Power is relative, and (mostly) over emphasized

[Rampage]

If you go to any car forum on the internet you will see the same argument for every car made. Every single one of them, no matter how powerful will have someone posting that it "needs more HP (or TQ).

My brother has a 2013 Camaro ZL1. The car comes stock with 580HP. He has it above 600HP with a couple bolt on mods. The Camaro forums has the same discussions wherein some people say the car could "use" more HP. Seriously?

[makesdrivingfunagain]

Originally Posted by Rampage

For all those that want more horsepower just remember that it will cost MONEY (big money). Whether it is from the aftermarket or the factory 40-50HP and 30TQ more is going to cost big bucks. That car will no longer be the bargain priced sports car that the current FR-S and BRZ are. It will also weigh more because of the bigger engine or SC or turbo or hybrid power plant plus bigger brakes and bracing to handle the added power and weight. Will the FR-S still be a great buy with 250HP and a price tag of $33-35K?

For its price and weight, the FR-S/BRZ has more than adequate power for all "legal" street needs.

Just learn to drive a stick! ;P

The WRX base price is just under 26k. Subaru could have put a little turbo on their to make the 265hp and 230+ torque. This is the same price. However, an option would have been nice, such as following the Subaru models in the wrx, sti category. This would have added weight, however, we could lose it elsewhere. Anyways, it is still a great car!

[thill]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

By most measures the Mustang has better power AND handling rolling off the showroom floor. This is backed up by better lap times in overall comparisons that the Mustang usually dominates (from a performance standpoint) in it's price bracket. If you want to enjoy power and handling you'd get a Mustang, that's why it keeps getting brought up.

You don't have to tell me the Mustang feels like a pig, I know, that's why I bought an FRS. When you talk about having the "best of both worlds" that car already exists and if you want to spend less than $50k (dat BOSS 302) it's built by Ford, like it or not.

Exactly. Which is why I made my Mustang comment. I am not a Mustang guy, but if someone came to me and told me they wanted a car that could go very fast in a straight line, or around a corner and they had $30K to spend, I would tell them to buy a Mustang GT. Performance wise, it is the best bang for the buck. I would not classify it as a drivers car though. But if you enjoy that brute force speed and knowing only a handful of cars can beat you between lights, then this is the car on a budget. And it definitely gives you that feeling that you are flying by the seat of your pants... I was finding them with the track pack for under $30K new near me.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

By most measures the Mustang has better power AND handling rolling off the showroom floor. This is backed up by better lap times in overall comparisons that the Mustang usually dominates (from a performance standpoint) in it's price bracket. If you want to enjoy power and handling you'd get a Mustang, that's why it keeps getting brought up.

You don't have to tell me the Mustang feels like a pig, I know, that's why I bought an FRS. When you talk about having the "best of both worlds" that car already exists and if you want to spend less than $50k (dat BOSS 302) it's built by Ford, like it or not.

Okay so how about this, you're telling me we're not allowed to get power, handling AND relatively light weight.

I don't want 420 hp. I don't want a 3500lb car. I don't want a track car with stupid expensive consumables. Asking for an under 3000lb rwd sports car with great handling and a power to weight ratio of 10:1 isn't being unrealistic IMO.

[thill]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Okay so how about this, you're telling me we're not allowed to get power, handling AND relatively light weight.

I don't want 420 hp. I don't want a 3500lb car. I don't want a track car with stupid expensive consumables. Asking for an under 3000lb rwd sports car with great handling and a power to weight ratio of 10:1 isn't being unrealistic IMO.

Why not just FI your current car?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Okay so how about this, you're telling me we're not allowed to get power, handling AND relatively light weight.

I don't want 420 hp. I don't want a 3500lb car. I don't want a track car with stupid expensive consumables. Asking for an under 3000lb rwd sports car with great handling and a power to weight ratio of 10:1 isn't being unrealistic IMO.

http://www.uscaterham.com/
http://www.lotuscars.com/
http://www.porsche.com/usa/

[red_comet]

Originally Posted by makesdrivingfunagain

The WRX base price is just under 26k. Subaru could have put a little turbo on their to make the 265hp and 230+ torque. This is the same price. However, an option would have been nice, such as following the Subaru models in the wrx, sti category. This would have added weight, however, we could lose it elsewhere. Anyways, it is still a great car!

I'm sure that the WRX base price is influenced by the fact that the car is built from an existing, mass market platform.

The markup from the Impreza to the WRX is a significant one, though it does include a lot of other bits and bobs that aren't just the turbocharger. I think that putting a turbo on this vehicle would be just as expensive- if not more- as the options currently on the aftermarket.

