3 things: Even after reading many reviews, I still can't fathom these...

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

To me, the Mustang won't count until it has real rear suspension. I don't care how advanced or well tuned the solid axle is, it's just too archaic and every track test I've ever seen for it has complained about it in some way, using phrasing akin to, "it's great for a design that should be outdated." If you have to qualify it it's not really a compliment.

Am I the only one that finds it odd that someone that doesn't own this car and plainly doesn't want to has as many posts as fatoni?

Nathan

the only reason i dont have one of these cars is because i dont know where ill be living in the next couple months and i dont want to have to deal with buying a car and then immediately having to deal with a different states registration. i understand the criticism for my patience though. i have driven the mustang as well as the frs and i can tell you that the solid rear axle is much less noticeable than the 220hp the frs is missing. i like the frs as much as the next forum member but that doesnt make it somehow faster than the numbers indicate.

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by fatoni

you can turbo those giants too. if youre trying to make a point in cost effectiveness, the frs is far from the poster child. since youre keen on examples, i can have a mustang gt when the market allows for cheaper than an frs. if you spend the money on a turbo, you are still likely making less power than the mustang (although you are right in the fact that hp is only part of the equation). i guess a 30k+ frs can kill the 25k mustang gt giant. or how about how you can buy a miata, supercharger, rollbar, springs, sways, shocks, swaybars, clutch and exhaust for less than a brz?

my point is, cost provides diminishing returns. almost always, the cheaper modified car is going to be a better value. that doesnt mean that every car is going to be a giant killer.

Watch this and tell me the car isn't a giant killer......

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7a...o#.UUEX-Vd1GSo

[boead]

Originally Posted by fatoni

the only reason i dont have one of these cars is because i dont know where ill be living in the next couple months and i dont want to have to deal with buying a car and then immediately having to deal with a different states registration. i understand the criticism for my patience though. i have driven the mustang as well as the frs and i can tell you that the solid rear axle is much less noticeable than the 220hp the frs is missing. i like the frs as much as the next forum member but that doesnt make it somehow faster than the numbers indicate.

But the Mustang is a piece of shit

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

To me, the Mustang won't count until it has real rear suspension. I don't care how advanced or well tuned the solid axle is, it's just too archaic and every track test I've ever seen for it has complained about it in some way, using phrasing akin to, "it's great for a design that should be outdated." If you have to qualify it it's not really a compliment.

Am I the only one that finds it odd that someone that doesn't own this car and plainly doesn't want to has as many posts as fatoni?

Nathan

I noticed that too, I was like this guy doesn't even own the car. That's why I took everything he said with a grain of salt.*shrug* People like that never understand the cars anyway. I'm not trying to be a downer. Before I owned my BRZ I understood the AE86 and cars like it very well, it's not something that can be easily put into words.

[SubieNate]

Originally Posted by fatoni

the only reason i dont have one of these cars is because i dont know where ill be living in the next couple months and i dont want to have to deal with buying a car and then immediately having to deal with a different states registration. i understand the criticism for my patience though. i have driven the mustang as well as the frs and i can tell you that the solid rear axle is much less noticeable than the 220hp the frs is missing. i like the frs as much as the next forum member but that doesnt make it somehow faster than the numbers indicate.

Fair enough. For the record, I wasn't trying to be a ****. It was a legitimate curiosity. You post a lot of complaints about the car, you don't have one, and you've been here quite a while.

220 more hp would be too much in my book. So "missing" is the wrong term when it comes to how many of us look at the car. I love that I can drive the piss out of this thing on my local backroads and not worry so much about killing someone. I'd much rather have 200 hp in a 2700 lb car than 400 in a 3800 lb car. Personal preference. I'm aiming to tune the car NA, raise the rev limit a bit, and put out maybe a max of 220 hp wheel at this point. Another 220 on top of that? Unnecessary. I've seen a Shelby Mustang take Mullholland in the hands of a young driver with mediocre car control skills and too much confidence. It's too fast for aggressive street driving. Period.

Judging by the 86's track times and it's dominance in every classed event (where things are classed based on the weight of the vehicle and power level) it is in fact faster than the numbers indicate. Look at the track record the CSG car set at Streets (IIRC) on the stock engine. Look at the track times it's been able to put up despite it's power level on tracks all around the world. The combo of light weightedness, good suspension design and aerodynamics counts for a lot when things other than straightline speed are in question. For some of us, fast isn't defined stoplight to stoplight.

Cheers
Nathan

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by boead

But the Mustang is a piece of shit

I disagree, it's not a piece of shit. It's a huge cliche now, everyone has one. Once something becomes too popular it loses all coolness. The GTR suffered that fate, it became too popular and knocked itself right off the cool pedestal. I prefer the R34, the R34's popular has pretty much died off to where only the true fans like it.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

Watch this and tell me the car isn't a giant killer......

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7a...o#.UUEX-Vd1GSo

it isnt a giant killer. of course you can make any car into a pretty fast car. i could just as easily post a video of a miata passing a viper or a civic passing a gtr. its anecdotal evidence. you havent shown me anything about those corollas or that gtr or those drivers. there are too many variables and not nearly enough information to make any reasonable claim from one video. just like i wont say that stock miatas are faster than corvettes even though when i go out to the autox i see them pull better times on a regular basis. i have owned an ae86 and i can tell you from experience that the thing is piss slow. i am also confused by how the ae86 has attained this legendary status as a drivers car yet the mustang gets dismissed for having the same suspension layout.

