New Rumor: Subaru Developing Turbo 4 2.0T for BRZ

[_hollywood]

Originally Posted by RRnold

Good things come to those who wait!

Only the things left by those who hustle

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I stand by my original statement: the 2013 Accord offers significantly more features and creature comforts for every dollar spent. The videos did nothing to challenge my point.

No shit Sherlock.

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by industrial

A Casio g-shock has way more features than a Rolex submariner, therefore, the Casio is superior.

Get the hell out of here.

You're going to compare a plastic digital watch to one made with 18ct gold? Didn't I point out that the twins have no exotic materials in them?

You must have forgotten your daily Ritalin dose, ADD is strong within you. Normally we encounter people as dense as this on a Civic forum, but I guess we're seeing what everyone is talking about in regards to Scion and its demographic.

I give up, you can't fix stupid.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I'll try one last time:

Now that another vehicle(automobile) has come from another Japanese maker for the same price as the FR-S/BRZ, but offers significantly more stuff, features, whatever you want to call it(things that cost money to add), it most certainly can be directly compared.

You can add back up cameras to the FR-S/BRZ, but you're going to pay additional money for it. It comes standard on the "other" $25k vehicle. Keep doing that until you run out of standard features. The list is longer on one side than the other, yet the price is equal.

These two paragraphs show me you're still missing the point of my definition of "features" point. What about all the features/stuff/things it costs money to add that the BRZ has that the Accord doesn't? Low CG? Balanced handling? 6-spd manual? Limited slip differential? Good steering feedback? Light weight? How much would it cost to add those features to an Accord?

If you don't think those things cost money to add/design/build, you don't understand how R&D and manufacturing costs work -- especially on a car designed essentially from the ground up.

Originally Posted by fistpoint

The FR-S/BRZ does not contain precious metals like titanium all over the place does it? what about carbon fiber? Those things would in fact make my argument moot, but it doesn't have these materials. The aluminum hood is the most "exotic" piece in this regard.

See my sentence above. Cost of materials is just one (often small) part of overall cost to produce.

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I think the real answer is obvious, Accord will sell 250-300k a year just in the US alone and make less money for each vehicle sold, but sell 10x-20x as many and more than make up the profit difference in sheer volume. But that doesn't negate the fact that it offers more for your $25k, as I'm sure many other vehicles do for the same "volume sales" reasoning.

This is more of an argument against any low volume, non-platform sharing sports car, not really FR-S/BRZ specific. The problem with building a sporty car based on a volume-selling platform (i.e., Evo/Lancer, STI/Impreza, GTI/Golf, MS3/Mazda3, etc.) is that you can't escape the limitations of the base platform -- high cg, unfavorable weight distribution, poor polar MOI, overweight, compromised suspension geometry, etc. -- basically all of the areas the BRZ excels.

This was exactly the point raised by one of the design team members in the videos I posted. I was hoping you'd catch that bit.

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

These two paragraphs show me you're still missing the point of my definition of "features" point. What about all the features/stuff/things it costs money to add that the BRZ has that the Accord doesn't? Low CG? Balanced handling? 6-spd manual? Limited slip differential? Good steering feedback? Light weight? How much would it cost to add those features to an Accord?

If you don't think those things cost money to add/design/build, you don't understand how R&D and manufacturing costs work -- especially on a car designed essentially from the ground up.

I'm sure the Accord also had millions of dollars of development money. And for every "feature" by your definition that the Accord doesn't have, there was money spent on things the twins don't, namely NVH. They cancel each other out.

What is important is what will happen to the price when a several thousand dollar turbo is added. Increasing the HP by N/A methods should halve the price increase I believe. Many car companies give upto 20HP increases with only the standard yearly price increase for example.

I'm saying they sort of shot themselves in the foot for initial pricing with little room for performance increase without pricing themselves out of competition in the process. Who the hell buys a $30k Civic for example? Sure, a handful of people, just like the two people who paid almost $40k for their FR-S in my area...with just a 5-axis kit and Bespoke.

*really done now, horse has become glue.

[Sargy]

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I'm sure the Accord also had millions of dollars of development money. And for every "feature" by your definition that the Accord doesn't have, there was money spent on things the twins don't, namely NVH. They cancel each other out.

What is important is what will happen to the price when a several thousand dollar turbo is added. Increasing the HP by N/A methods should halve the price increase I believe. Many car companies give upto 20HP increases with only the standard yearly price increase for example.

