2017 BRZ price in Japan and new 4.2" LCD screen information

[krayzie]

Parts bin LCD screen?

[wbradley]

Originally Posted by Dark

4.2" screen? Will it also have massive 480x320 pixels resolution from 2010 smartphones?

Someone mentioned they hope it incorporates navi. You would need to wear a jewellers eyepiece to see it ! LOL. So its the WRX onboard display features, but smaller screen and lap timer, g meter and some engine performance paramters added.

Funny how they are getting more and more feature rich each year. Perhaps the next gen twins will be a nice trade up for current owners.

Then, the step down SFR and the big step up FT1. Who ever thought Toyota would once again be a sports car maker. I am worried the FT1 will be too good to pass on

[JDM4E]

Originally Posted by krayzie

I think they should have just made the entire 3rd pod being an LCD or simply just redesign the entire dash, this looks like a half ass job to save money just to get the speedo showing on the corner of the center pod. Same for the ND Miata where the LCD doesn't fill up the entire side pod.

+1
It looks awful, almost laughable what they did. Cheap and cheerful!

[Bristecom]

Bummer on the torque dip and not having an actual tire pressure read out.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Bristecom

Bummer on the torque dip and not having an actual tire pressure read out.

The dip is yet to confirmed and they have to draw the line on the gadgets at some point or it will morph into a $40K car in a hurry. Ain't nothin' is free in the long run.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

The dip is yet to confirmed and they have to draw the line on the gadgets at some point or it will morph into a $40K car in a hurry. Ain't nothin' is free in the long run.

Adding $5 sensor isn't going to jack up the price from 27K to 40K. We're just so used to marketing pitch, our brains adjust to thinking it would jack up the price by that much.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Dark

Adding $5 sensor isn't going to jack up the price from 27K to 40K. We're just so used to marketing pitch, our brains adjust to thinking it would jack up the price by that much.

You are right adding one would not but I am looking at total picture not one sensor (4 actually). If the tire pressure gauge was there then people would say why doesn't it have X and if X was there then it should have Y and so on until it is the price of a BMW. Adding extras has to have a cut off point someplace or it can just keep snowballing.
If the guestimated prices are accurate then I think they did a great job of giving extras while maintaining price point with what they have done.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

You are right adding one would not but I am looking at total picture not one sensor (4 actually). If the tire pressure gauge was there then people would say why doesn't it have X and if X was there then it should have Y and so on until it is the price of a BMW. Adding extras has to have a cut off point someplace or it can just keep snowballing.
If the guestimated prices are accurate then I think they did a great job of giving extras while maintaining price point with what they have done.

Shouldn't the twin already have TPMS on each corner? They just need to digitize and display the info on screen. Subaru also have that on the feature on their other cars. It's a matter of adding a few lines of code and testing it. R&D's job is to keep making improvement on the products. If it's a low volume product, have a small dedicated group works on it. Not like they create a new feature like Eyesight that would eat up a huge chunk of the resource. Guess Subaru just like to go cheap on everything.

[mazeroni]

Originally Posted by Dark

Adding $5 sensor isn't going to jack up the price from 27K to 40K. We're just so used to marketing pitch, our brains adjust to thinking it would jack up the price by that much.

Aye, but every penny spent is a potential lose of $$$.

Let's say they sell 30K combined FR-S and BRZs globally in 2017.

30,000 x 4 sensors (20$) = $600,000 /yr.

Let's say they keep it around for at least 3 years. That is $1.8M for 1 feature that we must ask, is it necessary? Or will it increase sales?

Toyota/ Subaru have to be working on thin margins with the Twin. So I could guess the cost engineers have already ruled out a number of wanted features. The target audience for these cars obviously aren't people concerned with ease-of-access features, comfort, or long-term value.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by mazeroni

Aye, but every penny spent is a potential lose of $$$.

Let's say they sell 30K combined FR-S and BRZs globally in 2017.

30,000 x 4 sensors (20$) = $600,000 /yr.

Let's say they keep it around for at least 3 years. That is $1.8M for 1 feature that we must ask, is it necessary? Or will it increase sales?

