Quote:
Originally Posted by CatDaddysBBQ
But as I mentioned - don't try to decide on looks before you see it in person. I will say that the biggest difference is that ALL the photos (even the ones I took on my phone that I didnt' really use in the article) have: They all make the car look more narrow, taller and bubblier than it really is.
|
I think you depicted exactly what I didn’t like about the new car from the pictures. It has this narrower, less athletic look to it, especially the front and rear ends. Glad to hear it looks more like the 1st gen in person.
You’re doing a great job selling me on this new car btw, especially the comparison to your current e85 setup. Frankly better than any Toyota ad could have done. Thanks for your impressions. I will probably end up trading in my e85 FRS in a few years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering
If the new car is dyno-ing at 195-200 whp according to the engineers, that's pretty darn solid.
Not an expert by any means, but I feel like that means the 228 crank hp might be underrated?
- Andrew
|
Using the standard 15 percent drivetrain loss (assuming a dyno jet), 195 whp would be 229 crank hp. 200 whp would be 235 crank hp. So sounds about right for a word of mouth approximate number to me.
FWIW my 2013 with a K&N air filter and CBE made 176 whp on a dyno jet. I think bone stock would have been right around 170 whp (which falls right in line with the 15 percent drivetrain loss estimate).