YES! AWD Turbo BRZ in the works for sure!!!

[Sushi Boy]

Originally Posted by WillieRX

I guess im also using the butt comparison. I have driven many coupes, but the coupe I have driven the most was my '94 Corvette, and the WRX is a completely different car than the BRZ. I have never driven a BRZ either. And probably will not be able to test drive one for a while due to very high demand.

why not just test drive the FR-S.. same engine, not knowing much difference between the two besides the obvious isnt the suspension nearly the same... I use to own a 2003 RSX Type-S and the FR-S still felt better during a test drive as far as handling and being that I had a 6spd in the RSX I have yet to drive a 6spd FR-S and since both cars have 200hp. Id would be interesting to compare the two. RSX was FWD and i have been around FWD since Ive started driving, once I drove the FR-S it felt totally different.. its the first RWD car I have ever drove and I was impressed with the throttle response. It felt as if I was being pushed in the FR-S to go faster.. like it had more to give... but once i drive the 6spd version ill have a better idea..

and oh an AWD would def. ruin the vehicle but adding a little more power through N/A or supercharger would be nice.. I mean why not subaru isnt this their first RWD car (correct me if im wrong I dont really know subaru's) why not toss a superchager or let it be an N/A beast..

[OrbitalEllipses]

Why would they want to build a mini STI? Get yer heads outta yer asses guys, it's not happening.

[Zadkiel]

Originally Posted by Sushi Boy

why not just test drive the FR-S.. same engine, not knowing much difference between the two besides the obvious isnt the suspension nearly the same... I use to own a 2003 RSX Type-S and the FR-S still felt better during a test drive as far as handling and being that I had a 6spd in the RSX I have yet to drive a 6spd FR-S and since both cars have 200hp. Id would be interesting to compare the two. RSX was FWD and i have been around FWD since Ive started driving, once I drove the FR-S it felt totally different.. its the first RWD car I have ever drove and I was impressed with the throttle response. It felt as if I was being pushed in the FR-S to go faster.. like it had more to give... but once i drive the 6spd version ill have a better idea..

and oh an AWD would def. ruin the vehicle but adding a little more power through N/A or supercharger would be nice.. I mean why not subaru isnt this their first RWD car (correct me if im wrong I dont really know subaru's) why not toss a superchager or let it be an N/A beast..

The first FR Subaru was in the 50's. I think this is the first since that one.

[Draco-REX]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

Why would they want to build a mini STI? Get yer heads outta yer asses guys, it's not happening.

If they want teams to start using the WRX in the WRC again, they have to make it smaller. Current WRC cars are build on the Super2000 rules with cars the size of the Ford Fiesta. The current outgoing WRX is way too big and heavy to be competitive in the WRC.

I'm thinking the cries for a small, turbo, AWD coupe will be answered with the new clean-sheet WRX

[TheRipler]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

This thread made me lose brain cells, I swear. Yes, let's ruin the sports car we've built by grafting an AWD system onto it, thereby trashing it's balance, center of gravity and weight distribution, and try to compensate for it's reduced handling capabilities by adding more horsepower. Brilliant.

Want a light AWD turbo coupe? Buy an Audi TT and leave the BRZ alone, please! Aluminum space frame, 3,153lb curb weight, 211hp, 258lb/ft, 0-60 in 5.3sec, 23-31mpg. $38k base price. Hell, I'll sell you one myself!

This is the perfect example of what I don't get. You already have your perfect sports car. It's called a BRZ or FR-S. No one is trying to ruin your car.

You don't seem to care that Imprezas are not lookers, or that the best looking one (yet still quirky) we got in the states wasn't turbo (2.5RS). I'll assume the TT was a joke. I mean, why not just get a 911 GT2 RS, right? That would be the target. Turbo, check. AWD, check. Looks, check. Affordable... 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

Some people like different things, and options aren't bad for anyone. They're just options. It's not like they'll stop making NA BRZs if a turbo model is added to the lineup. You're mind doesn't have to change if someone on the internet has a different opinion. It's all good. Buy the NA version if it makes you happy. People still bought 289 Cobras when the 427 was available. Some are happier with the lighter motor. Others aren't satisfied without the brute force.

