New FR-S BRZ Technology Info! Engine specs, CoG, Drag Coefficient, Dimensions, etc.

[fr-s]

hello everyone, is the fr-s/ft86 gonna be 4 passenger or can it be 5 passenger?

[Buggy51]

Originally Posted by fr-s

hello everyone, is the fr-s/ft86 gonna be 4 passenger or can it be 5 passenger?

It can be a clown car if you want it to be >_>

but in seriousness, 4.

[fr-s]

if u look at the picture below, u see the rear seat and in the middle theres a cup holder, u could seat in the middle but if the cup holder is not removable it'll be uncomfortble no?

[tripjammer]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

Hm... if you look at the interior shot that was in some other threads it does look like the rear view mirror has a very thin frame. Seems like a stretch to say that it improves forward visibility but maybe that's what they're talking about.


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2181

I see what you are saying...that rear view mirror does look thin...frameless. Never seen that before in a production car...hmmm nice!
I also now think the push button start is in a good location after looking at a right hard drive FT-86.

[BobbyBalaz]

First of all, I must say, utterly amazing forum. Just love what all you guys have done so far, for the fans & random visitors (like me) seeking more information on what 'might' just be the game changer for 'sports cars'.

The collective enthusiasm on this forum has shifted my momentary weekend fling, into a full blown obsession for the FT86.

I was wondering if someone could shed some light on the AT transmission for FT86. After doing some digging on the forum, I read somewhere that it'll be based on the IS-F 8Speed AsinAW transmission, how far is this true?

On the most recent leaks, it says 'Downshift spring control'. Couldn't find any information on that either. Any idea what that means?

Any information on shift times? Will it RevMatch?



Again, thanks for this amazing forum guys.

[chulooz]

Mmmm looks like there will be some nice pounds to drop when switching to a single exit, maybe Ti? :happy0180:

[Buggy51]

Originally Posted by BobbyBalaz

First of all, I must say, utterly amazing forum. Just love what all you guys have done so far, for the fans & random visitors (like me) seeking more information on what 'might' just be the game changer for 'sports cars'.

The collective enthusiasm on this forum has shifted my momentary weekend fling, into a full blown obsession for the FT86.

I was wondering if someone could shed some light on the AT transmission for FT86. After doing some digging on the forum, I read somewhere that it'll be based on the IS-F 8Speed AsinAW transmission, how far is this true?

On the most recent leaks, it says 'Downshift spring control'. Couldn't find any information on that either. Any idea what that means?

Any information on shift times? Will it RevMatch?



Again, thanks for this amazing forum guys.

Since I think I'm one of the few that actually bothers to look at the automatic >_>... currently based on like two or three reviews that actually drove the Subaru BRZ (erm test model), its most likely based on the Lexus IS transmission; however, it may be more likely be towards the IS350 (already a 6-speed transmission) than the IS-F. I can be hopeful and hope they bring more technology from the IS-F but mm... well depends on the overall cost of the car at the end, no?

Nevertheless, most of the reviews say they found it a nice automatic though one prefers the manual.

[madfast]

wow that engine bay looks like a tight fit from above. good luck trying to fit a turbo in there. supercharging is looking more and more attractive with every bit of new info...

[ft86cbx]

Originally Posted by Hachiroku

Here are some new scans from training manual, discussing technologies and design goals/concepts for the FR-S BRZ FT-86.

Nothing new, but the more materials the better

Where is this coming from? Is it being leaked directly to you? If its not coming direct from Toyota why can't we just get the whole document instead of the drip feed?

Either way, thanks for the info Hachi.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by madfast

wow that engine bay looks like a tight fit from above. good luck trying to fit a turbo in there. supercharging is looking more and more attractive with every bit of new info...

lol, looks like loads of space to me.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by anton33

what do you guys think the ground clearance will be? 5.5 inches like a second-gen Toyota MR2?

Goodness I hope it's not that much. That said, based on the mule/Nurburgring pictures, the car looks like it's got a mild lift-kit. Those of you desperate for ground clearance in your sports car will be pleased. The rest of us will be itching like Dave Chapelle's crack-addict skit to kick the stilts out of that beeoootch.

Originally Posted by fr-s

hello everyone, is the fr-s/ft86 gonna be 4 passenger or can it be 5 passenger?

Barely a 4 passenger. In the industry "2+2" is sneaky-speak for "2 passengers plus 2 quad-amputee midgets". The only way a 5th passenger is going to fit in the car is if they're dead in the trunk.

Originally Posted by madfast

wow that engine bay looks like a tight fit from above. good luck trying to fit a turbo in there. supercharging is looking more and more attractive with every bit of new info...

We still haven't seen a comprehensive picture of the engine bay. The see-thru drawing just posted doesn't really show the boundaries of the engine bay, so at this point it's way too early to jump to conclusions about aftermarket fitments. I'm sure there'll be plenty of room, but that's just a guess.

[skeeler]

I can't believe this manual has the gaul to call this a front-midhsip design. The engine's center of mass is in front of the front axle. That may be a reasonable design trade-off for the low center of mass offered by the boxer engine, but it's absolutely not a front-mid layout.

On a related note,* I'm still concerned about the front struts, and I'm looking forward to seeing camber curves, or at least how much static camber can be achieved.

* This topic is related because the struts are necessitated by the width of the boxer engine.

[blur]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Barely a 4 passenger. In the industry "2+2" is sneaky-speak for "2 passengers plus 2 quad-amputee midgets". The only way a 5th passenger is going to fit in the car is if they're dead in the trunk.

Oh that's not true, I've fit 5 people in my car and it's classified as a 2+2.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by skeeler

I can't believe this manual has the gaul to call this a front-midhsip design. The engine's center of mass is in front of the front axle. That may be a reasonable design trade-off for the low center of mass offered by the boxer engine, but it's absolutely not a front-mid layout.

On a related note,* I'm still concerned about the front struts, and I'm looking forward to seeing camber curves, or at least how much static camber can be achieved.

* This topic is related because the struts are necessitated by the width of the boxer engine.

I share your pain, Monsieur.


Although I would not necessarily use the "has the gaul" language. It's a little hostile. Not to mention misspelled.