Tada Tetsuya Announces Updated 86 Will Be Coming... Soon

[Kelbyat07]

Nono leave the car alone

[Eminent Performance]

As much as I want to keep the car N/A, I have to agree it needs to either get a 2.5 N/A or a turbo. I think 50-100hp to the wheel is really needed stock to be competitive and to really do the chassis justice.

Not everyone is willing to put in all the track days and all that is needed to be an "equal" driver with the next guy. And some of us want to just have extra passing power. I came from the G35 crowd so I welcomed the light weight, canyon carving aggressiveness of the car - and I still love mine! But to say I don't WANT more power is a blatant lie.

I am scared with all that "FRS isn't selling well" talk, that they may just leave it as is and do minor tweaks and then cut-and-run. I really hope that doesn't happen.

At the same time, cars like the original 86 and the 240SX and even the 350Z now, have lasted the test of time and become great hits with the aftermarket even till today. So maybe we all just need to give the car some time to mature and accumulate some aftermarket interest... see where the road takes us... so to speak! ;-) ... Either way... I love the FRS and 99% of owners / randoms who walk by are awesome! I've gotten many gas station conversations about my car and people love to hear I get 30 MPG and shred tires on some weekends haha.

[Sarlacc]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

When I read your post IDK why, but this song came into my head.
sorry off-topic LOL

That's actually a pretty accurate rendition of how I feel in my GT86

[regal]

Originally Posted by LadyFRZ

People are more spoiled than anything,with Camrys with v6s and whatnot.
I agree with you though,more power doesn't mean it will be better.

Superb handling, great mpg, balance; one of these would be compromised if more power is added.
Plus,when is it enough?Even if the twins get 250HP, there will always be someone saying "MOAR POWAH!111!11"

I just want more torque than anything...

In the 60's and 70's it was common for a big family sedan to be faster than a real sports car, speed isn't everything. Doesn't bother me at all that a camry is a lot faster tan my FRS, the camry just isn't a drivers car.


The only real issue is the torque dip especially if you live in the hills. I consider it a defect that no one really understands yet, but that day will come.

[Quentin]

Originally Posted by regal

In the 60's and 70's it was common for a big family sedan to be faster than a real sports car, speed isn't everything. Doesn't bother me at all that a camry is a lot faster tan my FRS, the camry just isn't a drivers car.


The only real issue is the torque dip especially if you live in the hills. I consider it a defect that no one really understands yet, but that day will come.

The torque dip appears in all sorts of dual VVT engines. My '10 4Runner had a similar dip. The GM 3.6L and Pentastar have a dip. It isn't as pronounced as the twins, but when you tune for low end torque for daily drivability and high power, especially with only 2L to work with, midrange is compromised.

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by Quentin

The torque dip appears in all sorts of dual VVT engines. My '10 4Runner had a similar dip. The GM 3.6L and Pentastar have a dip. It isn't as pronounced as the twins, but when you tune for low end torque for daily drivability and high power, especially with only 2L to work with, midrange is compromised.

Agreed.. It was an engineering decision based on what systems the car is equipped with. If they used a more sophisticated cam system with variable lift, they could have addressed the torque dip.. By giving us most of torque down low, compromises were made..
I have no issues with the dip.. It's not that bad.. It's there.. But isn't an issue in everyday use.. Driving "normally" you don't run into the dip and the car pulls descent down low.. Want to play some, just keep the revs up and work the gears for the upper rpm power curve..
A good compromise.. Unlike some high revving engines 2L engines that are difficult to drive in traffic due to the tq band being in the upper rpms

[mid_life_crisis]

Originally Posted by Mikem53

I have no issues with the dip.. It's not that bad.. It's there.. But isn't an issue in everyday use.. Driving "normally" you don't run into the dip and the car pulls descent down low.. Want to play some, just keep the revs up and work the gears for the upper rpm power curve..
A good compromise.. Unlike some high revving engines 2L engines that are difficult to drive in traffic due to the tq band being in the upper rpms

Exactly. I consider it as having two driving modes. The lower rpms are for putting around lazily and the high rpms are sport mode (and I have an automatic). I just want more power in the upper range. They can leave the area below the dip alone. Stay in that range and get seriously good gas mileage and not make a lot of noise. Downshift, make noise, go fast, guzzle gas, have fun!

[xxBrun0xx]

Originally Posted by Eminent Performance

As much as I want to keep the car N/A, I have to agree it needs to either get a 2.5 N/A or a turbo. I think 50-100hp to the wheel is really needed stock to be competitive and to really do the chassis justice.

I'm not sure I agree with this, and here's why:

1. With more power, there's no obvious direction for people to start modding towards. They knew this would be a popular tuner, so giving people an obvious starting point makes a lot of sense

2. Stock, this car corners like it's on rails. If you add 50-100 hp, it's going lose grip on those same corners if you drive it anywhere near the limit

3. What if you put stickier tires from the factory? Now, you lose the ability to get the rear end loose at safe speeds on public roads

4. +30 mpg is really attractive for a lot of us coming form high-hp, low mpg cars. Add a turbo? That goes out the window. Run a 2.5L? Now you've got lots of low end torque without much steam up high and a much lower redline (assuming it's anything like Subaru's current 2.5's). You also screw up the weight balance and you'll be lucky to get 30mpg, let alone the 35 some of us have gotten

5. A higher hp car would also likely require larger brakes + rotors (higher initial cost + maintenance costs)

If you make all of those changes, you're significantly upping the cost of manufacturing the car, which will be passed on to the consumer. At $35k, would anyone buy a 300 hp brz with a worse weight balance, reduced mpg, higher maintenance costs, and (probably) worse handling? Maybe, but there is a LOT more competition at that price point. I love that my car only has 200 hp and understand that there is more to being "fast" than 0-60 times and highway pulls. I love how simple everything is and how easy the car is to work on. Call me crazy, but I think the engineers at Subaru actually knew what they were doing.

