Adequate/Inadequate power for DD on stock BRZ?

[PhyrraM]

Originally Posted by rvoll

........why does anybody even care if a minivan is faster or slower? ........

I don't know about too many other places in the country, or the world, but here in SoCal the answer is personality and ego.

There are tons of folks (predominantly, but far from exclusively, younger folks) who just have to be first off the line or ahead of you no matter the speed or conditions. To these people being behind virtually anybody else seems to be taken as an insult or slight. So, combine that type of person (with the manual trans and torque dip) and a similar type of person in an automatic equipped minivan (or Altima, Camry, Fusion, F150, etc, etc) than can just be lazy and floor it and they will call their Twin slow every single time.

[JustSomeGuy]

Originally Posted by GrantedTaken

Did you even read the links you posted?
Not one of the minivans in the links above are faster than the BRZ.

if you referencing me about the links then yes, i did read them. i also did not claim they were faster than the brz if you read correctly before
i was just posting links to tests of minivans for people to see that they arent faster 0-60

[8inchAzN]

Originally Posted by Stang70Fastback

I'm not "shifting the goal posts." I'm pointing out that you are making unreasonable comparisons. Price is ALWAYS an underlying part of the comparison. So is the idea that we are obviously excluding special "crazy fast" edition vehicles. Otherwise there wouldn't be a point to any of these comparisons. Any reasonable discussion has reasonable limits. If you want to take things to the extreme just to validate your argument, that's fine, but you're turning the conversation into something other than what was intended.

One of your comparisons was a vehicle that doesn't exist.

The other was a vehicle with a starting price that, in today's money, was more than TWICE that of the most expensive Toyota Sienna you can buy.

It's also not *really* a minivan, but I'll let that one slide since it's commonly referred to as one by people who think sliding doors are what make minivans uncool.

None of that extra fluff is relevant to this discussion. Is the R63 AMG a minivan? Yes Is it faster than a BRZ? Yes

Want to add in another criteria such as price? New discussion.

[Stang70Fastback]

Originally Posted by 8inchAzN

None of that extra fluff is relevant to this discussion. Is the R63 AMG a minivan? Yes Is it faster than a BRZ? Yes

Want to add in another criteria such as price? New discussion.

Fine then. I'm done discussing this with you anyway since you clearly can't be reasonable. I should have realized that when you used the non-existent Pacifica Hellcat as one of your original examples to back up your claims, lol.

[spralwers]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

I'm starting to lean toward the slightly inadequate, and the torque curve is to blame. I'm in 6th, doing about 90-100 kmh on the highway, a lane opens up and I wanna quickly overtake. So I shift down to 5th, and speed climbs so slowly, so I shift down to 4th. Still not really enough.

At that speed, downshift to third. This is a requirement with N/A 4 cylinder cars.

[rvoll]

Originally Posted by PhyrraM

I don't know about too many other places in the country, or the world, but here in SoCal the answer is personality and ego.

There are tons of folks (predominantly, but far from exclusively, younger folks) who just have to be first off the line or ahead of you no matter the speed or conditions. To these people being behind virtually anybody else seems to be taken as an insult or slight. So, combine that type of person (with the manual trans and torque dip) and a similar type of person in an automatic equipped minivan (or Altima, Camry, Fusion, F150, etc, etc) than can just be lazy and floor it and they will call their Twin slow every single time.

If it were so important to them, they would not have purchased a Twin. If they did, then they have an IQ issue. There are plenty of muscle cars with a lot of torque off of the line. Lots of Honda's as well. If anyone wants a more perfect car, then spend the money for it. It seems that most people today want something for nothing -- a cheap car than handles extremely well and has over 500 hp. That's what really gets me about this topic. This car is fine as is. The designer at Toyota said if he put more HP into the car, he'd have to redesign the whole car including structure and suspension to have it as balanced as he would want. Besides, they just did add 5hp. Isn't that enough????????????

