FRS stands for "FUN but REALLY SLOW"

[srt4evah]

Originally Posted by Honesty

A guy we used to autox with up here in PA drove a stock Neon coupe ACR and absolutely crushed in it. Car was bone stock. He was one of the more talented drivers I've seen. Very very smooth, very surgical. I think having a car like an FR-S would make someone a better driver, with a car that doesn't use power but finesse to be quick (Like the AE86?).

For what it's worth, the old ACR came with adjustable suspension from the factory, and with proper settings and sticky tires it could also pull 1g on the skidpad, no aftermarket parts needed aside from the tires.

[tinnyms3]

I love speed as much as anyone, and have owned 300+hp cars, but at the end of the day, driving purity and connection to the car is what I enjoy the most. No matter what you drive, there will always be faster cars out there on a strip or track. Looking for this 'perfect' car has been my life's journey, ie 4 door hatch cayman R for 25k, and I know I will never find one.

In today's new car market, ft86 twins comes closest to this ideal despite 'paltry' 200hp.

[Jeff86]

My other car started life with 200hp too. Then something happened...
A nice roots supercharger won't upset the balance of the car with linear application of power.

[Splat]

Originally Posted by subatoy

I'm gonna start by saying that I've owned a Integra GS-R, 06 WRX, 370Z and now and 2011 GTI...(yes I change cars often)
so my next target was the FRS/BRZ so after 3 years following this car and reading so many great reviews I finally got to test drive an FRS.

sadly it was an automatic but at least I got to compare the transmission to my DSG on the GTI.

first thing was that the seats are great! maybe better than my GTI's (autobahn package) and that's a lot to say.
the engine doesn't sound ANYTHING like the typical boxer engine in my WRX which i think is sad but I'm sure it's due to the equal length headers.

The suspension is very nice, firm but not harsh which feels just like the 370Z. The steering wheel response is great, just like that on the 370z.

The tires on that car are meant to slide! you can easily spin the tires even without trying so I'm sure this car would be a lot of fun when drifting around the track.

The tranmission is surprisingly similar to the DSG on my GTI, for a few momments there I forgot I wasn't driving my car so that's plus.
I still think that buying this car with an auto tranny is a SIN and you should be ashamed for buying such car.

now the bad part is that the car has NO BALLS what so ever, my completely stock Integra GSR felt faster than that car.
I wasn't expecting any power out of the FRS but I wasn't expecting it
to feel that underwhelming.

conclusion for me is that I'm keeping my GTI. I'm sure the FRS is a great track car but I don't think you'll get much fun out on the real world without driving wrecklessly (fast turns and stuff).

Eventhough the GTI and this car have the same power the GTI feels 10X faster (thanks to the torque given by the turbo).
I've learn that I prefer a car that feel faster than one that IS faster but feels slower.

For the money of a brand new FRS I would recommend getting a used 370Z ANY DAY there is nothing this car does better than the nissan specially at the track and the 370z does come with balls.

So this is my totally subjective opinion and I honestly don't care if anyone agrees or not. I just thought it would be nice review based on my experience living with all the other cars that in some way or another relate to this car.

Yes I looked and test drove gti.... has some go, not much more than frs and I must say has the smoothest turbo kick in. Anyway, thankfully many cars to choose... to me , well the style just is aweful to me. I saw a 50year old lady in one..... the nissan Z is just ugly, to me. My subjective to your subjective. :happy0180:

[///Murph]

lol good post by the OP. I agree with most of it.

Also why do ppl on here keep calling their cars "86's"???

Its not an 86. Its a cheap watered down version on the real 86 you see everywhere else in the world.

We have Scion FR-S's.

[iLuveKetchup]

Originally Posted by ///Murph

Also why do ppl on here keep calling their cars "86's"???

Easier to type & refers to FR-S/BRZ (inclusive).

