Toyota confirmed to be exploring forced induction for GT86 mid-cycle refresh

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

I'm rather happy with the car I have for 25k. If I wanted to spend an extra 10 grand, I could have just gotten a 370Z sport and called it a day.

The motor is pretty damn good as is and reminds me a lot of the S2000 motor (small displacement, high rev, lightweight). Adding a bunch of heavy stuff in the engine bay will change what the car is about. Would I like a little more power? Maybe... but for daily driving, the thing is about as fun as can be while remaining economical.

I agree but if I wanted a little more power I would just do something noninvasive like an exhaust and cai.

[FRiSson]

I respect the engineering and science of turbocharging. However, for engine longevity and lower cost of ownership, I favor a naturally-aspirated engine. From an aesthetic standpoint there is a certain purity to an engine that gets its power simply from good design and high compression. Some car companies, not all, use turbos as a way of getting extra power from mediocre engines.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

I agree but if I wanted a little more power I would just do something noninvasive like an exhaust and cai.

I'll just do them myself. I did that in my TC with all "TRD" branded stuff. CAI, exhaust, springs, short shifter. They actually ended up coming out with a very similar model later (The RS5.0 I think), but mine was still unique and I loved the pride of putting things in myself, even if pretty much everything were simple bolt ons.

[Z-PDX]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

Actually I know what I'm talking about.

Tell us more. We can't wait to hear...

[campy]

I thought Toyota and Subaru already "explored" this. Toyota's doing a supercharger and Subaru said no.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by FRiSson

I respect the engineering and science of turbocharging. However, for engine longevity and lower cost of ownership, I favor a naturally-aspirated engine. From an aesthetic standpoint there is a certain purity to an engine that gets its power simply from good design and high compression. Some car companies, not all, use turbos as a way of getting extra power from mediocre engines.

Another thing about turbo cars, even the best of them seem to still struggle to get their MPGs in the 20s. I owned two relatively stock turbo DSMs, a 98 Eclipse GS-T and 90 Talon TSi AWD. Both had simple intake and exhaust, nothing else. They were a hoot to drive, but I'd be getting about 17mpg in the Talon and struggling to hit 20mpg in the Eclipse. Even a modern WRX base is advertised 19/25 MPG, with the STi getting 23/17.

More air = more fuel, means worse MPG. I loved the sound of a screaming turbo and the progressive acceleration curve, but having driven a simple intake/exhaust tC for the past 8 years, I've really begun to like the power delivery of N/A engines.

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by Z-PDX

Tell us more. We can't wait to hear...

We meaning you and I already said what Subaru or anyone else would do If they were going to produce greater power in a BRZ without using a turbo.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

I'll tell you how they could get more power without force induction. They could use a new ECU or reflash the existing one, they can put a bigger exhaust and CAI then use a higher end intercooler then possibly change some of the engine internals. Boom you have an extra 50hp or so. I'm using my Nissan's 2.5L as a guesstimation, with a catback and cai I can get an extra 20hp out of it. They are two different engines but the outcome will be about the same.

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

Actually I know what I'm talking about.

it doesnt really sound like it. for starters what is the specific output of that 2.5 you are comparing the frs motor to? what do you expect a cold air intake to do? longer tubing simply increases airflow speeds at lower engine speeds but at the cost of restricting them at higher speeds. it just shifts the power peak more than it adds power. and using a higher end intercooler? what does that even mean? i wasnt aware that the frs had an intercooler at all. the only way the frs is going to gain 50hp without using forced induction would be by adding thousands of rpm to the engine speeds and the appropriate cams to go with it.

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

Another thing about turbo cars, even the best of them seem to still struggle to get their MPGs in the 20s. I owned two relatively stock turbo DSMs, a 98 Eclipse GS-T and 90 Talon TSi AWD. Both had simple intake and exhaust, nothing else. They were a hoot to drive, but I'd be getting about 17mpg in the Talon and struggling to hit 20mpg in the Eclipse. Even a modern WRX base is advertised 19/25 MPG, with the STi getting 23/17.

More air = more fuel, means worse MPG. I loved the sound of a screaming turbo and the progressive acceleration curve, but having driven a simple intake/exhaust tC for the past 8 years, I've really begun to like the power delivery of N/A engines.

i think you should look into more modern turbo systems. a lot of time they can rob you of power but there are examples of turbos doing good things for mpgs relative to their power output.

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by fatoni

it doesnt really sound like it. for starters what is the specific output of that 2.5 you are comparing the frs motor to? what do you expect a cold air intake to do? longer tubing simply increases airflow speeds at lower engine speeds but at the cost of restricting them at higher speeds. it just shifts the power peak more than it adds power. and using a higher end intercooler? what does that even mean? i wasnt aware that the frs had an intercooler at all. the only way the frs is going to gain 50hp without using forced induction would be by adding thousands of rpm to the engine speeds and the appropriate cams to go with it.



i think you should look into more modern turbo systems. a lot of time they can rob you of power but there are examples of turbos doing good things for mpgs relative to their power output.

Technobabble aside, we'll see when someone does a naturally aspirated car with everything I included.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

Technobabble aside, we'll see when someone does a naturally aspirated car with everything I included.

its already been done and its nowhere near 50hp. if you get an exhaust and intake it will look like it adds more power than it does because its leaning out the engine which it what you would do in a tune. i would love to hear your explanation for using an intercooler though.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i think you should look into more modern turbo systems. a lot of time they can rob you of power but there are examples of turbos doing good things for mpgs relative to their power output.

Those Subaru numbers are for 2013 Model Years. 19/25 for WRX and 17/23 for STi. Then there's the Mazdaspeed 3 at 18/25 and Lancer Evo at 17/23. The only one remotely reasonable is the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T at 21/30. What other turbo models are there? And what mileage do they get?

[Gen]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

Those Subaru numbers are for 2013 Model Years. 19/25 for WRX and 17/23 for STi. Then there's the Mazdaspeed 3 at 18/25 and Lancer Evo at 17/23. The only one remotely reasonable is the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T at 21/30. What other turbo models are there? And what mileage do they get?

328i 23/34
335i 23/33
Veloster Turbo 25/34
GTI 21/31
Optima Turbo 22/34
A4 24/31
Dart 27/37

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

Those Subaru numbers are for 2013 Model Years. 19/25 for WRX and 17/23 for STi. Then there's the Mazdaspeed 3 at 18/25 and Lancer Evo at 17/23. The only one remotely reasonable is the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T at 21/30. What other turbo models are there? And what mileage do they get?

i think what happens for a lot of sporty cars is the factory uses a relatively rich tune in order to keep intake temps down and ensure the longevity of the product. at those levels of production it seems better to err on the side of caution. im not saying that turbos are great for economy in sports cars. im just saying that they might not be as bad as you think. if you get on it, its going to suck all your fuel. if you dont, turbos are getting pretty effecient and will give you reasonable economy.

[Gen]

As long as I am getting above 10 mpg, I really don't care that much. While I'm happy to have better gas mileage, I'll take power over MPG any day. I'm not a delivery driver, so if it costs me an extra $20 a week, it's no matter.