Subaru previews next-generation BRZ, announces November 18th unveiling date

[spike021]

With all this talk about calipers I’m surprised nobody cares that these were supposed to be translucent so that you could easily see the brake pads.

Now I’m definitely not buying this one.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by Red-86

My 86 was the GT model here in Oz, the base with those 16” Enkeis, and I actually liked the simple style of them. I just wish they were larger and wider. I never cared for the 17” or 18” GTS rims except for the ones that came with the PP. The stock 17s though, both pre and post facelift were always ugly to my eye.

At least these new ones look OK. I’m a sucker for a classic JDM TE37 style rim with 5 or 6 spokes and a bit of lip, which never goes out of style. I don’t know why automakers don’t stick with timeless designs, but insist on short term trends which date the rims and the car horribly within a few years.

Meh.. to each their own. I was never big on that classic 5-6 spoke style and get sick of seeing it on every broken down civic on the road. I did get a nice pair of 6 spoke wheels on my first car, but this was only because I was broke and it was the cheapest thing I could afford at the time. I like the PP wheels on the 17s+ and the upcoming wheels are nice as well. At least I find that they are a good stock wheel of choice for a 26-27k car.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

There were similar questions when Alpine said the A110 will get the PS4 tire and not the PS4S tire that gives better lap times. When they were questioned about the decision, they said that the intention was to provide a more streetable tire and not a track-focused tire. So, yes a particular tire might hurt specific measurements and lap times, but such numbers don't provide always the complete truth.

I wonder if Toyobaru would have admitted that they wanted the Primacy tires, so the the car slid more and looked flat in the turns to match their marketing about the boxer being good at anti-roll.

Interestingly, the Primacys are more expensive than the PS4S.

[Lynxis]

I'm 100% certain the Primacy was chosen because it's an economy tire and for little other reason. That the tire allowed for some small, simple skids and "matched the car" has always come across to me as marketing spin.

The twins came out with EPA combined fuel economy rating of 28MPG and if it came with something like the PSS, would have probably dropped it another MPG or two. These cars released at what I'd consider the height of the fuel economy craze with most pedestrian vehicles boasting 35-40mpg figures on regular fuel, so I can imagine there was a lot of concern within Subaru at the time that the relatively poor fuel economy ratings AND needing premium might turn casual buyers off this car.

Ultimately I don't think it mattered much for these cars but these are the things bean-counters are paid to think about all day.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I wonder if Toyobaru would have admitted that they wanted the Primacy tires, so the the car slid more and looked flat in the turns to match their marketing about the boxer being good at anti-roll.

Not so much marketing about the boxer being good at anti-roll. The cog is really low in this car, lower comparing to other "sports" cars. They just fitted quite soft springs which was better for not losing grip in bad pavement, but not that good in race track and with stickier tires. I would say the marketing part was to promote that this was a track car. It could evolve to a track car, but with enough changes and not by just swapping tires. Toyota is doing the same now with the GR Yaris. It is supposed to be a rally background car and the most you can see testing it is in race tracks which is a joke.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by Lynxis

I'm 100% certain the Primacy was chosen because it's an economy tire and for little other reason. That the tire allowed for some small, simple skids and "matched the car" has always come across to me as marketing spin.

The twins came out with EPA combined fuel economy rating of 28MPG and if it came with something like the PSS, would have probably dropped it another MPG or two. These cars released at what I'd consider the height of the fuel economy craze with most pedestrian vehicles boasting 35-40mpg figures on regular fuel, so I can imagine there was a lot of concern within Subaru at the time that the relatively poor fuel economy ratings AND needing premium might turn casual buyers off this car.

Ultimately I don't think it mattered much for these cars but these are the things bean-counters are paid to think about all day.

Im more certain that Toyota is just able to source a buttload of Primacy's. Toyota uses them in all their "sport" trims on all their cars.

[RayRay88]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

Im more certain that Toyota is just able to source a buttload of Primacy's. Toyota uses them in all their "sport" trims on all their cars.

