Motor Trend: 2016 Miata vs 2015 BRZ

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by fteightysix

I didnt read through all 13 pages, But the numbers at the track didnt make sense. I know different days can give different numbers, but my best in a FRS with just a EVO3 catback and everything else stock is a 1:31.6 or .7 it was a couple years ago, and i know Randy has been under :30.0 in a stock FRS.. so im surprised at the lap times that day. it was even as the Miata ran the same day in same conditions, but mine was almost dead heat of summer and the track was "greasy" as some said, but it felt fine to me, i was always happy getting within a second of his first lap record of a FRS :30.8 i believe. So im surprised the BRZ was this "slow" My car is a Auto and it was my 4th or 5th time at the track with Mike Kang assisting me

Hell I think Mike Kang runs faster then :30's in a stock twin

-Thomas

Some of the pics looked a little wet. Bridgestone Potenzas>>Michelin Prius tires in the wet by a large margin.

[krayzie]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

This is why I love the idea of the 4c. It has the performance without the extra weight. Unfortunately I'm not a fan of the looks or lack of manual option.

That and turbo lag and tendency towards understeer from what I've read.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by abraxis

Like I said, I already have a 2100lb MR. I don't need an Elise. I also have the virtue of waiting without spending lots of money on false hope and missed benchmarks. Eventually someone will get it right. So far they haven't.

Pretty much leaning toward the BAC Mono eventually which you CAN buy and drive legally. So yeah, enjoy the Fiat.

Love the BAC Mono. The price tag is just a bit steep for essentially a track car.

Originally Posted by krayzie

That and turbo lag and tendency towards understeer from what I've read.

I'd really like to drive one. Someone brought one out to a recent track day I did. Wasn't that impressive in the corners, but MR cars sometimes require a different driving style to really be fast. Lots of trail-braking on turn-in to minimize understeer, then hard on the power on track-out to make use of the rear grip.

[Levi]

Originally Posted by ZDan

What is fine for 2+2s and bigger/heavier/longer-wheelbase cars with upscale nameplates at much higher price points is not necessarily the best solution for a smaller, 2-seat, lighter-weight, less expensive MX-5.

In the case of the Corvette, moving the transmission from the back of the engine to the front of the diff certainly resulted in a longer wheelbase and no improvement in weight distribution. Longer wheelbase on a very high-powered supercar may be desirable, but on a low-powered fun sports car it's a drawback.

A lot of reasons I'm sure, with available race transmission configurations and the rulebook no doubt playing a large part in what is optimal, as well as aero. Again not necessarily relevant to a small/light/relatively-inexpensive production road sports car.

I think a rear transmission or transaxle would have been a bad move for the MX-5. It almost certainly would have increased the wheelbase, added weight, added cost, and probably would not have improved f/r weight distribution and likely would have increased polar moment of inertia.

A lot of nonsense. Many cars in the list I mentioned are not big heavy GT but also light (relative to class) high-performance sports car with only two seats.


Show me evidence about that for the Corvette.



Why would MX-5/S2000/GT86 not benefit from transaxle? I just don't understand how you come to the conclusion that transaxle increases wheel base. The GT86 has a wheelbase of 2.570 mm, the Porsche 944 has a wheel base of 2.400 mm. Same for the Alfa 75 it is a sedan with shorter wheel base than GT86.


What would be the disadvantage of a transaxle MX-5? Not weight increase, not wheelbase increase, not worse handling but on the contrary even better, but just price for customer, but that is the company's fault.


Small light sports cars should not necessarily be build cheap, even cheap no person buys them (in Europe).


As for your wheelbase argument, indeed it increase with a rearwards pushed engine like new M5-5 and GT86 compared to Subaru Impreza.

[Kids Heart]

I fit my newborn and soon to be 4 year old in my back seats so let's not pretend a back seat is useless.

[Andrew025]

Originally Posted by Kids Heart

I fit my newborn and soon to be 4 year old in my back seats so let's not pretend a back seat is useless.

This ^
I've said it before, but the back seats are one of the reasons I didn't get an s2k.

