These cars are fast

[regal]

Originally Posted by kiichiro

My drag skills suck, so let's get that outta the way

My supercharged vortech modded brz ran 14.02 and 14.1 a few times this weekend, on a testing tune. I have another tune I didn't get to run this time, but I can see there being more than another .3 seconds with a better tune and driver. That's fast, getting in the 13 range but myself, for a sports car don't consider it fast. My 60 foot says I suck, so if my 2.2 was 1.9 I guess 13.7 is respectable, but c'mon a new stock vette does much better

This with stock header, will rerun ASAP and let you know again
My new catless header is coming this week

I ended up giving away my p and l header, great product for NA but on my setup was just too hot where I live

13.7 quarter is plenty fast, impressive what was your e.t.? And try not to get wrapped up in the chasing\hp game, its never ending and pointless unless your hobby is some form of track event.


Does the Vortec help or hurt in the peskiness of the engine?

[utekineir]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

The guy very humbly stated that he was a newbie and wanted to know what "tune" meant. Plugging "tune" into this board's search box maxes out at 500 posts full of shorthand and jargon. In order to understand what you're reading, you have to already understand what tuning is, which sorta defeats the purpose.

You're a very lucky fellow to have burst forth wet and stinking into this world astraddle a turbo that you milled from billet and assembled in the womb, but the rest of us had to start from scratch at some point. You've spent a lot more time and effort trying to justify being a knob than it would have taken just to point the poor kid in the right direction to begin with.

You've spent a lot more time and effort coming up with witty paragraphs to tell me I'm an ass for telling the guy to look in the technical section instead of helping him yourself.

What's that make you? Other than some sort of pretentious ****?

Technically. We're both immature quibbling dinks. The difference is one of us atleast acknowledges it.

Wether you like it or not the technical section will help the guy. Sorry for not taking the time to rewrite everything that's Allready been written to help people.


Now if youd kindly go watch some matlock your bottle of windex to drink will be along shortly.

[CBR600RR]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

For reference, a Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds.

Think it could catch our cars on the track?

3.9 seconds??????

2009 = 4.4 sec http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...ee-srt8-page-3

2012 = 4.7 sec http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...8-test-reviews

2014 = 4.6 sec http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...t-drive-review


all fast, but not 3.9 seconds fast.

[Scavanger]

There are 3 categories when referring to a car in terms of speed
1. Slow
2. Quick
3. Fast

This car would fall in the quick category it is by no means fast, but it sure ain't slow either. I think it's a perfect little car IMO

[Chad86]

Originally Posted by Scavanger

There are 3 categories when referring to a car in terms of speed
1. Slow
2. Quick
3. Fast

This car would fall in the quick category it is by no means fast, but it sure ain't slow either. I think it's a perfect little car IMO

This sounds great, but I thought my 03 celica gt with 140 hp was quick. Would it be more accurately classed as slow then?

[CatDaddysBBQ]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

A lot of people just completely miss the point of this car. I chalk it up in large part to young people who have never ridden in an MGB just not having lived the history. I've been waiting a long time for a car like this.

HA! I learned to drive a manual in a MGB-GT when I was 12 in my uncle's (5 acre) backyard. So true.

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by regal

I'm in this camp, and would much rather dd my frs than an WRX. But sales are a factor and I believe they can offer the car with a~240hp/180ft-lb advertises turbo package for no price increase. I think the D4-S was a blunder that prevented this from being engineered in, half way thru development.

Delusional

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by Chad86

This sounds great, but I thought my 03 celica gt with 140 hp was quick. Would it be more accurately classed as slow then?

Call it whatever you want.. Everyone has their own idea of what is fast or slow..
It all depends on what you're used to.

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by regal

I'm in this camp, and would much rather dd my frs than an WRX. But sales are a factor and I believe they can offer the car with a~240hp/180ft-lb advertises turbo package for no price increase. I think the D4-S was a blunder that prevented this from being engineered in, half way thru development.


But I do have one question when did a 6.5" 0-60 mph car not be considered fast? Just an educated guess but I think about 20 years of corvette models weren't this fast.



Semi-budget cars have quickly become a commodity and this car shakes that trend which is great, its just too bad corp. politics got in the way a bit. A little turbo done right would have made this one of those once in a life-time buys.

How can you believe a turbo version of this car would cost the same? Considering the extra hardware, cooling, beefier block and components, different tuning, EPA testing/compliance, cafe penalties, etc... Makes no sense..
Not everyone is enamored with turbo power.. I prefer the linear response of a NA engine to a small displacement turboed engine..
I'm not saying a turbo version wouldn't be any fun.. But some prefer the benefits of instant throttle response and linear feel of a NA engine..
Not to mention, cost, added heat, complexity.. Etc..
Less is more.. Which is why so many like it the way it is right out of the box..

[utekineir]

Really, minus the torque dip that can be learned to straddle this car didn't feel terrible power wise out of the box. On my end it just made me appreciate other faster things more.

Far from fast, hell far from minivan slaying fast. But it wasn't god awful unless you sit in the dip. But still worth it for the other aspects of the car (handling, fun, economy)

Headers and s2 flash cleaned the dip up nicely.

an sc cleaned it up more.

