Came here to say that. Stock it's 260HP, 260ft-lbs. With the factory Stage 1 it's 280HP, 320 ft-lbs. LNF engine FTW.

Love my 'Balt, wish it was RWD, but I still love the thing.

Just raise max rpm in second gear to hit 60. Ecu tuners can do this

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

The flat engine doesn't have any obvious benefits seen in numbers instead they're felt. Lowering the center of gravity has been the main thing that flat engines do better. By lowering the center of gravity you not only reduce the amount of roll but particularly on a car like this it means Toyota and Subaru don't have to tune the suspension so tightly allowing for better ride comfort without compromising handling. This is generally why when there's a Evo vs. STi battle, the Subaru is often the more daily driver friendly of the cars.

When I heard they were going with a flat engine, for me that was bonus points. I didn't understand the benefits of a flat engine...until I owned one. I'll happily trade some power in favour of less body roll and a nicer ride. Of course that's just me, I can't tolerate an uncomfortable car. I'm not sure why people rag on Subaru NA engines, I currently drive one and my engine is now 10 years old and has done sufficient mileage, but it still runs like a champ. It doesn't even leak to my surprise.

I think you're right, based on a google search you made me do!

I was chatting with a trucker a few months ago who had a 4 cyl diesel but that appears to be an exception.

i dont think thats the case at all. i wouldnt be surprised if the sti has a higher cog due to its awd drivetrain.

i dont know why people care about specific output. power is power.

Ummmm... 3sge beams. Stop talking outta your ass

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_S_engine"]Toyota S engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

My ass has spoken. 3SGE "BEAMS" was last made in 2005, if you count the RWD Altezza 4-cylinder as a "BEAMS" engine.

-alex

3sge beams was what I was pleaing for even when this car was still in its concept stages. I was never kinned to the fact that they wanted and ultimately stuffed a stupid boxer in to the car. In some ways, I still ain't. In fact, I never liked boxers at all due to their over complexity in making just a puny little 4 banger. But I guess Toyota liked it that much that they went ahead with it.

In my perfect world, it would've been better to have stuck an all aluminum 2.0L 2zz-GE style motor into the car at the expense of some handling. Even an all aluminum 3gse beams would've done the job.

I still find it sad that even after 10+ years of development, the fa20 with it's high compression and direct/port injection, it still only puts out 200hp. Dammit, if talking strictly Toyota, the beams engine did that back in 1998!

And you don't think Toyota could've made something similar if not the same during the ft86 development? I wouldn't be silly and dismiss that they couldn't pull a newly developed beams motor outta their closet... Which they should have!

Toyota can make anything they want, but you're missing the point here.

Given the current state of global emissions requirements, and Toyota's position as a leader in hybrid technology, do you realistically think an investment in a new high output 4-cylinder engine is in Toyota's best interest?

I'm not being silly, I'm following the money trail that Toyota corporate has taken over the last 5 years.

But hey, if you want to keep dreaming about a 3SGE or 3SGE replacement from Toyota, be my guest. There's also all these other BRZ guys begging for a STi version too, you can join their club.

-alex

Yeah, physics is just a lie! Think of the money we can save by ignoring it. Don't tell anyone, though. There's still much money to be made before we let on.

Odd that the FR-S/BRZ has been favorably compared to the Cayman. Any guesses as to why that might be? Something similar in their design goals? Physical characteristics, maybe? Hint, it's probably not marketing BS. Says a lot about the people who designed the car that it gets mentioned in the same sentence as a Porche. I think you can claim to be the first one to lay the faults of the FR-S (real or not) on "marketing BS", though. That's strong work.

Toyota should have gone to Yamaha and asked them to tweak the Subaru engine.

I don't think I ever called the twins marketing BS. I said COG being thought of as the biggest performance triumph is marketing BS. As others have stated before on this thread the COG does not result in any tangible or quantitative advantage. Yes the feel might change, but the difference between going inline vs. flat wouldn't be a big change. Also, I'm not even sure how this inline vs flat debate came up. I was stating I just think Toyota could have done better than the fa20.

You think the twins being favorably compared to the cayman is due to it having a lower COG? Are you serious? The only advantage the twins have against the cayman is price and its ability to have fun at low speeds. You somehow make it seem like if the twins used any other engine somehow the cars dynamics will drastically change.

I don't understand these people that keep chiming in with their 2 cents on my comment. Do any of you really think the fa20 is some great accomplishment and no other engine would have been better on the twins? I love the car, but lets be serious. I'm not even bashing the car yet all these people feel like they need to defend it.

I don't know where this idea that changing CG height won't affect performance came from, but it's wrong. Differences in CG height will affect more than "feel", they'll also affect performance in a measurable and important way.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/new-car-and-driver-center-of-gravity-height-and-variable-slalom-tests-feature

http://phors.locost7.info/phors01.htm

http://www.stockcarscience.com/blog/index.php/why_the_car_won_t_turn_1

there was an amazing thread on this topic. wish it never died. hopefully you guys will revive it:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39707