Motor Trend's $28K Bang for the Buck (spoiler alert!)

[SUB-FT86]

A torqueless engine in a sports car makes it less of a Band for Buck in my opinion. I hate it when you like everything about a car except its engine. Its the way I feel about my RSX and when I test drove a S2K the engine was only fun and exhilarating above 6k rpms. This made me feel like the S2K was way overpriced by like 5k and when I compare the FRS to the S2K price tag I can say the FRS looks like a better bang for the buck on paper. 40 more hp and leather for 11k more? Hell no!

I think the FRS is the best bang for buck in the small size sporty car class but in the middle size sporty class the Mustang and GC is king of bang for buck.

[thill]

People also need to understand that the BRZ and FR-S are selling at or above MSRP in the real world. The Mustang and Gencoupe can be found for invoice or lower. $28k will put you in the 3.8 liter RSPEC manual Gencoupe and nearly in a Mustang GT. That is bang for the buck. I was able to buy a 2013 Gencoupe (2.0 T) with floor mats, an iPod cable, and 3 years of maintenance paid for for $23,700. That is a lot of car for the money and if I want mods down the road it would leave me money to do that.

[Minovsky]

Originally Posted by 86fanatic

It's very obvious in these online forums people who live their lives vicariously through youtube clips, and base their total opinion off what they see online, to those who are genuinely passionate about driving cars.

I really wonder what is the motivation behind the people who post ad nauseum in online forums about wacky track battles between the Mustang and the M3. You will only be preaching to the choir, that is the people who have the same philosophy of vicariously living through you tube clips.

The people disagreeing with you are trying to help you develop a more realistic and, ahem, reality based interpretation of these cars and what they are designed for. It doesn't take 20 years of track experience to understand that these cars are different, and anyone can go to a dealership and attempt to test drive them back to back to see the differences. That if, if you really are passionate about cars and not just trying to stir up problems in online discussion forums.

I won't reply further, and I truly I wish you the best. Engaging in these online discussions is always fruitless and after every reply I almost immediately regret the time I spent. I hope one day you feel the same, because these arguments do get everybody nowhere fast.

Cheers :happy0180:

[Tbomb 25]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

A torqueless engine in a sports car makes it less of a Band for Buck in my opinion. I hate it when you like everything about a car except its engine. Its the way I feel about my RSX and when I test drove a S2K the engine was only fun and exhilarating above 6k rpms. This made me feel like the S2K was way overpriced by like 5k and when I compare the FRS to the S2K price tag I can say the FRS looks like a better bang for the buck on paper. 40 more hp and leather for 11k more? Hell no!

I think the FRS is the best bang for buck in the small size sporty car class but in the middle size sporty class the Mustang and GC is king of bang for buck.

I agree with everything you said....although the BRZ/FRS has more torque than the K20 with a broader torqueband....but the question is gonna be will you like it compared to the Mustang or the GC...sure it will feel more healthy downstairs than the K20 cars or the S2000 but it doesent rev as well as them...and the V6 cars rev just as good as it does so its a lot to think about no doubt.

[Tbomb 25]

Originally Posted by thill

People also need to understand that the BRZ and FR-S are selling at or above MSRP in the real world. The Mustang and Gencoupe can be found for invoice or lower. $28k will put you in the 3.8 liter RSPEC manual Gencoupe and nearly in a Mustang GT. That is bang for the buck. I was able to buy a 2013 Gencoupe (2.0 T) with floor mats, an iPod cable, and 3 years of maintenance paid for for $23,700. That is a lot of car for the money and if I want mods down the road it would leave me money to do that.

True but you can find good dealers....and it will be smooth sailing finding 1 by the time late June comes...all the price trickary will be over.Im glad your happy with your GC i bought 1 in Oct...and exercised their 90 day full refund return policy...it had many positives but it had many more negatives,i liked it but i didnt love it. For me its down to the Mustang V6 with the PP/Recaro's,Base GT with Sync or the FRS....i dont like the frontend on the BRZ or the interior so its out its still a amazing car and i will admire it everytime i see 1 but the FRS fits prosona much better.For now i will drive my E30 and the wifes Sonic LTZ 1.4t and work on the MkIII Supra once July 15 hits I'll get 1 of the 3.Talking to a guy for a hour today a former Gen coupe with a Raven FRS didnt help the others case very much me and him are have been looking at the same cars except his other car is a STI mind is a Supra we are both 6'3 210 pounds fits us both like a glove..lol

[Dadhawk]

Added website link to article in OP (thanks Astericked Accolade).

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...or_comparison/

[TuxedoCartman]

Let's not beat around the bush: a lot of times, enjoyment of sports cars is all about perception.

So let's assume that yes, the Mustang V6 is not only cheaper than the twins, but also faster in both a straight line and around a track. Now... will that stop you from feeling a bit blue every time a Mustang GT pulls up next to you at a light? (To say nothing of the Boss 302, the Shelby GT500, the Shelby KR, etc...) You might be able to walk away from Genesis Coupes and BRZ's and GTI's all day long, but will that stop people from looking at your ride and assuming you're merely a commuter wanting a sporty car, instead of an enthusiast? (I know, I know... "I ride for my own pleasure, not what others think," yadda yadda...)

