Everyday Driver - ND Miata vs. FR-S vs. BRZ

[Entroper]

Yeah, despite that ND is quicker from 0-60 and in the quarter mile, the BRZ is quicker past 60 where it becomes less power-to-weight and more power-to-drag, so it's going to win at places with long straights like VIR and the `ring.

I would be very surprised if the S001s were equal to the Primacy HPs.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Proof that the S001's aren't faster than Primacy's? The S001 is supposed to be Bridgestone's replacement for the RE050A's, and we already know the 86 gained 2.1 seconds per lap on RE050A's over Primacy's in one test.

With all the advances in tire technology, I can't see Bridgestone replacing the RE050A's with a slower tire.

Nothing that you haven't seen me post before, an 86 was tested at SoW with Bridgestone S-04 which Bridgestone and Tirerack both claim is a more performance oriented tire than the S001 (which is listed as a low rolling resistance tire) and only picked up 0.2s, not nearly enough to close the 1.4s gap you posted.

The RE050A is listed as a 140TW tire, not sure how the 280TW S001 is supposed to be faster given it's description on Tirerack and Bridgeston's own site. While it looks like the RE050A was OE on the NC, I don't see Bridgestone claiming the S001 replaces them.
"The Potenza S001 is designed to combine low rolling resistance efficiency with maximum sports performance in dry and wet conditions."
But I wouldn't mind seeing that test you mentioned with the RE050A, it didn't pop up in my quick googling.

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

I said it was course dependent, which it is. We already know the BRZ is faster at VIR grand and about equal at Bedford West.

I guess course dependently my 86 is unquestionably faster than a new Mustang GT, new Golf R, 370Z, and a handful of M cars and Porsche's produced in the last few years because I beat them handily at autocross with street tires and camber plates. Bet that would piss off a lot more people than the Miata being faster than the 86, claiming that an 86 is straight up faster than those cars because it wins out in a certain scenario.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Nothing that you haven't seen me post before, an 86 was tested at SoW with Bridgestone S-04 which Bridgestone and Tirerack both claim is a more performance oriented tire than the S001 (which is listed as a low rolling resistance tire) and only picked up 0.2s, not nearly enough to close the 1.4s gap you posted.

Never said it'd close a 1.4 s gap. I said I thought it'd be a dead even heat between the two on equal tires.

In other words, the Twins would probably gain the 0.5 s deficit at Blyton Park and be faster at Bedford and VIR Grand. ND would still have the edge at SOW and Laguna. Not a stretch to think equal tires would be worth 0.5 s.

If it closed the 1.4 s gap, it would no longer be a dead even heat. The Twins would be faster.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

But I wouldn't mind seeing that test you mentioned with the RE050A, it didn't pop up in my quick googling.

It was posted on this site a while back, but I don't have it offhand.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I guess course dependently my 86 is unquestionably faster than a new Mustang GT, new Golf R, 370Z, and a handful of M cars and Porsche's produced in the last few years because I beat them handily at autocross with street tires and camber plates. Bet that would piss off a lot more people than the Miata being faster than the 86, claiming that an 86 is straight up faster than those cars because it wins out in a certain scenario.

If I write it's "course-dependent" and list out published road course times, it's pretty clear I'm referring to road courses. I almost feel like you're arguing for the sake of arguing

All course-dependent means is there are some road courses where Twins will be faster, some where the ND will be faster, and some where they'll tie. Depending which road course you pick, you'll get a different result. Given the Twins are +1.4/-2.2 seconds of the ND at five different road courses, I'd say "course-dependent" is a particularly fitting description here.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Never said it'd close a 1.4 s gap. I said I thought it'd be a dead even heat between the two on equal tires.

In other words, the Twins would probably gain the 0.5 s deficit at Blyton Park and be faster at Bedford and VIR Grand. ND would still have the edge at SOW and Laguna. Not a stretch to think equal tires would be worth 0.5 s.

If it closed the 1.4 s gap, it would no longer be a dead even heat. The Twins would be faster.



It was posted on this site a while back, but I don't have it offhand.



If I write it's "course-dependent" and list out published road course times, it's pretty clear I'm referring to road courses. I almost feel like you're arguing for the sake of arguing

All course-dependent means is there are some road courses where Twins will be faster, some where the ND will be faster, and some where they'll tie. Depending which road course you pick, you'll get a different result. Given the Twins are +1.4/-2.2 seconds of the ND at five different road courses, I'd say "course-dependent" is a particularly fitting description here.