In general, are the totally anti any turbo people also defending the Prius tires? The car may be the best vehicle many have ever owned (or will soon own), but that certainly doesn't make it perfect.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by WillieRX

Very well stated arguments, I do see where your coming from. And good description too, I do understand the difference and applications in a turbo vs supercharger, but can be helpful for those who don't know.

However, it seems that the supercharger would just create more mechanical load on a small displacement 4-cylinder engine, making it work significantly harder than it would with a turbo.

Originally Posted by Draco-REX

True, the drag on the engine is much higher with a supercharger. But the trade off is worth it in my opinion.

I think this shouldn't be too much of a concern, if you're looking for just a little bit more power then in this time and age, Roots type supercharger puts up quite a fight. Say we want to force feed the engine 20% more air for a nominal, say, 240hp before supercharger losses. If the supercharger is working against 0.3 bar pressure (intercooled), at ~40% efficiency it would be using only 6 hp or so at full power, which really isn't bad at all.

On the other hand, a turbo is "peaky", and maximum boost anywhere needs to be limited. You can put a small turbo that peaks early in, but it'll choke the power at high rpm and the gains will be nonexistent. You can put a slightly bigger turbo with a very free flowing turbine in for high end boost, but the "turbo lag" will suck ass and so will the response. You can make the turbine more restrictive and limit boost through wastegates and stuff, but you lose efficiency, and backpressure will be sapping close to what the supercharger is sapping. Turbos make a lot more sense when you want big boost.

[Dimman]

It's called the next WRX, people...

Platform sharing, much?

[mattles]

Any of you guys against superchargers, I dare you to go find someone with a rotrex-equipped Miata. Driving one of those almost made me want to sell my turbo and convert my turbo miata to a rotrex miata.

[Alkiera]

Originally Posted by TheRipler

You don't seem to care that Imprezas are not lookers, or that the best looking one (yet still quirky) we got in the states wasn't turbo (2.5RS). I'll assume the TT was a joke. I mean, why not just get a 911 GT2 RS, right? That would be the target. Turbo, check. AWD, check. Looks, check. Affordable... 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

Given the price difference between the NA AWD Impreza and the Turbo AWD Impreza WRX is a hefty $8,000, 45% more than the base price, where do think a turbo BRZ would be priced? Obvious guesses put it at either +$8,000, or +45%. The straight cash option puts the price at $33,495, putting it just under the WRX STi, and thus the 2nd most expensive car Subaru makes. And that doesn't include the added cost/weight for the AWD system as well?

Yes, it's cheaper than the Audi TT... but not by much. The TT does have an expensive DSG auto tranny, and some stuff only in the Limited BRZ (Alcantera leather seats), which is probably the rest of the expense.

What other turbo AWD vehicles are under $30000? The WRX($25.5k), the Lancer Ralliart ($28k), and....? I looked and found nothing else.

Subaru has 2 options for you... Turbo AWD = WRX. NA RWD = BRZ. About the same price, very different choices made during design. Like a 'gaming laptop', any attempt to cram all the features together will probably come out bigger, heavier, and more expensive than you'd like.

[Turbowned]

Originally Posted by TheRipler

This is the perfect example of what I don't get. You already have your perfect sports car. It's called a BRZ or FR-S. No one is trying to ruin your car.

You don't seem to care that Imprezas are not lookers, or that the best looking one (yet still quirky) we got in the states wasn't turbo (2.5RS). I'll assume the TT was a joke. I mean, why not just get a 911 GT2 RS, right? That would be the target. Turbo, check. AWD, check. Looks, check. Affordable... 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

Some people like different things, and options aren't bad for anyone. They're just options. It's not like they'll stop making NA BRZs if a turbo model is added to the lineup. You're mind doesn't have to change if someone on the internet has a different opinion. It's all good. Buy the NA version if it makes you happy. People still bought 289 Cobras when the 427 was available. Some are happier with the lighter motor. Others aren't satisfied without the brute force.