[mike_ekim1024]

Originally Posted by rvoll

If it were so important to them, they would not have purchased a Twin. If they did, then they have an IQ issue. There are plenty of muscle cars with a lot of torque off of the line. Lots of Honda's as well. If anyone wants a more perfect car, then spend the money for it. It seems that most people today want something for nothing -- a cheap car than handles extremely well and has over 500 hp. That's what really gets me about this topic. This car is fine as is. The designer at Toyota said if he put more HP into the car, he'd have to redesign the whole car including structure and suspension to have it as balanced as he would want. Besides, they just did add 5hp. Isn't that enough????????????

The car is fine as is... before smog regulations and the torque dip. I keep hearing a header and a tune makes it just right. Not a monster, but not just “adequate”. I understand regulations and why they are there. It’s just too bad a supercharger can be legal, but overkill just to legally fix the dip. I’d buy a low powered, less expensive SC if it did the same perf and a good header and tune.

[86 South Africa]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

...thinking that all driving must be done balls out.

Tried this once. A bit embarrassing at the traffic lights.


As to OP. I’ve done a few things to mine;
Stock. Great car, drives fine and is tons of fun. As all have said the whole power issue is over rated.

I did go and add headers + FF + tune. If you have the cash do this... it genuinely improved everything about the car’s performance curves. Made driving at any RPM good.

Then I decided to SC. Expensive and obviously adds power. Doesn’t destroy the balance of the car at all imo. This one is a toss up of risk, and cash. If you have cash and don’t mind risking your engine it’s great. But honestly... the headers and tune are far better value vs the gains in characteristics you get.

[rvoll]

Originally Posted by mike_ekim1024

The car is fine as is... before smog regulations and the torque dip. I keep hearing a header and a tune makes it just right. Not a monster, but not just “adequate”. I understand regulations and why they are there. It’s just too bad a supercharger can be legal, but overkill just to legally fix the dip. I’d buy a low powered, less expensive SC if it did the same perf and a good header and tune.

The torque dip was addressed in the 2017 revision. You can download the 2017 blueprint elsewhere on this forum. Interior quality and ride quality, important to me, were also addressed. There is still a slight dip, but less than before. And you wouldn't pay less for a Twin with a header and a tune. In any event, a header creates more noise and a tune is less reliable -- both are important to most consumers. If the car were as noisy as it was in 2016, I would not have purchased it.

[Capt Spaulding]

Jeeze,

In 1972 I bought a '70 SS396. A "hot" car for the time. It was an automatic (TH400 I think) with a claimed 350 HP. Dollars to donuts it didn't make over 280 at the wheels. My girlfriend (now wife) was a stop light terror in that car.

Now my wife drives a '12 Camry SE V6. (she still wants "ponies"). It'll run from 60 to 100 in the length of an 18 wheeler (doing 60). The BRZ will probably only hit 90-95 in the same pass. if you could time shift the camry back to 1971 it would be one of the fastest (and best handling) cars on the street. In the 80s the Ferrari 308 GTS was ADVERTISED as having 205HP.

In 2018 the twins are more than fast enough to get you into trouble and forgiving enough to let you off the hook if you'll let them. And for about $8000 1980 dollars.

The hilarious thing about these arguments is the fluidity of the standards, We have the "raw number" approach using 0/5-60 and 1/4 mile times. Now we have the "minivan" standard. I really like that one. Can't wait to see what's next.

[Lantanafrs2]

It's not a roll on car. Quick launch on a manual takes a little work and each gear relies on momentum from the gear before it even on the corn.

[rvoll]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

The hilarious thing about these arguments is the fluidity of the standards, We have the "raw number" approach using 0/5-60 and 1/4 mile times. Now we have the "minivan" standard. I really like that one. Can't wait to see what's next.

What about a 50 foot race between the car and a runner?

[bcj]

"She turned me into a newt!"

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by bcj

"She turned me into a newt!"

. Did you get better?