The 2nd gen BRZ will have similar performance to…?

[joro2]

>> Every time I'm in a Boxster/Cayman/Miata

My 1991 gen 1/NA MX-5 had a small rear shelf behind the seats, which as long as the top was up was a useful storage area.
Love the “storage shelf” back seats on my 2017 BRZ, a lot like my beloved and now long gone ‘91 Miata except a (welcome) bit bigger.

[~el~jefe~]

Originally Posted by ZDan

*Power* pretty well takes gearing into account. Torque by itself is meaningless. The real story is that the updated 2.4-liter powerplant should have relatively fatter power curve up to peak, vs. current-gen and S2000's more linear/straight-line power curve.

The real difference is 50/50 vs. 55/45. And it *is* significant. It isn't a 5% difference in static load on the drive wheels, it is a 10% difference. It is significant enough that a not-even-50/50 Miata beats the FT86 to 60 and in the 1/4-mile by about half a second despite similar power to weight and same 1/4-mile trap speed.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B78...uXfT1q4d2rUvGA
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ne-more-power/


HA! Pure marketing b.s. "50/50" isn't perfect, and you want *more rearward bias* for best FR sports car performance. Also there's a LOT more weight transfer at max acceleration off the line than they are suggesting here...

this is true. The Mazda mx-5 RF 2019 has almost the exact 0-60 times as the lighter soft top mx-5, and sometimes better due to the heavier roof pushing down on the rear tires when load transfers.

50 / 50 is great for no power quick turns.



and sure, when you hit the gas, weight goes strongly to the rear, braking to the front, 50.50 is for different things.

[RippedManiac]

Its benchmark was turbo mustang.

I think it will feel like Kouki NA catless header + tune, but stock.

If it has the same 17%hp 16%tq drivetrain loss, 228/184 goes to around 189/154 to the wheels. Mines at 186/148.

I cant wait to see the NA builds on this engine. I hope it hits the mythical 200+ wheel on 91 no corn.

[timurrrr]

Toyota said GR 86 does 195+ whp.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by RippedManiac

Its benchmark was turbo mustang.

I think it will feel like Kouki NA catless header + tune, but stock.

If it has the same 17%hp 16%tq drivetrain loss, 228/184 goes to around 189/154 to the wheels. Mines at 186/148.

I cant wait to see the NA builds on this engine. I hope it hits the mythical 200+ wheel on 91 no corn.

It was discussed in another thread and a full article was written about how fast it feels by a Gen1 owner. It matches more with a full bolt-on and E85 gen1.

[wbradley]

...the first, with an improved torque curve.

[SockMonkey]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

It was discussed in another thread and a full article was written about how fast it feels by a Gen1 owner. It matches more with a full bolt-on and E85 gen1.

Do you happen to remember the name of the thread? I had some bolt ons and 93 on my Gen1, and it was a notable improvement. I wish we had e85 around here, imagine what this will feel like to bolts ons and a proper e85 tune.. But I might be moving to an area with e85, the big question is how concerned I am with the warranty... lol

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by SockMonkey

Do you happen to remember the name of the thread? I had some bolt ons and 93 on my Gen1, and it was a notable improvement. I wish we had e85 around here, imagine what this will feel like to bolts ons and a proper e85 tune.. But I might be moving to an area with e85, the big question is how concerned I am with the warranty... lol

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145943
He states it in his article a bit ways down when he talks about the current gen1 he owns.

I've got a great header and E85 flex-fuel. It's plenty fast for me, especially as a DD.

[Ernest72]

All the reviews on YouTube will come out after august 17th. You will get all your answers. Reading speculation on a forum will not help your decision.

[Simmons]

I remember back when the brz 1st came out and Moto-east was using my car for testing tunes, I got the JDL header and e85 tune, it felt like a totally different car it actually made tq instead of a dip. I think it was like 206whp.
If my 2022 feels like that stock, I will be happy.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Simmons

I remember back when the brz 1st came out and Moto-east was using my car for testing tunes, I got the JDL header and e85 tune, it felt like a totally different car it actually made tq instead of a dip. I think it was like 206whp.
If my 2022 feels like that stock, I will be happy.

206 whp will be a stretch. Informally Toyota engineers basically said it should be "around" 196 whp.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by ZDan

HA! Pure marketing b.s. "50/50" isn't perfect, and you want *more rearward bias* for best FR sports car performance. Also there's a LOT more weight transfer at max acceleration off the line than they are suggesting here...

I think with high horsepower a lot of weight over the rear axle makes sense for handling, particularly for corner exit which is key.

But I'm not sure how FR cars with lower horsepower would benefit. I mean I'd assume for instance that MR cars would struggle to keep as efficient a line as a FR - wouldn't there be front grip limitations?

Genuinely would like to know.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by Blighty

But I'm not sure how FR cars with lower horsepower would benefit. I mean I'd assume for instance that MR cars would struggle to keep as efficient a line as a FR - wouldn't there be front grip limitations?

Genuinely would like to know.

I don't think power and total weight play a part. A Lotus Elise at 2000 lbs and 190 HP with MR layout handles wonderfully with a 38/62 weight distribution and can out corner most cars on similar tires. An MR car does require a different driving style at the limit than an FR car, though.

I think the consensus of more weight at the rear for RWD is indeed more for powering out of turns, with understeer prevention due to low weight over the front wheels is handled by geometry and tuning.

[Code Monkey]

Assuming conservatively a 15% drivetrain loss, the 2nd gen should dyno at 238*.85 = 202 whp. If you can extract the same power per liter from the 2.4 as from the 2.0, the 2.4 should be rated at 246 hp or 209 whp. My suspicion is that 246 is too close to 2.0L Supra's 255 so the engine got detuned to 238. With a header I would not be surprised to see 220-230 whp, add flex fuel and get to 240 whp.