Going from 1st to 2nd gen - questions and thoughts

[OwlDance]

tl;dr at bottom
So I've had my car for almost 7 years now, a 2019 AT 86 bought september of 2018 - and to my knowledge one of the earliest sold 19s on the east coast. It's been used as a daily and has proven fantastic since. Learning about this car has taught me a veritable shitload of knowledge through this forum combined with curiosity that has benefitted me greatly in a lot of aspects of life.

I recently had an offer from my dealership to trade in my car and while I'm skeptical of the offer it did get the "what if" gears churning of going from gen1 to gen2 as a sentimental last hurrah to the ICE engine.

My car's getting a little long in the tooth with caster on the passenger right side not quite correct (I believe I need more than an alignment) and needing to keep the steering wheel tilted left slightly. A wheel bearing has been fading slowly for like 5 years and I can tell that at 37k miles now with city driving, the dampers are nothing like they used to be - I can feel the car dip forward under braking whereas it would never do so before.

AZP installs is an hour away on a good day and going to and from them to do serious work would be an issue if it would take more than a day for mods or chasing down issues.

Overall though, my car is in great shape. I can afford any difference from trade in cost without issue but I'm not gonna stiff myself for a bad deal either, and I question of trading up is worth 10-15k.

Pros for new car: built in oil temp reader, integrated oil heat exchanger, new car benefits (warranty, reset maintenance), more power, nicer suspension.
Cons: Less efficiency (I like efficiency from both a cost and mechanical standpoint) and huge up front cost.

I am looking for a gen2 AT but there is one HUGE caveat that keeps me from springing for it - that the early MY gen2s did not let you downshift above 4k RPM for some inexplicable reason. My gen1 will downshift up to almost 7k in the previous gear without issues, from RPMs around 4700 I think (for appropriate gears).

My question is for any 2025 AT owners and potentially AT gen1 to AT gen2 owners - how does the transmission feel, and does the 2025 gen2 AT let you downshift at reasonably high RPM for the gear ratios?

tl;dr looking to maybe go gen1 AT to gen2 AT (trans is due to health reasons). Thoughts on the change and transition, and does the newest model year allow proper higher rpm downshifts akin to gen1?

Or just put down half the money instead into refreshing my gen1? I do feel the vague urge to indulge in what may be the last generation of a pure ICE sports car. I do like how a gen2 looks innred/pavement as well.
Thanks for reading the word salad.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

My tl;dr - economically you're better off doing some maintenance/upgrades on your car. I personally preferred the 1st gen, but if you're fine with the 2nd gen and have the funds to upgrade, it's a fairly small difference.

Originally Posted by OwlDance

My car's getting a little long in the tooth with caster on the passenger right side not quite correct (I believe I need more than an alignment) and needing to keep the steering wheel tilted left slightly. A wheel bearing has been fading slowly for like 5 years and I can tell that at 37k miles now with city driving, the dampers are nothing like they used to be - I can feel the car dip forward under braking whereas it would never do so before.

Wheel not centered is a toe problem, not caster. Imbalanced caster is when letting go of the steering wheel and the car pulls to one side. If you let go of the wheel, regardless of its position, and the car tracks straight your caster is fine (but keep in mind that roads are almost always slightly sloped so it's a little hard to distinguish between road surface and slight alignment issues).

Dampers do age out, although with just 37k miles I doubt they're at the end of their life. Might be a good opportunity to get high quality coilovers.

All of this is under the assumption that there's no damage to the suspension - no big potholes or accident damage.

Originally Posted by OwlDance

Pros for new car: built in oil temp reader, integrated oil heat exchanger, new car benefits (warranty, reset maintenance), more power, nicer suspension.

Do you track the car? If not, why bother with oil temp and heat exchanger (which does little to cool the oil on track anyway)? If you do, a $15 OBD scanner and a $5 Torque Pro app will give you oil temp, and an aftermarket oil cooler is needed anyway (with many 2nd gen replace the OEM heat exchanger anyway). Suspension is different, not nicer. After the 1st gen gradually merging the differences between the 86 and the BRZ, the 2nd gen again diverged them (BRZ more stable, GR86 more tail happy). Nothing that good aftermarket coilovers won't solve better.

Originally Posted by OwlDance

I am looking for a gen2 AT but there is one HUGE caveat that keeps me from springing for it - that the early MY gen2s did not let you downshift above 4k RPM for some inexplicable reason. My gen1 will downshift up to almost 7k in the previous gear without issues, from RPMs around 4700 I think (for appropriate gears).

