BRZ/FRS vs 2015 WRX

[Frost]

Originally Posted by thill

I think he has a good argument:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/special-...transformation

But the new WRX would probably be faster is my bet.

My only problem with that test is that they didn't use the same tire across the board. Granted, the tires they tested the WRX probably came with the stock car but I just wished they upgraded the BRZ to the WRX stock tire instead of going "close enough".

Sometimes, considering my background, it really irks me when people do "tests" and "comparos" but don't do a true scientific balanced test.

[kuhlka]

Originally Posted by BadMoon

I think the spoiler is standard on the STI. From what I have read is if you plan on taking your car to the track go with the STI. If you plan on using it as a DD then the WRX will be just fine and darn fast to boot.

I really love the Audi S4's but don't have the funds to spend. This could be a viable alternative. Although far less sexy.

You don't buy an STI as a budget decision. A WRX can easily be upgraded to the power and handling of an STI for less than the difference in price. Most buy - Because STI. The nicer/racier interior and seats help a lot. My 05 was a night and day difference in interior compared to most other cars I was looking at, including the Evo.

I use my STI mostly as a winter DD and general inclement weather beast. It's going to be gradually upgraded to full-on race car status in the coming years, but with minor alignment tweaks it handles almost as well as my BRZ. In crap weather it's a no-brainer which car I'm driving. It takes off from stops in the rain like it's dry out, and the snow drifting is ear-to-ear grins.

I think fanboys of the 86 are going to be disappointed if a professional racer does a back-to-back comparison of the new WRX vs BRZ. Even past reviews of other imports in the same price range of the BRZ have won by seconds simply because they had more power. The 86 was designed to be FUN to drive, not necessarily the fastest thing around a track. If that were the case they would have made it AWD with MOAR POWAH! (*cough* STI *cough*).

I look forward to seeing what the next STI will look like. IMO, the photos of the red WRX don't look all that great. Those photos of the white look worlds better. I'd also bet black, DGM, and silver look slick. I wonder if they'll ever bring the paddle 6AT STI to the US. I bet they'd sell a lot more.

[kuhlka]

The black reminds me of my 05 STI... If it made ugly love to an Evo X. Looks okay/good. It'll probably look badass in STI trim.


Eh, silver looks a bit blah.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Frost

My only problem with that test is that they didn't use the same tire across the board. Granted, the tires they tested the WRX probably came with the stock car but I just wished they upgraded the BRZ to the WRX stock tire instead of going "close enough".

Sometimes, considering my background, it really irks me when people do "tests" and "comparos" but don't do a true scientific balanced test.

Yep agreed, same tires for all would have been the way to go. But one thing we can take away from the test: the BRZ w/Z1SS (EP summer tires) was 1.3 s faster than the WRX w/SP Sport 01's (UHP summer tires) over a 1.5 minute course.

Would upgrading the WRX to Star Specs make it faster? Yes. Would it be 1.3 seconds faster? Who knows, but it'd be close either way.

Originally Posted by kuhlka

I think fanboys of the 86 are going to be disappointed if a professional racer does a back-to-back comparison of the new WRX vs BRZ. Even past reviews of other imports in the same price range of the BRZ have won by seconds simply because they had more power.

Depends why the "fanboys" bought the car in the first place, right? If they bought it thinking it would be a track monster, then sure, I have no sympathy for the willfully ignorant. But if they bought it for the way it drives, I doubt that will change, whether the BRZ is compared to the old WRX or new.

My personal take (having owned an STI in the past): as long as the WRX is based on an AWD econobox platform, it won't ever drive like a proper RWD sports car. No amount of revisions to the WRX can change that.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

My personal take (having owned an STI in the past): as long as the WRX is based on an AWD econobox platform, it won't ever drive like a proper RWD sports car. No amount of revisions to the WRX can change that.

Agreed. AWD is very tough to make it feel like a true RWD without some ridiculous sofware and mechanicals to boot. The Audi R8 comes to mind but that is an exotic.

We're talking about the WRX on the other hand... nonetheless, I care nothing for the looks. I never loved the WRX/STi for the looks. It was everything behind the wheel... until I fell in love with a MR2 and then never looked back. The BRZ/FRS reminds me too much of her but with a warranty!

