Sport Auto: Toyota 86/FR-S Nurburgring and Hockenheim Laptime and Performance Results
 

Attachment 25938


RESULTS:

1. Dyno-measurements: Everything is as claimed by factory: 200,6 hp @ ca. 6900 rpm, ca. 210 Nm @ ca. 6450 rpm.
2. Tyres: Stickier Bridgestones instead of the Michelin Primacys.
3. Nürburgring-Nordschleife: 8.44,9 min - the engine is great at high revs, the suspension works very well on the bumpy surface, as well as the braking-system.
4. Hockenheimring short course: 1.19,4 min - the GT86 is 2,1 seconds quicker around the short HHR as it was on the Michelins. Neutral behaviour.
5. Aerodynamic: Cw 0,33 - Relatively low Cw, but high uplift-forces: 41 kg at the front, 32 kg at the rear.
6. Maximal lateral G-force: 1,20 g.
7. Acceleration/flexibility: 0-100 km/h in 7,1 s (0,5 s under factory's claim). 80-120 km/h in fifth gear: 9,2 s.
8. Braking: 100-0 km/h with warm brakes (10th braking in a row): 36,4 m. Peak longitudinal G-force: -1,09 g.
9. 18 m slalom, ISO evasive test: 68,1 km/h, 140 km/h.
10. Final score: 44/100 points.

8:44.9 doesn't seem like too bad a time. My thoughts were hoping for 8.30 back when the specs were first released.

Not bad, that's ahead of the Civic Type-R (8:47) and just behind the S2000 (8:39). What kind of Bridgestones were used?

Bridgestone Potenza RE050A

http://www.oponeo.de/gfx/articles/za...50_a_V9D-0.png

Thanks. Those tires are pretty average for street summer tires and along the lines of what you'd expect from the factory, so that choice makes sense.

Now imagine seeing some tuner cars out there like the AVO.

Here is the rest of the list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...legal_vehicles

what size tire. from the pictures it looks great

Same size as stock tires.



As Toyota said, the GT86 is a base car. But there is so much that can be improved if have are ready to spend more. Few other wars have such huge potential (Pagani Huayra, McLaren MP4-12C, Porsche 981, BMW E82).

Any in car video of the time attack? I bet the biggest problem the car encountered was the long ass straight thats why it lost so much time.

Ill quite myself from over a year ago in another thread:

So my estimate back then was pretty much spot on. (Especially if they had used Michelin Pilot Supersport.)

44/100 points, lol

I agree. Best street tire on the market!

afraid not, but here's a vid of a decent lap:
http://youtu.be/tilml_sDGbI

Is a final score of 44/100 good or bad or what? Is there a list of what other cars got somewhere so we can have some apples to go with them apples?

Also it sounds like the car has lots of lift. I guess we will need fugly wings to give our cars more downforce. :( Maybe a better diffuser and front lip will make enough of a difference and still be streetable.

Here's a list of Nurburging times:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...eife_lap_times

Wouldn't mind seeing some videos of that lap.

On a dry day Star Specs or RS3's would beat super sports.

I personally can't find any other car that has a "score" listed from the Nurburgring, just lap times...it is bugging the crap outta me! I have to know what that score is all about.

So it turn out Civic Type-R actually is among the most slowest car out there on the race track :).

Haha was talking more about the S2000 actually. Not sure what people were expecting out of the GT86 at Nurburgring, it's a power course.

Post that a car beat a frs in a straight line and I promise u someone will say oh well the frs would win on a racetrack. Post that a car beat a frs on a racetrack and people will say oh it wouldve won if it was on aftermarket tires. Post that a hhr ss beat it on a track with comparable tires, and it turns into " oh this car is about handling feel and fun anyway"

So they weren't impress by the car? 44/100 sounds negative to me.

Definitely troll. Whine all your want about what "someone" would say, the reality of this car is that it is about handling feel and fun, regardless of what track environment you put it in. Go race magazines somewhere else.

It's on par with an S2000, which makes some sense. Go brag about the HR SS here:
http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=45

Whine all I want about what "someone would say" but I can go around this forum and find dozens of examples huh. U clicked into this thread because u wanted to find out its nurburing time even though it really doesn't matter if the frs ran it in 10 mins because its all about handling and fun. The forum mods deleted my posts because... I posted facts but they weren't pro frs?

Or perhaps they were inflammatory?