I just find it hilarious how hard the concept that the ND is faster in 4/5 scenarios is for some people to swallow even after you factor in tires.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I just find it hilarious how hard the concept that the ND is faster in 4/5 scenarios is for some people to swallow even after you factor in tires.

I find it easier to just post up results and let them speak for themselves. No ambiguity there. Bone stock, ND has been faster at most tracks so far. Which is faster will come down to specific track.

I think the max performance tire debate is harder to settle because you have one test showing the 86 is 0.2 second faster with S04 PP and another showing it's 2.1 seconds faster with RE050A. So the spread is improvement by 0.2 to 2.1 seconds switching to MP tires. That's a big range.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

I think the max performance tire debate is harder to settle because you have one test showing the 86 is 0.2 second faster with S04 PP and another showing it's 2.1 seconds faster with RE050A. So the spread is improvement by 0.2 to 2.1 seconds switching to MP tires. That's a big range.

Source for the 2.1 second RE050A claim? Speaking in abstract numbers the RE-11 only picked up 2.5s on SOW, surprising a tire supposedly a class down is only a few tenths slower.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Source for the 2.1 second RE050A claim? Speaking in abstract numbers the RE-11 only picked up 2.5s on SOW, surprising a tire supposedly a class down is only a few tenths slower.

I'll have to search for it later tonight. It was posted a while back on this site. The test was at Hockenheim short course. I think there was another test showing ~1.5 second improvement switching to MP tires. Really stretching my memory here though.

RE050A's are 140 TW tires as you mentioned, which is actually lower than all of the top EP street tires. TW is a bit of a farce though as we all know. RE11's aren't really that competitive in the EP tire category, so I can kind of believe it. I would also imagine driver and course will affect results too. Lots of factors at play.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

RE050A's are 140 TW tires as you mentioned, which is actually lower than all of the top EP street tires. TW is a bit of a farce though as we all know. RE11's aren't really that competitive in the EP tire category, so I can kind of believe it. I would also imagine driver and course will affect results too. Lots of factors at play.

Depends on the timeframe, RE11 and the RE11A were quite competitive upon introduction and only fell out of favor a few years ago.

On a side note, looking forward to trying out some RE-71R's this weekend, though not on an 86.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Depends on the timeframe, RE11 and the RE11A were quite competitive upon introduction and only fell out of favor a few years ago.

On a side note, looking forward to trying out some RE-71R's this weekend, though not on an 86.

Nice which car? Everyone I hear raves about the grip on the RE71R's, although perhaps not the wear

[totopo]

I really don't understand the obsession with track times on this forum. When it came out, the twins were just about the slowest sports car for the price and has remained that way. The car was specifically designed to buck the trend to get good track times with high hp and big tires and instead to make a fun sports car.

If you want track times for money, go get a v6 or ecoboost mustang or similar camaro.

Go look at the miata boards. Everyone knows the miata is slow, but they don't give a shit and obsess over track times and 0-60 times about any car that may be slower. The whole point of these cars is for fun, who cares which slow car is slower.

[DAEMANO]

The Everyday Driver video OP posted pretty much says that this launch edition MX-5 didn't feel as sharp and wasn't preferred by either journalist to an FR-S w/ MPSS or a fully stock BRZ.

Then somehow the lap times of the Club edition MX-5 get mixed in and discussed equally to the cars in the video? Shenanigans. Nobody is arguing that a base MX-5 upgraded with an LSD, better tires, shocks, aero and brakes could be quicker on a track than a stock, non-upgraded 86. But really, put $3500-$6000 worth of well chosen mods on any $25k car and you could probably get faster lap times than a base 86 or base MX-5.

Stock for stock the Mazda doesn't seem to match up dynamically or metrically to the 86 for the Everyday Driver crew. That's ok, the Mazda is for a different buyer (one who wants a roadster and only 2 seats). Why this so hard to accept I have no clue.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Nice which car? Everyone I hear raves about the grip on the RE71R's, although perhaps not the wear

'14 Mini Cooper S, so much delicious torque out of that B48 and ~100 lbs lighter than my 86.

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

Stock for stock the Mazda doesn't seem to match up dynamically or metrically to the 86 for the Everyday Driver crew. That's ok, the Mazda is for a different buyer (one who wants a roadster and only 2 seats). Why this so hard to accept I have no clue.

You're right, the Miata ahead per Darksunrises post above, metrically speaking, stock for stock as they roll off the dealership lot.

