FR-S/BRZ vs 2011+ Mustang V6

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by iShaveWithKatana

If you think that's bad, google or search "Mustang Getrag MT-82 Chinese"

It's one of many reasons why I literally wasn't been able to replace my with a similar car (until now, if the BRZ/86 proves reliable).

My Audi S4 has already had about a half dozen issues in two years.

I drover my RX8 for almost 4 years and put 58,000 miles on it doing nothing but oil/filter changes, a coolant flush & refill, added a fresh set of spark plugs, and an air filter change, with not a single issue.

yeah thats why i never bought a mustang v6 in the first place, i was under my friends 2010 (i know its different parts) but i could see them cutting costs in places where they shouldnt have

ive been reading the stang forums for a couple hours now, looks like there has been failures below 120

doesnt have to do with hp but with the drive shaft rpms, when they get over 6800-7000, the two piece drive shaft comes apart into a million pieces

[Phaedrus29]

Originally Posted by fatoni

Truecar.com and then get a GT for the price of a brz

Just got back from test-driving a '12 V6 and a '13 GT. I have to say that I felt underwhelmed by the V6, and out of these two I would definitely go GT. This has me a bit worried about how the Toyobaru will feel, but we'll see. The big hp and torque numbers of the V6 felt so wimpy to me...I wonder how the feel of the Toyobaru will compare.

And with the announced pricing, the '12 GT is officially (slightly) cheaper (on truecar) than the BRZ. Want...to...test...drive!

[SuqMadiq]

Originally Posted by Phaedrus29

Just got back from test-driving a '12 V6 and a '13 GT. I have to say that I felt underwhelmed by the V6, and out of these two I would definitely go GT. This has me a bit worried about how the Toyobaru will feel, but we'll see. The big hp and torque numbers of the V6 felt so wimpy to me...I wonder how the feel of the Toyobaru will compare.

And with the announced pricing, the '12 GT is officially (slightly) cheaper (on truecar) than the BRZ. Want...to...test...drive!

Just to note, unless you get a Mustang V6 with the track package (I believe that's what it is called) you're going to have bad time. You really need the 3.31 gears if you want it too feel peppy. W/o the package I believe they just have 2.73s, which is a highway gear to get better mileage.

In all honesty, if you can get a brand new Mustang GT with 412hp and that will out corner the BR-Z and FR-S all day long, you should get that. The 5.0 is very impressive, and pulls just shy of a G on the skidpad. That, along with a 0-60 of under 5 secs, a quarter mile of 12.XX, and a whole list of other things it seems that this would be the better buy.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by SuqMadiq

In all honesty, if you can get a brand new Mustang GT with 412hp and that will out corner the BR-Z and FR-S all day long, you should get that. The 5.0 is very impressive, and pulls just shy of a G on the skidpad. That, along with a 0-60 of under 5 secs, a quarter mile of 12.XX, and a whole list of other things it seems that this would be the better buy.

It all comes down to taste and preference. Nothing beats the feeling of a broad powerband with gobs of low-end torque, but the car still has heft. Undoubtedly a good car, but if you prefer the dynamics of a light car...you prefer the dynamics of a light car.

The Mustang has always been good bang for your buck.

[Guff]

Originally Posted by SuqMadiq

Just to note, unless you get a Mustang V6 with the track package (I believe that's what it is called) you're going to have bad time. You really need the 3.31 gears if you want it too feel peppy. W/o the package I believe they just have 2.73s, which is a highway gear to get better mileage.

In all honesty, if you can get a brand new Mustang GT with 412hp and that will out corner the BR-Z and FR-S all day long, you should get that. The 5.0 is very impressive, and pulls just shy of a G on the skidpad. That, along with a 0-60 of under 5 secs, a quarter mile of 12.XX, and a whole list of other things it seems that this would be the better buy.

All good points, but 'out corner the BRZ and FRS all day long' is pushing it. On a tight and technical AutoX, the BRZ would almost certainly post better times than the GT.

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by Guff

All good points, but 'out corner the BRZ and FRS all day long' is pushing it. On a tight and technical AutoX, the BRZ would almost certainly post better times than the GT.

yeah sad that the new v6 driveshaft shatters and the v8 tranny starts having problems at 5k miles

i would spend 30k on a supra with 200k miles on it compared to a new mustang, i may break a driveshaft... at 800rwhp...

the reason why mustangs are cheap is because they are cheaply made and untested... i mean if the 5.0L started having tranny problems for a lot of people at 5k miles... they must have done almost no track testing and built the thing on a computer hoping it would work, the BRZ/86/FR-S has seen 6 years of track testing... i would be amazed if its reliability didnt satisfy me... or if anything broke under 50k miles, even on its first year...

[Guff]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

yeah sad that the new v6 driveshaft shatters and the v8 tranny starts having problems at 5k miles

i would spend 30k on a supra with 200k miles on it compared to a new mustang, i may break a driveshaft... at 800rwhp...

the reason why mustangs are cheap is because they are cheaply made and untested... i mean if the 5.0L started having tranny problems for a lot of people at 5k miles... they must have done almost no track testing and built the thing on a computer hoping it would work, the BRZ/86/FR-S has seen 6 years of track testing... i would be amazed if its reliability didnt satisfy me... or if anything broke under 50k miles, even on its first year...

Yeaaaaaahhhhhh!!!

And even then, it likely wouldn't break.

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by Guff

Yeaaaaaahhhhhh!!!

