BRZ vs Mustang - Here is the review the haters have been waiting for.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

cf is a property between two materials and doesn't change as long as traction is maintained. Once the tire breaks away cf begins to decrease but as long as there is no slipping the cf is constant.

Tire Cf changes all the time.

Edit:
I have to quote Wiki here:

While it is often stated that the COF is a "material property," it is better categorized as a "system property." Unlike true material properties (such as conductivity, dielectric constant, yield strength), the COF for any two materials depends on system variables like temperature, velocity, atmosphere and also what are now popularly described as aging and deaging times; as well as on geometric properties of the interface between the materials.

[Spaceywilly]

I too have been reading wikipedia to find the answer I found this wikipedia article that explains what's going on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_load_sensitivity

Tire load sensitivity describes the behaviour of tires under load. Conventional pneumatic tires do not behave as classical friction theory would suggest. The load sensitivity of most real tires in their typical operating range is such that the coefficient of friction decreases as the vertical load, Fz, increases.
Coulomb friction theory says that the maximum horizontal force developed should be proportional to the vertical load on the tire. In practice, the maximum horizontal force Fy that can be generated is proportional, roughly, to the vertical load Fz raised to the power of somewhere between 0.7 and 0.9, typically.
Production car tires typically develop this maximum lateral force, or cornering force, at a slip angle of 6-10 degrees, although this angle increases as the vertical load on the tire increases. [1] Formula 1 car tires may reach a peak sideforce at 3 degrees [2]

Now I have to go read some more and understand what they're talking about

more good stuff here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornering_force

and here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_transfer

In the case of tires, although traction increases with load, it increases less than linearly, and coefficient of friction decreases with load. A larger contact area reduces the load per unit area, resulting in more grip. There is a point of diminishing returns, such as weight and aerodynamic drag. It's also true that a larger tire dissapates heat and with a lighter load involved, it wears less. Another reason for a larger contact area is to compensate for debris or track imperfections interfering with the tire and pavement contact.

Note that load sensitivity is commonly used to adjust the understeer or oversteer of car. When a car turns, the downforce on the outside tires is increased and the downforce on the inside tires is decreased. The body of a car also rolls a bit, and the supension can be used to unequally distribute the load between the front and rear tires. If the front end is relatively stiffer, then more of the downforce is exerted on the outside front tire, and the relative grip is reduced because of tire load sensitivy. A stiffer front end causes the front end to lose some grip in turns, resulting in understeer. A relatively stiffer rear ends results in oversteer. Street cars are generally setup with understeer, while race cars are setup with a small amount of oversteer.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=330790

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

Production car tires typically develop this maximum lateral force, or cornering force, at a slip angle of 6-10 degrees

correct!

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Where's numerous accounts of BRZ runing 6.4 seconds without a roll-out?

Where's ANY account of BRZ running 6.4 seconds without roll out...Show me that while you're at it..

Until then 6.4 is an absolutely arbitrary number that has ABSOLUTELY no relevance..as 6.4 was done by Motor Trend..Who records their 0-60 time..using a rollout...

Motor trend has confirmed this which is why their 0-60 times are always much faster than every other standard test performed on vehicles..

and in response to MID 6 second 0-60's..

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take-road-test


http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...ype-s-page-6-1


http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...s/viewall.html


Those are along with Road&track/MT..Evo didn't have a review i could find...Edmunds only had MFC estimates.

I still have yet to see the "numerous confirmed duplications" of a sub 6.4 second run by the RSX-S. Just one at 6.2, one at 6.4, and 6.5. Use Motor Trend's numbers for the RSX if you want.

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Yes....I do honestly think because the Graph shows LESS power than the BRZ..it'd be a different car or a RSX-S that had been run ragged..why?
Because i'm assuming (unless you don't know how dyno's work) that these tests were done in the same conditions or AT LEAST similar conditions on the same type/brand of dyno....So that rules out variation from brand/type drum size and other environmental impacts...

That leaves us with the parasitic loss of rotational inertia...In which, the RSX-S has less and the Subaru has MORE....Meaning the subaru LOSES more between it's path from the output shaft to the rubber.

