Not disappointed but curious. Why BRZ's acceleration numbers are relatively slow?

[Wait4BRZ_STI?]

Since we have had many reviews recently, I did notice that the reported acceleration numbers are pretty slow. Coming from 97 Accord, I feel that 0-60 in 7.3 sec is more than enough. However, I cannot help but wondering what is the cause of the relatively slow acceleration of BRZ?

Most reviews posted 0-60 ranges from 7.1-7.6 secs. For comparison,

Gen 1 RSX Type-S, 200hp, 2790lb has 0-60 being 6.4

Civic Si (K20A), 200hp, 2877lb has 0-60 being 6.3-6.7

Gen 1 S2000, 240hp, 2864lb, 0-60 being around 5.4.

RX-8, 232hp, 2900-3100lb, 0-60 being 5.7-6.5.

The latest comparison review with Miata mentions "these two cars are nearly equal in a drag race". But from the spec, Miata should be much slower in terms of straight line speed.


My understanding is that BRZ has stronger low-end torque when compared to any of the reference cars. Why the actual acceleration number is relatively slow?

Some possible causes I can think of are

(1) Gear ratio
(2) Less grippy tires
(3) The journalists did not want to abuse the car,
(4) Toyota/Subaru overrated the engine output.

However, none of the above makes perfect sense. The gear ratio should be quite tight since BRZ needs an extra shift before 60mph. I do not foresee 151lb/ft torque can overpower the stock tires. The journalists are unlike to "baby the car". The dyno results posted previously also showed strong numbers.

Any other thoughts/explanation?

[feedbag]

2nd gear tops out at 59mph, requiring the driver to shift into 3rd to get up to 60. This extra shift adds about a half second to the 0 - 60 time. Also, Motor Trend reported a 0 - 60 of 6.4 seconds.

[pithy_logorrhea]

Delete thread. We really don't need another whiney "BRZ IS SLOW" post. If you don't like it then don't buy it. If all you care about is straight line speed this car is not for you.

[Wait4BRZ_STI?]

I am sorry that I may not make my post clearer. I am quite happy as the way the car is, and I do not have any concern/dislike about the acceleration number.

However, it does seem an anomaly in terms of the actual acceleration number when compared to the reference cars. (I did not list those high-power cars, such as 370z, TT, etc.) I am just curious what could be the causes of the relative slow test numbers.

[Variant]

Originally Posted by pithy_logorrhea

Delete thread. We really don't need another whiney "BRZ IS SLOW" post. If you don't like it then don't buy it. If all you care about is straight line speed this car is not for you.

Don't get your panties in a knot. He isn't bashing the BRZ, just wants an explanation to justify the numbers.

[the_3d_man]

I think that we should eliminate this BS 0-60 standard that was only marginally relevant 20+ years ago. I propose that from here on out all cars' acceleration are measured with an accelerometer and plotted on a graph vs. time. The usefullness of such a graph would be similar to a dyno chart. It would become invaluable in discussions like this. Why in this age of technology do we still rely on this magical 0-60 time? My phone has the capability to measure acceleration and plot a curve. Anyone can do this. I'll leave you all to debate this.

[DSR2409]

Originally Posted by the_3d_man

I think that we should eliminate this BS 0-60 standard that was only marginally relevant 20+ years ago. I propose that from here on out all cars' acceleration are measured with an accelerometer and plotted on a graph vs. time. The usefullness of such a graph would be similar to a dyno chart. It would become invaluable in discussions like this. Why in this age of technology do we still rely on this magical 0-60 time? My phone has the capability to measure acceleration and plot a curve. Anyone can do this. I'll leave you all to debate this.

I don't know about getting that complex, but, being a car with motorsports in mind, autocrossers are only going to care about how fast it does 30-70, and track racers are only going to be concerned with 45-130ish. 0-60 is no real indication of the acceleration you would experience while racing. I would guess the FRS/BRZ would, with its still close 2nd-5th gears, perform very well against the aforementioned cars in these tests.

[Wait4BRZ_STI?]

