FT-86 may be comparable to... a Saturn Sky?

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

Exactly what I'm thinking. I hate to beat a dead horse, but it would be a different story if it were turbocharged from the factory. A few bucks on a turbocharged car goes a long way.

I'm also curious how easily a motor swap would be on one of these. If the bolt patterns, mount locations, etc are an exact/close enough match to the current WRX that would definitely be the route I'd be going right out of the gate. One of my closest friends is a Subaru mechanic so it would be that much more convenient.

Remember this engine will be mounted lower and closer to the firewall than any engine Subaru has ever done before. Think of headers, oil pan, and all turbo + pipping. I highly doubt this will be a simple drop in and go engine swap. Not saying someone won't find away to make it work but expect a lot of fabrication required.

[Levi]

+1

I know the FT-86 is not about max speed and acceleration but it should get from 0 to 100 kph under 6 seconds. A diesel BMW 123d with 200 PS get from 0 to 100 kph in 7 sec with all the weight it has, comfort, security and so.

I anyway hope for some surprises:
1000 kg (DIN)
210 PS
8.000 RPM

[iff2mastamatt]

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

But why? Looking at cars in the FR-S's weight/power/price class...
Genesis Coupe 2.0T weighs 3300 pounds, has 210hp and runs 6.8/15.2
Mazdaspeed Miata weighs 2500 pounds, has 178hp, and runs 6.7/15.2.
2012 Civic Si weighs 2900 pounds, has 201hp, and runs 6.6/15.0.

If the FR-S weighs 2700pounds, has 200hp there's no reason why it shouldn't be beating the FWD Civic Si and run 6.5/14.9 or better. Is my thinking really that unrealistic?

I'm expecting it to be around mid 7s for 0-60 mostly because I don't want to disappoint myself when the final specs debut. Might it go 0-60 in 6.4? Sure it can, but why give it an optimistic assumption now? I was so close to purchasing a Z last year until I discovered this car, so believe me, the difference between 5.1 and 7.5 seconds is huge when comparing the two. However, I didn't really feel that I needed that extra second or two of faster acceleration to justify a higher price with (possibly) lower feel economy. Toyota wants this to be a fun car that looks great, with decent mpg. I would be delighted if this car did 0-60 in less than 7 seconds, but compromising the handling, looks, and mpg would not be worth it. Curves are more fun anyways

[82mm 4g63]

Originally Posted by iff2mastamatt

I'm expecting it to be around mid 7s for 0-60 mostly because I don't want to disappoint myself when the final specs debut. Might it go 0-60 in 6.4? Sure it can, but why give it an optimistic assumption now? I was so close to purchasing a Z last year until I discovered this car, so believe me, the difference between 5.1 and 7.5 seconds is huge when comparing the two. However, I didn't really feel that I needed that extra second or two of faster acceleration to justify a higher price with (possibly) lower feel economy. Toyota wants this to be a fun car that looks great, with decent mpg. I would be delighted if this car did 0-60 in less than 7 seconds, but compromising the handling, looks, and mpg would not be worth it. Curves are more fun anyways

I can respect that, but I think what you're thinking is a little bit backwards. The FR-S is a sports car. IMO someone purchasing a sports car should expect performance and be happy with improvements to fuel economy, not the other way around. I don't want to sacrifice 1 second in 0-60mph to pick up 3mpg.

Realistically, using your Z to FR-S comparison, the Z gets 19/26mpg and the Impreza is getting 27/36mpg. For simplicities sake, let's say the FR-S falls somewhere in between and gets 23/29. That isn't wallet saving enough for me to be putt-putting around when the likes of a GenCoupe is getting almost the same fuel economy, at 21/30mpg, while weighing more and maintaining reasonable performance. The FR-S is going to have a weight and balance advantage as well as a fuel delivery technology(Toyota) advantage over the the GenCoupe, so it should be able to match (and beat) it's performance while still being reasonably economic.

[madfast]

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

When they announced there will be no turbo version of the FR-S, I'll be honest, my excitement took a huge hit. Squeezing power out of a small displacement NA motor costs a heck of a lot more than it's force induced counter part. If I'm going to have to drop 10grand into this car to get it to compete with a 370Z

This mentality, of a tuner drag car, is simply not what the FR-S is all about. this car is made for the track/auto-x and drifting. its not about power. they say it all the time in press releases, interviews, and press conferences. this car is about balance. get the idea of turbos, etc. out of your head. yeah i'd like a mini LF-A for 25k as well but it just isnt happening...

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

Good, I was scared there for a minute. I know acceleration isn't everything, but there is nothing "sporty" about a car that takes over 7 seconds to get to 60mph. My one last hope is that they don't tune down the looks of the car too much. Each one of the concept cars were amazing looking(especially the lights), if the final product rolls out with Miata like styling I may have to commit myself.

this is what i mean. statements like this are just...
being "sporty" has NOTHING to do with straight line speed. why are the old british roadsters the quintessential sportscar? for their speed? no... not even close...

thats why i said you're looking at the wrong car. you want it to be something that it isnt meant to be. this car is like a miata, mr-s, or s2000... none of those cars were insanely fast, but they handled beautifully and were fun. thats what counts. if that isnt what you're looking for, you're looking at the wrong car...