[regal]

Originally Posted by Mikem53

How can you believe a turbo version of this car would cost the same? Considering the extra hardware, cooling, beefier block and components, different tuning, EPA testing/compliance, cafe penalties, etc... Makes no sense..
Not everyone is enamored with turbo power.. I prefer the linear response of a NA engine to a small displacement turboed engine..
I'm not saying a turbo version wouldn't be any fun.. But some prefer the benefits of instant throttle response and linear feel of a NA engine..
Not to mention, cost, added heat, complexity.. Etc..
Less is more.. Which is why so many like it the way it is right out of the box..

Because I work in the auto industry, but at least now you understand what I am saying.. If Subaru continues with their plans to use the FA20T in more cars it will become more expensive to deal with the D4-S than their vesrion DIT.


And no its not dumping its working in whats called a lean manufacturing environment. The actual cost to Subaru on the Forester FA20 turbo+DI is probably already less than Toyota's D4-s DI on the twin's FA20. The EPA and other countries testing is going to be the most expensive part of the business case, but if marketing wants it bad enough they will get it, that is if CR and others don't keep it from selling.


You have to understand that labor costs can be more than parts cost for one, R&D, and tooling capital can more expensive as well. The FA20T has the tooling done, captial spent and labor issues figured out. A detuned GT-86 FA20T slightly modified for fitment would probably cost little if any thing to switch from the Toyotas D4-S blackmail. Tada, maybe someone higher f-up when they stepped on Subaru's toes.


Subaru holds all the cards when the contract runs up. Toyotas only option is what they did to the 2ZZ, a positive displacement supercharger, I've heard rumbling that for emissions this is even better than a DIT, but I'm afraid that will cost $35k. And I wager they kill the whole project before being outdone by Subaru.

[kh060]

Originally Posted by humfrz

DANG, kh060, did anyone ever answer your question ...

Back in the day (oh here we go again ..), a "tune" or to "tune up" a car, usually involved adjusting the spark (to the plugs) and adjusting the amount of fuel and air that could enter the engine. Some considered modifying the exhaust as part of a tune.

A simple "tune up" was to replace the spark plugs, ignition points, condenser and maybe a carburetor kit install. Then adjust the points, timing and the carburetor. That was about all there was to it.

Some considered an electronic ignition, multiple carburetors and headers a part of "tuning".

Now days, the air/fuel ratio (carburetor) and spark (distributor/timing) is controlled by an onboard computer (the ECU).

So, to "a tune" a modern engine consists of adjusting the various parameters within this computer to achieve the desired engine functioning.

This is usually done by a computer program which talks to the onboard computer (ECU).

Now I'm not a "tuner" .... not since we lost the carburetors and distributors (hell, I can't even get to the spark plugs) ... so, my understanding may not be exactly correct.

Hopefully, this will give you some background and a kick start ....


humfrz

Thanks you guys. I did not expect to wake up to all the replies. I never had the guidance to work and love our cars = I was the kid who spray painted silver racing stripes and paid to have a cherry bomb muffler installed (couldn't afford giant terminator spoiler) on my 93 inline 4 toyota camry, and still got blown off by a yellow Laid Law bus . I'm glad all of that is in the past so now that I'm kinda grown up and my first new car purchased didn't satisfy me enough (13 Avalon Hybrid Limited) I liked how the FR-S looks and the price looked good so I got one. I don't have the urge to drive my car like an F16 anymore but you guys keep talking about "tunes" and all of that, so it just lit a spark again in my heart again started being curious again like a 10 year old boy. Yes it's all confusing and new to me, remember I was a lame-o a long time ago believing that, silver stripes and loud muffler on the Camry given to me was totally a badass and fast car (For some reason a lot of chicks didn't dig me or my car!)

[Chad86]

Originally Posted by utekineir

Really, minus the torque dip that can be learned to straddle this car didn't feel terrible power wise out of the box. On my end it just made me appreciate other faster things more.

Far from fast, hell far from minivan slaying fast. But it wasn't god awful unless you sit in the dip. But still worth it for the other aspects of the car (handling, fun, economy)

Headers and s2 flash cleaned the dip up nicely.

an sc cleaned it up more.

This is what I need! Can you point me in the right direction?

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by regal

Because I work in the auto industry, but at least now you understand what I am saying.. If Subaru continues with their plans to use the FA20T in more cars it will become more expensive to deal with the D4-S than their vesrion DIT.


And no its not dumping its working in whats called a lean manufacturing environment. The actual cost to Subaru on the Forester FA20 turbo+DI is probably already less than Toyota's D4-s DI on the twin's FA20. The EPA and other countries testing is going to be the most expensive part of the business case, but if marketing wants it bad enough they will get it, that is if CR and others don't keep it from selling.


You have to understand that labor costs can be more than parts cost for one, R&D, and tooling capital can more expensive as well. The FA20T has the tooling done, captial spent and labor issues figured out. A detuned GT-86 FA20T slightly modified for fitment would probably cost little if any thing to switch from the Toyotas D4-S blackmail. Tada, maybe someone higher f-up when they stepped on Subaru's toes.


Subaru holds all the cards when the contract runs up. Toyotas only option is what they did to the 2ZZ, a positive displacement supercharger, I've heard rumbling that for emissions this is even better than a DIT, but I'm afraid that will cost $35k. And I wager they kill the whole project before being outdone by Subaru.

The FA20T doesn't fit in the BRZ because it has a bottom mounted turbo system, the exhaust is on the wrong side of the car and wouldn't come close to have the correct clearance. While you may "feel" and "think" Subaru/Toyota can easily make this happen, they can't, its a matter of economics and research and developement and would need to have the car completely re-designed. There's no way you work in the "automotive" industry and then spout the information you do, its embarassing.