Originally Posted by feedbag

2nd gear tops out at 59mph, requiring the driver to shift into 3rd to get up to 60. This extra shift adds about a half second to the 0 - 60 time. Also, Motor Trend reported a 0 - 60 of 6.4 seconds.

Thank you for the information. I did understand that the extra-shift will cause 0.3-0.4 sec (0.5s is when babying the car). However, even after subtracting 0.5 sec, the number is still relatively slow (again I am quite happy for any car that does 0-60 in the 7sec range). This seems like a puzzle to me, especially considering RSX and Si are all FWD, which should have slower acceleration numbers than a RWD with similar/better power-to-weight ratio.

Some other possible causes I could think of
(5) The reciprocating mass of a boxer is heavier than an inline 4,
(6) BRZ is optimized for fuel efficiency (longer stroke maybe?),
(7) The suspension set up,
(8) Weight distribution.

Maybe it is all of the above. I will appreciate any thought on possible causes.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by the_3d_man

I think that we should eliminate this BS 0-60 standard that was only marginally relevant 20+ years ago. I propose that from here on out all cars' acceleration are measured with an accelerometer and plotted on a graph vs. time.

I've been touting in-gear accelleration g measurements for some time now. Any time you add human interaction it leaves [plenty] of room for error or interpretation. The perfect example here is the methodologies between Inside Line and Motor Trend when testing the BRZ. Cautious versus aggressive yields very different results. The closest we get to this in current car mags are in-gear acceleration times, however rare that happens. Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Autoblog's sensational headline garnered hundreds of comments when they usually get 12-ish.

To the OP: You can assume those 0-60 times you posted of other cars are "maximum" i.e. Motor Trend style. In that case, the BRZ is comparable. The S2k of course has better launching and more power, ditto the Rx-8. Suspension geometry plays a huge part in getting power to the ground, any reasonably seasoned drag racer will attest to that. A car like the BRZ that's built for balance, playfulness, and malleability at the limit will sacrifice some forward bite.

[ahausheer]

0-60 testing procedure will cause the times to vary by nearly a second. Some mags do huge clutch dumps, others start from idle, some do an SAE correction for air temp, humidity etc. The extra shift will really kill the time as well. Ill bet the 6.4 is at the top of second and the 7's are in 3rd. I agree the times do seem strangely lower than you would expect when comparing similar cars.

[7thgear]

if the tires grip it doesn't matter if the car is fwd or rwd..

[86'd]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

I've been touting in-gear accelleration g measurements for some time now. Any time you add human interaction it leaves [plenty] of room for error or interpretation. The perfect example here is the methodologies between Inside Line and Motor Trend when testing the BRZ. Cautious versus aggressive yields very different results. The closest we get to this in current car mags are in-gear acceleration times, however rare that happens. Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Autoblog's sensational headline garnered hundreds of comments when they usually get 12-ish.

To the OP: You can assume those 0-60 times you posted of other cars are "maximum" i.e. Motor Trend style. In that case, the BRZ is comparable. The S2k of course has better launching and more power, ditto the Rx-8. Suspension geometry plays a huge part in getting power to the ground, any reasonably seasoned drag racer will attest to that. A car like the BRZ that's built for balance, playfulness, and malleability at the limit will sacrifice some forward bite.

And even then, people have a hard time launching the S2K because of the rev happy nature of the engine.

When it first came out, and maybe still to this day, people would launch the S2K at 2,000RPM and say, "This car sucks!"

If a person has never driven a high strung engine before, they'll be in for a huge dissapointment.

And for the price, I don't think the car is that slow. 6.4-7.x is a wide range, but all signs point to the car being faster rather than slower.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if there was a nudge in the direction for the Scion to be a little quicker on average, when those reviews come out...just a hunch.

[blackmist27]

i for one, am disappointed. no there is no drag racing for me but who doesn't want something with more 'umf!' right?

[Wait4BRZ_STI?]

Thank you all for sharing the insightful comments on suspension, test procedures, launch techniques, autocrossing experiences.