Engine idle chirping (cricket) noise poll.

[Prog]

Originally Posted by xRavenFRSx

I don't mean as far as serious problems go, of course they are expected to take care of those. But for the many noises and imperfections that aren't causing mechanical issues with the car, that's to be expected of a first generation car. Theres a varied level of wear and use they cant simulate in research and testing. Its crazy to think theyre going to go through and fix the long list of these noises and imperfections on 100,000+ cars. Theyre getting info from dealers for these problems that were reporting, and theyre using this to make a more refined 2nd gen car.

I traded a 2010 Camaro 2LT/RS in for my BRZ. I got that car when they were super rare and there were waiting lists for it. Know how many weird noises it had? Zero - from the day I got it to the day I traded it in.

This isn't Toyota's or Subaru's first car, I don't know why people are acting like they don't know how to make cars and that we should forgive very irritating and embarrassing problems with the 86.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Prog

I traded a 2010 Camaro 2LT/RS in for my BRZ. I got that car when they were super rare and there were waiting lists for it. Know how many weird noises it had? Zero - from the day I got it to the day I traded it in.

How a 2010 Camaro performs is completely irrelevant to the enjoyment of this car. They have so little in common that the fact that you would even try to compare them makes me question why you bought a BRZ in the first place. If your Camaro was so great, why trade it?

Originally Posted by Prog

This isn't Toyota's or Subaru's first car, I don't know why people are acting like they don't know how to make cars and that we should forgive very irritating and embarrassing problems with the 86.

These cars are a brilliant exercise in compromise. Toyota and Subaru could certainly design away many of the issues. But then either: 1) the car wouldn't perform the same way or 2) it would cost a lot more. And that would pretty much defeat the purpose.

I'm not bothered by that at all, but then I grew up with British sports cars. My mom had an MG Midget. My dad had an MGB. I had a Triumph TR6. An MGB costs $3K in 1970 (about $17K in today's dollars), but it was a true sports car that could corner with some of the most expensive cars in the world at the time. But to get it that cheap, you had to put up with leaks, brittle British steel, strange noises, unusual odors, weird electrical problems and all sorts of other issues. The 60s Austin Healey Sprite that almost became my first car didn't even have door handles!

Having experienced first hand how bare bones those old cars were, it simply amazes me that we can have a sports car that performs like this one and also has modern amenities and safety features. Power steering? Auto windows? Air conditioning? And it actually passes crash tests? For under $30K?!?! What sorcery is this?

So I think you need to just get over it, stop complaining and just enjoy what you have. I for one am glad that Toyobaru built this thing instead of taking a safer path and making a car just like so much other boring crap already on the market.

BTW, you think this car is bad? Wait until they release the "Baby 86," which they're talking about being 2100 lbs. and having a target price under $20K. I have a feeling that thing will make an FR-S look like a supercar.

[yaguphire]

Baby86.. Interesting

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by yaguphire

Baby86.. Interesting

IF it happens. It's still just a twinkle in the eyes right now.

[litemup]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

How a 2010 Camaro performs is completely irrelevant to the enjoyment of this car. They have so little in common that the fact that you would even try to compare them makes me question why you bought a BRZ in the first place. If your Camaro was so great, why trade it?



These cars are a brilliant exercise in compromise. Toyota and Subaru could certainly design away many of the issues. But then either: 1) the car wouldn't perform the same way or 2) it would cost a lot more. And that would pretty much defeat the purpose.

I'm not bothered by that at all, but then I grew up with British sports cars. My mom had an MG Midget. My dad had an MGB. I had a Triumph TR6. An MGB costs $3K in 1970 (about $17K in today's dollars), but it was a true sports car that could corner with some of the most expensive cars in the world at the time. But to get it that cheap, you had to put up with leaks, brittle British steel, strange noises, unusual odors, weird electrical problems and all sorts of other issues. The 60s Austin Healey Sprite that almost became my first car didn't even have door handles!

Having experienced first hand how bare bones those old cars were, it simply amazes me that we can have a sports car that performs like this one and also has modern amenities and safety features. Power steering? Auto windows? Air conditioning? And it actually passes crash tests? For under $30K?!?! What sorcery is this?

So I think you need to just get over it, stop complaining and just enjoy what you have. I for one am glad that Toyobaru built this thing instead of taking a safer path and making a car just like so much other boring crap already on the market.

BTW, you think this car is bad? Wait until they release the "Baby 86," which they're talking about being 2100 lbs. and having a target price under $20K. I have a feeling that thing will make an FR-S look like a supercar.

[Prog]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

How a 2010 Camaro performs is completely irrelevant to the enjoyment of this car. They have so little in common that the fact that you would even try to compare them makes me question why you bought a BRZ in the first place.

