Do we really want a Turbo BRZ? I'm going to say no.

[MrVito]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

I disagree. The AS1 is meant to be cheap, fun to drive, simple, drivers oriented car that the average man can afford. Just like the AE86. The WRX/STI and Evo focus on providing performance that would cost 2-3x as much in a European car. But they rely on turbos and complicated AWD systems to correct for poor driving ability. Let me say that again, they have to correct for poor driving ability with their complicated onboard systems. I don't want a turbo that will be overly complicated (compared to NA) and increase the cost of the car. This car has its purpose. If you want turbo add it yourself or get the turbo WRX or Evo. This car has its own niche and it isn't the high horsepower dyno queen crowd.

I like how you only addressed the AWD mentions. We could bring up the NA vs FI Supras, FC RX7's, S13, s14, s15, DSM's, 300ZX, SRT4, etc etc. Clearly lightweight and 200-275 hp puts something in the "high horsepower dyno queen crowd". Few in this list had to correct for "poor driving ability" with "complicated on board systems". As far as the AWD platforms are concerned, yes, driving all four wheels does require greater expense and additional components. Now did the older generations of WRX/STI or Evolution have "comlicated on board systems", nope, and they were still highly competitive drivers cars, read up on the 22b if you disagree,

Would I expect to pay more for a version of the AS1 which includes forced induction and makes more power? Of course, to think otherwise would be foolish. Do I want it to be AWD, absolutely not, if I did, I'd just buy another STI, (I miss mine quite a bit). Nor am I saying that the vehicle should ONLY be available as FI, both versions could have their place. It seems that a lot of people think that forced induction must be complicated. Lets list what a FI car has that a naturally aspirated version doesn't. Not what parts are different, just what is "extra".

1. Turbo or supercharger
2. Oil lines to and from the turbo, (some SC units are self contained for lubrication)
3. water lines (not all turbos use these, supercharges as far as I have seen, do not at all)
4. Bypass valve (blow off valve)
5. Intercooler (again, not all FI systems use these, but most modern ones do)
6. Intercooler piping (several superchargers do not require these, as the intercooler is mounted to the SC)


So at a maximum six things, at a realistic minimum with a self oiling, intercooled SC, three things, which are all typically packaged together.

Obviously the tune is different, the exhaust manifolds for turbos are different, the injectors are typically of a higher flow rate, the pistons are often a different material, the cams of a different profile, the fuel pump a different flow rate. Suspension components are typically different to support higher weight transfer due to more power. Compression is lower. But, the NA engine still has all of these things, albeit typically of less expensive materials in many cases. In fact, the DI PI fuel injection system on this car is more complicated than ANYTHING on an AE86, and more complicated than a typical single turbo system. If anything, vehicle cost and complexity could have been left out, as well as some additional weight by sticking to a single injection method.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that this car seems to quickly be garning the love of the same type of people who say that putting an LS1 in an RX7 ruins the "soul" of the car.

If this car sells well in it's first year or two, there WILL be forced induction versions, and I would be nearly willing to bet that the 1.6 DIT engine on display next to the FA20 at the Tokyo show will be the one to go in it. I will still buy the NA version when it comes out in the spring, and I'm sure I will LOVE it in stock trim. I will however, trade in or sell it when the factory FI version is available.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by MrVito

I like how you only addressed the AWD mentions. We could bring up the NA vs FI Supras, FC RX7's, S13, s14, s15, DSM's, 300ZX, SRT4, etc etc. Clearly lightweight and 200-275 hp puts something in the "high horsepower dyno queen crowd". Few in this list had to correct for "poor driving ability" with "complicated on board systems". As far as the AWD platforms are concerned, yes, driving all four wheels does require greater expense and additional components. Now did the older generations of WRX/STI or Evolution have "comlicated on board systems", nope, and they were still highly competitive drivers cars, read up on the 22b if you disagree,

Would I expect to pay more for a version of the AS1 which includes forced induction and makes more power? Of course, to think otherwise would be foolish. Do I want it to be AWD, absolutely not, if I did, I'd just buy another STI, (I miss mine quite a bit). Nor am I saying that the vehicle should ONLY be available as FI, both versions could have their place. It seems that a lot of people think that forced induction must be complicated. Lets list what a FI car has that a naturally aspirated version doesn't. Not what parts are different, just what is "extra".

1. Turbo or supercharger
2. Oil lines to and from the turbo, (some SC units are self contained for lubrication)
3. water lines (not all turbos use these, supercharges as far as I have seen, do not at all)
4. Bypass valve (blow off valve)
5. Intercooler (again, not all FI systems use these, but most modern ones do)
6. Intercooler piping (several superchargers do not require these, as the intercooler is mounted to the SC)


So at a maximum six things, at a realistic minimum with a self oiling, intercooled SC, three things, which are all typically packaged together.

Obviously the tune is different, the exhaust manifolds for turbos are different, the injectors are typically of a higher flow rate, the pistons are often a different material, the cams of a different profile, the fuel pump a different flow rate. Suspension components are typically different to support higher weight transfer due to more power. Compression is lower. But, the NA engine still has all of these things, albeit typically of less expensive materials in many cases. In fact, the DI PI fuel injection system on this car is more complicated than ANYTHING on an AE86, and more complicated than a typical single turbo system. If anything, vehicle cost and complexity could have been left out, as well as some additional weight by sticking to a single injection method.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that this car seems to quickly be garning the love of the same type of people who say that putting an LS1 in an RX7 ruins the "soul" of the car.

