I don't get the whole "a V6 Camry is faster" complaint. Well, why is anyone surprised? It has two extra cylinders, additional HP, and can be equipped with a "sports" transmission, but also costs almost $5K more than a base FR-S (about the cost of adding a turbo)
Heck if I bought the Camry and it was slower in a straight line, I'd be pissed. Still, I'd rather be driving the FR-S.
It's like saying the Cadillac CTS-V wagon shouldn't be faster just because its a station wagon (technically a crossover). Its not taking the entire configuration into the picture.
My response is, for a 4 cylinder car that averages 32MPG over 40K miles, yea, I'd say its pretty doggone fast.