Now if we have 2 cars that are BOTH 200HP (actually one is 200 (RSX-S) one is 198(BRZ)) on the same dyno their results should not only be closer...but the RSX-s should have a slight advantage in peak HP production from THOSE indications alone...

Which is why it's simple to come to the conclusion it is either not a RSX-S but a RSX+ a part or two...Or a RSX-S who's worn to crap.

A lot of speculation going on there. Here's another RSX-S at 159 whp. Another at 167 whp. Another at 162 whp. Are these all broken or worn down RSXs as well? There are more out there.

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

And the relevance of that is ZERO, because whether or not the 210HP is a pre-post standardization rating..The result is MORE power than 200ps..So the RSX-S is either 210HP or 207HP, both of which are more than 198hp, unless that rule has changed at some point in time that unless it's value is 230 or higher it doesn't count.

Nope, try again. The rating dropped from 210 to 201. Under the current standard, the RSX-S was a 201 hp car at its peak.

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

One I don't remember anyone specifying we would compare the older less powerful RSX-S to the new car..That seems kind of silly don't you think there bud?

You're the one who claimed 167 whp could never be an RSX-S. If you didn't account for the k20a2, that's your mistake not mine.

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

however the "2" we have availible to us for the BRZ avg out to 168WHP...but even with the generous 173WHP rating of inside lines dyno...That puts it square in the cross hairs of what the older series RSX-S dyno regularly..

Actually that 164 of Cobb tuning to the 173 of Inside line is the EXACT parameters in which Pre-05 RSX-S's dyno on avg.....
Meanwhile the 05+ RSX-S...Dynos on avg, a tad bit higher than both of them..

now we take a big circle back to the "RSX-S should have a slight advantage on power production than the BRZ simply because their power production is so similar yet the RSX-s spins the front tires" And if you want to throw in the old RSX girl into the equation then you get the "the RSX-S produces slightly less, but due to the nature of FWD should put about the same power to the ground"..but since no one mentioned the OLD RSX-S there's no need to bring it up.

So what we're left with....Is a RSX-S that gets more power to the ground, accelerates faster to 60...and has more revs and tighter gears to work with...Making the whole "you won't notice the dip because the GIGANTIC 7Ftlbs of torque will quash that discrepancy" incorrect....

Take any stock k20a2 dyno you want and overlay it on the BRZ dyno. It will make less torque at almost every point in the torque curve.

So the fact of the matter is, no matter how you spin it, the BRZ makes an additional 20-30 lb-ft to the wheels and has shorter gearing. I see you still haven't calculated torque to the wheels to see which will actually have a stronger midrange. Scared of what you'll find?

Here's a preview.

at 5000 rpm in 1st gear:

RSX-S:
114 lb-ft x 3.266 (1st) x 4.389 (FD) = 1634 lb-ft

BRZ:
139 lb-ft x 3.626 (1st) x 4.100 (FD) = 2066 lb-ft

And in 2nd gear:

RSX-S:
1065 lb-ft

BRZ:
1247 lb-ft

And at the "deadspot" in the BRZ torque curve (4000 rpm) in 1st gear:

RSX-S:
1648 lb-ft

BRZ:
1814 lb-ft

And in 2nd gear:

RSX-S:
1075 lb-ft

BRZ:
1094 lb-ft

Shall I keep going? Face it, you're wrong. The BRZ with a 20-30 lb-ft advantage and shorter gearing will feel stronger in the midrange than the RSX-S. Even in its deadspot.

[Kunzite]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

I am seriously considering a BRZ for my wife....But the more I read about it being the second coming of Jesus Christ, the less I want her or myself to be associated with the target group.

And thanks for the a-typical "omg you don't like it more than you like your own mother!!?!?!? Troll!!!!" response.

Watch out, people. From now on let's keep it secret if we happen to somehow like the 86, otherwise reasonable, impartial gentlemen like KeepGuessing will try to make it sounds like we're fanatics.
After all, it's completely ridiculous to like the 86 on a forum dedicated to it.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

I actually compared the two and prefer the BRZ's torque-band. The BRZ is stronger across the board (probably due to how much compression it's running), except above 7200 rpm where the k20's variable valve lift (i.e., VTEC) really pays off. See below for ghetto excel chart:



At 2600 rpm, the BRZ is making 30 lb-ft more than the RSX-S! Also consistently makes 20-25 lb-ft more across the board.

