New Rumor: Subaru Developing Turbo 4 2.0T for BRZ

[Demandred7]

I cannot believe where this thread has gone.

[sho220]

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?

Aren't manuals always cheaper than autos?

[Giccin]

This thread...

lol

[Superhatch]

This thread started stupid and just kept the pedal mashed to the floor the whole way.

[switchlanez]

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.

Originally Posted by industrial

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.

I'll throw in a few more cheap shots and say if the Accord were RWD, it'd cost a few thousand more than the FR-S. If the FR-S were FWD, it'd cost a few thousand less than the Accord. With the FR-S, you lose some features but gain RWD. Hence, the Accord and FR-S are very appropriately priced relative to each other. In the year 2000, the FR-S would've cost around $18-19k after inflation adjustments. The Celica GT-S and RSX-S (both FWD) cost around $22-23k at that time.

Sorry for going OT; every time the turbo rumor comes up I just regurgitate (as I've done in the first page of this thread) what I've already posted in many of the past turbo rumor discussions hence I embrace these diversions.

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by sho220

Aren't manuals always cheaper than autos?

Initially, yes, but with MPG favoring the auto these days, the auto pays for itself in a wickedly lickety shot spick spickety split Lickety.

[sho220]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

Initially, yes, but with MPG favoring the auto these days, the auto pays for itself in a wickedly lickety shot spick spickety split Lickety.

I think we were talking about initial cost, not cost of ownership. Then again, I'm really not sure what this thread was about? Something about a turbo???

[86pro]

come on toyota give us a boosted version better than subaru!!!!!! its all of our heritage!!

[coyote]

Someone please change the thread title from "New Rumour" to "45th Re-Run of Oldest BRZ Rumour".

[NYNOMAD]

Now Autoweek is jumping on the BRZ Turbo band wagon... No real new news...

[jadewbj]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

I watched all of both videos(thanks for posting them), but there is nothing in them concerning features, it's all about the center of gravity and lowering the hood, suspension bragging, etc., etc.

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.

For fun I went and did what you asked. I listed the options that each car has that the other does not. I don't care about anything on the accord list, especially in a sports car. I also did not list everything they did to achieve the center of gravity which in my mind are features.

HONDA ACCORD EX: $25,025

• Audio Touch Screen
• One-Touch Power Moonroof with Tilt Feature
• Smart Entry System
• Fog Lights
• Multi-Angle Rearview Camera with Guidelines
• Engine Start/Stop Button
• Dual-Zone Automatic Climate Control with Air-Filtration System
• SMS Text Message Function[5]
• Illuminated Steering Wheel-Mounted Cruise, Audio, Phone and i-MID Controls

SCION FR-S: $24,995

• Sport Pedals
• Torsen Limited Slip Differential
• Lower Center of gravity than any car other than the Lexus LFA and Ferrari 360
• Electric Power-Steering
• 2750lb Curb Weight due to lightweight materials vs 3192 in accord
• Rear Wheel Drive
• Large Bolster Racing Type Seats

[tripjammer]

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.

There will never get a Scion FR-S Turbo, maybe...only maybe a BRZ Turbo. They will only make like 3000 of them per year and sell everyone of them. The FR-S at $25k is still a good deal. This BRZ Turbo will be in the mid to upper $30k range. Still a good deal considering the performance you will be able to get out of it.

But for the people who are overpaying for the FR-S\BRZ\86, oh well it is what it is....

Just say no...There are plenty of cars out there at MSRP or below. I even found a BRZ premium brand new close to $24k, you just got to look.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by sho220

Aren't manuals always cheaper than autos?

Generally true, except that Honda doesn't even offer a manual option for the V6 Accord trims. The cost of implementing that option (design, testing, manufacturing) would be quite large for Honda. I doubt they could profitably offer it, and if they could, I'm not convinced it would be cheaper than the current automatic option. Just speculation though...

[WolfpackS2k]

Way to f*ck up this thread guys. You should have just ignored the moron talking about Accords but no...

FFS