Is anyone else on the fence due to the engine choice?

[NESW20]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

Ba-dum-dish

???

if i want boosted fun, i have my MR2.

[Allch Chcar]

Here that would qualify as funny...

Personally, I do believe that N/A the FT-86 would be far more exciting than anything else I've driven in my short driving life.

[TRDMAN]

I hope this car sounds good

[Kage]

Originally Posted by TRDMAN

I hope this car sounds good

http://www.toyota-europe.com/innovat..._ii/index.aspx
sounds on the right side....I hope the production sounds like that. PERSONALLY I think that sounds amazing.

And just out of curiosity, assuming the engine is 200hp how much torque(lb-ft) do you think this engine is MOST-LIKELY to have.

Also how well do these engine respond to boost? I'm only looking to get maybe 270hp(assuming the 2700lb weight expectancy)

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Kage

http://www.toyota-europe.com/innovat..._ii/index.aspx
sounds on the right side....I hope the production sounds like that. PERSONALLY I think that sounds amazing.

And just out of curiosity, assuming the engine is 200hp how much torque(lb-ft) do you think this engine is MOST-LIKELY to have.

Also how well do these engine respond to boost? I'm only looking to get maybe 270hp(assuming the 2700lb weight expectancy)

145ish lb-ft if it's a 2.0L.
175ish lb-ft if it's a 2.5L.

Educated guesses on my part.

[Archer256]

oh that engine sound...

[old greg]

Originally Posted by Kage

Also how well do these engine respond to boost? I'm only looking to get maybe 270hp(assuming the 2700lb weight expectancy)

It's impossible to say at the moment. The FB engine is all new, and the only version of it out in the wild right now is a low-spec n/a motor in the 2011 Subaru Forester. No one's gotten to play with a turbo'd version yet. But back in the olden days (before it was cheaper to just buy a used WRX or Sti) people were getting 200 awhp reliably (~270bhp, up from 175) from the stock 2.5RS motor. A few folks were running 15+ psi and making 300+ awhp on bone stock engines. So nothing is certain, but 270 bhp shouldn't be too much of an issue.

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by Kage

http://www.toyota-europe.com/innovat..._ii/index.aspx
sounds on the right side....I hope the production sounds like that. PERSONALLY I think that sounds amazing.

And just out of curiosity, assuming the engine is 200hp how much torque(lb-ft) do you think this engine is MOST-LIKELY to have.

Also how well do these engine respond to boost? I'm only looking to get maybe 270hp(assuming the 2700lb weight expectancy)

Would have to know where HP peaks on the curve to get an exact measure.

If it peaks at 6800rpm: ~154 ft/lbs of torque
If it peaks at 7500rpm: ~140 ft/lbs of torque

[fatoni]

i dont really understand the boxer motor. i have yet to see any of the advantages the motor provides pay a significant dividends. the evos have tall i4s and i fail to see anything subaru have an advantage. it also makes things complicated with plumbing and having two cylinder heads. vettes seem low slung enough and they fit a 6l v8 under there...

[NESW20]

however, the subarus you're referring to have the engines WAY farther forward than the evos. the ft86 will have the engine very very low, and very far back.

toyota understands how critical it is to get the CG low and centralized.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i dont really understand the boxer motor. i have yet to see any of the advantages the motor provides pay a significant dividends. the evos have tall i4s and i fail to see anything subaru have an advantage. it also makes things complicated with plumbing and having two cylinder heads. vettes seem low slung enough and they fit a 6l v8 under there...

Originally Posted by NESW20

however, the subarus you're referring to have the engines WAY farther forward than the evos. the ft86 will have the engine very very low, and very far back.

toyota understands how critical it is to get the CG low and centralized.

It's all about packaging. The Evo is based on a transverse FWD chassis whereas the Subaru boxer is longitude and uses a symmetrical AWD for everything which by design requires the engine to sit pretty far forward as NESW20 mentioned.

V config engines are popular because they are compact especially for RWD chassis layouts. The V4 has become extinct/rare, the last V4 that I know of was the Ford Essex and that was almost 15 maybe 20 years ago now. So it only makes sense that instead of a standard straight 4 or making a V4 from scratch that Toyota used a flat 4 from Subaru to fit in such a compact layout. For a car as small as the FT-86, it makes a big difference. Compare 4 banger cars like the Miata, the Silvias, etc to a regular transverse econobox and the longitude engine takes a lot of extra sheet metal to surround those engines.

At least that is how I understood their reasoning.

[old greg]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i have yet to see any of the advantages the motor provides pay a significant dividends.

The big dividends for the FT86 are as follows:

It's lightweight: Expect an FB20 to weight less than 260 lb (without exhaust or accessories).

It's short (height-wise): That sleek low hood and pointy nose are only possible because of the flat four. Because of stupid pedestrians in Europe, if the car had an inline or V engine the hood would be bulbous like the 370z.

Minor bonus: There's no harmonic balancer, so lightweight aftermarket crank pulleys are perfectly fine for the motor.

[SOB]

150 ft/lbs is weak sauce. Definitely will not be buying if its that little. Rather buy the Focus ST at that point.

[old greg]

Originally Posted by SOB

150 ft/lbs is weak sauce.

It's an N/A 2 liter. Honestly, what were you expecting?

So I decided to be a little bit scientific about this torque business. As far as I know there are only two previous examples of Yamaha+D4s, the 2UR-GSE and the 2GR-FSE. The 2UR makes 373 ftlb from 5L (BMEP=184.4psi) and the the 2GR makes 278 ftlb from 3.5L (BMEP=196.4psi).

If we assume that the FB will end up in the same range of BMEP, we're looking at 150-160 ftlbs.