I read this as well on the new forum. Apparently the 2025 have some transmission updates that are supposed to help with that. A test drive is probably the best way to confirm if the behavior of the trans suits you.

[mrderp]

I did swap my 2014 for a 2017 to satisfy my "Buy a new car at least once" checkbox and because a test drive revealed all the little nitpicks I had with the car were solved.

Now, I find myself somewhat in your shoes after 8 years with the 86.

It's hard to justify a monthly payment for just "oil cooler, a bit more power".
If you wrench on your car, or even if you don't, just the cash you'd put as a down payment on the new one would net you a nice refresh.

Wheel bearings are easy to swap and I'm from the rustbelt. Get another OEM one and you're golden.

It's going to be an emotion based decision more than anything rational.
Best of luck to you.

[fredzy]

I guess with a '19 you've got about the smallest jump "up" from 1st gen to 2nd gen there could be. Also to consider (could be pro or con) is the safety tech - not sure if the '19s had eyesight or whatever Toyota called it on the 86, but all 2nd gens have that stuff from 24-on. I think all ATs had it from that start.

I've seen a few AT's sit for a while around here. So 1. should be easy to get a test drive and 2. they would probably deal on them.

Just be warned, if you test drive, that brand new car feel could have an outsized effect on you and blow away any vestiges of logic you're trying to maintain toward the decision.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by mrderp

It's hard to justify a monthly payment for just "oil cooler, a bit more power".

"A bit more power" is a bit of an understatement. As someone who routinely ran his first gen on E85, the 2nd gen is still a DRAMATICALLY better engine just on 91. Stock they are putting down more power to the wheels than a FBO 1st gen on E85.

[NARFALICIOUS]

Will echo the power sentiment--2nd gen engine is a lot more powerful, quite a difference maker. However, gas mileage is noticeably worse as well.

It seems like you want that feeling and experience of the 2nd gen, I would say go for it. But if the reason you want to move up is the work that needs to get done, take a couple days off and drop the car off, you'll spend a lot less and your car will feel new again for the next 7 years. Any suspension issues or wheel bearing issues you have can be fixed relatively easily, assuming there is no frame damage.

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS

Will echo the power sentiment--2nd gen engine is a lot more powerful, quite a difference maker. However, gas mileage is noticeably worse as well.

It's not just the "more power". It's the much greater torque at low rpms. You don't have to downshift and wring it out whenever you want some shove. That same attribute means that when trying to be efficient you can use lower rpm. When I'm trying I can sustain 36mpg.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

It's not just the "more power". It's the much greater torque at low rpms. You don't have to downshift and wring it out whenever you want some shove. That same attribute means that when trying to be efficient you can use lower rpm. When I'm trying I can sustain 36mpg.

How are you achieving 33% more mpg than EPA highway ratings? And also, why?

I didn't buy this car because I cared about MPG.

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

How are you achieving 33% more mpg than EPA highway ratings? And also, why?

Because I'm a much better driver than those goons and sometimes when I'm running an errand I'm not playing with the car, just trying to get somewhere efficiently.

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

I didn't buy this car because I cared about MPG.

The OP stated that while it's not his main priority, it does matter to him. I'm in the same boat. Fuel economy was one of the reasons I chose this over a M2.

[bababooey]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

How are you achieving 33% more mpg than EPA highway ratings? And also, why?

took a trip w/ a couple mountain bikes up to colo from texas, lower altitudes I was getting about 25 mpg average on the low lands, and up in the mountains still having that extra drag on the back, i was able to achieve north of 30 mpg despite having to lean into some of those steeper pitches.


only thing i could imagine less dense air = less fuel required.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

Because I'm a much better driver than those goons and sometimes when I'm running an errand I'm not playing with the car, just trying to get somewhere efficiently.

They use a chassis dyno to calculate ratings.

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

The OP stated that while it's not his main priority, it does matter to him. I'm in the same boat. Fuel economy was one of the reasons I chose this over a M2.

16/23 vs 20/26

You're talking about approximately $300-350 a year if you drive 15,000 miles per year. That's like a nice steak dinner over the course of a year.

I mean, to each their own, but that's about the same efficiency difference between a 1st and 2nd gen. To me that's negligible.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by bababooey

took a trip w/ a couple mountain bikes up to colo from texas, lower altitudes I was getting about 25 mpg average on the low lands, and up in the mountains still having that extra drag on the back, i was able to achieve north of 30 mpg despite having to lean into some of those steeper pitches.


only thing i could imagine less dense air = less fuel required.

Yep, and less HP. And because the air is less dense, their is less aero drag.