I'm saying they sort of shot themselves in the foot for initial pricing with little room for performance increase without pricing themselves out of competition in the process. Who the hell buys a $30k Civic for example? Sure, a handful of people, just like the two people who paid almost $40k for their FR-S in my area...with just a 5-axis kit and Bespoke.

*really done now, horse has become glue.

Haha I'm not sure I agree with all of that, but yeah the horse is definitely glue now

[Turbowned]

Whoah! You are NOT comparing the Honda Accord to the Scion FR-S right now, are you?

[Shinji2787]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I'm sure the Accord also had millions of dollars of development money. And for every "feature" by your definition that the Accord doesn't have, there was money spent on things the twins don't, namely NVH. They cancel each other out.

What is important is what will happen to the price when a several thousand dollar turbo is added. Increasing the HP by N/A methods should halve the price increase I believe. Many car companies give upto 20HP increases with only the standard yearly price increase for example.

I'm saying they sort of shot themselves in the foot for initial pricing with little room for performance increase without pricing themselves out of competition in the process. Who the hell buys a $30k Civic for example? Sure, a handful of people, just like the two people who paid almost $40k for their FR-S in my area...with just a 5-axis kit and Bespoke.

*really done now, horse has become glue.

Last time I checked turbos are an incredibly cheap way to add power and NA tuning is where things get expensive for moderate gains in comparison to F/I...

[Justkiz]

@fistpoint, I think you are in wrong place to hanging around mate.

You just don't understand what exotic means and emotional value of sports car.
We don't call Accord drivers as enthusiast neither Accord drivers call themselves as enthusiast (I think!).
For us (enthusiast or patrol head) we do not care about features in the car you are after such as creature comfort thingy.

[Turbowned]

The Honda Accord is an appliance on wheels. The FR-S/86/BRZ is a sports car. Let's agree to disagree before my head explodes.

[jonnyozero3]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

Let's agree to disagree before my head explodes.

Yeah really. I just shake my head in dismay at the display of extreme retardation and hit alt+F4. It's like people can't even speak the same language to have a simple discussion.

Back on track: the original article posted at top is a worthless addition to previous rumors since it doesn't have a source. It only rehashes old news. It's nothing but a means for revenue for their website based on visits.

[industrial]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

You're going to compare a plastic digital watch to one made with 18ct gold? Didn't I point out that the twins have no exotic materials in them?

You must have forgotten your daily Ritalin dose, ADD is strong within you. Normally we encounter people as dense as this on a Civic forum, but I guess we're seeing what everyone is talking about in regards to Scion and its demographic.

I give up, you can't fix stupid.

I guess I assumed you knew a little more about watches. In general, a classic submariner is just steel and fairly plain not all fouled up with gold, ti and the like. Contrary to what you may think, a submariner is a world class divers watch, not jewelery. It can be, just like a g-shock can be bought with gold, ti etc. A g-shock could be thought to be the pinnacle of digital diver's watches. It's durable and has every feature you might require on a dive. Why then would anyone buy a Submariner over a g-shock? It's the craftsmanship, reputation, excellence of design and single minded execution of making a great diving watch. All you really need in a dive watch is the ability to survive underwater, note the time and measure the rate of your descent and ascents (counting seconds). You don't need 5 digital alarms, 3 stopwatches, digital time, solar power, day of the week, countdowns, moonphases or whatever other silly gadgets casio crams into their watches. You need solid construction, a legible face, good luminescence and a rotating bezel.

I suppose my original analogy would be better fit for a Mustang Boss vs. 911 conversation. You can insert Seiko dive watch in my original comparison if that makes you feel any better. I never though anyone would compare an Accord with a FT86. It just doesn't make sense. Might as well compare every car ever made with a Fit or a Prius because those are about the most practical cars ever made.

Regardless, my point is, easily quantifiable features do not translate directly into value. Excellence in design, execution and passion are fundamental elements of the consumer experience missing from your equation.

[sho220]

Originally Posted by Mango22

This better not be true, or Subaru just lost a return customer. Who the Frack does this without letting the customer base know in advance. We were told no turbo, no turbo, no turbo and now, yes there will be a turbo within a year from now. This $hit pisses me off! Had I known I would have waited. effin Bastards!

This post conflicts greatly with your signature line...just thought I'd point that out...