In general, are the totally anti any turbo people also defending the Prius tires? The car may be the best vehicle many have ever owned (or will soon own), but that certainly doesn't make it perfect.

Firstly, I'm no proponent of an "N/A only" BRZ, nor do I think the BRZ is "perfect" as-is. I'll be bolting a supercharger to that thing as soon as a proper kit comes out. My beef is with all-wheel-drive. It's a ridiculous proposition in this car, and anyone who thinks this car needs it is totally missing the point.

As for the TT, I was being perfectly serious. If a WRX base price is $25,595 and a WRX STi starts at $34,095, what makes you think the BRZ's base price of $25,495 isn't gonna jump nearly $10k with AWD and a turbo, too? $38k for an Audi TT is a relative bargain, and it ticks all the boxes of what everyone seems to want: light weight, all-wheel-drive, turbo, quick, sexy and affordable. It effectively is what the BRZ would be with AWD and a turbo, except with an aluminum space frame.

What exactly does a $200k limited production über-Porsche have to do with this argument? And BTW, the GT2 RS is rear-wheel-drive

[xwd]

AWD will never happen on the BRZ but I fully expect to see a 35K turbo version next year. Subaru makes turbo engines so as much as a supercharger would be great it's not going to happen.

[DookDookDGM]

Originally Posted by dwx

AWD will never happen on the BRZ but I fully expect to see a 35K turbo version next year. Subaru makes turbo engines so as much as a supercharger would be great it's not going to happen.

Subaru also makes nothing but AWD cars, so as much as an FR Subaru would be great it's not going to happen

[Zadkiel]

I just can't see the point of a turbo. Shed some 100-200lbs in weight, remove the rear seats if need be, more aggressive suspension tuning, bigger brakes, better exhaust and intake, and a better ECU tune. You'd have a 2500lb car with 250-275hp. This car doesn't need a turbo.

Everyone is obsessed with FI to the point where if it isn't turbo then it needs to be somewhere along the line. I had a 240SX with an SR swap that weighed about 2300lbs, had 300hp, and made every attempt to kill me. 250-275hp in a 2500lb car is plenty fast enough.

AWD is not even an option on this. Every single part of the front suspension and chassis would need modifying to even get close to accepting the required AWD components. Adding almost 300lbs worth of weight to the front end and only bumping hp to 300 would result in almost exactly the same 0-60 times but with worse handling characteristics.

[TheRipler]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Firstly, I'm no proponent of an "N/A only" BRZ, nor do I think the BRZ is "perfect" as-is. I'll be bolting a supercharger to that thing as soon as a proper kit comes out. My beef is with all-wheel-drive. It's a ridiculous proposition in this car, and anyone who thinks this car needs it is totally missing the point.

As for the TT, I was being perfectly serious. If a WRX base price is $25,595 and a WRX STi starts at $34,095, what makes you think the BRZ's base price of $25,495 isn't gonna jump nearly $10k with AWD and a turbo, too? $38k for an Audi TT is a relative bargain, and it ticks all the boxes of what everyone seems to want: light weight, all-wheel-drive, turbo, quick, sexy and affordable. It effectively is what the BRZ would be with AWD and a turbo, except with an aluminum space frame.

What exactly does a $200k limited production über-Porsche have to do with this argument? And BTW, the GT2 RS is rear-wheel-drive

Well, you got me. It's been a while since I've seen a GT2. Guess I'll have to turn down my milestone to the anemic 997 Turbo.

Perhaps it's just me, but low end Audis don't do it for me anymore. In fact, none of the alternatives thrown out in here spark any interest for me.

I don't actually think they will make an AWD version, but I still don't see what's wrong with wanting. We can call it a BRX if it makes everyone feel better. If they don't make one, it will just make my life more difficult. Maybe even a hybrid would be OK, with just electrics on the front. Hey, how about a full on diesel electric hybrid, and put the motor wherever you want.

I'm still holding the prediction of a turbo for MY 2015. It's going to happen.