The primacy HP are actually suprisingly decent track tires. The frs doesn't have enough HP to make use of really sticky tires; the times don't actually improve that much. Given equal tires, the FR-S track times are about what you expect for its hp and hp/weight.

really?
 

are you sure about that?

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/16/r...h-a-tire-swap/

Jaden

yeah, 2 seconds from 1:29 to 1:27 going to the extreme performance z1 star specs is not that impressive. About what you would expect from going up one tire class (MP->EP or UHP -> MP).

So yeah, a frs on EP tires can edge out a 2009 mazdaspeed 3 on OEM MP tires and 2009 wrx on OEM UHP tires. Yay?

I mean if I put hoosier A7's on a a corolla S it would probably clock off decent times.

ok butt hurt much???
 

you were making that post in response to my assertion that the FRS could beat the cars that he listed with a tire change, I was right... get over it.

Jaden

just a tune (oft) and a tire change and they don't stand a chance...

Haha, they very much stand a chance and will again be faster... if they just use the same tire. Comparing cars on completely different tire classes is a little...

Putting EP tires on "Subaru WRX, Focus ST, VW GTI, V6 Mustang" will benefit those higher hp cars more than putting EP tires on the fr-s

An altima on Hoosier A7's can probably beat a fr-s on primacy's on the track. Therefore the altima is better?

no it won't...
 

Those higher hp cars are also HEAVIER.

They will NOT benefit as much...because there is more weight pushing against the tires.

That was also without any chassis stiffening etc.. which will also benefit the lighter car more...

Jaden

I'll tell you what, what's the msrp on your 370 new? When I get up to the difference between our cars in price(and any additional mods you've made) I'll race you ANY where you want...

I have no real data to back it up, but I think higher HP cars do better with better tires because cornering speed is a relatively small portion of lap times and differences in cornering speeds cause less changes to the time, whereas braking and accelerating are a lot more. So higher HP cars get a lot more benefit by corner exit acceleration and then maintaining it a bit longer with braking at the end of straights.

Chassis stiffening I think also benefits heavier cars more, given the same % stiffening. The point of stiffening is to combat flex from suspension from lateral acceleration. So a heavier car will have more weight to flex given the same % stiffening.

The msrp on my 370z is a lot because I have nice creature comforts and actually slower than just the sport. Racing me is also kind of a moot point because i am a shitty driver.

how do you explain that tire comparison where the frs had the biggest jump in tire performance but the smallest amount of lap time reduction compared to a mustang and a 3 series?

thats easy. Contact patch.

I wasn't, the person I quoted was commenting on how poorly a 300hp 86 with upgraded brakes and tires compares to a stock vehicle for the same price. Please pay attention next time before turning your rabbit hole into a worm hole.

On the Mustang, yes I think an FRS with upgraded tires and brakes will crush it all day long as long if its puts out similar power and torque to whatever mustang you are referring to. My post clearly indicated comparing cars with equal power or cars with only 300hp so that's off the table and a non issue till we talk about gearing differences. So yeah, an FRS making the same power or torque as an Ecoboost, V6 or V8 GT with proper rubber and brake upgrades to transmit the power and stop the car will eat the face off either of those Mustangs all day respectively.

The WRX is more interesting as you trade AWD for a chassis with better CoG, weight distribution, lower mass, lower polar moments, better aero, better potential braking. Going to depend on the specific details and the track, etc. AWD is a powerful tool for laying down fast laps. That's why I kind of avoided it in my original comment.

Regardless, I think people that make very general absolute performance or value "winner" claims when comparing lightweight RWD coupes to FWD hot hatches, heavy RWD muscle cars, dinky featherweight roadsters and AWD 4-door sedans to usually be the confused ones.

Add increased size/weight/flex of the wheels chosen and much heavier tires if we are talking the stupid Tirerack advertisement they did at SoW. The increased linear grip and chassis potential was negated by the near exponential loss of power due to the low torque output of the motor. Put the same stock FA20 power numbers in the Mustang and BMW 3 and the performance improvement would be even worse than the FRS.

Other videos that are not wheel advertisements and actually use controlled variables show better lap times up to 2-3 secs/lap on the stock car depending on conditions. Note, going too big and heavy while changing overall gearing ends up costing 0.5 secs because it's torqueless and can't use the rubber.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_IWa_qlt3g"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_IWa_qlt3g[/ame]

The 86 is and always was about balance. You just need to set proper goals and find it if you bought the car to mod it. Spending money stupidly like the Tirerack and most other aftermarket folks want you to do is a good way to stay slow or make your car worse.

ok fine no racing...
 

Instead we can have a third party drive both cars and then rate them on creature comforts, sound system, looks, driving feel etc...

It doesn't have to be about get down or around the track fastest. For the money with the know how and willingness to tune, I argue that the twins are the best starting point bang for your buck.

I know how to build sound systems, modify the body, the interior, the engine etc...

That's what tuning is about.

You wanna just buy the best car :clap:, go ahead, I'll build it and pocket the difference. :happyanim::burnrubber:

Jaden

abraxis, thanks for the video very informative and that video must be in the
wheel/tire thread. Now i know which kind of tire i will buy