The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

OK. So the first gen twin had similar performance to a DC2 Integra Type R.

‘12 to ‘16 BRZ vs DC2 Integra Type R —> https://zeperfs.com/en/duel4320-176.htm

‘17+ BRZ vs DC2 Integra Type R —> https://zeperfs.com/en/duel6893-176.htm

Where do you think the 2nd gen twin will land? Journalists have always bemoaned the lack of power, hopefully this gen will shut them up. I’m thinking similar or maybe slightly better performance than an S2000.

Can’t wait for the reviews to come through in the coming months!

S2000 has slightly better power/weight and much better weight distribution, but 2nd-gen probably has stronger midrange pull. I expect 0-60 a similar to a couple of ticks behind and a 1/4-mile trap speed of ~98-99mph for 2nd-gen, same to ~2mph slower vs. S2k.

The GR86/BRZ2 has 22 ft*lbs more torque though. Considering the S2000 has 9 horsepower more, I think this will all come down to gearing.

Not so sure the weight distribution is a real detriment, it may just change the ideal tire stagger setup and/or the way you drive the car. 50/50 vs 53/47 isn’t a huge difference. According to Nissan (citing development of the Z33), 53:47 weight distribution is actually better than pure 50:50 because, when the car is accelerating, weight transfer will lead to 50:50.

I think ZDan’s 98-99 mph trap speed prediction will be dead-on accurate. Does anyone think it is kind of sad that we are using a 20 year-old car as a benchmark for 2022 sports car, and potentially still falling short in some key performance parameters?

*Power* pretty well takes gearing into account. Torque by itself is meaningless. The real story is that the updated 2.4-liter powerplant should have relatively fatter power curve up to peak, vs. current-gen and S2000's more linear/straight-line power curve.

The real difference is 50/50 vs. 55/45. And it *is* significant. It isn't a 5% difference in static load on the drive wheels, it is a 10% difference. It is significant enough that a not-even-50/50 Miata beats the FT86 to 60 and in the 1/4-mile by about half a second despite similar power to weight and same 1/4-mile trap speed.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B78...uXfT1q4d2rUvGA
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ne-more-power/

HA! Pure marketing b.s. "50/50" isn't perfect, and you want *more rearward bias* for best FR sports car performance. Also there's a LOT more weight transfer at max acceleration off the line than they are suggesting here...

Depends on how you look at it. Yeah a lot of turbo hot hatches will perform better these days. But the S2000 is pretty well regarded even today and was a different class of car, compared to what a twin is in. I think for a corner carver that you can drive on the street the power should be about spot on. I want a decent amount of power but I don’t want to drive a car where if I redline it in third on a spirited drive I wind up in court. I’ve also been pretty content with the current gen’s power for the past few years. If I end up getting the new one down the track the extra bump in power will still be welcome. If it is at around the S2000 performance, I think it is a good incremental step and should be celebrated.

Nope! The S2000 cost about as much as a 2.0 Supra in today's dollars ($45K or there about). Add in we get 7 airbags, keyless entry and other standard features, plus having to hit all modern emissions and safety regulations, the car is $10~15K less with *almost* comparable performance. It is a steal.

Alternatively, if you wanted a better value and more performance, the Veloster N is probably the performance bargain king right now. But I don't think the GR86/BRZ will be that far off from the N.

The big issue with using a 20 year old car as a benchmark is that it wasn't subject to the same restrictions as one now. If you applied all the emissions, mileage and crash requirements from 2022 to anything 20 years old then it's performance would reflect it.
There is also the small thing about price that can not be ignored. The Integra being compared to would be around a $45,000 car in today's money. Not exactly comparing apples to apples.
No doubt without the restrictions and at almost double the price a new Twin would blow the doors off any 20 year old car.

Beat me to it by 3 minutes! I shouldn't have taken so long to type.

The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

How? Power (kW) = Torque (N.m) x Speed (RPM) / 9.5488
Power output is not dependent on gearing. Effective wheel torque is.

I could only find published data that says 53/47. I’m sure that’s with both seats all the way back and all that, but every manufacturer will play with those numbers.

The miata’s power to weight is 0.076, the BRZs is 0.072. Add to that that the Miata has less inertia to get off the line with the 400lbs missing and that it comes with much better tires, and I’m not surprised.


I’m sure some of it is marketing, but the principle holds true. Nobody cares about the exact weight distribution when launching, you just want as much as possible over the drive wheels. You care about the exact figure during cornering, during which the weight transfer is in the single digit %s. That’s how you figure out your tire stagger. It’s also a fairly steady state condition once you’re settled so you don’t square the difference. You could argue that 53/47 is enough to warrant a 235/215 F/R stagger, but I think it’s entirely reasonable to assume 53:47 is close enough to 50:50 that you can account for that with alignment.