This.

At that time anything toyota and "sporty" that didn't have the budget for the Michelin PSS got the Primacy.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

Im more certain that Toyota is just able to source a buttload of Primacy's. Toyota uses them in all their "sport" trims on all their cars.

Originally Posted by RayRay88

This.

At that time anything toyota and "sporty" that didn't have the budget for the Michelin PSS got the Primacy.

They can source any tire they want with the volumes they buy. I am in the camp that believes it was the best compromise between performance and fuel economy. Getting a better price on some PSS4s is easy but managing to pull a couple more MPG out of the car using them is not. They need every MPG can can get to meet the requirements set out by governments around the world so if a certain tire helps them get it they will use it!

[RayRay88]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

They can source any tire they want with the volumes they buy. I am in the camp that believes it was the best compromise between performance and fuel economy. Getting a better price on some PSS4s is easy but managing to pull a couple more MPG out of the car using them is not. They need every MPG can can get to meet the requirements set out by governments around the world so if a certain tire helps them get it they will use it!

I was inclined to agree, having exclusive contracts with Michelin at the time meant the Primacy fit the bill for everything they wanted out of the tire (Eco Summer tire).

But then I look at the TRD SE with the PS4S tires and the same recommended EPA mileage as the base cars with the primacys.

The BRZ tS drop in mileage makes sense with the massive wing. This leads me to believe it's a bit more about shaving a few dollars from the base price than it is about the tire. I know you work with OEM suppliers so you can imagine the penny pinching. Toyota can force prices down with volumes but there's still some cost discrepancies, no?

Like always we're probably over thinking it. The truth probably lies between all our guesses.

I really don't have a problem with the primacys, they're fine for what they are, OEM tires to be eventually replaced with something a lot more aggressive.

[DarkPira7e]

Originally Posted by dpfarr

I’m so sorry that people have to garage their cars or change wheels per season.

I love it. Things don't get as stale when you always have something to look forward to. It's a matter of perspective- I love having the chance to drive in deep snow and in negative temperatures. And you get two have TEO signature wheel looks, not just one.

I feel bad for people who only have one vehicle fashion season!

[RToyo86]

As much as I hate exposing the car to salt, slapping on the winters and driving through snow sideways puts a massive smile on my face.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

One take on the Primacy's I've read once is that the OEM left the tires as the "weak link" in the car - they dialed it in to be as sporty as they could, and then dialed back via the tires. Then an owner that wants a more hard-core experience can just swap the tires (an easy and relatively cheap thing to do). This reasoning kinda makes sense, especially with the bare-bones stripped out version available in Japan (the RC/RA trims).

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

This reasoning kinda makes sense, especially with the bare-bones stripped out version available in Japan (the RC/RA trims).

The bare-bones stripped out version had steel wheels, open diff, smaller brakes, no aero. It is as the word says. A bare-bones car up to the basics with an aim to change almost everything to aftermarket tuning parts. Oh and by the way, the RC/RA trims didn't have the Primacies. They had a Yokohama Decibel E70 16" tire.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

The bare-bones stripped out version had steel wheels, open diff, smaller brakes, no aero. It is as the word says. A bare-bones car up to the basics with an aim to change almost everything to aftermarket tuning parts. Oh and by the way, the RC/RA trims didn't have the Primacies. They had a Yokohama Decibel E70 16" tire.

I meant the RC/RA as an example of the OEM catering to a crowd that would want to modify the car and making it easier for them. 90% of the buyers don't touch the car - they get the regular trims; 9% modify it lightly - they get the regular trims and swap the tires and some other minimal mods; 1% modify it heavily - they get the RC/RA and swap everything.

Most OEMs don't cater neither to that 9% nor to that 1%. You want a better cornering Miata? Change the coilovers and sway bars (even on the Club trim).

I'd say that making a great car that's easy to modify is much harder than just making a great car. Subaru and Toyota did a wonderful job in that regard, more so than Mazda with the Miata.