I totally bought the wrong car

[Ganthrithor]

Originally Posted by thill

I ended up getting a 15 WRX but I can tell you the BRZ is a more fun car. I am considering adding either another FR-S/BRZ, Miata, or Elise as a fun weekend car.

Get an Elise: it's just unbeatable as a toy car in that price range (really in any price range short of supercar money, IMHO).

To the OP: the lack of passing power (for back roads, where passing zones are few and far between, and often quite short) is the only thing that irritates me about my car, but it's an easy fix with a supercharger kit if you're OK with modifying. I'd like to supercharge mine. Otherwise I agree with you-- assuming you don't have traffic holding you up, the BRZ makes plenty of power for having fun. You just need to wring its neck!

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by Mr_Hann

I don't Toyota deserves any credit for this car. I think they contributed direct injection, and some motor stuff. And the worst part of this car is...?

You're joking right? Tetsuya Tada from Toyota is reason why this car was even made in the first place. Subaru didn't believe in this car until Toyota made a prototype for them to drive.

[Mr_Hann]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

You're joking right? Tetsuya Tada from Toyota is reason why this car was even made in the first place. Subaru didn't believe in this car until Toyota made a prototype for them to drive.

Not joking, but definitely a high level of sarcasm. Now from what I just read on the internets minutes ago, Toyota did precipitate development. Subaru did turn it down, and Toyota did come back with a prototype for them to drive - based off a Legacy.

The statement I previously made is a statement in personal opinion. When I drive my car, the things that make this car great all feel like Subaru's doing. The tightness of the chassis, the steering feel, and the controls feel very similar to my old Impreza. While I am very grateful that Toyota proposed this idea to Subaru in the first place, at the end of the day I still feel like I'm driving a RWD Subaru.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Mr_Hann

I don't Toyota deserves any credit for this car. I think they contributed direct injection, and some motor stuff. And the worst part of this car is...?

Eh, I feel like saying a piece so I'll say it.

The car would not exist at all without Toyota, period. And if Toyota had not stayed true to concept of a lightweight RWD NA coupe I'm sure we would have gotten a 2 door Impreza, if we got anything at all. The styling is undoubtedly Toyota which I can't think of a good looking Subaru unless you really like how WRX's look.

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/tada-how-to...eated-the-gt86

As for the engine, lots of people rag on it, I simply ask what engine is currently being made that is better suited? 2.0L to avoid displacement taxes in other countries, meets modern emission standards, puts down ~140ish ft-lbs of torque below 3,500 rpm and revs to 7.4k without a single issue for tens of thousands of miles while easily returning 30+ mpg on the freeway? Let alone one that has taken so well to boost with 4 companies offering road legal forced induction kits putting out a so far reliable (again proven for tens of thousands of miles) +50% horsepower gains? A lot of the tunability in this engine comes from Toyota's D4-S system, without it I don't think it would be taking so well to FI. Mazda's SkyActiv 2.0L is decent but does not seem to have the high-revving character the FA20 has and due to their focus on lightweight design the SkyActiv's have not taken to boost very well (I hear the pistons are the first to go).

Edit: As for the weakest part of the car? My money is on the suspension, the rear does pretty well but the Mac struts up front do create the need for a ton of static camber in order to maximize grip. That is a Subaru thing. As well as the interior build quality, I actually had a plastic retainer snap off today that I need to go find so I don't get water in my drivers door... Budget Toyota's aren't going to be significantly better, but Subie is notorious for lackluster interiors even on cars optioned up to $40k.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Eh, I feel like saying a piece so I'll say it.

The car would not exist at all without Toyota, period. And if Toyota had not stayed true to concept of a lightweight RWD NA coupe I'm sure we would have gotten a 2 door Impreza, if we got anything at all. The styling is undoubtedly Toyota which I can't think of a good looking Subaru unless you really like how WRX's look.