[WolfpackS2k]

Dude if I could afford a Porsche I'd have one parked outside right now!

[ThisIsChrisKim]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

By most measures the Mustang has better power AND handling rolling off the showroom floor. This is backed up by better lap times in overall comparisons that the Mustang usually dominates (from a performance standpoint) in it's price bracket. If you want to enjoy power and handling you'd get a Mustang, that's why it keeps getting brought up.

You don't have to tell me the Mustang feels like a pig, I know, that's why I bought an FRS. When you talk about having the "best of both worlds" that car already exists and if you want to spend less than $50k (dat BOSS 302) it's built by Ford, like it or not.

Lap times are usually dictated by power. Superior handling can really only be compared with similarly powered cars.

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Okay so how about this, you're telling me we're not allowed to get power, handling AND relatively light weight.

I don't want 420 hp. I don't want a 3500lb car. I don't want a track car with stupid expensive consumables. Asking for an under 3000lb rwd sports car with great handling and a power to weight ratio of 10:1 isn't being unrealistic IMO.

For $25k it is. Otherwise that car would exist already.

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by makesdrivingfunagain

The WRX base price is just under 26k. Subaru could have put a little turbo on their to make the 265hp and 230+ torque. This is the same price. However, an option would have been nice, such as following the Subaru models in the wrx, sti category. This would have added weight, however, we could lose it elsewhere. Anyways, it is still a great car!

Maybe but the WRX is a souped up Impreza (econobox). The BRZ is a well engineered sports coupe. Base price of an Impreza is $17895. So the WRX cost $8K more. Base price of BRZ is $26K. Add the same $8K for the turbo and other upgrades and you have $34K. No longer a bargain sports car.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by ThisIsChrisKim

Lap times are usually dictated by power. Superior handling can really only be compared with similarly powered cars.



For $25k it is. Otherwise that car would exist already.

Yeah except I'd be totally cool with a faster version for $30k. Leave the current one alone at $25k, and uprated model for $30k

I know it's a difficult concept

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Yeah except I'd be totally cool with a faster version for $30k. Leave the current one alone at $25k, and uprated model for $30k

I know it's a difficult concept

Yeah, I agree. That is where the TRD or STI versions would be perfect. However, I think that only a $5K increase is overly optimistic. I feel it will be at least $8K.

[thill]

Originally Posted by Rampage

Yeah, I agree. That is where the TRD or STI versions would be perfect. However, I think that only a $5K increase is overly optimistic. I feel it will be at least $8K.

I don't know if this is the best comparison or not, but MSRP on a WRX base vs a WRX STi base is a $8300.

Base (Premium) BRZ MSRP is $25,595 (2014 pricing). Add $8000 onto that and an STi BRZ would be $33.5K ish.. Seems about right.. Not sure if Toyota would give you fewer options and price it lower... $31Kish?

It is more than I would like to spend.. But I love this car so much I would probably wait a year or so for demand to go down and pull the trigger..

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Dude if I could afford a Porsche I'd have one parked outside right now!

I like how you didn't quote me so I could respond that the post I responded to did not list a price requirement.

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Yeah except I'd be totally cool with a faster version for $30k. Leave the current one alone at $25k, and uprated model for $30k

I know it's a difficult concept

Compromises have to be made, compromises that major auto makers aren't willing to make to the interior and comfort (since you're asking for quality everything else). People bitch about how "bare bones" the FRS is, imagine the response to the car you're dreaming of.

Oh wait you don't have to imagine, kit cars fill that void.
http://www.uscaterham.com/
https://www.factoryfive.com/

I'm sure there's more, I just posted the reputable ones off the top of my head. Until then look back retroactively and realize the performance per dollar we're getting today vs. 10, 20, 30+ years ago.

i.e. in 1990 accounting just for inflation you're talking about a $14k budget.
That's right around the price of a new Nissan 240sx at the time, weighs about what ours weighs 2,800-2,900 lbs and a whopping 140hp! (Good motor though, just did the timing chain on the one in my truck).
RX7 was almost $18,000 that year, 160 hp, but it's a pig at 3,000 lbs

The kind of car you're asking for manufactures simply cannot make for a profit today. Maybe in ten years when they get cheaper composites and more engine development we might hit a car with your targets. I guess you'll fire back that with $5k/unit an OEM can add 80hp to this car to hit your 10:1 lbs/hp without destroying profit margin, which, if they could I'm sure they would.

Originally Posted by ThisIsChrisKim

Lap times are usually dictated by power. Superior handling can really only be compared with similarly powered cars.

So you only compare similarly powered cars without regards to price?

For reference
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...or_comparison/