"Underpowered"... compared to...?

[reeves]

Originally Posted by ABQautoxer

For me I was shopping a WRX vs the FRS. There is a huge difference in power for the exact same money (both $25k as the WRX can be had for well under MSRP). Add to that the Genesis Coupe 2.0T...

I didn't want a "converted" family sedan, made into a sports car, like the WRX and Genesis.. There will be PLENTY of turbo / supercharger options for those who want more power. For me, I like the 30+ MPG on the highway so I can drive & enjoy the FR-S every single day to/from work, while not spending too much at the pump.

[Hook]

I'm not too much of a car guy and don't really understand all the technical talk but my current car (while waiting for my GTS 8-6 to arrive) is a ford XR8 - V8 with a reasonable amount of a power (350hp).
I really enjoyed driving the 8-6 and don't think I will miss the extra power.
I kinda think of the comparison of a go-kart (86) vs a shopping trolley with a V8.
Sure the XR8 has lots of power but it feels a bit scary when I try to use it, like it wants to kill me but the 8-6 wants me to test it to its limits.
I've never really been excited about a car before the 8-6 and it will be my first drivers car rather then just a fast shopping trolley

[Skyhound]

I think people need a reality check. Up until the FR-S/BRZ actually came out, everyone was willing to concede that this car IS underpowered. Now that everyone has theirs, they don't want to regret their decision or just plain fanboyism is leading them to believe that the FR-S is the best car to have hit the market. Don't get me wrong, I am IN LOVE with my FR-S and I am perfectly happy with my purchase. However, the deliriousness of this board is starting to reach Slobalt/SRT4 levels.

No matter which way you cut it, 200hp is very little for a SPORTS car in this day and age. Yes, this car handles like a dream and connects you with the road in the most intimate way possible. Yet, this thing gets smoked on the track. In all of the track videos I've watched, this car can only "keep up" with other sports cars and has barely passed cars of it's class (a BMW Z4 and Miata). Now it IS a huge feet that this modest $25k car can keep up with a significantly more expensive CTS-V on the corners, but incredibly disappointing that it will never actually pass the damn thing since it gains so much ground on the straights.

Whatever though, 200hp is enough for some people. Hell, it's enough for me. Though for some people, it just isn't. Now you can say "just throw money at it in aftermarket parts", but while people can do that they may not want to. I personally only want this car to remain stock or at most with factory-installed options because I now how much painstaking R&D went into creating such an incredibly balanced vehicle. So if I wanted to pay more for more power, and I want pay for that in a nice one-time purchase from the people who know this car the best; I simply do not have that option thanks to Scion's "One Trim" policy. I can only hope to get lucky with a Release Series or wait for the Subie STI.

Please guys, just admit the car is weak. There's no shame in modesty.

[reeves]

Originally Posted by Skyhound

No matter which way you cut it, 200hp is very little for a SPORTS car in this day and age. ... Please guys, just admit the car is weak. There's no shame in modesty.

Its all relative.. I came from a (non-modified) 90's celica, integra, and (non-turbo) MR2.. so compared to those, the FR-S is an "upgrade" in power to me

[ZmZMWagon]

Originally Posted by Grishbok

ehhhh... no. The RX-8 is smooth, but a benchmark absolutely not. The mazdaspeed 3 continuously loses time and time again to its competitors the cobalt SS turbo and focus rs. It wins on interior styling and fit and finish only. The rx7 FC, and FD was absolutely a benchmark for rwd, the rx-8 not so much and compared to the heritage of the rotary engine and its more immediate FD predescessor, possibly the biggest disappointment from mazda. The FD was beautifully sculpted and incredibly well crafted, and when you compare it to the rx8, the soul of the rotary is seemingly lost and confused. It was a thoroughbred sports car in FD form, in rx-8 form its trying to be a people-carrier with the 2.7 doors and other unescesssary additions.

lol......please provide a link to the MS3 losing on a consistent basis......

BTW, last time I checked on this site everyone was getting a hard on because "5 minutes to a better FRS"......in which stock for stock the MS3 beat the FRS on a track......magazine racing FTW

[ZmZMWagon]

Originally Posted by fatoni

kinda worth noting is that when the msp came out they say it outhandled the itr and the 3 is its successor although im sure fwd handling gets overshadowed by crazy power so its tough to find a direct comparison. i wouldnt be surprised if there are a few other honorable mentions like the mini or the cobalt ss

Glad you mentioned this. Sports Compact car I believe was the one who said the MSP was the best handling FWD car all time.....prior to that Mazda also brought out the Protege MP3 which was also underpowered but handled like it was on rails.........

[Rossi]

You have to remember that this car was built for handeling, sure it's not as fast as some Hot Hatches, but for pure joy of driving, I'll take it over any hot hatch.

[20valvewynn83]

Power to weight ration
FRS 0.074 $24,955
BRZ (Premium) 0.072 $25,495
BRZ (Limited) 0.072 $27,495
Mustang 0.086 $22,995
WRX 0.095 $37,445
MX-5 0.069 $23,470
370z 0.101 $33,900
M3 0.112 $60,100
Genesis 0.081 $25,125
GTI 0.066 $23,995
Mini Cooper 0.067 $25,300

[ABQautoxer]

Did someone say the RX8 is a poor handling car? Really? Look don't get crazy, the RX8 is a good handling car. The MS3 is pretty good too, heck I drove a prep'd Mazda3 (non MS3) and I was very impressed. The MS3 isn't quite the handler the ITR is but has a lot more engine so combined its better overall IMO. One thing about the RX8, its unusually light for a car of that type.

