"gah FRS/BRZ are so slow, if only they had like 50 more hp"

[Wise]

If you don't take your car to the track then hp is only good for two things. 1. cafe racing or bragging 2. traffic light drags and passing flybys.

I didn't buy my car to race anyone. I bought it to satisfy my own desire to have a bulletproof rwd platform and chassis that makes carving up twisty mountain roads feel brilliant.

I have more fun in this car doing hald the speeds I used to do in my Supra. Also I think it's one of the classic car designs of our time. Beautiful lines and sharp styling.

Would I like to get rid of the torque dip? Sure I would, would I like a bt more power, of course. But I think an extra 20-30 at the fly is all I need to feel really happy with this car. Which can easily be achieved with an intake, tune, headerback.

[Andrew025]

Originally Posted by Wise

If you don't take your car to the track then hp is only good for two things. 1. cafe racing or bragging 2. traffic light drags and passing flybys.

Or passing people on 1 lane highways... but no one ever brings that up. Only "they don't know how to drive if they want more HP".

That said, I find I can pass people without much effort if I drop it into 3rd. Pulls pretty decent from ~4200 to 6000.
Its actually incredibly easy to pass if I hang back just a bit and take a curve much faster than the leading car and accelerate exiting the curve.I think people are afraid to rev it high or something?

[forzajuve]

You do make a good point. I typically drive my car in the 4-5k when it is streets and sometimes freeway and torque dip is no problem, because I am always past it!

[regal]

Personally the only thing that bothers me is the huge torque dip and the 2750 lbs, but its really not a big deal as a DD.

However in a few years when sales fizzle, Tada's decision to not use the DIT engine will be questioned.

These cars will go down in history as underpowered whether we agree with it or not.

The fact is for little additional cost the FA20T could be designed into this car by Subaru for little price increase and this car would have gone down in history as the <$30k Cayman killer. But that's what could have been.

That doesn't make it a bad car, its more of a 944S which is fine by me.

[jarviz]

Originally Posted by regal

Personally the only thing that bothers me is the huge torque dip and the 2750 lbs, but its really not a big deal as a DD.

However in a few years when sales fizzle, Tada's decision to not use the DIT engine will be questioned.

These cars will go down in history as underpowered whether we agree with it or not.

The fact is for little additional cost the FA20T could be designed into this car by Subaru for little price increase and this car would have gone down in history as the <$30k Cayman killer. But that's what could have been.

That doesn't make it a bad car, its more of a 944S which is fine by me.

What's wrong with 2750lbs? Still too heavy?

[thill]

Originally Posted by regal

Personally the only thing that bothers me is the huge torque dip and the 2750 lbs, but its really not a big deal as a DD.

However in a few years when sales fizzle, Tada's decision to not use the DIT engine will be questioned.

These cars will go down in history as underpowered whether we agree with it or not.

The fact is for little additional cost the FA20T could be designed into this car by Subaru for little price increase and this car would have gone down in history as the <$30k Cayman killer. But that's what could have been.

That doesn't make it a bad car, its more of a 944S which is fine by me.

When sales start to lag they will release a version that has more power and more performance parts. They will tack on a $5-7K fee on top of the current pricing and the enthusiasts who want more power can get it if they don't want to go aftermarket FI.

We all know this is coming, especially with the recent Tada quotes saying more power is on the way.

Otherwise people that want more power can get it now. There are tons of options out there to add power and torque and smooth out the torque curve. The big downside is that you have to pretty much through your powertrain warranty out to get it. But for many people who planned on modding the car anyway this wont be a problem.

[thill]

Originally Posted by jarviz

What's wrong with 2750lbs? Still too heavy?

I think we all would have loved this car to be closer to 2500lbs, but that is probably just too costly at the $25-28K pricepoint the car is sold at.

Somebody name another RWD sports coupe that is sold new today that is under 2800lbs that has a backseat and a useable trunk for $25K?

[regal]

Originally Posted by jarviz

What's wrong with 2750lbs? Still too heavy?

Heavier than any MR2 ever made. The last Toyota sports car the MR2/S was~2200 lbs. Toyota powered Lotus Elise less than that.


This is a small Gran Tourer, not a lightweight sprint sports car by any stretch of the imagination.

[gily25]

When I see these comments I think in this order:
1) This person can't drive or has no concpet of how mechanicals work
2) What did they drive before this car (on a regular basis, not once in a friends car)
3) Who recently complained about their car
4) Who needs to prove their "girth" at a stoplight? People with no girth at all
5) If 1-4 apply then get a Mustang/Camaro and the trailer park home to go with it, this car is for people with refined taste

For what it's worth the wife is driving a rental VW Beetle at the moment. All our cars are manuals, the VW is an auto. She was complaining the engine is low powered. I showed her how to accelerate a little slower to get the trans to shift faster. You get up to speed faster than if you plunge the throttle (like you can do with a manual bc you can shift faster). I think simply people with autos can't hear the trans shift and people with manuals are slow to shift. *2 cents*

[regal]

Originally Posted by thill

I think we all would have loved this car to be closer to 2500lbs, but that is probably just too costly at the $25-28K pricepoint the car is sold at.

