Motorweek: 2014 Scion TC > FRS

[Slipstream]

Originally Posted by Davey

And the steering wheel is so much easier to turn, too!

And as we all know, they're grounded to the ground. Probably because of the rims and the bluetooths.



I'm beating a dead horse here, but comparing these two and picking a winner is like declaring a hammer is a better tool than a scalpel. You can do more things with the hammer, and it's cheaper, and more durable, and lots of people have them. Therefore it's better... Just as long as you aren't trying to do brain surgery.

Context (MotorWeek's demographic and our position as driving enthusiasts) is key.

[Davey]

Originally Posted by Slipstream

And as we all know, they're grounded to the ground. Probably because of the rims and the bluetooths.

Not much sleekness to her body, you know what I'm sayin'?

But he seems to like it anyway...

[Ubersuber]

In what universe is 100 hp/litre inadequate power?

That is pretty much all you can get from an emissions legal naturally aspirated engine unless you are willing to spend huge money.

People also complain about the lack of torque. 151 lb ft from 2.0 litres is also very impressive twist. The BRZ has a short stroke (square bore/stroke ratio) flat four which pulls pretty well for a "big" bore engine (Subaru builds the FB engine with slightly undersquare bore/stroke for better low end torque) and the important thing is the FA engine is a screamer. 7,400 rpm for a reasonably priced sportscar is very impressive and it isn't just empty rpm either, this little sucker pulls right through the red line (first gear is a tad short for my taste).

The FA engine has the exact same torque curve (at a lower level but slightly better specific output) as both Porsche Boxster/Cayman engines, 2.7 or 3.4 litre (no surprise since Porsche helped Subaru develop their VVT) and in reality the Subaru puts out a bit more torque and power per litre than those excellent (and very expensive) Porsche engines. The "torque dip" is unavoidable with the type of VVT both Porsche and Subaru are using. In reality it is a pair of torque peaks that creates the "dip" and results from the crossover in VVT.

This little car is superb, unlike anything built before it.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Ubersuber

In what universe is 100 hp/litre inadequate power?

That is pretty much all you can get from an emissions legal naturally aspirated engine unless you are willing to spend huge money.

People also complain about the lack of torque. 151 lb ft from 2.0 litres is also very impressive twist.

HP/Liter is impressive until it gets stuck in a pig of a car. This 200 hp 2.0L would be miserable in lets say the current Mustang or Gen Coupe which clock in at >3,500 and >3,200 lbs respectively. Many people hoped this would be 100-300 lbs lighter than it is, that would certainly have made this a more impressive package (and it's possible with some sacrifices like the rear seats and some of the interior panels, racing buckets etc.)

This car has less twist than my 20 year old Nissan with a single cam 2.4L motor (151 ft-lbs vs. 154 ft-lbs), the FA20 is obviously better than the KA24E so you don't need to belabor the point, just saying it isn't some miracle motor.

FA20 is a very good motor, but as a package the Toyobaru loses a lot of comparisons at the price point.

Drag race? Mustang V6 is unarguably faster and costs less
Corners? Mustang and Gen coupe pull better skidpad entirely OEM, allow for tire budget then the Miata can pull over 1.1 no problem
'Round a track? Mustang V6 wins
'Round an autox? Depends, Toyobaru may win a specific layout but many favor speed or agility over the other leaving the Toyobaru out to dry

Practicality? Back seats are ok at best, loses out to the hatch TC in a heartbeat for storage not to mention true hot hatches (Abarth, GTI, Mini, Focus ST, Fiesta ST, Mazda3 (both speed and non-speed), Impreza, WRX) which are very nearly as fast.
Mileage? Good compared to Mustang/Miata/most other cars that win performance but loses to many of the hot hatches mentioned above.
Comfort? Many of the cars that win the above two categories ride smoother, have less NVH and better passenger space.
Gadgets? lol

What's left? Driving feel, chassis capability, aesthetics (to some), reliability (not confirmed yet), and overall experience. Those mean a lot to some people but could be unenjoyable (i.e. prefer experience of Mustang straight line over corner carving or unimportant to others.

I'd say if you polled 100 people on the street, gave them a TC for a week and then an FRS for a week and tell them the price most would pick the TC. I love this car and have zero interest in the TC but objectively speaking it isn't a slam dunk for the majority of the population.

[Black Tire]

Isn't Scion TC short for Scion Toyota Corolla?

