MR-S to FR-S

[Sully]

Originally Posted by cleethree

This is supposed to be a performance car, not a commuter like the cars you mentioned. Perhaps you should compare the offerings of Mazda, Ford, GM and Subaru for "Civic Si money." It's not just Hyundai that has "value" in the power department. It's safe to say that this car is underpowered relative to what we have in the market now.

While we're talking about the civic si, the ft-86 approximately the same power, several hundred pounds lighter and RWD. Compared to most other small, cheap-ish(but not economy) cars, even todays, it isn't underpowered. Scion Tc, civic si, GTI, Miata, Mini. Okay, sure. Okay, sure. Mustang, mazdaspeed 3 both handily win the horsepower war.

Excepting the S2000, the quoted specs of small NA engines have been pretty stagnant for near 2 decades.

This car has similar specs, sans RWD, to the 7th gen Celica GT-S or DC2 ITR. Cars from over TEN YEARS ago. I'm still optimistic however, it could be special.

Hell, the 4th generation prelude(BB6, the curvy one with the spaceship dash) had 190, 200hp, 161 tq at approx. 2700-2800 in 1991.

But I always wanted to do an h22 swap in my 3rd gen prelude, or get a same size, same practicality, same personality car in rwd, and the ft-86 is it.

On the power front: I'm predicting a mid model refresh giving another 20-40 horsepower. Gotta keep people(magazines) talking about the car with tangible upgrades&quotable specs. And to lure the people with expiring leases back in.

[86er|n2]

Originally Posted by VenomRush

it would be a lot easier to talk about the transition from an MR-S to FR-S if we knew what the hell the FR-S was like on the road

what MR-S cant you see this is a fast vs slow, turbo vs NA thread silly

[VenomRush]

Originally Posted by 86er|n2

what MR-S cant you see this is a fast vs slow, turbo vs NA thread silly

in that case...

theres about 30 threads about that

[Giccin]

Originally Posted by 86er|n2

what MR-S cant you see this is a fast vs slow, turbo vs NA thread silly

What is the definition of Fast and Slow? Everyone has their own views on what's fast and slow.

And there's already plenty of threads about turbo vs NA.



And as far as I see, the OP wanted to transition from MR-S to FRS.

[PAImportTuner]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Offerings from Mazda? Like the 170hp MX-5? Or the 230hp RX-8? And I assume you're referring to the V6 muscle cars when you mention Ford and GM. It's vital to look at weight when you're looking at those cars, and simply comparing price is not accurate either. The closest competitor handling-wise to the FT86 would likely be the V6 Mustang with performance pack, but that is not a twenty-three grand car anymore.

Also, it's not really fair to compare hot hatches either. Those cars benefit from economies of scale: i.e. it is much less expensive to drop a big engine in one of your bread-and-butter models than it is create a whole new car from scratch. Just look at Mazda's own Speed3 and MX-5. They have similar price points, but differ greatly in mission and perspective customer. If you want a fast Subaru, then buy a WRX. The FT-86's mission was never to be a "performance car," and if that's what you were expecting, then you missed the point.

"In this car we didn't go after those specs or speed, rather our aim was a car that the driver could really enjoy" -Kosuke Kubo

Below is a list of all cars that can and will be comparison tested AND they have every reason to be cross shopped and compared with the FR-S. Yes it would be fair as well.

Cars offered from 2011 and 2012:
1. Any compact or tuner with 170hp or more
2. Any compact or tuner under 3000#
3. Any compact or tuner with very similar or better power to weight ratio
4. Any compact or tuner that is in the $19-27k range
5. Any compact or tuner that is n/a, supercharged or turbo
6. Any compact or tuner whether FWD, AWD, or RWD that meets all 1-5.**

**due to the nature of 2+2 cars all 2,4,5 seaters are allowed.

Enough about a fun drivers car. Who are they building the car for? Themselves or current and foreseeable scene? Some companies can build cars like the Bugatti Veyron or Lamborghini Gallardo but they don't have to really sell them to stay afloat. This car has to sell for Scion and Subaru, so naturally you should build something the majority wants to buy NOT what YOU think is "fun", "what YOU were aiming for" and or keeping the heritage of a certain previous car.

Toyota basically kept saying; more fun and emotion, less power and more profit margin. Well power equals more fun and emotions to me, and a company telling me 50 times it's a fun and balanced drivers car or Keiichi saying it's perfect is not going to make me say "take my money".

[86er|n2]

Originally Posted by VenomRush

in that case...

theres about 30 threads about that

dont get me wrong i dont need to search for more turbo threads, I'm just saying that every topic turns into this "power" struggle, literally. its quite annoying actually, dont see why people cant accept what this car has always been from its inception. A light rwd cheap sports car, I think its because people have forgotten or dont know that the original ae86 and cars like it were just sporty grocery getters (that happened to be rwd as it was somewhat common up until then), for the average man more than they were "sports" cars. And with 200hp and 2650-2700lbs and most importantly RWD. This car fits into a great place in the market. This is essentially a rwd RSX Type S in a lot of ways, but with alot more focus on handling.

