Car and Driver is F-ing Stupid

[darthpnoy1984]

I just find it funny we were all crying and begging for this car to be build and now it's been out for nearly 4 years already I still hear complaints and moaning you babies are so hard to please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

I still have a hard time convincing people that a little boost doesn't automatically blow up these engines.

Even after showing them logs and dynos of Edlebrock/JCRS 86s they still don't want to believe it.

The number of people willing to plunk down >$30k on an FA20DIT-86, Subaru's first Direct Injection production motor, with a turbo on top instead of just buying one of the proven FI kits is fucking baffling to me.

'OE reliability! OE warranty!'

Yeah, I'm not hearing fantastic things about the FA20DIT's longevity and the engine is already having carbon buildup issues, the thing fails a leakdown test and then they have to walnut blast the valves to get it to pass. A handful of spun bearings and toasted engines mentioned here and there.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2756556

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2749732

Interesting post from Moto-East
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=254

[daiheadjai]

Originally Posted by Toroll

Fun Fact.

7000 rpm is very low for a car that has 86mm stroke. The stroke is usually what determines the rev limit. Shorter strokes can rev higher than longer stroke. The reason being is, PISTON SPEED limit.

Examples:
The 2zz in other cars are set to rev at 8,600rpm. It has 85mm stroke.
The K20 can easily rev att 8,300 rpm. Yes it is also 86mm bore x86mm stroke like the FA20.

The FA20 stroke will allow it to rev past 8,000 rpm but wasn't tuned to do that.

So no, Toyota/Subaru did not give any effort to make the FA20 to rev high even though the stroke already allows it.

I love the 2zz-ge (used to post and troll Newcelica.org even before I had my own car), but let's face it: that engine (and the F20, K20, etc.) was the product of a different era.
Current fuel economy and emissions regulations have made it difficult (if not impossible) to produce the type of rev-happy, high-output N/A engines.

As a side question, is there something about the H4/flat-four configuration that explains why it isn't as eager to rev like an inline 4?

[darthpnoy1984]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The number of people willing to plunk down >$30k on an FA20DIT-86, Subaru's first Direct Injection production motor, with a turbo on top instead of just buying one of the proven FI kits is fucking baffling to me.



'OE reliability! OE warranty!'



Yeah, I'm not hearing fantastic things about the FA20DIT's longevity and the engine is already having carbon buildup issues, the thing fails a leakdown test and then they have to walnut blast the valves to get it to pass. A handful of spun bearings and toasted engines mentioned here and there.



http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2756556



http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2749732



Interesting post from Moto-East

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=254

Yikes and lack of power complainers are still complaining lol be glad we're not dealing with issues like the WRX is.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

Yikes and lack of power complainers are still complaining lol be glad we're not dealing with issues like the WRX is.

The FA20's reputation isn't clean either, but saying 'FA20DIT nao' is silly.

I'm still not convinced my injector seals won't blow out on me within the next year.

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

I just find it funny we were all crying and begging for this car to be build and now it's been out for nearly 4 years already I still hear complaints and moaning you babies are so hard to please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some people are still upset that this car wasn't 2500lbs with 250hp for $21,000.

[darthpnoy1984]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

Some people are still upset that this car wasn't 2500lbs with 250hp for $21,000.

I know 2500 pounds wasn't happening given the age of safety standards and laws. The ride would've been punishing as hell, I once owned a 2002 Toyota Celica GT 5 speed that was barely 2400 pounds and was a punishing ride to commute but was fun as hell to drive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by daiheadjai

I love the 2zz-ge (used to post and troll Newcelica.org even before I had my own car), but let's face it: that engine (and the F20, K20, etc.) was the product of a different era.
Current fuel economy and emissions regulations have made it difficult (if not impossible) to produce the type of rev-happy, high-output N/A engines.

Exactly. Honda admitted that they had to abandon the K20 due to emissions. It's sad, but we won't see engines like that in affordable cars again unless emissions regulations change.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

I know 2500 pounds wasn't happening given the age of safety standards and laws. The ride would've been punishing as hell, I once owned a 2002 Toyota Celica GT 5 speed that was barely 2400 pounds and was a punishing ride to commute but was fun as hell to drive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[darthpnoy1984]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Yeah but I want trunk space and hard top thank you very much

I never understand these silly Miata comparisons it's like comparing apples and oranges (hardtop 2 + 2 vs 2 seater softtop)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

Yeah but I want trunk space and hard top thank you very much

I never understand these silly Miata comparisons it's like comparing apples and oranges (hardtop 2 + 2 vs 2 seater softtop)

Well you said it couldn't be 2500 lbs because of crash safety, and yet there's the miata under 2400 lbs. The Fiat Abarth is a 2+2 with a hatch under 2600 lbs and the Fiesta ST is a fucking four door hatchback that weighs less than an 86 with 200hp and a lower price tag to boot, none are criticised for a 'punishing' ride and all are in the price range of an 86 or cheaper.

Not to mention Lotus and Alfa Romeo building lightweight two doors at a higher price with no problems meeting safety regs.

Where did I make a comparison to an 86? All I'm saying is lightweight performance cars that are nice to drive on the street are not impossible to build. Apologies that wasn't evident.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

Yeah but I want trunk space and hard top thank you very much

I never understand these silly Miata comparisons it's like comparing apples and oranges (hardtop 2 + 2 vs 2 seater softtop)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

someone said 2400 lbs isnt happening but it is happening. if you think the miata is a poor comparison, what is a good one? comparing is a tool used for different things. not the same things. the whole apples to oranges thing confuses me.

[Cal3000]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

I still have a hard time convincing people that a little boost doesn't automatically blow up these engines.


Even after showing them logs and dynos of Edlebrock/JCRS 86s they still don't want to believe it.

At 9psi boost on 91, the engine could last as long as stock. That's good for 250whp. Slap a CARB kit on it and you are good.

[DarkSunrise]

Would love to see Toyota/Subaru work on reducing weight of the 86 for the next generation. Drop weight from 2750 --> 2500 lbs or less. Should be possible by reducing dimensions, using more aluminum throughout, eliminating the spare tire, and lightening exhaust and brake components.

Combine that with a slight bump in output from 205 to 220 hp and that would be a nice set of upgrades for the next generation car. Sadly they're probably going in the opposite direction.