I've always been just a *wee* bit more of a fan of cars that come with one engine choice, as opposed to different performance trims, for the ideal that engineers neither had to denude a real performance car for the economy version (ala Mustang), nor over-tweaked a budget chassis with go-fast bits (ala... well, '94-'04 model Mustangs). I think I make mental exceptions to that rule for cars in certain race classes, such as the Impreza or Lancer (or maybe I'm a hypocrite... who knows).

TL;DR As a performance enthusiast, I wouldn't want to drive a Mustang V6, because it's a gutted, neutered version of a performance car, and I feel like there would be too many reminders of how I had to settle for second best.

[phillip]

Originally Posted by TuxedoCartman

As a performance enthusiast, I wouldn't want to drive a Mustang V6, because it's a gutted, neutered version of a performance car, and I feel like there would be too many reminders of how I had to settle for second best.

That just doesn't make any sense. Applying it to other cars makes it seem like you're trying to mask that you want a Japanese car instead of an American one (nothing wrong with that, as I would probably take a Japanese one over an American one too). It's like saying you wouldn't want a Cayman because there is a Cayman S or a G35 because of the G35S, or really any car without getting every (or at least every sporty) option available.

[TuxedoCartman]

Originally Posted by phillip

That just doesn't make any sense. Applying it to other cars makes it seem like you're trying to mask that you want a Japanese car instead of an American one (nothing wrong with that, as I would probably take a Japanese one over an American one too). It's like saying you wouldn't want a Cayman because there is a Cayman S or a G35 because of the G35S, or really any car without getting every (or at least every sporty) option available.

I know nothing about the G35S, so I can't comment on that one, but yeah... my feelings apply to the Cayman as well. I'd feel the same way driving a base Cayman as I would a V-6 Mustang, since both cars are stripped down versions of higher performance cars (let's not forget that the Cayman S arrived before the Cayman).

I don't think my views have as much to do with where the car comes from, as it does racing. Imprezas/ Lancers are budget cars designed with go-fast stuff in mind, because they're raced in the WRC. Still wouldn't mean I'd ever own a base model one, though. But even though they race Mustangs in Grand Am and what not, they don't need the base model to qualify for those races, so it's simply there for looks and budget-minded people, in my opinion.

Not arguing the validity or rightness/ wrongness of views, just stating my own. :happy0180:

[phillip]

Originally Posted by TuxedoCartman

Not arguing the validity or rightness/ wrongness of views, just stating my own. :happy0180:

Yeah I didn't want to sound like I was attacking you or anything. I just don't get why somebody would want Car A over Car B when Car B performs better, but also has a higher trim level available (assuming same price, looks, fanbase, whatever). I certainly understand wanting the highest trim available for what you get though. I always wish my 2005 Legacy were a GT, but I'd still rather have it than a top trim... well I can't think of anything cheaper that has multiple engine options and is still worse than the Legacy for the same price, but you get the idea!

[TuxedoCartman]

Originally Posted by phillip

Yeah I didn't want to sound like I was attacking you or anything. I just don't get why somebody would want Car A over Car B when Car B performs better, but also has a higher trim level available (assuming same price, looks, fanbase, whatever). I certainly understand wanting the highest trim available for what you get though. I always wish my 2005 Legacy were a GT, but I'd still rather have it than a top trim... well I can't think of anything cheaper that has multiple engine options and is still worse than the Legacy for the same price, but you get the idea!

It's irrational, I know. But 98% of car ownership is emotion, so what can you do? I've at least figured out my emotional quirks regarding cars, so I can prepare for them, LOL...

It's funny regarding Mustangs: I had a 96 Cobra, in that Mystic color-changing paint that Ford did for a while. LOVED that car, partly because it handled so horribly. I mean, if you stared at it hard enough, the rear-end would break loose on it. It was fun! Now, I know the new ones out-perform those cars in every way: power, handling, reliability, etc... But when I drove an '06 GT, it just felt... well, it felt like a Lincoln Town Car to me. Too big, too fat, absolutely HATED the dash and seats... and shifter... and engine sound... There's nothing about the new ones that catches me. I'm probably one of the few people who, if given a choice between a new GT or even Shelby, and a zero-miles, newly manufactured '96 Cobra... I'd take the 96 model! How messed up is that?

What did this have to do with the topic? Oh... nothing, sorry. Cars, emotion. BRZ/ 86 twins = awesome. Mustangs can equal awesome, if that's your thing. Ya know what? Cars in general equal awesome. Whatever floats your boat!

[Dadhawk]

New video from Autoweek comparing 7 Performance Vehicles under $30,000 posted here.

[Tbomb 25]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

New video from Autoweek comparing 7 Performance Vehicles under $30,000 posted here.

Very nice find....its no suprise who the favorites are,their are a few things that bugged me tho...no MX-5,Mazdaspeed 3 or Camaro...and then the worst no FRS...clearly on price it and the base Mustang PP would be the winners consdering their price...

[Tbomb 25]

.....its a shame the Veloster Turbo, Dodge Dart SRT and Focus ST are missing all the shootouts Dodge,Ford and Hyundai really dropped the ball with the release dates of these 3 cars missing the spring and summer seasons as well....or either they were purposely trying to release after the FT-86/BRZ/FRS and Abarth....i guess the new GTI cant get here fast enough what a disapointment...lol