If this car sells well in it's first year or two, there WILL be forced induction versions, and I would be nearly willing to bet that the 1.6 DIT engine on display next to the FA20 at the Tokyo show will be the one to go in it. I will still buy the NA version when it comes out in the spring, and I'm sure I will LOVE it in stock trim. I will however, trade in or sell it when the factory FI version is available.

I was just referring to your comment about the WRX/STI and Evo and how they should never have been made because the owner would never reach 50% of their potential. I wasnt talking about a "NA vs FI Supras, FC RX7's, S13, s14, s15, DSM's, 300ZX, SRT4". Not the issue.

For me NA is always more fun than turbo, even if it has less power. If you want turbo power just add it yourself. If you want turbo RWD from the factory get a GC. Just not sure Subaru will offer the BRZ with turbo. Depending on how you read Subaru's comments, either there will never be a turbo offering or there won't be for some reason. I just don't see the need for Subaru to offer to make the car successful. They don't need to. The AE86 didn't need it. The rest of the car and it's design should speak for the AS1.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by lfawishes

no thanks. The last thing i'd take is a after market turbo setup on 12:5:1 might as well just pancake your motor by beating it. I want my turbo factory warranted and more importantly factory so it is made not to blow the motor vs. the alernative. Anyway nothing more dangerous than adding a turbo to a factory n/a engine, the engine needs to be setup for a turbo. Also an after market setup based on the current engine in its base form will just be the wrong way to go about it. No room room for a turbo, hah.

The only reason to not have a turbo version is a fear it would demolish the sti at 500 lbs less. Either way I imagine there will be a higher horsepower sti version given subaru clearly knows there is a market for it given their sti increased production and wrx combined with the relative cars i the market.

Well I am interested in the BRZ STI and I want it to be NA. I don't need a turbo on this car. Many feel that way on here. Then there are othe like you that want s turbo STI. Who will Subaru go with? I sure hope NA.

[Levi]

Me too I hope NA. There are many other better turboed cars out there for those that want turbo. New WRX? Anyway most of us are not professional drifters so no need turbo for the BRZ.

[fatoni]

hp for hp a turbo brz is going to be faster and cheaper than a n/a brz

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by Levi

Me too I hope NA. There are many other better turboed cars out there for those that want turbo.

Exactly. Imagine if the ITR or S2000 were turbo'd from the factory. Sure they would have +hp but that wouldn't make them more fun.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by fatoni

hp for hp a turbo brz is going to be faster and cheaper than a n/a brz

I could care less about absolute hp numbers. If you want hp get a GT500.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

I could care less about absolute hp numbers. If you want hp get a GT500.

if you couldnt care less about hp then why are you commenting on a turbo brz topic? i dont understand why people think turbo isnt fun. also the gt500 is probably in the neighborhood of 15k more.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by fatoni

if you couldnt care less about hp then why are you commenting on a turbo brz topic? i dont understand why people think turbo isnt fun. also the gt500 is probably in the neighborhood of 15k more.

Cause the topic is whether we want a turbo BRZ. My answer is no. I want a NA BRZ STI.


Fatoni, could you please capitalize when you write. It makes it much easier to read. Thanks.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

Cause the topic is whether we want a turbo BRZ. My answer is no. I want a NA BRZ STI.


Fatoni, could you please capitalize when you write. It makes it much easier to read. Thanks.

i thought a grammar nazi would understand the difference between "cause" and "because." using correct words makes it much easier to read. thanks.

and besides, if you dont care about horsepower great. the fact still remains that a turbo car is going to be cheaper at basically any hp rating. i would like my affordable sports car to remain affordable

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i thought a grammar nazi would understand the difference between "cause" and "because." using correct words makes it much easier to read. thanks.

and besides, if you dont care about horsepower great. the fact still remains that a turbo car is going to be cheaper at basically any hp rating. i would like my affordable sports car to remain affordable

Turbo has a higher entry price vs a comparable NA engine. I would like my affordable sports car to remain affordable.

Edit: I should note a 2.0 NA vs a 2.0t.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

Turbo has a higher entry price vs a comparable NA engine. I would like my affordable sports car to remain affordable.

i think maybe we have a different set of circumstances were talking about. i dont see how they would affordably crank out more hp from this car without the use of a turbo. i think with n/a you just run into diminishing returns way too fast. i know it may be extreme but the evo puts out like 290 from 2 liters. what is the fastest 2 liter without the help of forced induction and how much does it cost?
i really dont want a turbo car either but i just dont like to judge a car by its means instead of the end. my msp is more responsive than my miata

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i think maybe we have a different set of circumstances were talking about. i dont see how they would affordably crank out more hp from this car without the use of a turbo.
i really dont want a turbo car either but i just dont like to judge a car by its means instead of the end. my msp is more responsive than my miata

Could use a FA25 for ~250hp and 190tq.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

Could use a FA25 for ~250hp and 190tq.

i take it that you are just ignoring your earlier edit stating 2l n/a vs 2l turbo. even if we could just use that motor, we dont know if that would be cheaper than just using a turbo