Whatever it is, it'll still be too slow.

Benchmarks are:
Hypercars = Less than 2 seconds
Supercars = less than 3 seconds
"super" sport sedans = Less than 4 seconds
"regular" sport sedans/luxury sedans = Less than 5 seconds
Sports car = Less than 5 seconds
Family sedans = Less than 6 seconds
everything else = dont bother, too slow and unsafe


And it still needs a turbo.

Yeah, but what is *important* is how much wheel torque you have *at a given speed*. With torque only, you don't know that. With power, you have a good idea.

Power = thrust at the wheels * road speed
Torque = you know nothing without having all the gear ratios

In the end, power is what tells you about acceleration. When you adjust engine torque with gear ratios, you're basically calculating power. With no other knowledge than engine power, you can have a good idea of acceleration performance. With only engine torque, you know nothing about performance potential. Power is more "complete" info.

Measured numbers >>> manufacturer numbers. See my link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B78...uXfT1q4d2rUvGA
55.2F/44.8R.
I weigh my car every track event to verify I'm OK for my classification. Stock with me in it and a full or nearly-full tank is indeed 55/45 and not 53/47.

Have to include driver weight in there, I get 0.072 hp/lb (13.9 lb/hp) Miata and 0.070 hp/lb (14.3 lb/hp) for BRZ with 165-lb driver. They're comparable, with the BRZ's greater *peak* power/weight somewhat made up for by the Miata's "fatter" power curve.

The MIata's "less inertia to get off the line" is entirely accounted for in "power/weight". It's REAL advantage is *much better weight distribution*.

Yeah, and 10% difference in load on the drive wheels is *significant*.

Which is why I was considering running 255 fronts with 235 rears... Static weight distribution is so piss-poor on the BRZ that with square setup the fronts are overworked and the rears underutilized...

55/45 should be a lot worse under *braking* as well (all other things equal), as again the fronts are way more overworked, and the rears contributing even less.

And more importantly front/rear roll stiffness distribution. Just installed adjustable (two-hole) Eibach sways front and rear, set to soft setting front, stiff setting rear. Looking forward to track days coming up this weekend!

Fair points.

Yea I found my car benefitted from adjustable bars with more stiffness in the rear, much more noticeable than I was expecting.

I don't think it's sad. I sold my uber-fast 200+mph LS3 FD supercar because my BRZ was more fun on the street, and pretty much as fun at the track!

What's sad to me is that manufacturers are aiming more and more for performance specs and uber-super-megaperforrming cars rather than making smaller, lighter-weight cars that are inherently more fun :(

Let’s be honest many people will not be happy until this car has GT3 performance at 30k. Which will never happen IMO. My car is a DD and some fun spirited driving on good twisty mountain roads. I am happy with getting 80% of a Porsche at 20% of the cost.

It could also be the tires the cars come with...IDK why this is being ignored like it isn't a thing after 8+ years.:iono: Low grip tires and a ton of anti-squat. No one has really complained much about the weight distribution tbh...

I have... I'd greatly prefer a shorter-wheelbase, more cab-rearward 2-seater version at closer to 50/50! Grinding away the fronts at the track, 55/45 distribution is obviously a big drawback, being more nose-heavy than a Mustang or Camaro :(

Regarding "low-grip" tires, they have the similar or better grip vs. stock Miata tires, both turned 0.90g on Car and Driver's skidpad, BRZ has shorter braking distance. Miata has better drive grip off the line because it has significantly more load on the drive wheels. Hence it has quicker 0-XX times and 1/4-mile time, but at same 1/4-mile speed.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ne-more-power/
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B78...e7fBsneVQecZXQ

Does this car have significantly more anti-squat than most FR cars? That could explain some of it. I’ve found my car to be very hard to hook at launch even on Michelin PSS tires on soft stock rear springs. If I try to get off the line fast at autoX I end up roasting the rear tires more times than I’d like.

They can buy GT3.

I have bought gt86 don't event knowing what it is.

I have tuned it a bit. And it is enough. Nobody on the streets wants to cut corners on the same speed as I do.

If you want more straight line performance - buy a turbo kit, buy uber BMW M with tripple turbo. :D

This we agree on! If they built the 300+HP 'Stang killer so many scream for it would gain cost, and bulk, become less agile and all in all fit into a segment that is already spoken for by what used to be the "Pony" car class.
For every sale they made because it was an uber-super-mega performing car they would stand to lose more sales to the people that want that niche filled or just like a nice inexpensive coupe for day to day driving.
Actually a large basis of my dislike of the new styling is that it makes the car look like it is pretending to be something it is not.

