Any previous Scion tC owners? Pros & cons vs. the tC?

[VuDism]

also the TC IMO is more Toyota than the FRS...

The FRS feels like a Subaru to me. I've owned 2 Subarus...
I did come out of Fuji Heavy Industries factory...

[retrosmiths]

Stock vs stock, the FR-S is a driver's car, a slow-car-fast canyon-carver, with "emergency" seats for 2 other people, enough trunk space to be practical (compared to the Miata/S2K trunk), and just really fun to drive. The tC is a sluggish, anemic grocery-getter; a Camry in disguise, with no real aftermarket parts support (for the 2012+ models).

Those with resources can put a turbo in a tC and make it fast on a *straight* line. Sounds fun but if you think about it, even a grandma can put a pedal to the metal.

[VuDism]

Originally Posted by retrosmiths

Stock vs stock, the FR-S is a driver's car, a slow-car-fast canyon-carver, with "emergency" seats for 2 other people, enough trunk space to be practical (compared to the Miata/S2K trunk), and just really fun to drive.

The tC is a sluggish, anemic grocery-getter; a Camry in disguise, with no real aftermarket parts support (for the 2012+ models). Those with resources can put a turbo in a tC and make it fast on a *straight* line. Sounds fun but if you think about it, even a grandma can put a pedal to the metal.

I'd have to respectfully disagree with you about the TC

the 2012 TC once modded was a pretty nice coupe IMO.
There are actually plenty of mods for the 2012+ - Aero kits, suspension, turbo kits, header, exhaust etc.

I had TRD swaybars and springs on my 2012 tc and i thought it handled pretty damn well.

[retrosmiths]

Originally Posted by VuDism

There are actually plenty of mods for the 2012+ - Aero kits, suspension, turbo kits, header, exhaust etc.

There are parts out there but compared to the 86 market size, the tC2 is seriously lacking.

Originally Posted by VuDism

I had TRD swaybars and springs on my 2012 tc and i thought it handled pretty damn well.

"Well" in what sense? For daily driving, canyons, autocross or track?

Not trying to spark something. I used to own a 2012 tC and it's just not something I enjoyed due to the issues I outlined in my other post.

[VuDism]

Originally Posted by retrosmiths

There are parts out there but compared to the 86 market size, the tC2 is seriously lacking.



"Well" in what sense? For daily driving, canyons, autocross or track?

Not trying to spark something. I used to own a 2012 tC and it's just not something I enjoyed due to the issues I outlined in my other post.

LOL... what other car has the market the 86 has??? lol. a civic? wrx? evo?
the Tc2 market was enough to get what you want. i mean... what did you want for the TC2 that the aftermarket did not provide? ? i felt it had everything I would want to mod the TC with..

There were a lot of guys that autocross/tracked their Tc2 quite successfully.
I'm comparing "handling well" as daily driving and comparing it to my previous modded cars GC8-WRX Impreza, 2008 STI, and Nissan 350z. the Tc2 IMO handled well compared to those cars.

either way the FRS > TC .. so it doesnt really matter

[blackhawkdown]

The real truth:

FRS/BRZ is a cheap rwd economy car. The TC is a cheap fwd economy car. People make the twins like its all rainbows and shit. It is not. It is a cheap rwd sports car that has good handling from the factory. 200hp says it all. A Si has 205hp and that is coming from a civic. If you want a proper sports car, get a Supra, RX7, 370z, Porsche.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by blackhawkdown

The real truth:

FRS/BRZ is a cheap rwd economy car. The TC is a cheap fwd economy car. People make the twins like its all rainbows and shit. It is not. It is a cheap rwd sports car that has good handling from the factory. 200hp says it all. A Si has 205hp and that is coming from a civic. If you want a proper sports car, get a Supra, RX7, 370z, Porsche.

So hard to take any post you make seriously when you contradict yourself everytime. Just sayin

[Ocean-Grown 86]

The tC and FRS are completely different by nature but...I came from a 2010 scion tc automatic. It had a trd front strut bat, 18" trd wheels with Toyo proxes 4 tires. trd rear sway bar, and trd axleback exhaust. It was a comfortable and practical DD but even with all the trd goodies it still doesn't compare to my FRS in terms of driving enjoyment. It was an automatic after all. If I wasn't crazy about driving dynamics and sheer driving fun, then I'd still probably have the old tC. I do miss that sunroof and having more than one passenger was much easier.

On a side note, I borrowed a 2011 Scion tC with a 6mt. To be honest, I felt that the older generation was the better car. The first generation had a better interior and rode more comfortably, albeit slightly boat like. IMO the second generation had a very cheap interior and had a choppy ride.

[VuDism]

Originally Posted by blackhawkdown

The real truth:

FRS/BRZ is a cheap rwd economy car. The TC is a cheap fwd economy car. People make the twins like its all rainbows and shit. It is not. It is a cheap rwd sports car that has good handling from the factory. 200hp says it all. A Si has 205hp and that is coming from a civic. If you want a proper sports car, get a Supra, RX7, 370z, Porsche.

Yikes dude... i wouldn't take it that far. lol

-the Supra handles like shit.
-the Rx7 engine might not even last long enough to finish the track.
-370z? sit in a 370 and an 86 and see which has a better seating position for a "sports car"... also... base 370z is like $28k new... about the same range as a high end frs-brz. it also shares the same base motor as a Nissan Maxima and every other v6 Nissan has to offer... i guess it is also not a sports car?

So Subaru and Toyota had to joint develop an engine... d4s and all... for an economy car?

so horsepower is what makes a sports car??? so i guess the lotus elise with 180hp motor that is the same motor in a 2006 Toyota Corolla XRS not a sports car??? the same motor in a celica GT-s... not a sports car???

The Twins are sports cars... that happen to be affordable.

...Subaru/Toyota even went as far as making sure the cargo space was enough for a set of 4 wheels and a jack... for what? to get groceries? lol. The twins were built for a purpose. being an economy car is not that purpose

[MrAmalto]

Originally Posted by blackhawkdown

The real truth:

FRS/BRZ is a cheap rwd economy car. The TC is a cheap fwd economy car. People make the twins like its all rainbows and shit. It is not. It is a cheap rwd sports car that has good handling from the factory. 200hp says it all. A Si has 205hp and that is coming from a civic. If you want a proper sports car, get a Supra, RX7, 370z, Porsche.

Economy cars don't have factory limited slip differentials. The twins have one. Also the base 370z has an open differential and costs about 5 grand more. Lastly the twins have a lower center of gravity than most of the cars you mentioned, including some of the porsches.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by VuDism

The Twins are sports cars... that happen to be affordable.

Yep, I agree with this. I'd say the Twins more closely fit the definition of a sports car than my old STI or 350z, even though those cars had 300+ hp.

Sports cars are lightweight, purpose-built RWD cars. It's not about hp, as cars like the 167 hp Miata and 180 hp Elise prove. It's about weight, agility, and RWD.

[retrosmiths]

I think we're deviating from the thread topic here.

IMO, the tC2 is a Camry with a sportier exterior. The 86 is like a watered-down 911.

[noobcake]

Originally Posted by VuDism

The Twins are sports cars.

sports car

noun : a low, small car that seats two people and that is made for fast driving

[PHLonomenal]

This car fits the definition of sports car as well or better than my M3...slower or not.