FR-S vs. 370z, end all be all of discussions

[blur]

Originally Posted by Maxim

Look at the Mazda RX-8 for an example of how a great car can sell extremely poorly.

The RX8 is underpowered, unreliable and a gas guzzler. The FRS will make the same HP to the wheels as the RX8 if the 200 hp figure stands.

TBH, I think the FRS will be in direct competition with the RX8 in terms of track performance. They have very similar specs (lightest RX8 weighs 2800, makes 170 whp, and seats 4) however the FRS will clearly be cheaper.

[RRnold]

Originally Posted by DesertSpool

If the new Focus ST is anywhere near as cool as it appears to be, that might be my next ride to get me through my PharmD.

The WRX is the other option.

Gotta throw my puppy somewhere!

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

You mind editing your sig to make it more distinguishable so people don't mistake your post for mine. Thanks.

[midenginebias]

Originally Posted by Maxim

And therein lies the issue. A buyer of the Mustang won't be giving up .04g in lateral acceleration. In fact, I'd be willing to bet money that the opposite is true. The Mustang GT with the brembo brake package and summer tires is pulling .99g. Think about that.

In terms of handling limits, I promise, the Mustang GT (or the V6 performance package, which has the same limits but better weight distribution) will have higher limits than the FT-86/FR-S.

I think truthfully, the only metric that the FR-S will beat the Mustang in will be transient response (aka emergency lane change and slalom). The FR-S will have much narrower tires (and I'd be willing to bet, due to the price point, lower performing ones as well).

The Mustang also has absolutely stellar steering feel (seriously, drive one, they're incredibly surprising). The FR-S will be slower, have lower handling limits, lap slower, and probably will not beat the gas mileage of a v-6 mustang by more than 2-3 MPG. It will also cost about the same as the v-6.

Where the FR-S will win out is likely in handling feel and transient response. Low speed handling and initial turn-in will beat the mustang. It will feel much different than the mustang while it goes about it's business.

In short, because of the incredibly good job that Ford has done on all versions of the mustang, the FR-S is going to have some serious competition. The mustang is roomier, faster, will have higher handling limits, be faster on anything but an extremely tight autocross course, and will be able to carry more stuff.

The only place the FR-S will come out on top is the feel..and that's only if they get it absolutely spot on. It's enough of a factor that the Mazda Miata continues to sell excellently based solely on that, so it's not like it's nothing. But the choice will be very difficult. This car is entering into an EXTREMELY competitive market segment (performance 2+2 coupe) and unless Toyota can really keep the costs down and succeed in a major way with the aftermarket (and I do not mean Scion dealer-installed stuff), the car will likely not sell very well. Look at the Mazda RX-8 for an example of how a great car can sell extremely poorly.

I want this car to succeed as much as anybody because I've been jonesing for a lightweight RWD performance car for a long time. But it's still going to be a hard sell. I have no brand loyalty, like many of you do have, and so I will buy whatever gives me the best warm and fuzzy feeling. I think in terms of performance cars, I'm a good example of an enthusiast. I'm a horrible example of the average car-buyer though, because those people buy almost solely based on looks and price.

I only put up a conservative skidpad number because when it comes down to it, most drivers don't come close to that edge. I have driven LOTS of cars, even a 2012 Mustang today. Comes with the job.

I agree with you that the FR-S is more about dynamics, like an RX-8 vs. the 350z a few years back. The 350z got better gas, had more power, more weight, better G, but doesn't have the feel of the Rx-8, and that's where I think the pull is for those respective customers.

Same goes for the FR-S and a Mustang. It's a more extreme comparison but the argument still holds. Even if you want something in between, the Genesis Coupe is available.

As I said before in a post awhile back, all I really want is an Rx-8 with reliability and I'm hoping the FR-S is it. The Rx-8 has the best combination of steering feel, ride quality, g-ability, and response at the price point for a 2+2. The central tunnel in an Rx-8 works wonders for rigidity.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by RRnold

Yeah and I SO just noticed his SN starts with a "D". Flattering, but don't want anyone to confuse me for writing something he wrote...

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Yeah and I SO just noticed his SN starts with a "D". Flattering, but don't want anyone to confuse me for writing something he wrote...

I don't think anyone will confuse the two of you. Just add an avatar pic if you are worried.

[Maxim]

Originally Posted by midenginebias

I only put up a conservative skidpad number because when it comes down to it, most drivers don't come close to that edge. I have driven LOTS of cars, even a 2012 Mustang today. Comes with the job.

I agree with you that the FR-S is more about dynamics, like an RX-8 vs. the 350z a few years back. The 350z got better gas, had more power, more weight, better G, but doesn't have the feel of the Rx-8, and that's where I think the pull is for those respective customers.

Same goes for the FR-S and a Mustang. It's a more extreme comparison but the argument still holds. Even if you want something in between, the Genesis Coupe is available.

As I said before in a post awhile back, all I really want is an Rx-8 with reliability and I'm hoping the FR-S is it. The Rx-8 has the best combination of steering feel, ride quality, g-ability, and response at the price point for a 2+2. The central tunnel in an Rx-8 works wonders for rigidity.