If you don't like the FR-S/BRZ/GT86 then why are you wasting your time here?

Every time the 'Ring comes up on this board, I've never seen someone say this car would crush it. Always it's pointed out that the 'Ring as a whole is a power track, which is where this car does not do well. However, when you consider it only makes 200hp, it does very well as every car faster than it either makes more power or is markedly lighter.

So the HHR is faster on the 'Ring. What does it matter? What is your point? And how does that add to the discussion? Or are you merely pointing it out in hope it will cause conflict? Consider why you're posting something before you hit that submit button, or you may find the mods removing more of your posts.

Frankly, I think the car did well. It pointed out just how much the stock tires were hamstringing the car when it came to lap times. And its final result was right where it should be when you look at the surrounding cars. It's cool to have some real world numbers that can be compared to other cars.

you won't fit in the FRS anyway MUFFINman. So you can just gtfo if you don't like the FRS/BRZ. :D

Uhm... why are you posting in a forum only for the frs/brz?

Of course we only want to hear pro frs facts :happyanim:

I vote for a perm steam ID ban :D

Cool... I have been wondering when we would see some Nurburgring times for the twins.

Frankly I don't think the car did well. In addition to the hhr ss, I think it should've done better than a volvo c30 t5 and a 03 focus st. What got to me is that my original post got deleted by a mod. This is an open forum and I didn't post anything vulgar. It came across as " if u don't think the frs is gods gift to earth, gtfo". I like the frs. Its still on my short list for future cars. When/ if I end up buying one, it still doesn't change the fact that those hatchbacks beat it around a track in germany.

The irony being of course that you're the only person in this thread who's actually come in and said those things.

Not sure where you got all these preconceived notions about the GT86, like it "should beat" this car or that, or its owners "will say" this or that, but instead of judging the car and its owners based on your pre-conceived notions, how about just coming here and learning about the car? :)

Not in this thread but u can def see it in the vs forum. I wanted to voice my opinion that a frs/brz built from the ground up entry level sports car should be able to beat certain cars. That original post was deleted why?

Maybe it was doubling up with the topic started by Hachiroku which will be linked from the first page? I very much doubt there's any malice or agenda other than to consolidate discussion.

Look like fun....

Not to jump into this argument but he is right about the excuses. You need to actually visit more areas of this forum to find out what he means. I would still buy a BRZ/FRS regardless but I won't make any excuses about the overall performance. Some owners know the reality of the car.

When I say he's missed the point I mean he's ignoring that the car is about driver enjoyment, not the numbers. Look, I'm coming from my slightly modded IS350, I've driven my friend's 370z and another friend's M3, and I STILL had a blast testing this comparatively low powered car out, and I wasn't even going all that fast!

Sure, he's right that people make the "no it's not fast in a straight line but it'll kill ya in the corners" argument all the time. I also agree with what you said. The thing is, no one in this thread was being contentious or making excuses for it's performance (unless talking about how stickier tires would lower lap times counts) until he came in.

ANYWAY, back on topic. I'm actually pretty satisfied with the overall time. Like someone else said earlier, it's pretty close to an S2000 which has a 2-11 lb/ft torque and 37-40 hp advantage depending on generation. I've long considered an S2000 one of the best sports cars for the money, and I'm just excited that someone has finally started making a relatively affordable, lightweight, NA, sports car that comes this close to it again.

The supertest scores (normally out of 70 so I'm not sure what's going on there) are an aggregate of rankings in the specific tests that make up the review.

The number is only useful for comparison in the same price and performance bracket and to really see the importance you'd need to look at the specific scores on the specific tests.

The 86 supertest isn't on the website yet but you could run http://www.sportauto.de/supertests-978719.html through Google translate to get a bit of an idea.

Lol ok now that was funny to me. Before you guys beat me up "I like the FRS" but those excuses are true though.

...and what is it that you drive that you omit from your avatar?

If you're spreadsheet shopping, this car isn't for you. I bought a B8 S4 (350hp Audi AWD Sedan) brand new last year, and sold it 3 mo's later, partly because I spreadsheet shopped. .

I have the FR-S as my play car now, and it's far more fun to kick around in for less than half the money.

Go drive everything on your list. My biggest mistake was not driving an FR-S before I bought the S4, simply because none were avail at the time.

-Rich H.

Have you ever seen an HHR? :barf:
Go ahead and beat me on a track, at least the 86 doesn't look like an oversized PT Cruiser.