BM TV: 86 Tuning Potential, comparison among non-tuned 86, TRD86 and HKS86

[ESBjiujitsu]

you are my hero!!! so much great information!

[Sasquachulator]

Keep in mind:
the OEM tires are Parts Bin tires, meaning they most likely cost Toyota little to nothing to put onto the cars. (probably one easy way for them to save on costs for the car) Plus its the highest performing OEM tires in the company as far as i can tell that isnt on a Lexus. And its not just Prius Performance package, check out all the sport trimmed Toyota's (Sienna SE, Camry SE, Corolla XRS, etc), they're all equipped with Michelin Pilot Premacy's (i think there may also be another tire on them depending on where the car is located).

they do pretty well for stock tires i must say.

And remember, all OEM tires usually suck anyways.

[Exhaust]

I knew bigger wheels would be the way to go.... any joiners??

[Gardus@Supersprint]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

Keep in mind:
the OEM tires are Parts Bin tires, meaning they most likely cost Toyota little to nothing to put onto the cars. (probably one easy way for them to save on costs for the car) Plus its the highest performing OEM tires in the company as far as i can tell that isnt on a Lexus. And its not just Prius Performance package, check out all the sport trimmed Toyota's (Sienna SE, Camry SE, Corolla XRS, etc), they're all equipped with Michelin Pilot Premacy's (i think there may also be another tire on them depending on where the car is located).

they do pretty well for stock tires i must say.

And remember, all OEM tires usually suck anyways.

This is a sports car. I don't care what in the "Toyota parts bin". They can get Pilot Sport, Exaltos, or any other brand of tyres.
Re050A are pretty good and are OEM on many cars. Conti Sport Contact 3?
It's just a poor choice and they are paying the price with the GT86 getting poor laptimes on magazines.

[SUB-FT86]

I can't believe the automatic gets to the 1/4 mile in 15.9 seconds. That's terrible.

[dsgerbc]

How on earth were they able to stick 18x8.5 +48 rims up front? I thought there was not enough clearance for those (and for 235-wide tires as well).

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by 86'd

But I wanted to see the 400m!!!!!

It's obvious that tires are going to have a pretty big impact on this car, at least acceleration wise and braking.

braking and cornering not really acceleration (would help 0-60 but not accelerating from a roll)

Originally Posted by Gardus

It's just a poor choice and they are paying the price with the GT86 getting poor laptimes on magazines.

car was built not based on numbers but on fun and the stock tires are more fun but will post slower lap times...

[SUB-FT86]

What I don't understand is a IS250 with the same damn automatic weighs 3500 lbs, has 204 hp, and comes with 184 lb ft of torque yet it gets to the 0-400 in 15.6 seconds! Now the 86 auto is almost 700 lbs less weighty, the tranny is a slightly quicker shifter, and the torque difference is suppose to be a wash considering it only has 33 less torque with a 700 lb difference. I was expecting 0-400 for the auto in 15.1-2 seconds. The manual seems to be the best deal and the automatic sounds like less car for more money. And in the real world I believe the mpg is ultra close.

[YukiHachiRoku]

Originally Posted by Exhaust

I knew bigger wheels would be the way to go.... any joiners??

Me, but I was thinking 18 X 8/225 with +45 offset after a lot of pondering.

seems like a fair balance?

[Exhaust]

Originally Posted by YukiHachiRoku

Me, but I was thinking 18 X 8/225 with +45 offset after a lot of pondering.

seems like a fair balance?

My thoughts exactly, enough to close the wheel gap with a 3 second gain on the time attack. As well as a better selection in the wheel department.

[Lasse]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

What I don't understand is a IS250 with the same damn automatic weighs 3500 lbs, has 204 hp, and comes with 184 lb ft of torque yet it gets to the 0-400 in 15.6 seconds! Now the 86 auto is almost 700 lbs less weighty, the tranny is a slightly quicker shifter, and the torque difference is suppose to be a wash considering it only has 33 less torque with a 700 lb difference. I was expecting 0-400 for the auto in 15.1-2 seconds. The manual seems to be the best deal and the automatic sounds like less car for more money. And in the real world I believe the mpg is ultra close.

It's high strung small displacement N/A engine paired with automatic transmission. Of course it's slow on strip. Plenty fast for me, but i still prefer manual!

Besides, that lexus is quite fast in it's class.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Lasse

It's high strung small displacement N/A engine paired with automatic transmission. Of course it's slow on strip. Plenty fast for me, but i still prefer manual!

Besides, that lexus is quite fast in it's class.

Regardless of being high strung the power to weight ratio favors a FRS/BRZ automatic over a IS250. I remember telling somebody in a thread that in this day and age P2W ratio sometimes don't add up typically because of gearing,DCT,AWD and underrated F/I engines. But this is a case where none of that matters since both cars is RWD, same auto+gearing,and both N/A.

[Levi]

I don't know but I think it would make an even better lap time with 235/40/17.

[yajin]

hey, guys.
Just updated with the gymkahana part.

The post is getting longer...and my English is getting awkward....correct me if something weired....