 off the line or even lower speed pulls. You would expect a true sports car to gap a minivan, not crawl away.

Ricer - "A person who makes unecessary modifications to their most often import car (hence the term "rice") to make it (mostly make it look) faster." The 86 is almost a rice mobile from the factory, designed to look fast but its slow, adding some HP though will make it as fast as it looks.

Dont get me wrong, i love this car, it has everything you could want from a sports car, except one of the most important factors, speed. However like I have said many times that can be fixed with about 4-5k$

The best thing about this car isn't what happens when you use the gas pedal, it's how little you need to use the brake pedal.

(The ND/ND2 does this trick well too.)

https://www.zeroto60times.com/body-style/van/

https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...-60-mph-times/

….Why are you talking about Ricers now?

Acceleration is overrated, at least on public roads. It's easy to break 100 in a Prius. I just need enough power to pass, which I have with a downshift.

Without a launch the 86 brz frs is a 7.6-8sec 0-60. Sienna and caravan are low 7s. Heck my Mazda CX-5 is faster if 86 doesn’t launch.

Although honestly 0-60 is irrelevant. I think 40-120 times are better to compare. Although little data on that. That and stock 86 can barely even hit 120.

Where exactly are you getting any of your data?..

I say the LFX in an RX8,,,, but of course I'm a bit biased

You really have to decide on what you want bro. In my opinion, the BRZ is the perfect enthusiast car. It’s a blank canvas. You can build a beautiful show car or a track monster. You could also make it a perfect daily driver like most people do. Want to get rid of that torque dip? Get headers and a tune. Want to add more HP and torque? Get a supercharger or turbo kit. You’ll have the ultimate daily if money is no problem lol on top of all that, you can customize this car however you want with the endless aftermarket options. Endless amounts of wheels, suspension upgrades, aero parts, body kits, lighting-whatever you want you can bet someone makes it for the twins. And that’s really what made me go for this car.

I’ve owned a modified 335i with N54 engine and it was fun and all but pretty unreliable for me. Sometimes I miss the power but I don’t regret getting the BRZ. It’s something you can rev out around town or you can cruise with ease while saving a lot of gas. You can easily have fun with it in stock form or you can go crazy with it. If you’re looking for a small, RWD sports car, this is the one for you bro. Good luck :thumbsup:

Butt dyno. It's calibrated daily, though. :)

Can't quote him for some reason so I will jump in with you.
Without a launch the Caravan suffers the same time penalty as the FRS.
The only minivans that have a 7 second 0 to 60 (WITH a launch) are the very rare special versions (i.e the SXT. They consist of about 5% of the total made so are meaningless.
The 0 to 60 time for a MT FRS is 6.2 not 7.6.


I love how people distort the 0 to 60 times by taking the rare versions and applying them to everything.
The Twins are firmly in the lower spectrum of the "fast" cars and minivans are in the upper end of the "slow cars" but since they don't have a 3.2 0 to 60 then everything must be faster!

I'm a bit confused. According to the food and agriculture organization of the united nations (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/TP) Over 90% of rice consumed in america is produced domestically. Japan (where these cars are made) presents well below 1% of rice consumed in america. We actually import more rice from Brazil than Japan.



You must have been mistaken. Rice would clearly indicate a domestically produced product.

Film yourself doing 0-60 in 6.2 without launching on a stock 86/brz/frs. You won’t even get in the 6s.

You think auto minivans can rev to 5K+ and dump the clutch? They can rev to torque converter lock up usually in the low to mid 2ks and “launch” from there. not nearly the same difference.

This forum is riddled with 0-60 times illustrating without launching this is mid to high 7s 0-60. YouTube is full of 0-60s without launching as well showing this.

Everyone says this car is slower then your moms minivans. Obviously is partly exaggerated to make a statement that this car is slow. But i still provided examples of minivans as fast or faster if 86/brz/frs doesn’t launch. And tons of minivans do 8-8.2s which are probably equally as fast 0-40.