[WingsofWar]

Theres already so much wrong in this forum anyways. People expect a world class sports car, none even remotely remembers the "SPIRIT OF DRIVING" Japanese Cars, back in the 80s and early 90s. Which is not about power or speed.

AE86 was a gawd awful car, and for most people who haven't driven one, they will get disappointed in its performance after all this hype about the car. They will wonder why is this car praised? Because its not about the performance..The AE86 can rotate so fucking well, its ridiculous. Even my old 86 FC n/a had more power but kinda was difficult to rotate in comparison to the AE86.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

I can respect that, but I think what you're thinking is a little bit backwards. The FR-S is a sports car. IMO someone purchasing a sports car should expect performance and be happy with improvements to fuel economy, not the other way around. I don't want to sacrifice 1 second in 0-60mph to pick up 3mpg.

Realistically, using your Z to FR-S comparison, the Z gets 19/26mpg and the Impreza is getting 27/36mpg. For simplicities sake, let's say the FR-S falls somewhere in between and gets 23/29. That isn't wallet saving enough for me to be putt-putting around when the likes of a GenCoupe is getting almost the same fuel economy, at 21/30mpg, while weighing more and maintaining reasonable performance. The FR-S is going to have a weight and balance advantage as well as a fuel delivery technology(Toyota) advantage over the the GenCoupe, so it should be able to match (and beat) it's performance while still being reasonably economic.

Lol. EPA mileage. Seriously you have no idea. If you want a $30k sports car that goes fast and gets crappy gas mileage(if you ever bother to check it) you're looking at the wrong car. Subaru's new FB is being designed to be more fuel efficient than the EJ series. I expect it to get at least 21/30 EPA simply because it's going to have short gearing.

It's a 2.0L flat-4, seriously what are you expecting?

And people don't buy sports cars to get good or bad gas mileage. They buy it to get a fun and/or sporty car to drive. If it gets decent mileage yay, if not it's going to be even more niche at best. It matters to the future of this car. And the benchmark for efficient but powerful 4 bangers are the Honda Si engines, and those are capable of high 30's in the real world so screw the Z's meager 26 highway MPG. This isn't that kind of car!

[WingsofWar]

Inb4 RX-8 owners start complaining about MPG.

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

AE86 was a gawd awful car, and for most people who haven't driven one, they will get disappointed in its performance after all this hype about the car. They will wonder why is this car praised? Because its not about the performance..The AE86 can rotate so fucking well, its ridiculous. Even my old 86 FC n/a had more power but kinda was difficult to rotate in comparison to the AE86.

Yes indeed, the AE86 is a gawd awful car which saw zero success in basically all non-American racing venues.

If the AE86 was gawd awful, so was the SA/FB series RX-7.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

Yes indeed, the AE86 is a gawd awful car which saw zero success in basically all non-American racing venues.

If the AE86 was gawd awful, so was the SA/FB series RX-7.

I never said anything about racing. If you took the AE86 and expected to be comparative on the highway to cars of its time. It falls short.

I never said it was unsuccessful. I mearly said it was an aweful car..just straight out aweful out of the box. But a fantasic platform that held a lot of soul.

[chulooz]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

I never said it was unsuccessful. I mearly said it was an aweful car..just straight out aweful out of the box. But a fantasic platform that held a lot of soul.

I feel like this is true for most cars that enthusiasts worship. Sometimes you need to respect the platform more than the car that has been built.

[82mm 4g63]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

Lol. EPA mileage. Seriously you have no idea. If you want a $30k sports car that goes fast and gets crappy gas mileage(if you ever bother to check it) you're looking at the wrong car. Subaru's new FB is being designed to be more fuel efficient than the EJ series. I expect it to get at least 21/30 EPA simply because it's going to have short gearing.

It's a 2.0L flat-4, seriously what are you expecting?

And people don't buy sports cars to get good or bad gas mileage. They buy it to get a fun and/or sporty car to drive. If it gets decent mileage yay, if not it's going to be even more niche at best. It matters to the future of this car. And the benchmark for efficient but powerful 4 bangers are the Honda Si engines, and those are capable of high 30's in the real world so screw the Z's meager 26 highway MPG. This isn't that kind of car!

You're right, I have no idea...whether you're agreeing with me or disagreeing with me.
My assumption: "the FR-S will fall somewhere around 23/29mph City/Hwy."
Your assumption: "I expect it to get at least 21/30 EPA"

My point: "IMO someone purchasing a sports car should expect performance and be happy with improvements to fuel economy, not the other way around. I don't want to sacrifice 1 second in 0-60mph to pick up 3mpg."
Your point: "And people don't buy sports cars to get good or bad gas mileage. They buy it to get a fun and/or sporty car to drive. If it gets decent mileage yay, if not it's going to be even more niche at best."