And even then, it likely wouldn't break.

that why i have so much love for the supra, mechanically, when maintained, by maintained i mean just change the oil, nothing should break for a very long time... a lot of cars cant say that... if its built like a true toyota sports car then we shouldnt have any problems at all

my celica's rods have been tested at 700whp without breaking and it was designed as a 160 whp na chainsaw...

subaru also has great reliability, my best friends brother has a 600whp STI that likes to destroy transmissions, but the engine itself hasnt broken down and has run at boost for 85,000 miles...

yeah interior quality might be a bit cheap on these cars but drivetrains are pretty much bullet proof as long as you dont drop the clutch from the fuel cut

[86fanatic]

I was personally pretty surprised that both the V6 and V8 Mustangs have speed limiters set at relatively low speeds. The V6 is limited to something like 114, the V8 to 145/155 depending on gears.

Even the BOSS is limited to 155 MPH.

Not that I really drive my cars that fast, but considering the power coming out of those power plants it speaks volumes to how much Ford has faith in the drive train.

[Guff]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

that why i have so much love for the supra, mechanically, when maintained, by maintained i mean just change the oil, nothing should break for a very long time... a lot of cars cant say that... if its built like a true toyota sports car then we shouldnt have any problems at all

my celica's rods have been tested at 700whp without breaking and it was designed as a 160 whp na chainsaw...

subaru also has great reliability, my best friends brother has a 600whp STI that likes to destroy transmissions, but the engine itself hasnt broken down and has run at boost for 85,000 miles...

yeah interior quality might be a bit cheap on these cars but drivetrains are pretty much bullet proof as long as you dont drop the clutch from the fuel cut

Last year, I picked up a Supra with 256k miles. It was a TT 6-spd, and it was tip-top, even though the previous owner tracked it. My brother and I single turboed that sucker and made 450 or so reliably for another 2-3k miles til we sold it. The only thing wrong with that car was torn leather seats.

The Supra was a godly creation.

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

yeah sad that the new v6 driveshaft shatters and the v8 tranny starts having problems at 5k miles

i would spend 30k on a supra with 200k miles on it compared to a new mustang, i may break a driveshaft... at 800rwhp...

the reason why mustangs are cheap is because they are cheaply made and untested... i mean if the 5.0L started having tranny problems for a lot of people at 5k miles... they must have done almost no track testing and built the thing on a computer hoping it would work, the BRZ/86/FR-S has seen 6 years of track testing... i would be amazed if its reliability didnt satisfy me... or if anything broke under 50k miles, even on its first year...

The V8 transmission issue was few and far between it's unfair to blanket generalize all the mustangs because of a few lemons. Every manufacturer has them and if you think you're favorite manufac doesn't churn out a few lemons then you're decieving yourself.

The v6 drive shaft isn't a two piece like the v8's and it was the first year they were running with that amount of horsepower for that price. It's literally a $600 fix if you really feel like you'll be pushing the car like that and tracking it. It's already got 305bHP it's not like you'll be starving for power so sending $600 to the shaft isn't bad at all; also comes on a set of sticky tires with adequate diameter.

You're incredibly wrong about them not track testing their vehicles EXTENSIVELY before they're put into production. There are no manufacturers that neglect their vehicles that way. None. It's just that everytime there's a Ford recall everyone jumps down their throats. It's like, if they don't put out perfect vehicles they're still putting out late 80's early 90's Ford quality; which is 100% untrue.

[Capt Canuck]

Originally Posted by 86fanatic

I was personally pretty surprised that both the V6 and V8 Mustangs have speed limiters set at relatively low speeds. The V6 is limited to something like 114, the V8 to 145/155 depending on gears.

Even the BOSS is limited to 155 MPH.

Not that I really drive my cars that fast, but considering the power coming out of those power plants it speaks volumes to how much Ford has faith in the drive train.

I wouldn't doubt one of the reasons for the V6's low top-end speed limiter is because of the amount of them that end up in car rental fleets. They don't want anymore of them getting wrecked than need be ;-)

These are still cracking value IMHO and continually banging on about some weak points, that can be fixed, really is fanboyish or having the blinders fastened too tight.

[Phaedrus29]

Originally Posted by SuqMadiq

Just to note, unless you get a Mustang V6 with the track package (I believe that's what it is called) you're going to have bad time. You really need the 3.31 gears if you want it too feel peppy. W/o the package I believe they just have 2.73s, which is a highway gear to get better mileage.

In all honesty, if you can get a brand new Mustang GT with 412hp and that will out corner the BR-Z and FR-S all day long, you should get that. The 5.0 is very impressive, and pulls just shy of a G on the skidpad. That, along with a 0-60 of under 5 secs, a quarter mile of 12.XX, and a whole list of other things it seems that this would be the better buy.

Very good point about the track package. The V6 I drove didn't have the package, and I was mistakenly thinking the only difference was suspension and wheels/tires. I should certainly seek out the V6+track package before making the final decision. It will be an easy one though, if the Toyobaru wows.

[vivix]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

yeah sad that the new v6 driveshaft shatters and the v8 tranny starts having problems at 5k miles

i would spend 30k on a supra with 200k miles on it compared to a new mustang, i may break a driveshaft... at 800rwhp...

the reason why mustangs are cheap is because they are cheaply made and untested... i mean if the 5.0L started having tranny problems for a lot of people at 5k miles... they must have done almost no track testing and built the thing on a computer hoping it would work, the BRZ/86/FR-S has seen 6 years of track testing... i would be amazed if its reliability didnt satisfy me... or if anything broke under 50k miles, even on its first year...

>> Implying first year cars don't have issues
>> Implying the FRSBRZ won't

Oh you