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/tada-how-to...eated-the-gt86

As for the engine, lots of people rag on it, I simply ask what engine is currently being made that is better suited? 2.0L to avoid displacement taxes in other countries, meets modern emission standards, puts down ~140ish ft-lbs of torque below 3,500 rpm and revs to 7.4k without a single issue for tens of thousands of miles while easily returning 30+ mpg on the freeway? Let alone one that has taken so well to boost with 4 companies offering road legal forced induction kits putting out a so far reliable (again proven for tens of thousands of miles) +50% horsepower gains? A lot of the tunability in this engine comes from Toyota's D4-S system, without it I don't think it would be taking so well to FI. Mazda's SkyActiv 2.0L is decent but does not seem to have the high-revving character the FA20 has and due to their focus on lightweight design the SkyActiv's have not taken to boost very well (I hear the pistons are the first to go).

Edit: As for the weakest part of the car? My money is on the suspension, the rear does pretty well but the Mac struts up front do create the need for a ton of static camber in order to maximize grip. That is a Subaru thing. As well as the interior build quality, I actually had a plastic retainer snap off today that I need to go find so I don't get water in my drivers door... Budget Toyota's aren't going to be significantly better, but Subie is notorious for lackluster interiors even on cars optioned up to $40k.

Of the hundreds of thousand posts I have read on here (no, not an exaggeration check my stats and do some math) this is probably the most insightful ever.
It is almost the perfect summary and should be in the sales material.
/forum!

[pantdino]

"The FR-S seemed a lot more wiling to kick out the back when I didn't really want it to (both had factory issue rims/tires, no dealer changes there). I'd be happy to own either, but the nicer interior and added bit of confidence I got from the BRZ would definitely push me in that direction."


At least the early FR-Ss were tuned for less understeer /more oversteer than the BRZ. I don't know about the current MY. I find the FRS has entertaining very mild trailing throttle oversteer at the limit, which is enjoyable-- just enough that you can feel it rotate a little. That's how you know you're near the limit. A car that plows is boring and even one that it neutral to high loads is not as much fun to drive except on a race track.


When I bought my '13 FRS a year ago the BRZ sold for about $5K more because of the luxury features. I don't need $5K worth of luxury features, thanks. This is a sports car.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by pantdino

"The FR-S seemed a lot more wiling to kick out the back when I didn't really want it to (both had factory issue rims/tires, no dealer changes there). I'd be happy to own either, but the nicer interior and added bit of confidence I got from the BRZ would definitely push me in that direction."


At least the early FR-Ss were tuned for less understeer /more oversteer than the BRZ. I don't know about the current MY. I find the FRS has entertaining very mild trailing throttle oversteer at the limit, which is enjoyable-- just enough that you can feel it rotate a little. That's how you know you're near the limit. A car that plows is boring and even one that it neutral to high loads is not as much fun to drive except on a race track.


When I bought my '13 FRS a year ago the BRZ sold for about $5K more because of the luxury features. I don't need $5K worth of luxury features, thanks. This is a sports car.

My FR-S understeered like a pig.

12/12 build date.

The stiff rear springs allow the rear of the FR-S to unsettle easier than the BRZ imo which will absorb any road imperfections or bad driver inputs.

What really woke the car up and allowed my front end to grip was camber plates, factory camber for me was around -0.3, I don't think I've seen a car with greater than -1.0 degree up front factory and it takes either two sets of camber bolts (prone to slipping) or several hundred dollars on camber plates to get the front end to stop sliding first. Which is a byproduct of the Macpherson struts used by Subaru. I have heard it's also a big problem on older WRX's, some have struts in the rear as well limiting dynamic camber.

Most 86's being tracked seriously are doing so at about -3.0 degrees of camber or greater.

And I may mention the factory brakes are lacking, but they are undoubtedly sized properly and biased well for a stock-ish car requiring only a pad and fluid upgrade to handle track duty for the vast majority of drivers so I really don't take points away there.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by industrial

Ok, I'll play. Which engines produced today can you bolt on double the power without touching the internals and go legitimately beat on trackdays? There are lots of completely bolt on FI kits for this car. Why wouldn't that be considered a bolt on? Installing a supercharger on this car is about as hard as installing a rotated mount turbo on a STI. I didn't even have to touch the fuel system (though I did).