My apologies if I didn't make the comparison clear enough. The 5th gen Camaro was, for all intents and purposes, a new car that just bore the namesake and some styling cues to an older car that had been out of production for 7 years or whatever it was. My point was that GM made a car that did not leave people feeling like they were "beta testing" something, a sentiment which seems pretty common around here despite us driving production - and certainly not beta - cars.

Originally Posted by extrashaky

These cars are a brilliant exercise in compromise. Toyota and Subaru could certainly design away many of the issues. But then either: 1) the car wouldn't perform the same way or 2) it would cost a lot more. And that would pretty much defeat the purpose.

Weird that my 20 year old 240sx didn't have these annoying noise issues. What secret did Nissan have?

I will *not* apologize for a noise in these cars. People get so caught up in being apologetic about them that they don't understand that you can dislike certain things about them and still like the car. I do like my car. I *love* my car. But Subaru/Toyota are not doing me a favor by making this car, I am doing them a favor by buying it.

I am absolutely confident that modern technology is amazing enough to make a fuel pump that (despite being high pressure): 1) doesn't chirp 2) chirps but is insulated well enough that it can't be heard - or, alternatively, that this can be (or could've been) designed around somehow without greatly affecting any of the things we care about in this car.

[BRZJunkie]

Originally Posted by Prog

My apologies if I didn't make the comparison clear enough. The 5th gen Camaro was, for all intents and purposes, a new car that just bore the namesake and some styling cues to an older car that had been out of production for 7 years or whatever it was. My point was that GM made a car that did not leave people feeling like they were "beta testing" something, a sentiment which seems pretty common around here despite us driving production - and certainly not beta - cars.




Weird that my 20 year old 240sx didn't have these annoying noise issues. What secret did Nissan have?

I will *not* apologize for a noise in these cars. People get so caught up in being apologetic about them that they don't understand that you can dislike certain things about them and still like the car. I do like my car. I *love* my car. But Subaru/Toyota are not doing me a favor by making this car, I am doing them a favor by buying it.

I am absolutely confident that modern technology is amazing enough to make a fuel pump that (despite being high pressure): 1) doesn't chirp 2) chirps but is insulated well enough that it can't be heard - or, alternatively, that this can be (or could've been) designed around somehow without greatly affecting any of the things we care about in this car.

Seems like few people thinks like that around here. I agree 100%. My first Subaru. I expected THE package. A car is different things for different people. But basicaly, the factors in selecting a specific model takes : performance, styling, comfort, technology AND sound. Where du you draw the line as to what is unacceptable. Say, you purchased an exotic 200K$and 3 months later it starts to sound like a swarm of insect... would you be irritated? I love my BRZ and I can't accept there is no fix for the HPFP. I'm ranting again. Darn crikets.

All I'm saying is sound is part of the experience and if every red ligth reminds you that you are getting the short end of the stick from Toyata/Subaru ... well...

[litemup]

+1 for @extrashaky's post. So the HPFP gets a B+ because it squeaks... at idle... sometimes...

BFD

[BRZJunkie]

Originally Posted by litemup

+1 for @extrashaky's post. So the HPFP gets a B+ because it squeaks... at idle... sometimes...

BFD

Unreal!

[litemup]

Originally Posted by BRZJunkie

Unreal!

In what sense?

[strat61caster]

It squeaks, it really shouldn't and it's a damn shame.

Oh well, can't hear it at 7,000 rpm.

[litemup]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

It squeaks, it really shouldn't and it's a damn shame.

Oh well, can't hear it at 7,000 rpm.

Hey, I'll be the first one in line for the right stuff but until then, I refer all to my previous. BFD.

[DoomsdayJesus]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

Holy shit does that say the fuel pump costs $1300?



No, you can't. The standard actually says that to qualify as top tier gasoline, it MUST contain 8% to 10% ethanol. If it doesn't have ethanol in it, it doesn't meet the standard and is not top tier gasoline.

My mistake, you're right. There are equivalents however, like my local Acme Fuel station that use the same additives in the same volumes. IIRC top tier didn't originally have an ethanol requirement, it was added later. Not that it's an awful thing, since ethanol by itself is a pretty excellent solvent that fights deposits. It's just the energy density and water retention compared to gas that suck.

Finding 100% gas with decent detergent content is a pain in the ass, though. I just got lucky.

[extrashaky]

So last week I took a trip on a tank of the ethanol-free 92 octane gas I found. The crickets disappeared, but my mileage dropped from 34 mpg (on E10) to 30.5 mpg on the E0. Just to be sure, I filled up at Chevron, and my mileage is back up to 34.

Fuck this. I thought it was an interesting problem to try to solve, but I'm going to stick with top tier from now on and not bother with thinking about it any more.