The TC is a dead end boring car with wrong wheel drive..

The FR-S has POTENTIAL. With just the few mods that I have been able to afford, the handling is like magic. Power is readily available when I have the money. If I need THAT much cargo space I can always borrow my parent's Civic or my sister's minivan. I stopped watching Motorweek a long time ago. Besides, there are other places I can go to get shouted at each week.

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I'd say if you polled 100 people on the street, gave them a TC for a week and then an FRS for a week and tell them the price most would pick the TC. I love this car and have zero interest in the TC but objectively speaking it isn't a slam dunk for the majority of the population.

Most people vote with their wallets, which is why the Corolla and Camry win using your argument. Hence your argument is meaningless with respect to sporty type cars which the TC is far from being.


Also the FRS/BRZ is the ONLY car that plays well in all those categories you mentioned in a single package except drag racing. Though that can be fixed as well with FI, final drive and other trans work if you don't care about mileage.


You know you cut the 86 short on track performance when it's only 1-2 tenths slower than a 300hp Mustang around Streets of Willow on Prius tires no less. You know this and you've seen plenty of vids versus various S2000s on the track and it does very well for itself. I know you want to support your argument but let's not get silly implying the 86 is somehow an inferior dolt around a track. It doesn't take much to be highly competitive whereas a lot of those other option will have far less headroom in their chassis to keep up.


Give every car in your comparison the same amount of power, gearing and rubber and the 86 will run circles around them (production cars). Only the Miata is competitive but it lacks all the practicality you mentioned, gets less mileage and pollutes more with much less power!


If you are the type who makes buying decisions based on particular stats a car mag puts together and you bought this car, you're an imbecile. This car does everything it was designed to do and pays perfect homage to it's mission and historical lineage. You buy this car because all the others are too severely compromised one way or the other and simply can't be fixed to do what the 86 can offer. Period.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Boxer486

You buy this car because all the others are too severely compromised one way or the other and simply can't be fixed to do what the 86 can offer. Period.

I'll go paragraph by paragraph.
1. That is exactly the point of the opinion being discussed, I don't understand why y'all think it's the worst opinion in the world.
2. Yes it plays well, but does nothing as spectacular as something else, someone who focuses more on performance results or overall practicality will come to a different conclusion, hence the point of the opinion being discussed.
3. Yes I did sell it short, it is still however slower than the cars you and I mentioned. No argument the chassis is extremely capable, I already said as much. Bottom line is most people don't go to the track and fewer want to spend hundreds extra on quality tires and even fewer want to risk blowing a motor or drivetrain out by adding forced induction.
4. I'm not sure how this fantasy car argument works, I agree that the Toyobaru may be the best RWD chassis available today.
5. I don't think your wrong, I think the opinion from Motorweek is correct, for most people the TC is a better option. I already voted with my wallet, have you?

Bottom line is that if you want to go fast out of the box the FRS comes up short. If you want practical and 'sporty' (grounded to the ground) it comes up short once again. Not many people are searching for a practical true corner carver most want one of the other two I just mentioned, something like a Mustang or TC fits the bill better for less money.

Here's a link to the 10 second comment that spawned this thread, it's about 24 minutes in:
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365251632/

[tahdizzle]

TC stands for touring coupe. Don't know about the current gen, but the first gen had nothing to do with a corolla.

Built on the avensis platform with a usdm camry 4cyl.

I have no idea where this corolla business came from.

[2013GTRNate]

Is Motor week still in production?

I don't remember the last time I found any value from their commentary. Albeit they make some good points on this topic; the reality is that these people don't get most consumers.

More and more US car related television shows are losing watchers because they are quite simply out of touch. I am not a huge "mucsle car" fan, thus 99% of US car shows just don't scratch that itch for me. Don't get me wrong I'll watch them in a pinch but not if Top Gear, Fifth Gear, and or American Top Gear are on, to name a few.

I don't hate muscle cars but with my wallet I have voted and of my past 10 car they were almost all Japanese performance cars. I have never looked back and truly have few regrets. I regretted tuning my 300ZX TT to 550HP/602TQ it just never performed to the sum of its parts on a track or drag strip. Short of that all of my cars were great and the Z was awesome as well minus not meeting my unrealistic expectations for that platform (BTW all on a stock block with slightly modded OE turbos).