What I said, it wasn't spoken in a vacuum. It was said in context of a continuing dialogue. You can't FOX NEWS me and just take a statement out of the context of which it was spoken, pick a straw man, and proceed to win the argument you just crafted.

For example:

2015/2016 Ecoboost Mustang

2015/2016 WRX (yes I know this is essentially the same engine as the 86, just built to handle boost better which is the key)

2015/2016 WRX STI (probably too far out of the price range)

2008-2015 EVO X

2013-2015 Hyundai Genesis

Also, I wasn't trying to cherry pick anything, which is why I quoted the entire paragraph. All Im saying is while the FRS/BRZ can be made pretty quick, comparing them with 10k dumped into them with some of their competitors, with the same amount is absurd.

Put that same $10,000 into many other cars in the same relative price range and they can easily hang with, if not destroy an 86 in the straights and likely in most tracks as well (not to mention handle that power reliably).

The fa20 is a pretty decent engine, but I wouldn't say it's way better than any of the competitors, especially and NA variant running high compression.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Eh, I feel like saying a piece so I'll say it.

The car would not exist at all without Toyota, period. And if Toyota had not stayed true to concept of a lightweight RWD NA coupe I'm sure we would have gotten a 2 door Impreza, if we got anything at all. The styling is undoubtedly Toyota which I can't think of a good looking Subaru unless you really like how WRX's look.

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/tada-how-to...eated-the-gt86

As for the engine, lots of people rag on it, I simply ask what engine is currently being made that is better suited? 2.0L to avoid displacement taxes in other countries, meets modern emission standards, puts down ~140ish ft-lbs of torque below 3,500 rpm and revs to 7.4k without a single issue for tens of thousands of miles while easily returning 30+ mpg on the freeway? Let alone one that has taken so well to boost with 4 companies offering road legal forced induction kits putting out a so far reliable (again proven for tens of thousands of miles) +50% horsepower gains? A lot of the tunability in this engine comes from Toyota's D4-S system, without it I don't think it would be taking so well to FI. Mazda's SkyActiv 2.0L is decent but does not seem to have the high-revving character the FA20 has and due to their focus on lightweight design the SkyActiv's have not taken to boost very well (I hear the pistons are the first to go).

Edit: As for the weakest part of the car? My money is on the suspension, the rear does pretty well but the Mac struts up front do create the need for a ton of static camber in order to maximize grip. That is a Subaru thing. As well as the interior build quality, I actually had a plastic retainer snap off today that I need to go find so I don't get water in my drivers door... Budget Toyota's aren't going to be significantly better, but Subie is notorious for lackluster interiors even on cars optioned up to $40k.

I agree with your post completely, these engines do what they were mean't to do flawlessly. They weren't supposed to be high torque drag engines, and judging them based on that is idiotic.

[Mr_Hann]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Eh, I feel like saying a piece so I'll say it.

The car would not exist at all without Toyota, period. And if Toyota had not stayed true to concept of a lightweight RWD NA coupe I'm sure we would have gotten a 2 door Impreza, if we got anything at all. The styling is undoubtedly Toyota which I can't think of a good looking Subaru unless you really like how WRX's look.

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/tada-how-to...eated-the-gt86

As for the engine, lots of people rag on it, I simply ask what engine is currently being made that is better suited? 2.0L to avoid displacement taxes in other countries, meets modern emission standards, puts down ~140ish ft-lbs of torque below 3,500 rpm and revs to 7.4k without a single issue for tens of thousands of miles while easily returning 30+ mpg on the freeway? Let alone one that has taken so well to boost with 4 companies offering road legal forced induction kits putting out a so far reliable (again proven for tens of thousands of miles) +50% horsepower gains? A lot of the tunability in this engine comes from Toyota's D4-S system, without it I don't think it would be taking so well to FI. Mazda's SkyActiv 2.0L is decent but does not seem to have the high-revving character the FA20 has and due to their focus on lightweight design the SkyActiv's have not taken to boost very well (I hear the pistons are the first to go).

