GT86 vs Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.6 R

[tahdizzle]

Most people are in the mindset that a sports car has to have fast 0-60 and 1/4 times.

So by that logic, a Civic is as much of a sports car as a Twin is.

[thill]

My BRZ is more of a sports car than my WRX is.

At least by my definition of what a sports car is.

[johnnyfast11]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

Here we go. Lol.
86...
It's not fast (by any measure)
It doesn't handle well, it's fun handling but two different things
Def not a family car
Looks cheap but subjective
It IS cheap but not cheap enough and slower than a civic si.
It IS appealing for the fun handling. So there's that.

You're turn.

Oh and "drivers brain"? Lol. Save up and get a base z with sport if you want fast and fun.

sorry but your reply is really crap.

the 86 handles like a dream. its built for low center of gravity and therefore it handles like a dream.

that's mostly why we got the car.
power can always be added.
and the price is just right.

[AsianStyle]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

Most people are in the mindset that a sports car has to have fast 0-60 and 1/4 times.

So by that logic, a Civic is as much of a sports car as a Twin is.

Those people's mindsets are bad and they should feel bad.

[blackhawkdown]

I said the civic and the twins are sports compact cars. I didn't say sports car.

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by Chad11491

Yeah, surprisingly it hasn't gone up. I would love to do that if I was in to mustangs, just to see peoples reaction of that land yacht driving like that at an autocross haha.

Well, foxbody Stangs were considered land yachts back then, but compared to modern Camaros, Challengers and Mustangs they are pretty svelte lol.

[Cliu91]

Originally Posted by blackhawkdown

Please elaborate how comparing the twins to a civic is trolling? Same price point, compact sports car. Cheap, both are slow, and handles well in their respective drive layout. The hp and torque are pretty similar, weights are pretty similar. to me, it sounds like your offended because your car is compared to a civic.

1) This is FRS/BRZ vs. Genesis Coupe, even mentioning the Civic in this thread is a moot point cause it doesn't even belong here
2) "Handles well in their respective drive layout"... drive layout being different?
3) You're comparing two cars based on stats alone, have you sat in both the Civic and FRS? I doubt it.

[totopo]

Originally Posted by johnnyfast11

sorry but your reply is really crap.

the 86 handles like a dream. its built for low center of gravity and therefore it handles like a dream.

that's mostly why we got the car.
power can always be added.
and the price is just right.

You missed the point of his entire post. Theres kind of 2 ways to think about handling.
1) subjective: feel, fun, controllability, responsiveness
2) obective: measured performance.

True, low cg helps in both, and clearly the 86 is awesome bang for buck for the first one, but how it is in the second metric might not be as hot as a lot of people on this forum make it out to be. How about, it doesnt clearly stand apart from other reasonably priced new "sports" cars on the virtue of the second one, but it does on the first.

That being said, the Genesis coupe doesnt really fare well on the second point either. Its track times are pretty sad compared to similar hp and weight cars, like infinity g35/37/q or the BMW m235i. But it is a heck of a lot cheaper.

[Boxer486]

It's bizarre to me that so many people attribute their idea of 'handling' to what choice of tire the manufacturer decided to put on the car instead of the actual design and engineering of the chassis and how it is balanced and responds.


Tires are a consumable. They will have to be replaced. The idea you will drop tens of thousands of dollars choosing a sports, sporty, sport compact, GT, whatever car based on the performance of a couple hundred bucks of rubber that will go in the trash bin is asinine.


For that reason alone, it's pretty hard for me to take such people seriously as sports car enthusiasts. Not that it matters in the grand scheme of thing other than the amount of radiant noise flowing throughout the galaxy.

[totopo]

Originally Posted by Boxer486

It's bizarre to me that so many people attribute their idea of 'handling' to what choice of tire the manufacturer decided to put on the car instead of the actual design and engineering of the chassis and how it is balanced and responds.


Tires are a consumable. They will have to be replaced. The idea you will drop tens of thousands of dollars choosing a sports, sporty, sport compact, GT, whatever car based on the performance of a couple hundred bucks of rubber that will go in the trash bin is asinine.


For that reason alone, it's pretty hard for me to take such people seriously as sports car enthusiasts. Not that it matters in the grand scheme of thing other than the amount of radiant noise flowing throughout the galaxy.

Well with better tires, you lose a little on the subjective side, especially on the road. With equal tires, still the 86 isnt that stand out special. Maybe im wrong, time will tell, but it also somewhat hard to quantify performance in a meaningful way other than times, and the effect of the engine is hard to tease out. Certainly if you look at a stock frs, given equal tires it dosent really perform great, be it autox or road courses,or skidpad. It doesnt perform terribly, and is pretty good for its price in some metrics, but it also isnt stand out special.

