That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by JesseG

That’s a shame... I wonder how the poor reliability reputation started?

This certainly didn't help!

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Hehe, well I guess it was a question not a statement - but yeah I've put my person line in the sand, purely on the numbers.

You make a compelling argument based on output and specific output for a NA 4-cylinder. I'm curious how its weight and dimensions compare to the competition.

At first I was bummed about the lack of a turbo cuz I live at altitude, but I also live in a county without inspections so now you have me wondering how much a modern exhaust chokes up a car and if there's actually a chance for some NA power gains without compromises.

[albert]

Originally Posted by Red-86

Was that the N20 or B48?

The N20, I had the 2016 228i.

In my reading also found out the HP goes up when BMW switched to the B48, which is also in the I4 turbo Supra. Interesting.

[alone1i]

I think Chris Harris made good points between 86 and 370Z. Old video but probably one of the best review from one of the best Auto-Critics still alive.

[pallen]

The only reason people dog on this engine and complain about the torque dip is because the car it’s in is slow. (Aside from some 2013 quality issues) No one drives an engine, they drive a car. I love my 86 and wouldn’t trade it for anything, but it needs about 25% more.

if this car came from the factory with a turbo and 50% more power, it’s engine would be loved. That little torque dip is painful because its already barely enough power to feel sporty and then that hits. Yes, you can learn to shift around it, but you don’t have to do that with other cars. I don’t really blame the engine for that though, it’s more the design choice to use the 2.0 NA in this car.

Thankfully, I didn’t buy this car to drag race. I knew what I was getting. E85, headers and a tune, and I’m happy. I think people will love the 2022 if it gives that 20% boost in power. People like us will love it even more if they can do some simple mods and get another 20%.

[albert]

No running away from the torque dip. It's there for the emission compliance, right?

I started to get the purity of the engine... it reminds me of my old '94 Honda Civic that I used to drive at full throttle in the twisties. With 125 HP, it never bite, though it would hop and skip a bit when the road was wet.

With 80 HP more, I imagine it's still can be driven all out, pedal to the metal... thanks to the TC and VSC.

Mine has a turbo, added about 50-60 HP more, driving it at full throttle will rev it up pretty quickly passing 4-5K RPM and get it tail happy (TC off). Doing it in wet, it would break traction all the time. It becomes a throttle exercise too.

I've haven't driven the original NA... been curious how it feels. I always feel an extra 20-40HP should make it good. The new one with 28 HP more and lower/wider torque spread should make it very interesting to drive.

[Baldeagle]

Originally Posted by albert

No running away from the torque dip.
The new one with 28 HP more and lower/wider torque spread should make it very interesting to drive.

My expectation is not for the 2022 to be fast. If that extra 28 hp makes it 4/10ths of a second and 3-4 mph faster in the quarter, great, but that’s not a big deal based on today’s performance standard. However, if that extra torque makes light-throttle, lower-rpm power delivery more linear, that could be a big deal for daily drivers during their commute. If that extra torque also allows for a longer 6th gear for more relaxed highway cruising, even better.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Baldeagle

My expectation is not for the 2022 to be fast. If that extra 28 hp makes it 4/10ths of a second and 3-4 mph faster in the quarter, great, but that’s not a big deal based on today’s performance standard.

For me, the measuring stick is vs. existing BRZ/86. Honestly there aren't any other cars on the market now that appeal to me except the MX-5. Question for me is: will the new car feel and be significantly faster to the point that I wanna replace my '17.
I agree with your expectations, should be low/mid 14s at ~99mph vs. high-14s at 95mph.

However, if that extra torque makes light-throttle, lower-rpm power delivery more linear, that could be a big deal for daily drivers during their commute. If that extra torque also allows for a longer 6th gear for more relaxed highway cruising, even better.

Yeah, I expect much more linearity along with more urge everywhere, and probably taller gearing overall, or at least in 6th.

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by alone1i

I think Chris Harris made good points between 86 and 370Z. Old video but probably one of the best review from one of the best Auto-Critics still alive.