[rapidcars]

Originally Posted by Kids Heart

I fit my newborn and soon to be 4 year old in my back seats so let's not pretend a back seat is useless.

Agreed, I've driven both my parents to the airport with a suitcase in the trunk and my mom and another suitcase in the backseat. Not ideal but they are far from useless.

[computeruser]

Originally Posted by Andrew025

This ^
I've said it before, but the back seats are one of the reasons I didn't get an s2k.

Same here - it keep me from getting a Miata or a Boxter or a Cayman or another MG. Truth is that for a lot of us, 2+2 is a huge asset, whether it is because we're using it as a DD or to take longer trips or to transport a dog along with a passenger or whatever.

I certainly could have managed with a 2+0, as I have in the past, but a 2+2 or even a 2+parcel shelf is a lot more useful for me. I think there is room in the marketplace for 2+2 and 2+0 that handle well and do not break the bank.


I'm kinda late to the thread, but in reading over it, the point that seems to get lost in so much of this Twins -vs- XXXXX analysis is first that the absolute differences in performance are irrelevant to >95% of buyers and in 99% of driving circumstances. One platform is ideal for the person who values having the top-down option, the other is for the person who wants a 2+2. Both are great for someone who loves to drive and both present the option to have a credible track car for under $30k.

The other point is that we should lighten up a bit and be grateful for the fact that there are some solid options for drivers cars out there right now. We can acknowledge that Mazda seems to have gotten it pretty darned right with the Miata, just as Toyobaru got it pretty darned right with the Twins, without having to fret over tenths of a second lap time differences in order to declare one the *winner*.

[ben721364]

Originally Posted by computeruser

Same here - it keep me from getting a Miata or a Boxter or a Cayman or another MG. Truth is that for a lot of us, 2+2 is a huge asset, whether it is because we're using it as a DD or to take longer trips or to transport a dog along with a passenger or whatever.

I certainly could have managed with a 2+0, as I have in the past, but a 2+2 or even a 2+parcel shelf is a lot more useful for me. I think there is room in the marketplace for 2+2 and 2+0 that handle well and do not break the bank.


I'm kinda late to the thread, but in reading over it, the point that seems to get lost in so much of this Twins -vs- XXXXX analysis is first that the absolute differences in performance are irrelevant to >95% of buyers and in 99% of driving circumstances. One platform is ideal for the person who values having the top-down option, the other is for the person who wants a 2+2. Both are great for someone who loves to drive and both present the option to have a credible track car for under $30k.

The other point is that we should lighten up a bit and be grateful for the fact that there are some solid options for drivers cars out there right now. We can acknowledge that Mazda seems to have gotten it pretty darned right with the Miata, just as Toyobaru got it pretty darned right with the Twins, without having to fret over tenths of a second lap time differences in order to declare one the *winner*.

I hope you are correct about the depth and breadth of the market for such cars. Sales of the twins are way off [in NA at least] and speculation is that the MX-5 will catch up with demand by early next year.

[computeruser]

Originally Posted by ben721364

I hope you are correct about the depth and breadth of the market for such cars. Sales of the twins are way off [in NA at least] and speculation is that the MX-5 will catch up with demand by early next year.

So do I. I think the market is there, though, and it just isn't being cultivated well. Scion does essentially zero marketing for these cars, and Subaru does none whatsoever. The examples of these cars that do get sold do so in spite of Toyobaru's efforts.

The first gen Miata had it easy - it came on the scene when the last of the Brit roadsters were entering into classic/weekend-only status. They got their foot in the door and have maintained market position as a result of offering the Brit experience with modern efficiency and safety; they have also seemed to attract an older owner base as a result. And their Consumer Reports history is stellar, which matters to more folks than we might want to admit.

The twins, which are really the spiritual reincarnation of the early Zs, have a harder time connecting with the market on a nostolgia basis, since the age demographic that they appear to be attracting has no personal connection to the early Z cars; those buyers grew up studying the Civics and Accords, or if they leaned domestic, the F-body and Fox-body platforms. This is not helped by the fact that the dealerships fail to stock these cars, and instead stock and push the hell out of the WRX/STI, despite the two platforms being entirely different creatures in real world use.

