FR-S vs 312 hp Camaro?
 

Saw the fr-s vs z thread and i wanted to know how will the fr-s compete with the heavy camaro?

It won't. Nobody will be cross-shopping those two cars, especially once they realize how physically small the FR-S is.

I would avoid the Camaro like the plague, there is no reason a midsize car should weigh that much.

If you think the interior dimensions are any better, the rear leg room is 29.9 inches.


The FR-S is 167inches long, 2700lbs(est from the JDM weight), <51 inches tall, and .27 Drag Coefficient. And there is still 27 inches of rear leg room.

That should answer any questions you have. Now take your public flogging like a man :paddle:.

Thanks for an actual reply.

We heavily discourage newbies from posting new TOPICs until they get used to the forum. Saves space and no public backlash from reposting something we have a thread for.

For example, this post could have gone into the misnamed FR-S vs 370z thread since we are talking about comparisons there. You would have gotten some lame responses anyway but the responses would have been more positive than this.

Please be sure to post in the introduction thread and try to stay out of trouble, okay?

And welcome to FT86club!

thanks for that!!!

my wife wants me to get the new camaro (SS, mind you) over the FR-S because "its going to be tiny, you have twins to haul around!" so i can argue that its only 2 inches less rear leg room than the camaro!

dont knock my wife's taste, either. when i met her she owned a 2002 rsx type S, loves G35's and IS250's.

anyway, i remember when they (car and driver?) compared the V6 genisis coupe to the V6 camaro. pretty sure the hyundai won. and if that's the case... yeah. chevy is talking about the next camaro being "smaller and lighter". we shall see...

That's not true at all. If they fall into the same price range, which it's pretty much guaranteed they will, people will say "I can get this or this for the money I have."

In fact, I know people that are looking in the low-mid 20s range, and both of these cars are on their interest list.

It's 3 inches, I think, not a big difference.(not suggesting anything perverts >.>)

Not knocking your wife's taste. Those are plenty nice cars.

I can't get past that old school style though. I would rather have a more aerodynamic car than an old school style. Plus the 3 american sports coupes are all midsize with the interior dimensions of a sub-compact.

I can hope the next generations are smaller/lighter but they are already cramped to make room for those huge N/A engines. Most likely they will cut a few inches off the length and get back to 180" and cut a couple hundred pounds, still won't make them even close to sub 3100lb range.

Obviously power means nothing to me, so I could care less about the GT/SS when the v6 is way more HP than I want/need. I was looking at an early 90's Mustang because they were hatch, 2850lbs, and had a 4 cylinder. 105HP :bonk:.

If you like the style and want the power it's kind of silly to even consider the new FT86. I wouldn't if I did. What do you think?

That simply means those shoppers don't know what they really want at this time. As their shopping gets serious, they'll narrow down the market or vehicle class that fits them. Unless they don't know what they need, in which case they'll just pick whatever their friends tell them to buy or whatever they see in the media.

Simply shopping by price opens the doors for a boatload of cars. Nobody is seriously cross-shopping a base Camry to a MINI Cooper to a base F-150, even though their prices are virtually the same.

Yeah Shin, get what you want, cause in the end you'll kick yourself if you don't. Been there, done that.

Tell your wife that if she wants you to get a Camaro so bad though, you're getting a ZL1. :D

I believe both Ford and Chevy have said they're going to downsize their next pony cars. I say bring it on!

Funny story, that. When we sold the Yaris, we were looking at a ton of different cars. The Mini was on that list too. Well, the Clubman. Bought a Camry. Honestly, the only thing that wasn't on the list was a truck. Wife wants a Jetta Sportwagen now, lol. I'm one of the people that apparently doesn't know what I want. The thing is, I'm happy with many different vehicle classes, and so are a lot of people. My top-10 list for next year is all over the grid.

.37 cd?!?!?!?!! OMG! The Camaro is a flying fat pig!

What do you expect, it has square ends, fake vents and bulging fenders lol.

Okay but to be fair, it's not that bad. The Miata is in that ballpark (although it's a convertible, that steeply falling ragtop causes a ton of drag).

The Miata is about 0.36 at least for the NA/NB. Which used to be average.

Supposedly the new Mustang is 0.33, but I find that hard to believe.

Remember that the coefficient of drag is only part of the total drag force equation. Frontal area and velocity are relevant too.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...7b238e5de9.png

Drag Force = 1/2*air density*velocity squared*coefficient of drag*frontal area


So, this means that even if a car has a huge Cd, if its frontal area is low, the total drag will be medium. Since the FR-S has a low Cd and a low frontal area, total drag is low. In the case of the Camaro, it has a medium Cd and a huge frontal area, so it's total drag is quite high.


Put into more tangible terms, the FR-S, roughly calculated with 24 ft^2 frontal area going through 0 deg C air at 75 MPH will result in about 97 pounds of aero drag force. The Camaro, with roughly 28.1 ft^2 frontal area, results in 156 pounds of aero drag force; that's 60% more drag. Wow.

Wanna go fast? At 120 MPH, the FR-S will have about 248 pounds force of aero drag, whereas the Camaro will have 398 pounds of drag.