Subaru BRZ Prototype Review by Car and Driver. Calls it a Knockout.

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by Dimman

If those power/torque numbers are legit, 210 @ 6500 and 170 @ 4000 is pretty epic for a 2.0L NA.

Like really epic.


Edit: Impossibly epic maybe?

BMEP is ~210 psi (which is freakin' awesome) at both the torque peak and power peak. BMEP on NA motors is always highest at torque peak and then tapers down.

So there is some BS in the air...

Yeah, those numbers are better than the s2000...

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Guy. FR sports cars/ sport sedans/GTs. Toyota; 2000GT, Sport 800 (boxer rwd no less), T/RA2x-T/RA6x Celicas, 4 Generations of Supras, AE86 Corolla GT(s), Chaser Tourer V, Altezza/IS, Soarer/SC, Aristo/GS, LFmtherfkingA....

Subaru; um... hmmmm...

Yes. Makes complete sense that Subaru did everything but the styling.



So not trolling. Found the article this morning and was quite disgusted actually. These guys are behaving like spoiled fucking children, and ***if*** the journalism is accurate, they are downright lying. Even on the remote chance this were true, the version that the PROJECT's HEAD ENGINEER gave, was in no way damaging to subaru, they have no reason to be asses about it, and it befuddles me why they would chose to damage their relationship with the guys that own 17% of their company like that. ****s.

The last few weeks have been of the FML...nay... FMELL variety, so I really wasn't in the mood to say more.



Yeah. Fuck $28k. Better come with a turbo and the better side of 270hp for that price. Seriously.



Wow. Fuck working in Canada. That's some serious ass rape-age.



TAS = Tokyo Auto Salon, which is in January. You are looking for the Tokyo motor show there champ.

Well explain to me why most of the hardware is from Subaru? The engine, the platform, and the tweaked impreza suspension setup. Also tell me why the first prototype was a hacked together Subaru impreza and the only time we heard and seen the Toyota version was when it had the sexy body? the only thing I see personally that is Toyota is the D4-S addition to the engine and the sexy body that we both find attractive. Tell me something that I'm missing from this equation?

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by suprachica79

Yeah, those numbers are better than the s2000...

You meant the tq figures right?

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by Leeky

Well i've re-read this article about the BRZ (you can see in the pictures too that its the Subaru and not the Toyota) and there is the mention of things like climate control and a space saver tyre. Plus there are spotlights/foglight in the bottom of the front bumper in the smaller picture on page2.

So if the Subaru has the full spec, is 2800lbs that bad? and is $28k that far off?

The base price Toyota version with no air conditioning, no stereo, no spotlights and a tire repair can rather than a spare this could well weigh in 2600lbs and cost around $20k

Im starting to believe this article......

Two Things:

1) There is no way that a modern-day, mainstream auto manufacturer would ever dream of shipping a car without a radio or air conditioning.

2) There is no way that this car will start at $20k. It's not 1995 anymore.

[suprachica79]

I meant both, if you look at the power the s2000 makes at 6500rpm, this car beats it. Looks like makes about 160 to the wheels at 6500rpm, and this car will likely make a bit more to the wheels if the 210hp @ 6500rpm is correct.

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Two Things:

1) There is no way that a modern-day, mainstream auto manufacturer would ever dream of shipping a car without a radio or air conditioning.

2) There is no way that this car will start at $20k. It's not 1995 anymore.

Haha, I was thinking the same, although I can still dream about it starting at $20k, but I am fully aware that it is a dream

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by suprachica79

I meant both, if you look at the power the s2000 makes at 6500rpm, this car beats it. Looks like makes about 160 to the wheels at 6500rpm, and this car will likely make a bit more to the wheels if the 210hp @ 6500rpm is correct.

If that is true then I am in love with this engine. I could care less for that extra 1k rpms of flat power because I don't rev like a lunatic on public roads which is where I would drive this car 100% of the time.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Two Things:

1) There is no way that a modern-day, mainstream auto manufacturer would ever dream of shipping a car without a radio or air conditioning.

2) There is no way that this car will start at $20k. It's not 1995 anymore.

If you see only in US, yes. If you look world wide, no.

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

If that is true then I am in love with this engine. I could care less for that extra 1k rpms of flat power because I don't rev like a lunatic on public roads which is where I would drive this car 100% of the time.

It actually doesn't flatten out there. It continues to increase in power until about 8200rpm where it tops at 190-195hp at the wheels. So it still produces another 30+hp at the wheels, but at an additional 1.5-2k worth of rpm, is it worth it? I'd rather have more power at a lower RPM that is more useable for the kind of driving I do. And the tq isn't even close really, maxing out at 130-140ftlbs at the wheels at about 6500rpm. At 4000rpm, the s2000 has about 110ftlbs at the wheels.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by suprachica79

It actually doesn't flatten out there. It continues to increase in power until about 8200rpm where it tops at 190-195hp at the wheels. So it still produces another 30+hp at the wheels, but at an additional 1.5-2k worth of rpm, is it worth it? I'd rather have more power at a lower RPM that is more useable for the kind of driving I do. And the tq isn't even close really, maxing out at 130-140ftlbs at the wheels at about 6500rpm. At 4000rpm, the s2000 has about 110ftlbs at the wheels.

I wasn't talking about the S2K. I was talking about the motor in the FT86. They said in the article it feels like it peaks earlier by 1k rpm.

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I wasn't talking about the S2K. I was talking about the motor in the FT86. They said in the article it feels like it peaks earlier by 1k rpm.

Oh, gotcha. Well that's even better then for my use of this vehicle.

[serialk11r]

Are people seriously taking the estimated figures seriously? As I pointed out in a previous thread, 170ft-lb of torque is almost as good as a Ferrari, and this is not going to be possible in a car where they actually care about emissions, noise, and economy, nevermind cost. For reasons I've described already, I think by over 200hp they mean barely over, not even 210. Again, with a 7.5k redline, the most you can hope for is maybe a bit over 200.

I wonder how they "estimated" the power peak to be at 6500rpm just by driving it...I don't think you can quantify differences in acceleration that accurately just by "feeling" it. The estimated specs are obviously full of shit.

[Leeky]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

If you see only in US, yes. If you look world wide, no.

+1

Here in the UK you can pretty much get any car of this price range without Airconditioning. Plus even if the base model does come with a stereo, we'll be talking a basic CD headunit weighing less than 1/2kg and costing Toyota less than £10 to make. And im sure it will take all of 5mins for me to take out. So no big deal if there is a stereo as standard.

Toyota have always be saying that they wanted to start this car around the 20k mark... they are still saying it now.... so thats what im expecting.

Size/engine/spec wise its closest competitor on the road at the moment is the latest MX-5. And you can buy the 2.0 litre (160bhp) engine version of this with an LSD for just over 19k. So it looks like it doesnt need to be 1995....

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Are people seriously taking the estimated figures seriously? As I pointed out in a previous thread, 170ft-lb of torque is almost as good as a Ferrari, and this is not going to be possible in a car where they actually care about emissions, noise, and economy, nevermind cost.

I wonder how they "estimated" the power peak to be at 6500rpm just by driving it...I don't think you can quantify differences in acceleration that accurately just by "feeling" it. The estimated specs are obviously full of shit.

To answer your question, no, I don't take these numbers seriously at all. No way a car like this has 170ft-lb of torque. But it's fun to play with the numbers when you have nothing else to talk about haha