Honestly though, the real beauty of the k20 series engines is how much untapped potential they have. 200whp is possible with I/H/E/T thanks to a very free-flowing head (i.e., variable lift valves/VTEC).

I have been looking for something like this for a long, long time. I hope this is true since I always said to myself I wish my RSX had about 25-35 extra Tq in the low to mid-range. :happy0180:

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

I am seriously considering a BRZ for my wife....But the more I read about it being the second coming of Jesus Christ, the less I want her or myself to be associated with the target group.

I sort of understand where you're coming from. I mean, I REALLY REALLY wanted this car from the moment I started doing research on it a few years back. Problem is, what's starting to bother me about the community following it are the select few that treat the car like the worlds holy grail, and argue/insult people that don't have their mentality. As if nothing on gods green earth could hold a candle to it.

It's like the civic fanboys that would swear on the graves of all their dead relatives that their D15 on Rota's runs 4 second quarters, traps at over 300, could lap the nurburgring in 30 seconds and would eat a veyron for breakfast all while making them pancakes and eggs for lunch.
People seriously need to take a step back on the fanaticism.

I agree, this car is something the automotive world needed, we needed to pump the brakes on the horsepower race and go create a few platforms whose sole purpose is driving feel and personal enjoyment. That SHOULD NOT be confused with this being the end-all be-all for performance because it's not; every single review says that it's not. It's far from fast, but it's not entirely slow; the car does well what it was designed to do. .93g's on econo-slippers, if you said that to me a few years back I'd drug test you; put some sticky rubber on there and you'll look like you just shot out of a cartoon. That's it though, that's what you're getting for the price you're paying. GREAT HANDLING, AMAZING FEEL, DECENT interior, and OKAY power (And if you really think this thing is overpriced, you're stoned. You have ZERO concept of how much time and financial backing R&D requires.) You won't be chasing down and wrecking any of the big boys or coming first on track day without a little work. But why do you care? Fucking enjoy yourselves, period.

/endrant

[Lighting Red]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

I agree, this car is something the automotive world needed, we needed to pump the brakes on the horsepower race and go create a few platforms whose sole purpose is driving feel and personal enjoyment. That SHOULD NOT be confused with this being the end-all be-all for performance because it's not; every single review says that it's not. It's far from fast, but it's not entirely slow; the car does well what it was designed to do. .93g's on econo-slippers, if you said that to me a few years back I'd drug test you; put some sticky rubber on there and you'll look like you just shot out of a cartoon. That's it though, that's what you're getting for the price you're paying. GREAT HANDLING, AMAZING FEEL, DECENT interior, and OKAY power (And if you really think this thing is overpriced, you're stoned. You have ZERO concept of how much time and financial backing R&D requires.) You won't be chasing down and wrecking any of the big boys or coming first on track day without a little work. But why do you care? Fucking enjoy yourselves, period.

/endrant

Perhaps Subaru should pay you for use of this paragraph, and include it in the glovebox of every new BRZ they sell. Gotta keep it real.

[Kunzite]

I see no pro-86 zealots; however I see people claiming they can't breathe because of all the pro-86 zealots. Strange, don't you think?
Maybe said people should take a step back, try to understand why one would like the 86 as it is, and why telling them to like a completely different car instead is not an option. I believe it's more of a communication issue than a fight between fanatics and haters.
Well, if you're looking for something different, that's perfectly fine - but then - what are you doing on this forum?

SVTSHC, nice "rant" - and what a coincidence, what I want is exactly: "GREAT HANDLING, AMAZING FEEL, DECENT interior, and OKAY power". Looks like a perfect fit

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I have been looking for something like this for a long, long time. I hope this is true since I always said to myself I wish my RSX had about 25-35 extra Tq in the low to mid-range. :happy0180:

Yep, I was surprised at how much stronger the BRZ was through its torque curve. I think what we're seeing is the benefit of direct injection (i.e., 12.5:1 compression ratio) and a nice choice in cams. Also take a look a few posts up at torque to the wheels. The BRZ is putting down more power through its midrange than the RSX-S in 1st and 2nd. It's tuned for good low and upper-midrange (relative to its small displacement).