Were you reading earlier when I compared the FR-S to the Civic Si, GenCoupe, and Miata? Also, which part of my post got you thinking I'm looking for a $30k sports car that goes fast and gets crappy gas mileage? I could've sworn I said, "The FR-S is going to have a weight and balance advantage as well as a fuel delivery technology(Toyota) advantage over the the GenCoupe, so it should be able to match (and beat) it's performance while still being reasonably economic." I was referring to the 2.0t GenCoupe, if that clarifies anything.

Anyway, to answer your question. I am expecting the FR-S to get around 23mpg around town and 29mpg on the highway. Are you only asking about my expectations in regard to fuel economy?

Originally Posted by madfast

This mentality, of a tuner drag car, is simply not what the FR-S is all about. this car is made for the track/auto-x and drifting. its not about power. they say it all the time in press releases, interviews, and press conferences. this car is about balance. get the idea of turbos, etc. out of your head. yeah i'd like a mini LF-A for 25k as well but it just isnt happening...(1)

this is what i mean. statements like this are just...
being "sporty" has NOTHING to do with straight line speed. why are the old british roadsters the quintessential sportscar? for their speed? no... not even close...

thats why i said you're looking at the wrong car. you want it to be something that it isnt meant to be. this car is like a miata, mr-s, or s2000(2)... none of those cars were insanely fast, but they handled beautifully and were fun. thats what counts. if that isnt what you're looking for, you're looking at the wrong car...

(1) I just want to make sure I'm understanding you here. A ~$25,000 car that gets 23/29mpg c/h, runs high 14second 1/4miles, and mid 6second 0-60s would be so game changing that it needs to be considered a mini LF-A? I guess.

(2) Agree'd, which is why I compared the performance of the FR-S to a Miata, Civic Si, and a GenCoupe.

[Laika]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

Theres already so much wrong in this forum anyways. People expect a world class sports car, none even remotely remembers the "SPIRIT OF DRIVING" Japanese Cars, back in the 80s and early 90s. Which is not about power or speed.

AE86 was a gawd awful car, and for most people who haven't driven one, they will get disappointed in its performance after all this hype about the car. They will wonder why is this car praised? Because its not about the performance..The AE86 can rotate so fucking well, its ridiculous. Even my old 86 FC n/a had more power but kinda was difficult to rotate in comparison to the AE86.

WoW speaks the truth.

There is no reason to get offended though. The ae86 was a "gawd awful" car in the sense that Miller Lite is an awful beer. It's not something I'd drink for the flavor and the AE86 is not something I'd drive for status or recognition. On the other hand I can't count how many of my greatest nights in undergrad involved $1 miller lite's. The AE86 might be a terrible car to daily drive for boring journeys but given an empty track, some spare tires and enough gas, I don't think I'd ever want to get out of that car.


Either way, :happy0180:

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by 82mm 4g63

You're right, I have no idea...whether you're agreeing with me or disagreeing with me.
My assumption: "the FR-S will fall somewhere around 23/29mph City/Hwy."
Your assumption: "I expect it to get at least 21/30 EPA"

My point: "IMO someone purchasing a sports car should expect performance and be happy with improvements to fuel economy, not the other way around. I don't want to sacrifice 1 second in 0-60mph to pick up 3mpg."
Your point: "And people don't buy sports cars to get good or bad gas mileage. They buy it to get a fun and/or sporty car to drive. If it gets decent mileage yay, if not it's going to be even more niche at best."

Were you reading earlier when I compared the FR-S to the Civic Si, GenCoupe, and Miata? Also, which part of my post got you thinking I'm looking for a $30k sports car that goes fast and gets crappy gas mileage? I could've sworn I said, "The FR-S is going to have a weight and balance advantage as well as a fuel delivery technology(Toyota) advantage over the the GenCoupe, so it should be able to match (and beat) it's performance while still being reasonably economic." I was referring to the 2.0t GenCoupe, if that clarifies anything.

Anyway, to answer your question. I am expecting the FR-S to get around 23mpg around town and 29mpg on the highway. Are you only asking about my expectations in regard to fuel economy?



(1) I just want to make sure I'm understanding you here. A ~$25,000 car that gets 23/29mpg c/h, runs high 14second 1/4miles, and mid 6second 0-60s would be so game changing that it needs to be considered a mini LF-A? I guess.

(2) Agree'd, which is why I compared the performance of the FR-S to a Miata, Civic Si, and a GenCoupe.

No no no. I'm saying your comparing the smallest difference possible which is EPA scores. In the real world the Mileage varies and a more efficient car is capable of far more MPG improvement than a less efficient car. A 30MPG 4 banger Si is capable of closer to 40MPG while the Z is capable of high 20's maybe 30 MPG if you granny it. If you race your cars then the difference could be 20MPG - 22MPG. For the vast majority of people that small of a difference is negligible and that is what you are doing, comparing the worst possible scores.

It's just a difference in thinking about the same numbers. You look and see the smallest possible difference while I look and see how much of an improvement they are capable of in the real world.

Does that show how big of a difference there is between you and me on this?