Performance can mean different things. People are too focused on these cars straight line performance. Just get a Mustang if that's your priority. My '13 has a few goodies on it and I run in the 1:40's at Laguna. This weekend I was getting pointby's by 911's, BMW's and a C8 and I'm an 8\10 driver so there's more on the table, (gotta drive it home). I'm guessing the new 86 stock will be about the same performance as I have with the tune and header I did.

These cars need to be bought for their other attributes and not as a stoplight warrior. A well sorted Gen 1 is a great car and I'm guessing a well sorted Gen 2 will just be that much better.

And there's the context of prices when new, fuel economy, and emissions standard.

You couldn't jack-rabbit an S2000 every stop light and still average 26-28 mpg average (stock, and yes YMMV). And it costed me maybe 20-25% less to buy new in 2021 dollars. Less outright track-transferable performance but it's a great compromise in performance in numerous categories.

That said, I see S2000's still competitive in SCCA and wonder if I made a bad choice hahaha... until I take a 4 hour road trip.


edit: S2000 price after inflation already discussed. But yeah S2000 is probably the closest. There's not much else at the same price point now it seems. Although, in agreement with Tommy's point, maybe the focus is too much on the individual specs. The big picture maybe equates to higher powered vehicles (in line with SCCA classifications).

Tee hee, at Palmer last year, BRZ 1:48.160 (1st in Touring 60), GT3 1:49.360 (3rd in Touring 80):
https://www.comscc.org/events/result...?id=2020-08-09

Ha-ha, *mostly* agree! I still think they could make a higher-perf version by shortening the wheelbase and ditching the rear seats, fixing the f/r weight distribution, *losing* bulk, making it *more* agile. And I wouldn't be opposed to a 300hp N.A. v6 or turbo-4 version of that, which *could* still come in at current FT86 weight. Still waiting/hoping for a modern 240Z! But I know it ain't happenin'...

It is a difference of could vs would. By the time they pulled that all off you have a Supra priced car.

Except, it would only be the same car in name only. Until you do it, you don't know any of that would make it "better" just "different".

Not at all... Not talking about a 2 seat version of a luxury platform complete with built-in BMW +$$,$$$ upcharge and luxobarge mass. A 2-seat version of the FT86 (keep it simple and leave 228hp n.a. flat-4 alone) could be built for less $$$$ than the 2+2 (fewer parts, lower materials costs), but of course they could and would sell for more $$$$ because "dedicated 2-seater" and they'd likely have to if demand for less utilitarian version were significantly lower. But they would expand total sales a bit overall and help amortize the shared bits. Anyway, figure they could sell it for +$5k over FT86 pricing, I'd be fine with that.

A two seat version is different than a shortened, rebalanced, higher HP, lighter version. Agreed they could take the current car and strip it down a bit but what you asked for before (as Hawk pointed out) is a totally different car. What you really want is a new MR2 which although not probable is at least possible in the future.

The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

Would it be cheaper to build? Material cost isn’t what drives cost, it’s time on the assembly line first and foremost. Bolting in the rear seat belts and seats probably didn’t take any longer than installing all the behind the seats trim panels and cubbies you have in a 2-seater. The Miata is a lot smaller than the twins, but it definitely isn’t cheaper.

Also the Supra isn’t more expensive because it says BMW under the hood, it’s cheaper because of it. The extra cost vs the twins comes from the fact that that turbos, better brakes, better suspension, fancier diff, etc. all add cost.

The Supra also isn’t heavy, in fact it’s lighter than any BMW by about 3-400 lbs. if you added a turbo I-6 with a strong enough drivetrain, brakes, and suspension to a twin from the factory, with wide wheels and tires it would weigh about the same as the Supra I’d wager.
Everything that transfers power or stops it, or reacts it into the chassis, now needs ~70% more surface area at minimum to meet the same margins. (It’s an approximation 385/228=1.69) Probably more for chassis sections that react drivetrain load, since they’re likely in bending and getting more section modulus from sheet metal is not trivial.

It'll be a little slower than my e85 FR-S or an AP2 S2000. For context, in 5-90 mph pulls, my E85 FR-S is:

1) Even with a stock AP2 S2000
2) 1 car length behind an AP2 S2000 with HFC, VTEC lowered to 5500 RPM, and LWFW.

My car is probably making around 190 whp (OFT e85 tune, stock header/exhaust) and should weigh around 2700 lbs. Power-to weight wise:

1) Stock AP2 = 2850 lbs / 240 hp = 11.9 lbs/hp
2) My FR-S = 2700 lbs / 224 hp = 12.1 lbs/hp

The gen 2 BRZ manual should be 2815 lbs / 228 hp = 12.3 lbs/hp

So a touch slower.

