BRZ after Cayman S and M3... is it a downgrade? NOW WITH VIDEO!

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by SuiSid3l

Still think its a joke we are comparing 2 cares with MSRP's twice that of a BRZ/FRS....

Thats like comparing the Cayman to a 911 gt3.....

IMO these 3 cars are in completely different categories. This is straight up a tuner car, the Cayman was not designed to be a tuner car. The M3 could make that argument but at the end of the day its a luxury sports sedan/coupe. Why are we even arguing about this. You wanna dive something out of the gate with limited mods thats more of a luxury car? Or you want to mod/tinker with your car and drive a straight up raw sports car? Question answered...

That being said, the review was very well done and I enjoyed the insight. Still kind of an irrelevant argument IMO but I'm sure there are other parties who's interest this peaked.

Call me crazy but some people like owning a high performance car that has a factory warranty AND proven track reliability.

[SuiSid3l]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Call me crazy but some people like owning a high performance car that has a factory warranty AND proven track reliability.

Still doesnt answer my question. Your comparing cars in 2 completely different price ranges and arguing why a car with 2x the MSRP has superior performance. If you want a high performance car like that of a Cayman or M3, why in the world are you comparing it to a strictly built tuner car at half the price...

yes a used M3 or Cayman can be bought in some circumstances for around the price range of a new FRS, but like you stated - If your looking to buy a car with a factory warranty.....your not getting one from a car thats 5+ years old.

I understand its a compliment to the BRZ/FRS to compare to cars that cost 2x as much and discussion is good, but you guys spent 2 pages arguing a point that makes no sense.

If your looking to buy an M3 or a Cayman S/R still under factory warranty (IE not in the 26k range)....this is honestly the last place you probably would be looking for valid comparisons in performance.

[red bread]

Originally Posted by SuiSid3l

Still doesnt answer my question. Your comparing cars in 2 completely different price ranges and arguing why a car with 2x the MSRP has superior performance.

Well, just for argument's sake, let's do just what you mentioned. A GT3 vs a Cayman. Not as silly as it sounds. The Cayman handles better, the GT3 is more track sorted. You can make the GT3 faster, Champion offers a 3.8L conversion, using the GT3 motor, and still end up under GT3 pricing with room left over for brakes and suspension sorting. You won't be anywhere near a stock racing category, but you'd still have more money in your pocket.

There are all sorts of cheaper cars that are more fun than more expensive cars. You could tell me a Bentley Continental was the same price as a BRZ, and I'd still prefer the Subie, the luxury fluff doesn't mean much to me. As mentioned frequently, a 335i lease is similar to the Subie, but it's also heavy, lacks an LSD and isn't nearly as engaging to drive, plus, if you were determined, you could spend Cayman money on a 335i.

I'm still shopping Caymans against BRZ's and also mildly considering the Alfa 4C, but it could be vaporware, and it's a silly two pedal car too. But I'm aware of price, it's just not the primary factor.

[BryanGT]

That's a great video, but I think this thread should really be about this picture:



I mean, I don't have the words...

[SuiSid3l]

Originally Posted by stockysnail

Great video. I agree with you completely, thus me owning a BRZ and dropping too many performance parts into it.

I agree, just too good a STARTING platform if you love to mod.

[SuiSid3l]

Originally Posted by red bread

Well, just for argument's sake, let's do just what you mentioned. A GT3 vs a Cayman. Not as silly as it sounds. The Cayman handles better, the GT3 is more track sorted. You can make the GT3 faster, Champion offers a 3.8L conversion, using the GT3 motor, and still end up under GT3 pricing with room left over for brakes and suspension sorting. You won't be anywhere near a stock racing category, but you'd still have more money in your pocket.

There are all sorts of cheaper cars that are more fun than more expensive cars. You could tell me a Bentley Continental was the same price as a BRZ, and I'd still prefer the Subie, the luxury fluff doesn't mean much to me. As mentioned frequently, a 335i lease is similar to the Subie, but it's also heavy, lacks an LSD and isn't nearly as engaging to drive, plus, if you were determined, you could spend Cayman money on a 335i.

I'm still shopping Caymans against BRZ's and also mildly considering the Alfa 4C, but it could be vaporware, and it's a silly two pedal car too. But I'm aware of price, it's just not the primary factor.

You only compared the Gt3 and Cayman 1 way. And which car handles better is strictly a matter of opinion without a multitude of performance drivers agreeing. That i'd have to look up. But from a Sheer overall performance I dont believe you could honestly sit there with a straight face and compare the 911 flagship with a Cayman.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...et-test-page-3

And that was a Cayman R.