Originally Posted by boead

But the Mustang is a piece of shit

im sure there are at least as many people saying the same thing about the frs and their statements are just as qualified as yours.

[ZDan]

I don't miss my S2000's "missing" 260+hp relative to my RX-7 for the 99% of the time I'm driving it like a normal, reasonable human being on the street.

I know I would *DESPERATELY* miss my S2000's or RX-7's light weight and fully independent suspension if I were hulking around in a live-axle 3600+ lb. Mustang on the street all the time.

Small, lightweight, well-suspended cars are a joy (to me) to drive even at 2/10ths just tooling around. Bulky, overweight, live-axle behemoths? Not so much...

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by fatoni

it isnt a giant killer. of course you can make any car into a pretty fast car. i could just as easily post a video of a miata passing a viper or a civic passing a gtr. its anecdotal evidence. you havent shown me anything about those corollas or that gtr or those drivers. there are too many variables and not nearly enough information to make any reasonable claim from one video. just like i wont say that stock miatas are faster than corvettes even though when i go out to the autox i see them pull better times on a regular basis. i have owned an ae86 and i can tell you from experience that the thing is piss slow. i am also confused by how the ae86 has attained this legendary status as a drivers car yet the mustang gets dismissed for having the same suspension layout.


im sure there are at least as many people saying the same thing about the frs and their statements are just as qualified as yours.

Yep you don't get it and probably never will. Fair enough. It's a zen thing, some people get it and some don't.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

Fair enough. For the record, I wasn't trying to be a ****. It was a legitimate curiosity. You post a lot of complaints about the car, you don't have one, and you've been here quite a while.

220 more hp would be too much in my book. So "missing" is the wrong term when it comes to how many of us look at the car. I love that I can drive the piss out of this thing on my local backroads and not worry so much about killing someone. I'd much rather have 200 hp in a 2700 lb car than 400 in a 3800 lb car. Personal preference. I'm aiming to tune the car NA, raise the rev limit a bit, and put out maybe a max of 220 hp wheel at this point. Another 220 on top of that? Unnecessary. I've seen a Shelby Mustang take Mullholland in the hands of a young driver with mediocre car control skills and too much confidence. It's too fast for aggressive street driving. Period.

Judging by the 86's track times and it's dominance in every classed event (where things are classed based on the weight of the vehicle and power level) it is in fact faster than the numbers indicate. Look at the track record the CSG car set at Streets (IIRC) on the stock engine. Look at the track times it's been able to put up despite it's power level on tracks all around the world. The combo of light weightedness, good suspension design and aerodynamics counts for a lot when things other than straightline speed are in question. For some of us, fast isn't defined stoplight to stoplight.

Cheers
Nathan

i try not to use classed events as evidence because things get outclassed by rules. when i said "numbers" i wasnt talking about a tale of the tape. im talking about lap times. other than that i agree that the mustang is a lot of car for street driving. i also much prefer the frs to the mustang. it probably sounds like im hating on the frs a lot but not at all. im just saying the mustang is faster and dollar for dollar, its going to stay faster. that goes for almost any driving situation.

[SubieNate]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i try not to use classed events as evidence because things get outclassed by rules. when i said "numbers" i wasnt talking about a tale of the tape. im talking about lap times. other than that i agree that the mustang is a lot of car for street driving. i also much prefer the frs to the mustang. it probably sounds like im hating on the frs a lot but not at all. im just saying the mustang is faster and dollar for dollar, its going to stay faster. that goes for almost any driving situation.

From a pure speed standpoint, the V6 mustang with the track package is going to be hard to beat stock for stock, when put up against almost any currently produced car.

But things like size (It's a boat!), seating position (sucks! Especially for someone tall, like me!), gas mileage (From what I've read, they rarely get to 30 on the freeway, regardless of EPA numbers), and in my case, an irrational dislike for anything not IRS take it out of the game.

Plus, as has been stated, the Mustang is definitely a "me too" car. "What kind of car do you drive?" "I've got a Mustang" "Hey, me too!"

Cheers
Nathan

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SubaruBRZLimited

Yep you don't get it and probably never will. Fair enough. It's a zen thing, some people get it and some don't.

listen, i get it. youre talking to someone who has owned an ae86, crx, and is on my second miata. i have never so much as made a modification outside of the handling department. the fastest sporty car ive ever owned is a msp and that comes in at a whopping 170hp. i feel like you are missing something and that has become punctuated by your calling "giant killing" a "zen thing."

i much prefer what the frs is about compared to some of the much faster cars. that, in no way, shape, or form, affects how fast the car goes.

[Double4Free]

The interwebs is serious business.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[Brzetto]

It's not the suspension layout of the AE86 that makes it great, it's the lightweight properly balanced chassis in addition to a cast iron engine block that can withstand a lot of turbo pressure without failing. It weighs 2300 lbs and if you infuse a good 200-250hp it can murder cars with a higher price tag and more power. That's a superior power to weight ratio. The RX-7 has the same general setup but it uses a cool yet unfortunately unreliable engine.