2013 Subaru BRZ vs 2012 Honda Civic Si HFP

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

His analogy made sense to me...

how? shoes arent required to run while tires are required to drive. if anything, things like swaybars and exhaust would be more optional than tires. if his analogy makes sense to you, its an equally viable argument that sways arent part of the car but they go on the car

[industrial]

Saw one on the road today. And I was reminded that...



This car is ugly. Really ugly. Looks okay from the front 3/4 angle in all the glamor photos, that's about it. And seriously, I'd have to question anyone who cross shops these two cars. If you are willing to make sacrifices for a car that's "good in the winter" and "practical"... WRX? MS3? GTI? Soon to dominate the market, Focus ST? $27k Civic SI? Really???

[MVJ1975]

Originally Posted by fatoni

doesnt bother me at all. im not saying that on equal tires, the brz isnt faster. im just saying the brz doesnt come with better tires

Then again, neither does the Si. The only version that does is the extremely limited HFP version.

If we're comparing stock cars, we should be comparing stock cars.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by MVJ1975

Then again, neither does the Si. The only version that does is the extremely limited HFP version.

If we're comparing stock cars, we should be comparing stock cars.

that is a stock car. this test doesnt prove the si can faster around that track, it proves the hfp can go faster around that track

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

how? shoes arent required to run while tires are required to drive. if anything, things like swaybars and exhaust would be more optional than tires. if his analogy makes sense to you, its an equally viable argument that sways arent part of the car but they go on the car

Shoes are required at a track meet (which is what he stated in his analogy, that it was a track meet).

[MVJ1975]

Originally Posted by fatoni

that is a stock car. this test doesnt prove the si can faster around that track, it proves the hfp can go faster around that track

It's not. The HFP is a dealer-installed package. If we're allowing those, I'm sure I can find a dealer that offers TRD upgrades for the 86.

[SnapOv3st3r]

Anyhow, No one mentioned this yet. But did anyone realize that this is the same track that they did the Genesis 2.0T vs FR-S on? Note the lap time of the FR-S

FR-S 1:26.2
HFP SI 1:26.5

That's .3 Tenths of a second faster than the HFP SI...so I guess if the SI "Dominated" the BRZ, I guess the FR-S simply "DESTROYS" the HFP SI

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI2snMjBqRE&feature=relmfu"]Scion FR-S vs. Hyundai Genesis Coupe Comparison - YouTube[/ame]



/end thread now..lol

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Shoes are required at a track meet (which is what he stated in his analogy, that it was a track meet).

well i dont know that thats true but if you want to go with the track meet analogy then lets follow it through. its not illegal to lose weight for a track meet. so lets just gut the cars and call them stock. agreed?

Originally Posted by MVJ1975

It's not. The HFP is a dealer-installed package. If we're allowing those, I'm sure I can find a dealer that offers TRD upgrades for the 86.

go ahead. youre not going to find a dealer with a trd supercharger on the brz and even if this was an frs, im not sure youre going to find one. once/if you can, then we can test those two cars together and come up with other conclusions. keep in mind that once you pay for that charger, i dont think it gets compared to a civic much

[MVJ1975]

Originally Posted by fatoni

go ahead. youre not going to find a dealer with a trd supercharger on the brz and even if this was an frs, im not sure youre going to find one. once/if you can, then we can test those two cars together and come up with other conclusions. keep in mind that once you pay for that charger, i dont think it gets compared to a civic much

Oh, I know. I'm just left wondering what the point of this comparison was. They don't compare on features, and they don't even compare on price, as the Si with the HFP is more expensive.

All this seems to say is "hey, better tires are better" but a moron could have figured that out.

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

well i dont know that thats true but if you want to go with the track meet analogy then lets follow it through. its not illegal to lose weight for a track meet. so lets just gut the cars and call them stock.

Not buying it.

[fatoni]

im dont care about changing your opinion but when using the track analogy you said tires being shoes

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

His analogy made sense to me...

but when i use the exact same analogy saying that weight is similar to weight you say

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Not buying it.

i dont know how you are looking at it but im pretty sure weight is closer to weight than tires are to shoes

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

im dont care about changing your opinion but when using the track analogy you said tires being shoes but when i use the exact same analogy saying that weight is similar to weight you say

i dont know how you are looking at it but im pretty sure weight is closer to weight than tires are to shoes

That's because no one, including me, agrees that weight is the same thing as changing tires. People don't go around on a regular basis in gutted cars and call them stock. However, tires don't last forever and it is inevitable that they must be changed. When you need new tires, are you going to go to the dealer and buy the same OEM tires? 9 out of 10 probably not. You can get cheaper better tires from Discount, Tire Rack...etc. So, every car that has then exceeded the life of its OEM tires and the consumer then goes out and purchases a different brand is all of a sudden a "modified" car now? Think not. But if it's been gutted....people consider that a "modification".

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

That's because no one, including me, agrees that weight is the same thing as changing tires. People don't go around on a regular basis in gutted cars and call them stock. However, tires don't last forever and it is inevitable that they must be changed. When you need new tires, are you going to go to the dealer and buy the same OEM tires? 9 out of 10 probably not. You can get cheaper better tires from Discount, Tire Rack...etc. So, every car that has then exceeded the life of its OEM tires and the consumer then goes out and purchases a different brand is all of a sudden a "modified" car now? Think not. But if it's been gutted....people consider that a "modification".

im not saying weight equals changing tires. im saying weight equals weight moreso than tires equal shoes. the fact that tires are consumable is the best argument i could think of but brake pads are consumable as well as shocks. do you buy oem pads or shocks? probably not. my only point here is that you cant make the argument for tires and argument against other mods without being entirely arbitrary and opinionated. i dont think opinions and preference deserve a place in objective comparison

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

im not saying weight equals changing tires. im saying weight equals weight moreso than tires equal shoes. the fact that tires are consumable is the best argument i could think of but brake pads are consumable as well as shocks. do you buy oem pads or shocks? probably not. my only point here is that you cant make the argument for tires and argument against other mods without being entirely arbitrary and opinionated. i dont think opinions and preference deserve a place in objective comparison

Imo...yes, people (average consumers) are still inclined to purchase OEM shocks and brake pads moreso than tires.

Aside from all this, the FR-S ran .3 tenths faster than the HFP SI on this same track.