As someone who has owned a few ae86s with varying amounts of power all NA and also who has owned faster and larger turbo rwd cars, I'd take a nice NA drivers car any day and that is what this promises to be. For me at least im much more interested in the handling and feel of this car than getting it to 400WHP hell when i here anyone talking about 300-400whp in a car like this, i think "why" other than to drag race usability and reliability with suffer poorly. But too each his own.

Plus it cant hurt that it looks so damn good too

[86er|n2]

Originally Posted by PAImportTuner

Below is a list of all cars that can and will be comparison tested AND they have every reason to be cross shopped and compared with the FR-S. Yes it would be fair as well.

Cars offered from 2011 and 2012:
1. Any compact or tuner with 170hp or more
2. Any compact or tuner under 3000#
3. Any compact or tuner with very similar or better power to weight ratio
4. Any compact or tuner that is in the $19-27k range
5. Any compact or tuner that is n/a, supercharged or turbo
6. Any compact or tuner whether FWD, AWD, or RWD that meets all 1-5.**

**due to the nature of 2+2 cars all 2,4,5 seaters are allowed.

Enough about a fun drivers car. Who are they building the car for? Themselves or current and foreseeable scene? Some companies can build cars like the Bugatti Veyron or Lamborghini Gallardo but they don't have to really sell them to stay afloat. This car has to sell for Scion and Subaru, so naturally you should build something the majority wants to buy NOT what YOU think is "fun", "what YOU were aiming for" and or keeping the heritage of a certain previous car.

Toyota basically kept saying; more fun and emotion, less power and more profit margin. Well power equals more fun and emotions to me, and a company telling me 50 times it's a fun and balanced drivers car or Keiichi saying it's perfect is not going to make me say "take my money".

Whats the real point of ur argument? Every post I see on this forum from you all you are doing is complaining about how this car basically isnt what you want or wanted, so why are you still here trying to convince everyone else its not what they want?

[VenomRush]

Originally Posted by 86er|n2

dont get me wrong i dont need to search for more turbo threads, I'm just saying that every topic turns into this "power" struggle, literally. its quite annoying actually, dont see why people cant accept what this car has always been from its inception. A light rwd cheap sports car, I think its because people have forgotten or dont know that the original ae86 and cars like it were just sporty grocery getters (that happened to be rwd as it was somewhat common up until then), for the average man more than they were "sports" cars. And with 200hp and 2650-2700lbs and most importantly RWD. This car fits into a great place in the market. This is essentially a rwd RSX Type S in a lot of ways, but with alot more focus on handling.

As someone who has owned a few ae86s with varying amounts of power all NA and also who has owned faster and larger turbo rwd cars, I'd take a nice NA drivers car any day and that is what this promises to be. For me at least im much more interested in the handling and feel of this car than getting it to 400WHP hell when i here anyone talking about 300-400whp in a car like this, i think "why" other than to drag race usability and reliability with suffer poorly. But too each his own.

Plus it cant hurt that it looks so damn good too

ok

[carbonBLUE]

FR-S Front engine rear drive sport
MR-S Mid engine read drive sport
FA-ST Front engine All wheel drive Sport Turbo?

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by 86er|n2

Whats the real point of ur argument? Every post I see on this forum from you all you are doing is complaining about how this car basically isnt what you want or wanted, so why are you still here trying to convince everyone else its not what they want?

Well said. I really don't get this guy. All he ever talks about is how the FT-86 will be too expensive for the amount of power that it offers, but didn't he buy a JCW Mini recently? Surely there are cheaper ways to go faster.

[cleethree]

The MR-S was a capable chassis that was under powered (in my humble opinion.) Being as though this car was built from the ground up to be a driver's car and not and upgraded econobox, it better be damn good!

[Shackelford]

As a current MR2-S owner I hope that the BRZ (or FRS) is just a fun to drive, but with mire power as I find myself wanting more everytine I drive it.

[switchlanez]

One thing I did not like about my MR-S was the engine. It should have come with the Yamaha-tuned 2ZZ to complete the package. (Random odd fact: a base version of the Lotus Elise sold in Europe came with the 140hp 1ZZ.)

2nd was the lack of rigidity in a soft top. I did get a hard top which adds some rigidity but all the stress is focused on its 4 latches which eventually wear, slowly diminishing its rigidity. If you're not going to have a top at least reinforce the chassis like the S2K with its rigid X-bone frame.

Another thing was cargo space. It only had a frunk and passenger seat. The MkII MR2 at least had a trunk... downgrading to it made life MUCH more livable. This item really depends on your needs.

Lastly, the transmission. Japan had 6-speed manual transmissions and so did Europe (with slightly different gear ratios). US only ever had 5-speeds.

FR-S is an improvement over the MR-S on all the above counts.

[Jordo!]

2ZZ in MR-S was common swap... and you are right -- there should have been an option for it.

My magic 8-ball says that 3/4ths or more of the folks who buy this car will be frothing at the mouth for a FI kit when one becomes available.

Yes, handling and braking are great and key to a "driver's car", but who the hell is going to turn down another 40-50 hp (or more?) if the option becomes availalbe (never mind the bitter truth that HP sells cars, especially in the States).

Somebody offer it with a reflash tuning solution and charge me what ever they want and I'll immediately sell my Z and buy the car and the kit.