All-New 2022 Subaru BRZ Makes Global Debut

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

But the most important hypercar metric is nowhere near the same!!
Its 0-60 is still gonna be somewhere around the 6 second range (faster than the current one which ranges between 6.2-7.4 depending on who measured it in what part of the world)

Thats not even luxury sports car numbers which is now under 4 seconds!

Subaru try to keep up!!!!

I'm guessing mid 5s for 0-60 if they geared it appropriately. Tires and torque do a lot for launching.

Plus, the gen1 ran out of gear 2 just shy of 60, if they gear it just a bit higher, that's at least .2 seconds right there. If they gear it a bit lower, then you still lose that shift time, but could increase acceleration for the period before the shift

Not that I really care. I just hope they keep similar gearing at gen1.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

But the most important hypercar metric is nowhere near the same!!
Its 0-60 is still gonna be somewhere around the 6 second range (faster than the current one which ranges between 6.2-7.4 depending on who measured it in what part of the world)

Thats not even luxury sports car numbers which is now under 4 seconds!

Subaru try to keep up!!!!

This car is meant to be a slightly more practical miata alternative not a luxury sports car. I get your point though. I would expect acceleration numbers to be on par with a new miata or maybe a twat hair better.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Also consistent with simply placing the engine lower in the car. It is in black and white from an official source. This isn't eve a debatable point.

Yes they lowered the whole car but they also put the engine lower as well.

Sitting low in the chassis, the Subaru BOXER’s unique design allows the BRZ to achieve a Center of Gravity (CoG)

Sitting "low" in the chassis. It doesn't say sitting lower.

You are so very credulous with "official sources"! Spokespeople and press-release writers don't necessarily know what they are talking about, and when they do can spin things to seem more impressive.

*Maybe* the engine is indeed lower relative to fixed chassis points, but I'm betting they just lowered the car... Or yeah, combination, for sure the current cars engine sits awfully high...

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

But the most important hypercar metric is nowhere near the same!!
Its 0-60 is still gonna be somewhere around the 6 second range (faster than the current one which ranges between 6.2-7.4 depending on who measured it in what part of the world)

Thats not even luxury sports car numbers which is now under 4 seconds!

Subaru try to keep up!!!!

OK now show me the list of cars that cost under $30,000 with a sub 4 time. I don't even care what class they are.
I will wait.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Sitting "low" in the chassis. It doesn't say sitting lower.

You are so very credulous with "official sources"! Spokespeople and press-release writers don't necessarily know what they are talking about, and when they do can spin things to seem more impressive.

*Maybe* the engine is indeed lower relative to fixed chassis points, but I'm betting they just lowered the car... Or yeah, combination, for sure the current cars engine sits awfully high...

Ok so show me how you know it was dropped .4. The car height is .4 lower it doesn't say they dropped it .4. We have no idea what the ride height is yet.
You only use the data point that agree with your theories? Cherry pick much?
Sure it may be off a bit but is what we have for OFFICIAL data right now.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Ok so show me how you know it was dropped .4. The car height is .4 lower it doesn't say they dropped it .4. We have no idea what the ride height is yet.
You only use the data point that agree with your theories? Cherry pick much?
Sure it may be off a bit but is what we have for OFFICIAL data right now.

Connect the dots: Car height is 0.4 inches lower. Driver is positioned lower. Engine positioned lower. C.g. is lower. All consistent with just lowering the whole sprung car. Occam's razor...

The "official" narrative might not be the simplest explanation, they tend to play things up and make even a relatively minor change seem like a host of "big improvements"...

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Not a hope in hell. Zero.



They explain the lower COG. Dropped engine, aluminum roof, aluminum front fenders, lower driver position, and repositioned supsension.

@ZDan is talking about overall height. It went up with the facelift for some reason.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Connect the dots: Car height is 0.4 inches lower. Driver is positioned lower. Engine positioned lower. C.g. is lower. All consistent with just lowering the whole sprung car. Occam's razor...

The "official" narrative might not be the simplest explanation, they tend to play things up and make even a relatively minor change seem like a host of "big improvements"...

The phrasing of the release would indictate that the.4 came off the body height not the overall height.
"The tidy coupe design is just over an inch longer and almost half an inch lower than its predecessor, resulting in a low and wide frontal area"

We will not know ride height until we see some road clearance data. The pictures sure don't make it look lower to the ground.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

@ZDan is talking about overall height. It went up with the facelift for some reason.

Those included the sharkfin The car did not grow 2 inches in 2017.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

The phrasing of the release would indictate that the.4 came off the body height not the overall height.
"The tidy coupe design is just over an inch longer and almost half an inch lower than its predecessor, resulting in a low and wide frontal area"

I can't for the life of me see how that suggests that the "body height" has shrunk rather than that the whole car came down...

Anyway, speaking of "official" data sources, they ain't always right...
From the Subaru site:
The 2.4-liter naturally aspirated engine redlines at 7,000 RPM and delivers a 15-percent increase in torque.

Peak power is at 7,000, redline is likely 7500rpm (indicated, anyway).
Peak torque is actually up 18% (184/156 = 1.18) and it's likely 20% or more up through much of the rev range given higher compression ratio and 1.2x displlacement.

I've had to write vehicle specs myself, and sometimes the editing goes a little wonky... Anyway, "official" data isn't always 100% correct.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I can't for the life of me see how that suggests that the "body height" has shrunk rather than that the whole car came down...

Anyway, speaking of "official" data sources, they ain't always right...
From the Subaru site:
The 2.4-liter naturally aspirated engine redlines at 7,000 RPM and delivers a 15-percent increase in torque.

Peak power is at 7,000, redline is likely 7500rpm (indicated, anyway).
Peak torque is actually up 18% (184/156 = 1.18) and it's likely 20% or more up through much of the rev range given higher compression ratio and 1.2x displlacement.

I've had to write vehicle specs myself, and sometimes the editing goes a little wonky... Anyway, "official" data isn't always 100% correct.

Neither are assumptions or random guesses. If I have to choose one set of data it will be the set provided by the manufacturer.

We will see what is what when we finally get a road clearance number.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Neither are assumptions or random guesses. If I have to choose one set of data it will be the set provided by the manufacturer.

Guesses from myself and plenty of other of the more knowledgable contributors here are not *random* but based on logic and reason.

We ALL know that nothing means anything to you until the almighty manufacturer lists "official" info. Even though that is not always accurate...

[bcj]

Originally Posted by etherdude

I like it. I think the Toyota version will look even better without the "smile" in the grill.

That's gurning.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Guesses from myself and plenty of other of the more knowledgable contributors here are not *random* but based on logic and reason.

We ALL know that nothing means anything to you until the almighty manufacturer lists "official" info. Even though that is not always accurate...

Yep. I don't like fictional bullshit presented as fact. Nobody should.

Logic and reason resulting in assumptions and theories do not equal knowledge. They just simulate it.

Some of the "more knowledgeable" contributors here are full of shit about 90% of the time so that is not a reference for their qualifications.

We will eventually get some more FACTS and see what is what.

At this point the known aspects of the lower COG are a lower engine, lighter upper body panels and weight redistribution through smaller upper greenhouse. Not sure why the assumed lower ride height even has to be considered.

LOL we dodn't even know what the actual new COG is beyond "hyper car". We could be debating a few millimeters.