Honestly the thing that alarms me the most about the FR-S/F-86 is that it's been stated that they're actually going for a slightly front biased weight distribution, because it's better for drifting. This is a HUGE red flag for me.

50/50, or even better, a slight rear bias, is much better for handling than any front bias. And if the base car is slightly front biased, then any possible turbo variant will be even more-so due to the extra hardware.

Drifting be damned, I want excellent road feel and neutral, controllable handling. The fastest way around a corner is not with the rear end swinging out. The RX-8 feels excellent because of it's low polar moment of inertia, which it has because of the light weight engine located towards the middle of the car. Any front bias at all hurts the polar moment of inertia because it means that the mass of the car is not as centralized as it can be.

I'd go as far as claiming that the car would actually handle better if it added 50lbs to the rear of the vehicle to even out the weight distro.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

I don't think anyone will confuse the two of you. Just add an avatar pic if you are worried.

I do...lol. Cause when I'm looking for my last post as a refernce in a thread, I only look for my sig (pic of my car). Have to stop everytime cause he's got a pic of my car in his sig...lol

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by Maxim

Honestly the thing that alarms me the most about the FR-S/F-86 is that it's been stated that they're actually going for a slightly front biased weight distribution, because it's better for drifting. This is a HUGE red flag for me.

50/50, or even better, a slight rear bias, is much better for handling than any front bias. And if the base car is slightly front biased, then any possible turbo variant will be even more-so due to the extra hardware.

Drifting be damned, I want excellent road feel and neutral, controllable handling. The fastest way around a corner is not with the rear end swinging out. The RX-8 feels excellent because of it's low polar moment of inertia, which it has because of the light weight engine located towards the middle of the car. Any front bias at all hurts the polar moment of inertia because it means that the mass of the car is not as centralized as it can be.

I'd go as far as claiming that the car would actually handle better if it added 50lbs to the rear of the vehicle to even out the weight distro.

Handling is more than just the FR weight balance.

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

AS for the FT, Tada said that the static weight distribution is not important to him, rather how the distribution is when the car is in motion.

Originally Posted by Snaps

IIRC 50/50 gives good turn-in, quick direction change, etc., but is generally a bit more unstable than having more weight in the front. 52/48 is supposed to be pretty much perfect for a FR car.

Originally Posted by proj3ct_run@bout

optimum weight distribution is closer to 45f/55r for a rwd vehicle. you want the rear tires to stick a little better so that you limit oversteer. that and braking is better with more rwd weight. as you brake the weight transfers forward to the front and this is why ~75-80% of braking is up front. being front heavy is only good for fwd cars and even then, you don't want very much front heavy. this is why the mr2 brakes so good. i tested mine to 104 ft 60-0.

a lower center of gravity is very helpful because in a corner, being as low and centered weight will help with traction. weight up high makes body roll in cornering.

Originally Posted by Calais

um this car is MEANT to oversteer, if you read through this forum you whould know tada-san said this car will not be 50/50 because that is not optimal for drifting...

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

I do...lol. Cause when I'm looking for my last post as a refernce in a thread, I only look for my sig (pic of my car). Have to stop everytime cause he's got a pic of my car in his sig...lol

I just meant that you provide useful posts whereas he doesn't always do so.

[OldSkoolToys]

People are also forgetting that you can make a car's turning balance neutral with just some proper adjustment in the in the suspension.

A slight off-balance weight distribution isn't going to effect everyday joe-hum driver, unless of course it was the (more rare) heavier in the rear where the drive wheels are, which would be nice to low-traction situations. FR/FMR isn't known for being heavier in the rear than the front, unless you purposely add weight in the rear to make it so.

This is why I hope the front has a double wishbone front suspension, as its a more versatile setup in terms of tuning capability than MacPherson Strut. I hope, but I don't expect it. I can easily live with MacPherson strut, as it's just easier to work on. Double wishbone is more $$ into production.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

I just meant that you provide useful posts whereas he doesn't always do so.

Thanks

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

This is why I hope the front has a double wishbone front suspension, as its a more versatile setup in terms of tuning capability than MacPherson Strut. I hope, but I don't expect it. I can easily live with MacPherson strut, as it's just easier to work on. Double wishbone is more $$ into production.

I agree. As long as Toyota makes the car fun to drive, I'm not sure I will care if it is double wishbone or McPherson struts. Obviously I would rather have the double wishbone front, but not if it is going to increase the entry price by a lot.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

I agree. As long as Toyota makes the car fun to drive, I'm not sure I will care if it is double wishbone or McPherson struts. Obviously I would rather have the double wishbone front, but not if it is going to increase the entry price by a lot.

I think they said that the flat 4 is too wide to easily package the upper wishbones, so they went with the off-the-shelf Subaru MacStruts.

Lots of superb handling cars use MacStruts so it's not the end of the world.

[xantonin]

Just because this car isn't the same class as a 370Z, doesn't mean people won't be shopping between the two.

I mean we apparently even have people shopping Corvettes on this forum, that decided to wait to see how this car comes out.

While obviously different classes, people are really not shopping for cars within the same class.

They are shopping between the classes themselves, trying to decide which class of car they will be satisfied with.

At that point, the logic is in their head only.