I like Harris and enjoy the quality of his content (thank Neil Carey for the incredible cinematography) but this video is misleading IMO, as someone who has owned both cars and driven them thousands of more km in all conditions than Harris has. That video is an emotional, subjective assessment of the cars that glosses over and downplays the faults of the cars he loves, whilst disproportionately focusing on and exaggerating the perceived faults of the car he lacks an emotional connection to. Never take a car reviewer’s opinion as gospel - drive the cars yourself and decide what appeals to you and the way you like to drive.

[alone1i]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I like Harris and enjoy the quality of his content (thank Neil Carey for the incredible cinematography) but this video is misleading IMO, as someone who has owned both cars and driven them thousands of more km in all conditions than Harris has. That video is an emotional, subjective assessment of the cars that glosses over and downplays the faults of the cars he loves, whilst disproportionately focusing on and exaggerating the perceived faults of the car he lacks an emotional connection to. Never take a car reviewer’s opinion as gospel - drive the cars yourself and decide what appeals to you and the way you like to drive.

Honestly, I totally agreed with your reply. But i have driven my colleague's 350Z and also boxter, i felt true about Chris's comment on that video. But yes, I am not an experienced driver and I am bit biased with 86. So, I should shut my mouth at this point.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by alone1i

Honestly, I totally agreed with your reply. But i have driven my colleague's 350Z and also boxter, i felt true about Chris's comment on that video. But yes, I am not an experienced driver and I am bit biased with 86. So, I should shut my mouth at this point.

I too agree. I drove a Boxster for a few months and loved the sound and it did seem to have a higher break away but once past the limit it was stressful. In my FRS it can go completely sideways and I can look at my phone to check a text (kidding but you get the idea). I also used to own a G35 6MT and absolutely hated that thing. I’ve never driven the Z but can’t imagine it’s entirely different. My G35 didn’t have a proper LSD which really drove me nuts. The DBW was incredibly laggy and the transmission was unbearable. I remember misshifting it fairly regularly. Once at about 80mph where I intended to shift from 3rd to 4th and grabbed 2nd instead. I knew I got the wrong gear right away but my foot was already in motion to drop the clutch so the car ended up pitching sideways as the rears locked. I quickly recovered luckily. So yeah I can relate a little to what he had to say about all the cars.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by Baldeagle

My expectation is not for the 2022 to be fast. If that extra 28 hp makes it 4/10ths of a second and 3-4 mph faster in the quarter, great, but that’s not a big deal based on today’s performance standard. However, if that extra torque makes light-throttle, lower-rpm power delivery more linear, that could be a big deal for daily drivers during their commute. If that extra torque also allows for a longer 6th gear for more relaxed highway cruising, even better.

I'm not sure Subaru would shoot for that small an improvement but who knows. Sounds like it's making e85 current gen numbers but the added displacement should do it with less effort imo

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

I'm not sure Subaru would shoot for that small an improvement but who knows.

We pretty much know from 228hp n.a. and 2815-2835 lb., it's a ~99 mph car in the 1/4.

Trap speed is roughly a function of the cube root of power/weight, scaling the current car's 95mph 1/4-mile trap speed by cube root (228/205) gives 98.4 mph. Better low-end and midrange call it ~99mph.

Could have a more significant improvement in 0-60 time if they gear it to get there in 2nd gear though...

[alex87f]

Originally Posted by pallen

if this car came from the factory with a turbo and 50% more power, it’s engine would be loved. That little torque dip is painful because its already barely enough power to feel sporty and then that hits. Yes, you can learn to shift around it, but you don’t have to do that with other cars. I don’t really blame the engine for that though, it’s more the design choice to use the 2.0 NA in this car.

Its engine would be loved, and there would be none on the road, because it would have been priced in the high 30's and very few people would have bought it.

I think the torque dip is "misunderstood" for two reasons:
-it's half a dip, but the other half is there's a torque "spike" around 3000 rpm that makes the dip feel more pronounced
-if you compare the torque curve to, say, an S2000, even at the lowest point of the dip, the 86 still has more torque. Granted, having more torque than an S2000 is hardly an achievement, but it help put in perspective something that might be exaggerated