[Tromatic]

The FR-S is like a 250 two-stroke bike. It takes work to ride well and quickly, and can be left for dead in the straights, but if you know anything beyond whacking the throttle you can embarrass people.

If you have this car "because racecar" and feel it needs more power on the street to have fun, you suck as a driver.

To me, this car is the 240 I can't have. It's awesome because of what it is, not what I wish it was. I look forward to having a classic (stock, mostly) first-gen in ten years.

ETA: Jay Leno visited Nissan and talked about the possibility of a new 240. The designs he was looking at were flat-out fugly. IT's going to happen to the FR-S as well. Perhaps "round and smooth" is a generational thing.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=filjihe00Go"]The Z Car - Part 1/5 - YouTube[/ame]

[czar07]

Originally Posted by xxBrun0xx

I'm not sure I agree with this, and here's why:

1. With more power, there's no obvious direction for people to start modding towards. They knew this would be a popular tuner, so giving people an obvious starting point makes a lot of sense

2. Stock, this car corners like it's on rails. If you add 50-100 hp, it's going lose grip on those same corners if you drive it anywhere near the limit

3. What if you put stickier tires from the factory? Now, you lose the ability to get the rear end loose at safe speeds on public roads

4. +30 mpg is really attractive for a lot of us coming form high-hp, low mpg cars. Add a turbo? That goes out the window. Run a 2.5L? Now you've got lots of low end torque without much steam up high and a much lower redline (assuming it's anything like Subaru's current 2.5's). You also screw up the weight balance and you'll be lucky to get 30mpg, let alone the 35 some of us have gotten

5. A higher hp car would also likely require larger brakes + rotors (higher initial cost + maintenance costs)

If you make all of those changes, you're significantly upping the cost of manufacturing the car, which will be passed on to the consumer. At $35k, would anyone buy a 300 hp brz with a worse weight balance, reduced mpg, higher maintenance costs, and (probably) worse handling? Maybe, but there is a LOT more competition at that price point. I love that my car only has 200 hp and understand that there is more to being "fast" than 0-60 times and highway pulls. I love how simple everything is and how easy the car is to work on. Call me crazy, but I think the engineers at Subaru actually knew what they were doing.

1. What...????
2. It will still corner like its on rails. The car isnt very grippy stock anyway...
3. A stupid statement because getting the rear end loose on public roads isnt safe anyway...
4. I dont care about mileage so meh
5. Why? if it weighs almost the same, I dont see how more HP will require bigger brakes..on the street anyway...all you are doing is getting to a the speed limit faster...

[Rayme]

It sounds like a normal mid-cycle refresh to me. Any good manufacturer does it and toyota is pretty good on keeping their cars refreshed every 3-4 years or so. New bumpers/lights and wheels and interior quirks. I'd like to see a 2.0 turbo version but I won't be able to afford it though haha, if this car gets more power they will upgrade everything else accordingly skyrocketing the price.

[Tromatic]

No matter what they do, people will bitch about it or ask if they should wait for the '17.

Me, I'll go for a drive in my awesome little car and have more fun that about 80% of the driving-while-dead zombies on the road driving cars that cost three times as much.

[Chad86]

Originally Posted by Sarlacc

I just enjoy my stock GT86. It's an awesome car. It's the best car I've ever had.

I see no point in yearning for something that doesn't even exist, especially when what you already have is awesome.

Will I take a test drive in a new version if it ever appears at my dealers? Sure! Love to. Will I buy it? Maybe, if it's even more awesome than the one I've got. I'm not convinced that's even possible.

In the meantime, I love my little GT86 just the way it is. Every day, through every commute, every mountain pass, every roundabout, every time it wiggles its naughty tail.

Did I mention it's awesome? Oh, I think I did.

Couldn't be said any better than this!

[Masago88]

Originally Posted by Tromatic

No matter what they do, people will bitch about it or ask if they should wait for the '17.

Me, I'll go for a drive in my awesome little car and have more fun that about 80% of the driving-while-dead zombies on the road driving cars that cost three times as much.

I've been driving for almost 10 years now, and when pressed to think about it, I don't think I've EVER once done a 0-60 mph floor in that entire span. I've done plenty of 15-60, 20-60, 30 ish-60, you get the drift. In my boat 98' camry, the list of cars I've passed is: audi S4, Audi S7, Audi TT, BMW E36 M3, E46M3, BMW 3 series, 5 series, Jags, Porsche cayman, Mustang (various), etc etc you get the idea. Why? Because a lot of those drivers like to cruise around in the right lane at 60 mph, avoiding risk of speeding tickets and reducing risk of collision. My driving is pretty much all high way or local roads, burbs and in the city. While I'm growing to appreciate cars more, I have no delusions of ever becoming some track star racecar driver. Too expensive for one thing, and too many other life things to worry about. I'd wager that 99% of people on the highway are using it to get from point A to B anyway, so I don't really see much of a point in fretting over the power of this car when in practice, I've been passing cars far more powerful than mine for years. Granted, should any of them choose they could floor it and pass me (right into the rear end of a car ahead), but they rarely seem to give a damn to me. I'm going to wait to see what all the updates are over, but in all likelihood I still want to purchase a 2014 model if the 2015 'update' isn't anything special.