Edit: As for the weakest part of the car? My money is on the suspension, the rear does pretty well but the Mac struts up front do create the need for a ton of static camber in order to maximize grip. That is a Subaru thing. As well as the interior build quality, I actually had a plastic retainer snap off today that I need to go find so I don't get water in my drivers door... Budget Toyota's aren't going to be significantly better, but Subie is notorious for lackluster interiors even on cars optioned up to $40k.

Some good points made. My main point was the feel of the car - and to ME, it feels more like a modern Subaru than a modern Toyota.

I do enjoy 95% of the engine, minus the torque dip. To get over 30 MPG in a decently quick car that revs over 7k is a beautiful thing.

I don't necessarily agree entirely about the styling being Toyota. Too subjective (unless someone chimes in otherwise). Exaggerated wheels arches are something Subaru has done forever, and I can't think of any Toyo in recent memory that accomplishes this. The overall silhouette is likely Toyota. I see Supra and MR2.

In terms of handling, what's the best handling Toyo product you've experienced, and what made it so?

[ajaxthebetter]

I believe Toyota is wholly responsible for the aesthetic design. Interestingly, I'd argue the BRZ looks most old-school Toyota like, while the FRS, with its angular and more angry face, is more Subaru-like.

The BRZ front end looks much like an Mk2 MR2 and 2000GT.

[isolato]

Originally Posted by IrishTG

I used to ride liter bikes off an on, and when I realized how insanely impractical it was on the street, I dropped to an SV650 which was still pretty damned quick off the jump and had good V-Twin passing power, but didn't have much top end at all and died off at about 125. Even with that, I realized that tight, technical cornering was my love and while the SV was a strong handler, it was still faster than I really needed so I traded it in and got a DRZ400SM supermoto. The DRZ was 0-60 in about 5.5-6 seconds (400cc single) and had a top speed of about 98mph (indicated!) with me on it. With a tailwind and a downgrade I broke 100 a couple times... lol. Anyway, that was my favorite bike EVER. I didn't care how slow it was and how poorly it did on the highway with no passing power, it was a monster in the corners when I got good rubber on it and adjusted the suspension to my weight and that is what gave me my thrills.

The fact that you loved your DRZ400SM and to some extent your SV650 (and favor those for the street over the space-time continuum-warping acceleration of a liter bike) is very revealing about the type of car that you would most enjoy, and I agree with you. After racing in WERA and riding many types of bikes, I still get more enjoyment out of my (now vintage) NT650GT Hawk for street rides.
I've had my BRZ now for almost three months, and it elicits many of the same feelings: you need to get your corner entries/apexes/exits right, but oooohh how good it feels when you do! I have a couple of friends who have the Focus ST and love it, and they have the same practicality concerns about the BRZ (toting kids in the back, etc.). Agree with many of the comments on the thread: enjoy what you have. However, if you do make the jump to an 86 at some point, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

[IrishTG]

Originally Posted by Mr_Hann

Which liter bike did you have?

2002 Honda SuperHawk VTR1000 and a 2004 GSX-R 1000, also had some seat time on a RC-51. And, if you want to be technical, a Harley Dyna Street Bob . Not quite the same, but it was a 1584cc bike so... lol.

[isolato]

Originally Posted by IrishTG

2002 Honda SuperHawk VTR1000 and a 2004 GSX-R 1000, also had some seat time on a RC-51. And, if you want to be technical, a Harley Dyna Street Bob . Not quite the same, but it was a 1584cc bike so... lol.

I had the same year VTR1000. Loved it for long trips, but once I was in the twisties I longed for something smaller and nimbler (even as fun as it was to scrape the pegs on the Superhawk).