Add in crossover suvs. List gets a lot bigger

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mot...der-40000/amp/

86TOYOkUr17, If anyone here actually cared about what you are trying to say they wouldn't have bought this car. This is a pointless one sided argument you are having. A ford taurus SHO (family sedan) was faster than a porsche 911 at the time. Pretty sure no porsche owner ever lost any sleep over that. This isn't a car you buy for straight line speed, no one anywhere ever said it was so who cares if a van with a big engine out accelerates it?



Why don't you just sell yours and buy a minivan if it bothers you so much? I'm sure the sienna and caravan forums would be just as interested in this comparison as we all are.

The OP specifically referenced how slow and non exciting the acceleration was.
I think you are just hopping into this thread off my final post and not regarding the entire context of the thread.
Nor did I ever say it bothered me, that and I’m FI so acceleration is no longer an issue.
You have people who get butthurt about people speaking the truth about the lack of acceleration this car has in stock form, or they try to mislead people claiming its faster then it is.
I’ve also said this car/platforms checks every box you could want/ask for out of a sports car minus one. Acceleration, and that can be resolved for around 5k$.
Easier to add FI then drastically changing weight, wheel base, entire look of car etc..

You are right, I am just responding to your last 6 or so posts where you said the car has no balls, is rice, and posted half page specs of minivan 0-60 times and argued with people about how it is slower than minivans. Pretty hard to even tell what the OP was saying after all that.

Wasting your time. The minivan times are obviously gospel while the 86 times are way off.
Creative interpretation of the data is creative.

Don't forget about the part where he called the 86 a sports car and in the very same post, said it wasn't. 420 IQ genius.

He has also yet to let me know where he gets his data that he seems to know all about. 0-40 times, 40-120 times.. etc.

Reread my post buddy. I specifically said 40-120 times would be better comparisons but the data is hard to find. I also said the minivans and crossovers are probably (meaning a theory) based on the fact that they accelerate substantially slower the faster they go more so then the 86s. And my personal experience with various crossovers. My mazda cx5 with its low end torque and AWD is surprisingly fast off the line especially 0-40. Slows down a bit 40-60. But still boasts a 7.6 0-60 without launching.

I never once said any of this.... reading compression would be a good skill to learn.

sports car

noun Definition of sports car


: a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sports%20car

Again reading compression would help a lot. I never once said the 86 can’t do a low 6s 0-60 WITH A LAUNCH! I said WITHOUT a launch it is a second slower. Putting it in the range of several minivans and crossovers. Have you read how motor trend and car and driver do 0-60 times? They launch manuals on a track in good conditions, so they are hooking and taking off, they just smash the peddle from a stop with autos, sometimes they brake and rev to torque lockup but that’s still not close to a real launch. Nor is it real world as your probably not hooking as well on the street. But hey if you like to rev up and launch at every stop light to pull ahead of minivans more power to you.

Are people really arguing this car is fast? Literally the number one thing everyone says. Car is amazing handling, great entry level track car etc etc.. but it’s just lacking that power and acceleration. I’m not saying anything remotely new. I hope I wasn’t the one to break the news to you this car wasn’t build from the factory for acceleration.

Like I said. How can you drive fast if you don’t have the power to go fast... you going to mash on the peddle for half a day?

It isn't a slow car. It just isn't as fast as some. And no not "everybody" says it is slow. The AVERAGE 0 to 60 for cars (including SUVs and Minivans) is 9 seconds. Even if we want to twist the times around to account for launch this car is still well below the average and in the "fast" category. Cherry picking top of the line minvans and repeating that their times are "faster" is not looking at the whole nor real world picture.

Ah your idea of driving is pedal mashing. So much makes sense now.

To get to a fast speed in this car you need to wot for about half a day. You seen the video of this car stock on autobahn? Guy got to 120mph I walked away made dinner, read my son a bedtime story and came back and he had just hit 130mph, went to sleep and woke up to see him just hit 142.

https://youtu.be/67jvKyqDIPY

He also did 0-62mph with a mini launch in 7.6sec.
Do I need to post more video evidence? That the 86 no launch is a second slower then with a launch? And real world I hope you aren’t launching at every stop.

A 30k$ Toyota Sienna L and 26k$ dodge caravan se are top of the line?
What about all the crossovers for under 30k$?

Not account for launching makes it real world scenario.