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Frost

Agreed. AWD is very tough to make it feel like a true RWD without some ridiculous sofware and mechanicals to boot. The Audi R8 comes to mind but that is an exotic.

We're talking about the WRX on the other hand... nonetheless, I care nothing for the looks. I never loved the WRX/STi for the looks. It was everything behind the wheel... until I fell in love with a MR2 and then never looked back. The BRZ/FRS reminds me too much of her but with a warranty!

Yeah there's something about lightweight RWD sports cars that's very addictive. Once you've driven one, you're hooked!

[boxer 2.5]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHBZX7ZAWfU"]2015 Subaru WRX First Drive and Review - YouTube[/ame]

[boxer 2.5]

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/201...iew-1484253453

[Floggin Tires]

Originally Posted by Frost

In fact, some body roll is needed to pull off the Scandinavian Flick.

No

Originally Posted by Frost

Suspension travel is what enables the flick maneuver

And No.

Originally Posted by Frost

Kinda like forcing a normally stable reaction into unstable state to a position where you want it to. LaPlace transforms anyone?

And yes.

A force acting on the tires great enough to loose traction. Is all.
Body roll and suspension travel can/will effect the flick.
Body roll and suspension are not needed to flick.
Ie: You can do a scan flick in a go-kart. No suspension.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by Floggin Tires

No

And No.

And yes.

A force acting on the tires great enough to loose traction. Is all.
Body roll and suspension travel can/will effect the flick.
Body roll and suspension are not needed to flick.
Ie: You can do a scan flick in a go-kart. No suspension.

Ok, I don't have the papers on hand to indicate why time-load is needed for the Scandinavian flick which then factors into roll.

Until I do, I cannot dispute this without it degenerating into a typical forum feud. So at best, I have to concede.

As for the go-kart example, same result, different dynamics in play if no suspension is involved. Time is always a factor and suspension = time. And time factors into load and impulse.

Now back to the thread!

[Floggin Tires]

Frost, understood, and concur.
No pissing match or feud was intended.
I thread jacked, my bad folks.

[fatoni]

i really think that everyone overestimates the importance of tires regarding the lap times. that comparison was at streets which is an absolutely tiny track where power is of little importance. look at the other tire comparison when they look at the 1 series, mustang and brz. the brz saw the smallest improvement in times despite making, by far, the largest jump in tire performance.

[sprintertrueno86]

Originally Posted by thill

The car would have to look much better in person than the pictures for me to consider it. I am really disappointed with the styling. When you consider they had a clean slate and used hardly any of the sheet metal of the current Impreza, I think they dropped the ball in the styling department. I also loved the hatchback and they killed that off.

This is so true. It looks like a mid cycle refresh instead of an all new design. I think the hatch/wagon will make its return in 2yrs.

[kuhlka]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Depends why the "fanboys" bought the car in the first place, right? If they bought it thinking it would be a track monster, then sure, I have no sympathy for the willfully ignorant. But if they bought it for the way it drives, I doubt that will change, whether the BRZ is compared to the old WRX or new.

My personal take (having owned an STI in the past): as long as the WRX is based on an AWD econobox platform, it won't ever drive like a proper RWD sports car. No amount of revisions to the WRX can change that.

What does it matter if it drives like a 'proper' RWD sports car if it costs about the same and goes around a track faster (and can handle inclement weather with a LOL)? When I was talking about fanboys, I mean the people who think the BRZ must be the fastest because it's new and light. The BRZ is fun at slow speeds. You can't really say that about the STI.

The other point I made was addressing was the handling gripe. The fact is the WRX and STI CAN be tweaked to handle like they're on rails (bushings, fender braces, etc). If you want an oversteer bias just put a huge swaybar on the back.

The only thing you won't get is the same weight advantage of the BRZ. My STI feels like a truck compared to my BRZ. It has a much more upright seating postion and completely different steering wheel size/placement. It grips corners worlds better than my BRZ in most cases (except a super tight slaloms during autocross) and refuses to lose the rear end unless I'm REALLY trying hard. However, I'd have to completely strip the interior, seats, trunk, etc to get anywhere near the BRZ's weight with my STI. The AWD just adds too much weight. Even then, I wouldn't have the same super low center of gravity as the BRZ. No biggie. Different purposes for different platforms, but they're both stupid-fun.