Toyota/ Subaru have to be working on thin margins with the Twin. So I could guess the cost engineers have already ruled out a number of wanted features. The target audience for these cars obviously aren't people concerned with ease-of-access features, comfort, or long-term value.

If you read my post thoroughly, I mentioned that adding sensors will not jack up the price from 27K to 40K (13K difference for each car). I also mentioned the twin already have TPMS sensors.

I don't mind them charging a 300-500% profit margin on convenience feature. Toyota and Subaru should ask themselves what they do wrong, why is the car not as successful as muscle cars? Is it the power? Can they make up power number with something else? Is it design? Can they do better with the same money? Is it the standard features and options? Fuji/Subaru and Toyota are not small companies and they obviously can't make their car better overall than competitors.

I'm a Subie owner, and I think Subaru have done a phenomenal job overall, but they can do better on their performance side.

Just my .02

[JDM4E]

Don't forget in general that anything added like this cost's much more for the corporation than the actual price of the item. You have to implement whatever thing into the whole process, like manuals, service, development, training, quality control, warranty, logistics etc etc. Implementing anything to the product of a big corp is expensive.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by JDM4E

Don't forget in general that anything added like this cost's much more for the corporation than the actual price of the item. You have to implement whatever thing into the whole process, like manuals, service, development, training, quality control, warranty, logistics etc etc. Implementing anything to the product of a big corp is expensive.

Right. That's why they normally add a bunch of stuff in at the refresh. They had opportunity to do so this time around, but they didn't.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I would love to have all that data available but the presentation just looks like they crammed it in where they could (which is exactly what they did I guess).

You can have all that data. The computer already has it. Just run Torque on a tablet or Android head unit and access it via an OBDII bluetooth adapter. I'm already running a lot of that on my engine monitor.

Originally Posted by Dark

Shouldn't the twin already have TPMS on each corner? They just need to digitize and display the info on screen. Subaru also have that on the feature on their other cars. It's a matter of adding a few lines of code and testing it.

Nope. The data isn't there. The TPMS units in our wheels are simple on/off pressure switches. They just tell the car to illuminate the idiot light when the pressure drops below the minimum pressure. They don't tell the car anything about the actual pressure until it drops to that level, and then it doesn't tell the car how low it actually is.

If the data were there, you could solve the problem by just reading it in Torque or DashCommand. I wish they could have just left that bullshit off there altogether, but the federal government says it has to be there. Thanks Obama.

[mazeroni]

Originally Posted by Dark

If you read my post thoroughly, I mentioned that adding sensors will not jack up the price from 27K to 40K (13K difference for each car). I also mentioned the twin already have TPMS sensors.

I don't mind them charging a 300-500% profit margin on convenience feature. Toyota and Subaru should ask themselves what they do wrong, why is the car not as successful as muscle cars? Is it the power? Can they make up power number with something else? Is it design? Can they do better with the same money? Is it the standard features and options? Fuji/Subaru and Toyota are not small companies and they obviously can't make their car better overall than competitors.

I'm a Subie owner, and I think Subaru have done a phenomenal job overall, but they can do better on their performance side.

Just my .02

Didn't realize there was a TPS monitor in the car already. Or is it just the BR-Z? I only ask because my tires have been down to 30 before and there was no indication.

Are there different types of TPS? Is it possible that the sensor is designed to go off a X pressure and signal a warning, kind of like a value or something that closes when psi drops, but doesn't actually read anything? Thus making it cheaper.

What I will say about the Toyota - Subaru relationship in terms of the Twins is that Subaru got the short end of the stick. If I recall correctly, I could be wrong, Subaru was under the impression that they were going to get a AWD option but then Toyota put together a prototype and showed it off to journalists without any AWD capability in the design. At that point Toyota had a % ownership in Subaru and there really was no dropping out of the project.

When you think about marketing, the only thing Subaru about the BRZ is the engine. Everything else was basically dictated by Toyota as far as I can tell. If they could go back I guarantee they would have dropped out of the project.