Still, I think that the merits of the Twins platform are strong enough to carry the platform forward as a compelling road car for everyday use, but Toyobaru will need to step up the marketing and education. Why does RWD in a (sports) car matter? Most kids have no idea; my dad, who is old enough to have driven a '63 split-window Corvette in high school, understands intuitively. Why is 200hp enough when your competitors (e.g. 6cyl Mustang) are all claiming 300hp+? It makes perfect sense to me, but I have years of MG, Triumph, and Austin-Healey experience under my belt.

I am really pleased to see the level of tuner enthusiasm for the Twins, but I think that this aftermarket attention has done two things which are hurting sales. First, it has really pegged the vehicle as a kids car, which is a marketing position that it doesn't have to occupy. Like it or not, there is a social stigma attached to that label that is hard to shake, and which can be downright toxic, particularly if your choice of vehicle plays any sort of role in image management with clients in a professional setting.

Second, the rise of tuner enthusiasm has allowed/encouraged Toyobaru to ignore the car in stock form, figuring that most of the sales will go to enthusiasts who will promptly discard tons of stock parts so they can tune and mod the hell out of it anyway. So they do nothing to sell the car on its intrinsic merits, to buyers who intend to enjoy it substantially as it is. I think this is misguided, particularly if we look to the Miata, which has managed to maintain a strong following among drivers of stock versions and among the tuner/modder/racer set, simultaneously.

By failing to make a conscious effort to position the Twins in the US market and to define who they should appeal to and why, they have been allowed to languish. And the sales figures reflect this mixture of confusion and apathy. Which is a total shame, because they offer a compelling mix of attributes that few other vehicles on the market offer.




As a corollary, I think it is interesting to compare these three theatrical-style ads. What market segment - age, gender, income, life stage, etc. - is each trying to appeal to? How well are they connecting to that market segment? Are they connecting with other market segment(s) in the process, or are they putting off other market segment(s) in the process?

Japanese ad:

American ads:

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by ben721364

I hope you are correct about the depth and breadth of the market for such cars. Sales of the twins are way off [in NA at least] and speculation is that the MX-5 will catch up with demand by early next year.

I disagree. For an affordable RWD Japanese sports car it is doing excellent, if anybody expected something different than any other offering from the land of the rising sun in the last 15 years they're insane.

[ben721364]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I disagree. For an affordable RWD Japanese sports car it is doing excellent, if anybody expected something different than any other offering from the land of the rising sun in the last 15 years they're insane.

I based my comment on AutoWeek 6/12/2015 which says 2015 sales of the BRZ are off 39%= and FR-s are off 27%+.

I agree with AutoWeek that the pie remains the same size and will be sliced into three and then into 4 pieces when the Fiat twin to the MX-5 arrives, if it does...




autoweek.com/.../5-cars-have-seen-2015-sales-plummet

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by computeruser

The twins, which are really the spiritual reincarnation of the early Zs,

Erm, really they are the reincarnation of the DOHC S13 240SX.

If they would do the right thing and make a cab-rearward 2-seat version, with the engine/trans/firewall/windshield/driver moved aft a good 18" or so (which should give it 50/50 or better weight distribution) then *that* would be a spiritual successor to the 240Z. Give it double wishbone front suspension, lower hoodline and fender peaks, and voila, you'd have a modern Toyota 2000GT!

[MightyMeeple]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I disagree. For an affordable RWD Japanese sports car it is doing excellent, if anybody expected something different than any other offering from the land of the rising sun in the last 15 years they're insane.

Thank you for posting these numbers in graphical format Strat...

Everyone who is concerned about sales volumes for the twis....PLEASE...take a look at these figures. I've seen them before in raw numerical format and was blown away. Look at much lower sales of the Z and Miata are during the 2.5 years of initial sales of the twins. And that's with basically no marketing or financial incentives.

As a car enthusiast, I'm actually much more worried about the Z getting scrapped at this point. Nissan really needs a 240z successor...with the "no go" on the IDX concept, guessing that isn't going to happen.