[R8]

Originally Posted by Grishbok

The rx7 FC, and FD was absolutely a benchmark for rwd, the rx-8 not so much...

Actually, if I remember my reading, the RX-8 improved upon the RX-7's chassis in just about every possible way: stiffer, longer wheelbase, engine mounted even lower and further back, longer control arms, improved suspension geometry, etc.

And the RX-8 was developed from the RX-EVOLV concept car, which already had the four-door clamshell design back somewhere around 1999 I believe. It was hardly a "last-second design change," as building a "foor door sports car" was the intention from the very beginning.

But this goes back to what I was saying before, that cars with great chassis are often called "underpowered" and dismissed simply because they *could* handle more power, but don't necessarily NEED it.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Grishbok

FWD cars are not inherently worse than rwd cars.

Yes they are :P (all else reasonably close to equal, anyway, a CRX will obviously handle rings around a 60s Galaxie 500).

A well tuned suspension and LSD used properly with modulating the brake with the left foot, trail into the corner, can provide remarkable cornering speeds.

The necessarily heavily front-biased weight distribution means fwd cars SERIOUSLY overwork the fronts while underutilizing the rears (inside rear off the ground while trailbraking!).

The cobalt SS turbocharged (made from 2008-2010) performed the nurbergring in 8:22. That is an incredible time for a front wheel drive epsilon II chassis, and a time which desimates a ton of rwd and awd cars.

They did a great job with the performance of that car. Too bad about the styling and (worse) the interior (ewwww...). In any case, it's performance will always be mentioned with the added commentary "for a front wheel drive car". Why? Because it's performance is only impressive in light of the fact that fwd is a pretty big disadvantage.

The FRS is a great car not because of its native RWD, but because it encourages and rewards the balanced attacking of the corners, carying more speed into, through, and out of the turn than any of above mentioned cars.

Due in large part to its being rwd.

The FRS can most closely be compared to a miata, the RX-8 is definitely at a disadvantage with its weight and last-second design change to make it more family friendly, which resulted in an upset and confused chassis. The only reason the rx-8 performs as well as it does is the advantage of its Renesis rev range, rotary engine.

You've got it exactly backwards. The RX-8 chassis and suspension are BRILLIANT! It is only let down by it's engine, which is down on power and way way way UP on fuel (and oil) consumption vs. similar gasoline engines. That car with an F20C, or better still an MS3 powerplant, would have been fantastic. Not too many people interested in a 20mpg sports car that only does 95mph in the 1/4...

The rotary engine allows it to rev forever, and its inherent centrifical focused design enables it to do so fluidly. It will loose mph in the corner comparatively to a miata and the frs without some serious stiffening of the chassis and fine tuning of the suspension

RX-8s stock suspension is better-tuned for performance driving than the Miata's, IMO. And the chassis is plenty stiff.

and an increase in torque delivery from the engine.

Yeah, the rotary, as much as I love them, just doesn't deliver the goods without a healthy dose of BOOST.
The n/a rotary would really make a lot more sense as an optional Miata powerplant than in a 3000 lb. 2+2.

[wbradley]

IMHO the rotary engine is purely a novelty item. Reciprocating engines are produced en masse at a lower cost and can be serviced by many more mechanics. They don't really need to be reinvented for anything a Wankel can do that they cant. When I sold Mazda for a while in 89-90 I was always thinking what a dog the RX-& was compared to the lower prices Nissan 240 SX. Overall, I don't care for Mazda or Nissan. The boxer is probably the better choice with similar benefits for CoG, weight, size etc.

[ABQautoxer]

Originally Posted by reeves

I didn't want a "converted" family sedan, made into a sports car, like the WRX and Genesis.. There will be PLENTY of turbo / supercharger options for those who want more power. For me, I like the 30+ MPG on the highway so I can drive & enjoy the FR-S every single day to/from work, while not spending too much at the pump.

I don't care about the mileage that much though its a nice perk. Why don't I care? Because of this:

12000miles/year / 30mpg = 400gallons * $3.50 = $1400

12000miles/year / 22mpg = 545gallons * $3.50 = $1907

For $507/year I'd rather drive I want. I like saving $500 but not so much I'd compromise what car I'd buy. Keep in mind when I say this I have ordered my FR-S so I'm not a troll. I do find it funny calling the WRX a converted family car, I don't think you've competitively raced a modern one.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by ZDan

They did a great job with the performance of that car. Too bad about the styling and (worse) the interior (ewwww...). In any case, it's performance will always be mentioned with the added commentary "for a front wheel drive car". Why? Because it's performance is only impressive in light of the fact that fwd is a pretty big disadvantage.

Due in large part to its being rwd.

RX-8s stock suspension is better-tuned for performance driving than the Miata's, IMO. And the chassis is plenty stiff.

if you ditch the "for a front wheel drive car" it still is pretty crazy. i know i must sound like a broken record but the thing went around nurburg 20 something seconds faster than any stock nsx ever has. it was faster than the isf, evo ix mr, s2000cr, elise sc, gen coupe 3.8, sti etc. its just plain fast

the miata is kinda tuned down but its the same suspension. im sure they just have to appease a wider audience but maybe a modded suspension comparison would isolate that rotary nature a little more