[Entroper]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

Then somehow the lap times of the Club edition MX-5 get mixed in and discussed equally to the cars in the video? Shenanigans. Nobody is arguing that a base MX-5 upgraded with an LSD, better tires, shocks, aero and brakes could be quicker on a track than a stock, non-upgraded 86. But really, put $3500-$6000 worth of well chosen mods on any $25k car and you could probably get faster lap times than a base 86 or base MX-5.

I think we all get it, DAEMANO. You don't need to tell us for the 27th time.

We don't have published track times for a Sport or a Launch Edition/GT. So comparisons are going to be made based on what we do have. Most enthusiasts are going to want to know how the Club performs, so that's what they test.

Stock for stock the Mazda doesn't seem to match up dynamically or metrically to the 86 for the Everyday Driver crew. That's ok, the Mazda is for a different buyer (one who wants a roadster and only 2 seats). Why this so hard to accept I have no clue.

An ND Club straight from the factory is still stock. But I do agree again that each car has its niche. The coupe being more hardcore than the roadster is appropriate.

Originally Posted by totopo

I really don't understand the obsession with track times on this forum. When it came out, the twins were just about the slowest sports car for the price and has remained that way. The car was specifically designed to buck the trend to get good track times with high hp and big tires and instead to make a fun sports car.

If you want track times for money, go get a v6 or ecoboost mustang or similar camaro.

I think people have a bit of a complex about it. They accept it's a slow car, but hey, it's better than a Miata, right? (NC when the 86 came out.) A year or so ago when the ND was revealed, people here were literally saying "the 86 will never be beaten by a damn Miata". So of course heads exploded when the first reviews hit the net and we're all arguing about it.

Go look at the miata boards. Everyone knows the miata is slow, but they don't give a shit and obsess over track times and 0-60 times about any car that may be slower. The whole point of these cars is for fun, who cares which slow car is slower.

Eh, they're kinda doing the same thing over there regarding the Everyday Driver review. And they got all up in arms over the Lightning Lap times at VIR, too. It's funny to see the same arguments from both sides.

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by Entroper

I think we all get it, DAEMANO. You don't need to tell us for the 27th time.

Since the disingenuous Club Miata vs base 86 argument came up for the 26th time, you're going to hear my rebuttal for 27th. Get used to it.

We don't have published track times for a Sport or a Launch Edition/GT. So comparisons are going to be made based on what we do have. Most enthusiasts are going to want to know how the Club performs, so that's what they test.

And most enthusiasts do a relatively cheap tire upgrade as first order of business on their 86s. There's a good reason for that. BTW how much quicker around the tested tracks would you estimate a Club MX-5 is than a base/launch/GT MX-5? (bet you won't answer this).

An ND Club straight from the factory is still stock. But I do agree again that each car has its niche. The coupe being more hardcore than the roadster is appropriate.

I meant base for base (which is true apples to apples as the car's cost almost exactly the same amount), my feeling is that reasonable people will have discerned that.

I think people have a bit of a complex about it. They accept it's a slow car, but hey, it's better than a Miata, right? (NC when the 86 came out.) A year or so ago when the ND was revealed, people here were literally saying "the 86 will never be beaten by a damn Miata". So of course heads exploded when the first reviews hit the net and we're all arguing about it.

Once again, just about any $25k car with $3.5-$6k worth of carefully chosen upgrades would be faster around a track than a base 86 or a base MX-5. Nobody's head exploded over the Club Miata being marginally quicker around a track than a Series Blue BRZ. Still for those that refuse to acknowledge the unevenness of that comparison, and then at the same time tout the superiority of the MX-5 (chassis, suspension, design philospohy), yeah, they should be rebutted.

Eh, they're kinda doing the same thing over there regarding the Everyday Driver review. And they got all up in arms over the Lightning Lap times at VIR, too. It's funny to see the same arguments from both sides.

There really aren't sides. There would be no basis for argument really at all if Mazda delivered and journalists tested base/launch/GT edition MX-5's vs baseFR-S or Series Blue BRZ. Apples to apples. No problem. Who cares which is faster around a track in those configurations. What I care about is a fair comparison. That definitely isn't being represented when forum posters like yourself try to pass off Club MX-5 vs. Series Blue or base 86 as being anything close to an equal comparison. So when Everyday Driver finally does what journalists should have done by testing apples to apples trim levels we end up with a different result. I'm not surprised, but apparently you and a few others are because you won't acknowledge the difference in the results.

I'm shocked.