I guess what I am saying is that with the big American car manufactures supporting so many of these channels we may never get an unbiased car show like what is seen on Top Gear UK.

Cheers,

-Nate

[Hot Lava]

Some very good arguments in this thread. But over all I tender this. What has not been said and what's at the back of all of our minds is of course, the ladies, babes, chicks as it were. The ratio of quality and quantity as it applies to this singular subject is of course greatly in favor of the twins. Argument over.

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I'll go paragraph by paragraph.
1. That is exactly the point of the opinion being discussed, I don't understand why y'all think it's the worst opinion in the world.
2. Yes it plays well, but does nothing as spectacular as something else, someone who focuses more on performance results or overall practicality will come to a different conclusion, hence the point of the opinion being discussed.
3. Yes I did sell it short, it is still however slower than the cars you and I mentioned. No argument the chassis is extremely capable, I already said as much. Bottom line is most people don't go to the track and fewer want to spend hundreds extra on quality tires and even fewer want to risk blowing a motor or drivetrain out by adding forced induction.
4. I'm not sure how this fantasy car argument works, I agree that the Toyobaru may be the best RWD chassis available today.
5. I don't think your wrong, I think the opinion from Motorweek is correct, for most people the TC is a better option. I already voted with my wallet, have you?

Bottom line is that if you want to go fast out of the box the FRS comes up short. If you want practical and 'sporty' (grounded to the ground) it comes up short once again. Not many people are searching for a practical true corner carver most want one of the other two I just mentioned, something like a Mustang or TC fits the bill better for less money.

Here's a link to the 10 second comment that spawned this thread, it's about 24 minutes in:
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365251632/

That's exactly why the video's analysis is BS as I had discussed with others earlier in the thread. The FRS has a better power/weight ratio and higher absolute horsepower value than the TC on both counts. Hence MW is full of shit in their analysis saying buy the TC over the FRS which is underpowered.


Yes, I have an FRS. I got it for the mileage and cargo capacity in a balanced package that won't put me to sleep. I already have sharper cars that exceed in particular areas better but the overall balance and capability of the FRS makes it the more enjoyable everyday drive that you just want to keep driving and not get out of even though in some ways it's a softer car. It's the Goldilocks porridge. Just right. Which doesn't mean can't be improved as we already seen that happen from the factory.


Another area where none of the cars you mentioned can touch the 86 is high speed aero. It cuts through air like a red hot ginsu through melted butter. Try equaling that in a Mustang, Genesis, TC or Fiesta. All bricks. So if you want absolute speed on the track, you can do it with this car.


Sure, there are tons of Corvette and Porsche owners that seem incapable of breaking 60mph in the fast lane too. However, this car was specifically designed to carry a set of four track wheels and tools in the back as well as having clearance and reversible headrests for a helmet. If people choose not to take advantage of a car's inherent design abilities, that shouldn't take anything away from the design itself. Which just goes to show comparing it to a TC is nonsense.


Here's the TC buyer to clear all this smoke and mirrors BS up from MW.


"Dad, I'm turning 18 and I want an FRS."


"No, this is your first car and it's going to be a Corolla. Cheap, reliable."


"But dad, a Corolla is weak sauce, other kids will laugh at me!"


"Alright, you can get a TC but that's as far as it goes."

[Deep Six]

At the end of the day this was just another automotive journalist taking a jab at the 86's perceived lack of power. This irrelevent TC feature was just a convenient opportunity as if a higher performance FRS would trump the more practicle TC in their strange balancing all the attributes mentality.

[superleggera]

I dont understand how the scion TC on paper or in real life would be better a car. The TC is a car with less HP, front wheel drive, and even gets worse gas mileage than an auto frs/brz, just to name a few things. Maybe it has better ride quality?

[strat61caster]

@Boxer486 @superleggera

Of course the FRS is the better car, I bought one and wouldn't dream of having a TC. The argument is that for most people the $5k upgrade (plus tax, title, license, maintenance) isn't worth it over a TC. TC wins in comfort practicality economy, and depending on the performance you're looking for the Toyobaru can be bested for less money. Argue 'till your blue in the face, it ain't going to change the numbers.

The kind of person considering a TC isn't going to care about aerodynamics or fitting four tires in the back (which I'm sure the TC can do as well), they want a something sportier than a corolla/civic, something slightly different, and reliable/economical, and that's the point of the review.