[MY13FRS]

My FRS, just like the S2000 and the Miata, are in the Smiles Per Gallon club.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by MY13FRS

My FRS, just like the S2000 and the Miata, are in the Smiles Per Gallon club.

unfortunately (or fortunately i guess) many people fail to value that stat which, as far as sports cars go, is the most important

[whateatsrabbits]

I traded in my MK6 golf for the FR-S. If I had a gti I probably wouldn't have. I said it before and Ill say it again "My 2010 vw golf 2.5l I5 MT felt like a torque monster compared to the FR-S." The golf/ gti is an amazing car in retrospect but it has its limitations, the FR-S blows those limits out of the water. I had some sticky sport tire on my golf, and going around this one turn I could only go about 35-40 tires squealing, under steering. I took the same turn in the FR-S at 50 tires weren't even squealing, I could go around the turn faster If I dare.

[MY13FRS]

Originally Posted by fatoni

unfortunately (or fortunately i guess) many people fail to value that stat which, as far as sports cars go, is the most important

And that's all good. We can say the same thing as how some people on here view the V8 muscle cars. Their owners must think that is the most important thing to them. Same difference.

[Demandred7]

Originally Posted by FRiSson

After test-driving dozens of cars recently, I've come to the conclusion that a test drive is only marginally useful. You get only an initial "sense" of the car, but you have to balance that against your unfamiliarity of the controls, the limited duration of the test drive and the inconvenience of being accompanied.

So all I can say to the poster, is that a test-drive gives you the basis for a few observations - but not enough to form an opinion. I have no choice but to disregard it.

Good point. One of the first things that my salesperson said while on the test drive was "try to keep it below 6000 RPM". This makes sense since I didn't own the car yet. My break in isn't complete yet, but, since owning the car and the occasional time where I needed to for safety reasons, I have had it above 6K and "slow" is not how I would characterize this car. Less than 400 km to go now then I can truly open her up.

[Max Schnell]

The reality here is that "Fun" is relative and subjective and so is "fast" when discussed in relation to your own preferences.

From purely objective performance stand point there is no way to avoid the numbers because that is the typical yardstick. The numbers are what they are and when different cars are compared on numbers then a hierarchy of those performance numbers would tier the cars pretty consistently.

As auto enthusiasts, and in most cases when it comes to cars, people are only looking at the objective numbers as a starting reference point. Auto ownership is very personal and consists of so many personal preference factors that no single car will ever meet everyone's needs. It is because of this that we have so many comparison threads on every auto forum.

When I look into cars I want to own the question I ask myself is only this: "are you going to be happy with most aspects of this car?" while keeping in mind that "You cannot have it all even when money is no object."

All that being said already I do feel the twins are not "fast" enough for my personal preference at the present. Like many others I do like the feel of torque off the line and the push into the seat as you accelerate. I do not speed much but I do like to reach the speed quickly. I also want sharp and consistent handling and I do not prefer a heavy feel to the car. The twins already meet 2 of 3 of my top preferences. I am waiting on the power end of it. All this is also contingent on not having to modify the car with power adders as my personal experience with aftermarket has been more negative than positive.

[Demandred7]

Originally Posted by Max Schnell

The reality here is that "Fun" is relative and subjective and so is "fast" when discussed in relation to your own preferences.

From purely objective performance stand point there is no way to avoid the numbers because that is the typical yardstick. The numbers are what they are and when different cars are compared on numbers then a hierarchy of those performance numbers would tier the cars pretty consistently.

As auto enthusiasts, and in most cases when it comes to cars, people are only looking at the objective numbers as a starting reference point. Auto ownership is very personal and consists of so many personal preference factors that no single car will ever meet everyone's needs. It is because of this that we have so many comparison threads on every auto forum.

When I look into cars I want to own the question I ask myself is only this: "are you going to be happy with most aspects of this car?" while keeping in mind that "You cannot have it all even when money is no object."

All that being said already I do feel the twins are not "fast" enough for my personal preference at the present. Like many others I do like the feel of torque off the line and the push into the seat as you accelerate. I do not speed much but I do like to reach the speed quickly. I also want sharp and consistent handling and I do not prefer a heavy feel to the car. The twins already meet 2 of 3 of my top preferences. I am waiting on the power end of it. All this is also contingent on not having to modify the car with power adders as my personal experience with aftermarket has been more negative than positive.

Well put. I appreciate the way that you have described your preferences. Characterizing the acceleration as "not fast enough" is way more respectful than telling people that their beloved car is "slow".

[crazyyankeefan]

The 86 is definitely not a very fast car, but to say it's slow is a bit extreme. It's still faster than most cars on the road though.