I mean, the whole idea is it wouldn't be exactly the same car, and if it had the same name (as Z and ZX 2-seater and 2+2 versions did) or a different name, makes no difference to me. I have driven enough different cars, smaller and larger, lighter and heavier, shorter- and longer-wheelbase, on the road and at the track, to have a good idea of what I like. Sacrifice of +2 seats and some utility (space) for shorter-wheelbase, better weight distribution, and slightly lighter weight would be "better" for me.

I'm going to reach a little but this is what I have to compare the Gen2 BRZ to:

2007 BMW E92 328i
230 hp @ 6500 rpm
200 lb-ft @ 2750 rpm
0-60 in 6.3 secs
Weight: 3340


2022 BRZ
228 hp @ 7000 rpm
184 lb-ft @ 3700 rpm
0-60 in 6.3 secs
Weight: 2815 lbs


I was happy with the performance of the BMW so I expect that I'll like the performance of the Gen2. Even more so than I did with my test drive of the Gen1.

Though as a general, this can be a good way to compare vehicles, I would bet on the the new BRZ to be a touch faster than yours with its updated engine and a much improved torque curve over the previous gen. When lbs/hp comes that close, a lot of other aspects can make a difference, and a smooth torque curve is definitely one of those as there is no dip in power in that region. Not starting arguments here, purely speculation :)

Yep point taken, we're all just guessing until these cars are released!

I'll be pleasantly surprised if the new car is faster than my e85 FR-S (or basically a stock AP2 S2000), but you're right, it should have a favorable torque curve compared to both. No waiting to get through the torque dip or hit VTEC.

The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?
 

The current car already does 6.2 seconds to 60:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...l-test-review/


I expect the GR86BRZ to drop into the 5's, matching the S2000 would require a significant 0.8s improvement to 60. Toyota does claim 1s improvement so it's not that unlikely car and driver can thrash one hard enough to get there. To match the AP2 S2000 in the quarter it needs 0.7s and only 2mph. Beating the trap speed seems easy at this point. Looks like the twins suffer more at the launch than anything. Hopefully the PS4s are going to help here, maybe not enough to match the 245 widths the S2000 has to work with.



S2000: 5.4 to 60 and 14.1 @ 97mph in the quarter:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15133774/honda-s2000-short-take-road-test/

Sounds like the GT3 needs a driver mod.

All equal, it's going to be slightly cheaper and lighter to not have 2 rear seats IMO, but not a big thing either way... I'm OK calling it "same cost to build".

From the get-go, I knew that partnering with BMW would mean the new Supra would be A. expensive and B. heavy.

4-cyl Supra is lighter by 200 lb. vs. M30i Z4, 6-cyl Supra is lighter by "only" 150 lb. vs. M40i Z4.

Anyway, at 3200 lb. for the 4-cyl and 3400 lb. for the 6, it's too heavy for *me*.

But you wouldn't do that, super-long I-6 into a platform designed for a super-short flat-4? Terrible idea that would never work. You'd just use the n.a. 2.4 flat-4, and have similar power/weight vs. 4-cylinder Supra. Good enough for me... But you could also *consider* turboing the 4 or transplanting in a compact N.A. V6 for 300hp and power/weight comparable to the 6-cyl. Supra. Woohooo....

God knows the Brembos on the 1st gen are *plenty* capable of handling 300+hp.

It is trivial. Road loads are way way WAY more significant to chassis stiffness and strength requirements. And again you'd be working with a lot less power required to achieve same power/weight anyway...

In the end, the Z4/Supra are luxury "sports cars" built from luxury sedan parts and pieces. it's the modern BMW approach. I wish they could remember how to build small/lightweight fun cars like the 2002, and E30 M3...

BMW always measure time from launch control.

Toyota measure from idle.

So, I hope that from launch gr86 will take only 5.7 seconds from 0-100.

On PS4

TBH I don't remember the car/driver, could be his car wasn't maxed out on points for the class he ran. For sure to be in T80 (only 2 classes up from me) it must have been a 996 or 997 GT-3 running 200tw or slower tires. I was on Hoosier A7s in T60, maxed out on points for the class. No doubt a good driver on the best tires allowable for that car in that class would have been a lot quicker...

Dan the rear seats are usually there in sports car for a lower insurance premium and broader marketability....honey its totally practical, see it has rear seats, the kids can fit back there no problem!

IIRC Toyota approached Porsche first, and I would absolutely love to have a Porsche NA 4 in that car.