Motor Trend: 2016 Miata vs 2015 BRZ

[Eski]

Originally Posted by Demandred7

Still want to see one in person. I have to respect what Mazda is able to do with this car.

I still require rear seats (regardless of their small size) and I have no desire to own a topless car. Rent or borrow maybe, but, not to own. The FR-S suits me better. And not a fan of body roll in a car.

I second that notion. Also i'll never fit into these cars, being 6'5...

Condoms 97% effective at preventing pregnancy...

Miata's 99.9%

[Hanzo]

I went from a NC2 to BRZ back to NC2.5 now going on to ND.

[Demandred7]

Originally Posted by Eski

I second that notion. Also i'll never fit into these cars, being 6'5...

Condoms 97% effective at preventing pregnancy...

Miata's 99.9%

Love the Robert Downey Jr quote in your sig.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by Entroper

Depending on how it's measured, the weight distribution varies significantly. The fuel tank is in the back, and the driver's seat is behind the CoG. So it might be 50/50 with a full tank and a 175-lb driver, and front-biased when empty.

The article from my original post has a direct comparison on page 3: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/specs.html

52/48 for the ND, 55/45 for the BRZ. Whatever the "real" figures are, this at least tells you that the BRZ is more front-biased, if you assume MT didn't screw up the measurements.

I'm pretty sure I read that the FR-S/BRZ 54/46 or 53/47 with driver... which is really close to the 240sx/Silvia (like it is in every other way too. haha.).

I'm pretty sure the ND is like the NC (and the S2000) where the engine sits completely behind the front axle, which is not the case for the FR-S/BRZ.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

I'm pretty sure I read that the FR-S/BRZ 54/46 or 53/47 with driver... which is really close to the 240sx/Silvia (like it is in every other way too. haha.).

I'm pretty sure the ND is like the NC (and the S2000) where the engine sits completely behind the front axle, which is not the case for the FR-S/BRZ.

Jives with owner results on the 86, I forget these things are solidly under 2,800 lbs for some reason.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7881

What's curious is that MT reports a 2,296 lb weight for the ND when Mazda is claiming ~2,330. 35 lbs ain't nothing to sneeze at, 10 of those are the Brembo package so I'm wondering if MT didn't have a full tank, would explain the 52/48 F/R balance. Subieyota claims a 2,758 so I can see 6 lbs here and there. Or maybe there's more weight saved on the Brembos than reported.

Maybe the conspiracy is that MT/Mazda pulled all the roadside safety kit out the back to get that extra 0.05 second on the comparison.

[krayzie]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

@krayzie

Another quote, browser isn't letting me edit:

I guess my main point is that how I've always understood it is that; if you want to develop a good car, you can't purely rely on high grip tires and electronics as crutches to achieve the bulk of the available mechanical grip.

High performance chassis and suspension development will come into play in order to share the load especially when closed to the limit.

Effective marketing is usually just throwing out a bunch of numbers.

I don't think Toyota has ever had a FR sports car with dead on 50/50 weight distribution. It's always more like 53/47 or 52/48 even with the last gen Supra.

[DarkSunrise]

Journalists loosely refer to the 350z/370z, Miata, RX-8 and Twins as having 50/50 weight distribution, but all are slightly front-heavy. Same for some BMW's, despite what their marketing says about "perfect balance".

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Journalists loosely refer to the 350z/370z, Miata, RX-8 and Twins as having 50/50 weight distribution, but all are slightly front-heavy. Same for some BMW's, despite what their marketing says about "perfect balance".

I think thatthat the thought process is based on accelerating out of the corners shifts the weight rearward.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by krayzie

I guess my main point is that how I've always understood it is that; if you want to develop a good car, you can't purely rely on high grip tires and electronics as crutches to achieve the bulk of the available mechanical grip.

High performance chassis and suspension development will come into play in order to share the load especially when closed to the limit.

Effective marketing is usually just throwing out a bunch of numbers.

I don't think Toyota has ever had a FR sports car with dead on 50/50 weight distribution. It's always more like 53/47 or 52/48 even with the last gen Supra.

100% agreed.

However, I think saying that the tires were chosen to show off the chassis is a... well it's a statement I can't wrap my head around. If you remember this is the statement that made a few of us scratch our heads:

They even went as far as to equip the car with a low grip tire just to prove their efforts in chassis and suspension R&D is brilliant.

The primacy's were explicitly chosen to show off the car as you said, get journalists and potential buyers during the test drive to smile and rave about how much 'fun' the car is, and it worked like a charm. Sure it's indicative that Toyobaru did their homework but as you say, a lot of it is marketing.

As for the weight distribution thing, you're forgetting the MR2's ranging from 45/55 to 43/57 F/R depending on generation, trim, and conditions.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

I think thatthat the thought process is based on accelerating out of the corners shifts the weight rearward.

Well, when the rear tires are the only ones being driven, it's better to have more than ~55-60% weight at the rear. One thing I hate about my FR-S is that I can't gas it during a turn without drifting, I like how MR cars stay planted up till a certain point. Life is more fun when you floor it.

The twins are not close to 50/50 in my book, 54/46 unloaded is quite front heavy, some FF cars are around there.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Journalists loosely refer to the 350z/370z, Miata, RX-8 and Twins as having 50/50 weight distribution, but all are slightly front-heavy. Same for some BMW's, despite what their marketing says about "perfect balance".

The 350z and 370z were never marketed as having 50/50 weight distribution. The 370z is like 54/46 without driver, I believe. They have marketing about this saying that it's forward to allow the weight to shift correctly to give better balance/stability under load, but it's mostly BS.....

Not sure about the RX8, but I know the RX7 and S2000 were specifically marketed as having 50/50 weight distribution.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Well, when the rear tires are the only ones being driven, it's better to have more than ~55-60% weight at the rear. One thing I hate about my FR-S is that I can't gas it during a turn without drifting, I like how MR cars stay planted up till a certain point. Life is more fun when you floor it.

The twins are not close to 50/50 in my book, 54/46 unloaded is quite front heavy, some FF cars are around there.

Yeah, the more forward biased weight is for easily holding/recovering from drifts and having more time to correct accidental oversteer... It's definitely not for ultimate grip or ultra-quick/sharp response.

[Pat]

I highly doubt manufacturers intentionally put more weight up front to more easily hold/recover from a drift.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by fatoni

I think thatthat the thought process is based on accelerating out of the corners shifts the weight rearward.

Yeah that was Nissan's given reason. In theory it also gives better steering feel, making it more obvious as the fronts get unloaded with power. Obviously not the best for performance, but at ~200 hp not a big deal.

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

The 350z and 370z were never marketed as having 50/50 weight distribution. The 370z is like 54/46 without driver, I believe. They have marketing about this saying that it's forward to allow the weight to shift correctly to give better balance/stability under load, but it's mostly BS.....

Not sure about the RX8, but I know the RX7 and S2000 were specifically marketed as having 50/50 weight distribution.

There's a reason I said "journalists" and not manufacturers.