Somebody name another RWD sports coupe that is sold new today that is under 2800lbs that has a backseat and a useable trunk for $25K?

If Toyota can build a Yaris @ $13k under 2300 lbs they could have built this under 2500 lbs, I think they chose not too because they wanted to position it as the lightest GT. As you say they designed the backseat which is useless in itself but it gives the car a small GT wheelbase and feel.


[QUOTE=gily25;1290325]When I see these comments I think in this order:
1) This person can't drive or has no concpet of how mechanicals work
2) What did they drive before this car (on a regular basis, not once in a friends car)
3) Who recently complained about their car
4) Who needs to prove their "girth" at a stoplight? People with no girth at all
5) If 1-4 apply then get a Mustang/Camaro and the trailer park home to go with it, this car is for people with refined taste

QUOTE]

But what do you get for the $13k over any companies budget model? You pay the extra 100% for performance, that's what its all about. Otherwise just get an appliance car.

Performance comes from chassis, suspension, the engine and the balance of the combination. Whole package greater than sum of parts.

Its not complaining its just pointing out to younger drivers that there are areas these cars are lacking, no car is perfect.

A lot of new owners posting I think should have bought a WRX, especially if they live somewhere straight and flat. Someone has to say look there is a lot more "mechanics" and value for the dollar with a WRX.

But if you value a drivers chassis over mechanicals this is a good car. But its a niche' car not for everyone.

[WolfpackS2k]

Well I took care of this "problem" and recently had a supercharger, as well as a few exhaust pieces, installed. Sitting at around 290-300 hp now and the car feels great.

Originally Posted by thill

Innovate, Vortech, JR, Kraftwerks.. They all offer great options, problem is by the time you add the Supercharger, license+cable+tune, better tires, some additional cooling options (oil cooler, radiator), and better brakes you are dropping some serious cash all at the expense of your warranty.

I have been debating this for quite some time and at this point I want to wait and see how these different kits hold up over time and also see if Subaru and Toyota offer something more powerful...

Even with 300 hp this car's brakes are fine. Upgrade the pads for the track and no worries. I'm doing my first track event with the car, at VIR, the 2nd week of November. All my cooling is stock for now but I think it'll be fine in the 50-60° air. An oil cooler is the next mod on the list, which I will have done before tracking the car in warmer weather.

But people that say this car needs all these brake and suspension upgrades to handle an extra 50-100 hp are wrong. The chassis isn't overpowered; it's fine.

[Steve201brz]

Saying a car needs more power is like saying my house needs bigger rooms. It's one of those things that goes without saying... Everyone wants faster cars. Don't think I've ever heard someone say "This car would be perfect if it had less power."

When I hear people criticizing this car for the power I just see them clinging on to (in my mind) the only issue they can. Maybe it bugs some people that this car is being thrown into conversations with some of the greatest cars for enthusiasts.

If this car did have an extra +50hp I'd love to see what they'd be complaining about next

[TylerLieberman]

There's always gonna be something about a car that you don't like. Whether it's $20,000 or $200,000. Unless the car was built from the ground up specifically for you, I don't see any way to have a car that you absolutely love 100% everything about. Maybe I'm just a bit picky...

I like mine but I agree about the power statement. It does need more. Going from almost 400hp in a WRX to an FR-S was almost like culture shock. It felt so pathetic on the street but on the track, it feels amazing with what power it does have. Up until that track day, I kept saying it needs another 100hp and FI of some sort. After that event, I think that extra 40-50hp peak and the loss of the torque dip in the mid range would make it perfect. I've lost the care to go FI now. All of the extra issues that potentially come with it isn't worth to me on a daily driven car. I'd prefer to keep it reliable and simple motor wise.

Maybe down the road if the car becomes a track only car, but until then..

Go from 160ish whp and a big dip in torque to 200whp and no dip at all pulling to 8k. Sounds like a winner to me.

[R.S-HawK]

Originally Posted by TylerLieberman

There's always gonna be something about a car that you don't like. Whether it's $20,000 or $200,000. Unless the car was built from the ground up specifically for you, I don't see any way to have a car that you absolutely love 100% everything about. Maybe I'm just a bit picky...

I like mine but I agree about the power statement. It does need more. Going from almost 400hp in a WRX to an FR-S was almost like culture shock. It felt so pathetic on the street but on the track, it feels amazing with what power it does have. Up until that track day, I kept saying it needs another 100hp and FI of some sort. After that event, I think that extra 40-50hp peak and the loss of the torque dip in the mid range would make it perfect. I've lost the care to go FI now. All of the extra issues that potentially come with it isn't worth to me on a daily driven car. I'd prefer to keep it reliable and simple motor wise.

Maybe down the road if the car becomes a track only car, but until then..

Go from 160ish whp and a big dip in torque to 200whp and no dip at all pulling to 8k. Sounds like a winner to me.

I noticed on your profile you have a '13 Focus ST.

How do you compare it against the FR-S in terms of power, torque and handling? I was (ironically) considering the car before going with the FR-S.