One caveat though. I don't think the BRZ engine will see the same gains with bolt-ons/tune as the RSX-S due to lack of variable-lift valves and a relatively low redline. The RSX-S really benefits from its free-flowing head in that regard.

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by Lighting Red

Perhaps Subaru should pay you for use of this paragraph, and include it in the glovebox of every new BRZ they sell. Gotta keep it real.

Haha, it's something I've been meaning to get off my chest for a while.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

I sort of understand where you're coming from. I mean, I REALLY REALLY wanted this car from the moment I started doing research on it a few years back. Problem is, what's starting to bother me about the community following it are the select few that treat the car like the worlds holy grail, and argue/insult people that don't have their mentality. As if nothing on gods green earth could hold a candle to it.

It's like the civic fanboys that would swear on the graves of all their dead relatives that their D15 on Rota's runs 4 second quarters, traps at over 300, could lap the nurburgring in 30 seconds and would eat a veyron for breakfast all while making them pancakes and eggs for lunch.
People seriously need to take a step back on the fanaticism.

I agree, this car is something the automotive world needed, we needed to pump the brakes on the horsepower race and go create a few platforms whose sole purpose is driving feel and personal enjoyment. That SHOULD NOT be confused with this being the end-all be-all for performance because it's not; every single review says that it's not. It's far from fast, but it's not entirely slow; the car does well what it was designed to do. .93g's on econo-slippers, if you said that to me a few years back I'd drug test you; put some sticky rubber on there and you'll look like you just shot out of a cartoon. That's it though, that's what you're getting for the price you're paying. GREAT HANDLING, AMAZING FEEL, DECENT interior, and OKAY power (And if you really think this thing is overpriced, you're stoned. You have ZERO concept of how much time and financial backing R&D requires.) You won't be chasing down and wrecking any of the big boys or coming first on track day without a little work. But why do you care? Fucking enjoy yourselves, period.

/endrant

I disagree on the price issue. Every car has a tremendous amount of R&D, and this car has a tremendous amount of it shared through various existing models of both companies. Compare manufacturing costs to either a tC or an Impreza and it shows that there is definately some hype that we are paying for.

However they could also be protecting themselves against unfavourable future Dollar to Yen exchanges...

(Is it just me or is it more the newer fans that are getting crazy and us old guys are more subdued?)

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Kunzite

I see no pro-86 zealots; however I see people claiming they can't breathe because of all the pro-86 zealots. Strange, don't you think?
Maybe said people should take a step back, try to understand why one would like the 86 as it is, and why telling them to like a completely different car instead is not an option. I believe it's more of a communication issue than a fight between fanatics and haters.
Well, if you're looking for something different, that's perfectly fine - but then - what are you doing on this forum?

SVTSHC, nice "rant" - and what a coincidence, what I want is exactly: "GREAT HANDLING, AMAZING FEEL, DECENT interior, and OKAY power". Looks like a perfect fit

its all out of hand but imo the zealots are the ones saying that the comparison with the mustang is a win even though it lost the objective tests and doing the same with that old 370z gymkhana while throwing out the megane comparo because it doesnt support their ideas.

im pretty close to a zealot. i think this is the most important car to come stateside since the miata in 89 because what i want to have is fun and these cars seem to have good value in terms of smile per dollar

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by Dimman

I disagree on the price issue. Every car has a tremendous amount of R&D, and this car has a tremendous amount of it shared through various existing models of both companies. Compare manufacturing costs to either a tC or an Impreza and it shows that there is definately some hype that we are paying for.

However they could also be protecting themselves against unfavourable future Dollar to Yen exchanges...

(Is it just me or is it more the newer fans that are getting crazy and us old guys are more subdued?)

thats Americans for ya

the car is perfect for me and my every day life