When you start talking about "chassis potential" well theres so many factors that people can argue until their face turns blue and never come up with an agreement, but thats the fun part of being an automotive enthusiast, right?

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Boxer486

It's bizarre to me that so many people attribute their idea of 'handling' to what choice of tire the manufacturer decided to put on the car instead of the actual design and engineering of the chassis and how it is balanced and responds.


Tires are a consumable. They will have to be replaced. The idea you will drop tens of thousands of dollars choosing a sports, sporty, sport compact, GT, whatever car based on the performance of a couple hundred bucks of rubber that will go in the trash bin is asinine.


For that reason alone, it's pretty hard for me to take such people seriously as sports car enthusiasts. Not that it matters in the grand scheme of thing other than the amount of radiant noise flowing throughout the galaxy.

Agreed, tires need to be considered in any evaluation of handling.

That said, the FR-S is still pulling up to 0.96 g on the skidpad with the much-maligned stock "prius" touring tires:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...test-sheet.pdf

And up to 1.00 g / 70+ mph slalom with actual performance street tires (and no other mods):
http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/t...ck-tested.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/special-...transformation

So from an objective standpoint, the chassis is definitely impressive. And more importantly, regardless of whether touring or extreme-performance tires are used, the fantastic balance is retained. It seems to be inherent to the chassis, and not the tires.

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by totopo

Well with better tires, you lose a little on the subjective side, especially on the road. With equal tires, still the 86 isnt that stand out special. Maybe im wrong, time will tell, but it also somewhat hard to quantify performance in a meaningful way other than times, and the effect of the engine is hard to tease out. Certainly if you look at a stock frs, given equal tires it dosent really perform great, be it autox or road courses,or skidpad. It doesnt perform terribly, and is pretty good for its price in some metrics, but it also isnt stand out special.

When you start talking about "chassis potential" well theres so many factors that people can argue until their face turns blue and never come up with an agreement, but thats the fun part of being an automotive enthusiast, right?

I don't know where you got your information from. Just see below.

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Agreed, tires need to be considered in any evaluation of handling.

That said, the FR-S is still pulling up to 0.96 g on the skidpad with the much-maligned stock "prius" touring tires:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...test-sheet.pdf

And up to 1.00 g / 70+ mph slalom with actual performance street tires (and no other mods):
http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/t...ck-tested.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/special-...transformation

So from an objective standpoint, the chassis is definitely impressive. And more importantly, regardless of whether touring or extreme-performance tires are used, the fantastic balance is retained. It seems to be inherent to the chassis, and not the tires.

[totopo]

Originally Posted by Boxer486

I don't know where you got your information from. Just see below.

Mostly by how there are currently so few events where they are competative. Dont take me wrong, I dont think the chassis is completely terrible and worthless, im just not so sure its convincing that its the second coming of christ or something.

Even in autox where it should be competative. Maybe that 0 speed launch is what really is killing its times. Maybe with more time as experience grows I will be proved wrong.

The skidpad is so hard to say. That 0.96 on stock tires seems hard to believe, when other people report 0.85-0.90. Maybe it was good conditions. Maybe they had a good driver. I would love to see back to back pro driver comparisons. Like I wish they got pobst or some pro autox guy to run gymkhana on dirferent cars w same tire on same day. Ah well, one can always dream.

Anyway, I keep digressing from my main point, which is, the 86 crowd on this forum mostly sounds like the annoying miata guys, but younger. Sure it is fun and svelte and great for learning momentum driving and a ton of fun on and off the track, but somedays people like too go fast as well, so why do you have to hate on them?

That being said, the Genesis 3.8 isnt really a good example of a faster car.

[blackhawkdown]

Originally Posted by Cliu91

1) This is FRS/BRZ vs. Genesis Coupe, even mentioning the Civic in this thread is a moot point cause it doesn't even belong here
2) "Handles well in their respective drive layout"... drive layout being different?
3) You're comparing two cars based on stats alone, have you sat in both the Civic and FRS? I doubt it.

1. Free country to post anywhere.

2. FWD or RWD, both handle well in their respective class.

3. Lets see, I have owned a civic, 2 integras, 1 accord. Driven a BRZ. So yes, I have.

4. Your such a fanboy. As much as I like the twins, I respect other cars for what they are and its capabilities. Yet, your post is full of fanboy praises.