I believe people are honestly missing my point. I own an FRS and I love the thing to death. I dont discount is potential and I welcome the comparison to cars that cost 2x as much. What I didnt understand was the 2 pages of arguing why a car that cost 70k new outperforms a 27k BRZ.... if it didn't something would be severely wrong.

I made the exact same point that you did. That i'd rather have a 30k sports car and pump 15k K in it and keep the change instead of outright dropping 60+ grand on an M3 or Cayman with a valid factory warranty.

If your shopping for a 6 or 7 year old Cayman in the price range of a BRZ and your interested in both, your definitely in the right place. But arguing why a BRZ cant outperform bewildered me.

[red bread]

Originally Posted by SuiSid3l

I made the exact same point that you did. That i'd rather have a 30k sports car and pump 15k K in it and keep the change instead of outright dropping 60+ grand on an M3 or Cayman with a valid factory warranty.

If your shopping for a 6 or 7 year old Cayman in the price range of a BRZ and your interested in both, your definitely in the right place. But arguing why a BRZ cant outperform bewildered me.

First point, you'd have a $28k car and some accessories you could sell off for a few grand. While the other one would still be worth $50k+. That's too easy.

Second, if I were buying a car for performance alone, I'd just buy a C7 or a Z28 and stop. But I want something that's fun to drive, the actual magazine numbers are not that important. I've had faster cars than either the BRZ or the Cayman, but I also have a four mile daily commute and rarely see the highway or interstate, so most of that is lost on me.

As for Cayman vs 911, mid engine vs rear engine really isn't a thing that can be argued. When Porsche builds race cars, like the real LeMans style prototypes, they do not have an engine over the rear axle. When they sell things to rich dudes with access to track time, sometimes they do.

[SuiSid3l]

Originally Posted by red bread

First point, you'd have a $28k car and some accessories you could sell off for a few grand. While the other one would still be worth $50k+. That's too easy.

Second, if I were buying a car for performance alone, I'd just buy a C7 or a Z28 and stop. But I want something that's fun to drive, the actual magazine numbers are not that important. I've had faster cars than either the BRZ or the Cayman, but I also have a four mile daily commute and rarely see the highway or interstate, so most of that is lost on me.

As for Cayman vs 911, mid engine vs rear engine really isn't a thing that can be argued. When Porsche builds race cars, like the real LeMans style prototypes, they do not have an engine over the rear axle. When they sell things to rich dudes with access to track time, sometimes they do.

Your resell comment makes sense, if your willing to drop 70k on the car to begin with. The point we were making is you can buy a 30k car and pocket the other 40k and mod it as you go. Me selling off parts and reselling my car for 20k is still a better value for me than dropping 70k on a car....regardless of what is resale value is. You buy it new for 70 and sell it for 50, you damn near lost as much in value as my car cost, not to mention interest.

Again, if your buying strictly for performance and you'd just buy a C7...you wouldnt be perusing this forum looking for comparisons against a BRZ that costs half as much, literally the exact point my post was making.

IDC what car you compare it to honestly. My point is a new Cayman S ~64k MSRP, FRS ~26k MSRP......so compare a Cayman S to ANY sports car thats MSRP is 2.5 times as much and see how equal they are....

Why is everyone so insistent on arguing this with me? All I'm saying is a car that costs 2.5 times as much SHOULD perform better. Arguing the point makes zero sense. If you want a car to mod your generally not looking to buy a 70 thousand Cayman or M3 with a factory warranty. And if you are, you'd be comparing it to OTHER 70k cars, not a 200hp na 26k car. Unless your trying to buy a 5+ year old version thats similar in price.

[red bread]

Originally Posted by SuiSid3l

Your resell comment makes sense, if your willing to drop 70k on the car to begin with. The point we were making is you can buy a 30k car and pocket the other 40k and mod it as you go. Me selling off parts and reselling my car for 20k is still a better value for me than dropping 70k on a car....regardless of what is resale value is. You buy it new for 70 and sell it for 50, you damn near lost as much in value as my car cost, not to mention interest.

I think we're essentially arguing two things. Your point that a $70k car should outperform a similarly designed $28k car is generally valid. The BRZ is a good example of a reasonably priced car that holds it's value well, however the Cayman holds a percentage of it's value better than nearly all other cars and the M3 isn't bad either.

My point in all of this is simply that sometimes cheaper cars are more fun, or can be proportionally more fun than more expensive cars.

[SuiSid3l]

Originally Posted by red bread

I think we're essentially arguing two things. Your point that a $70k car should outperform a similarly designed $28k car is generally valid. The BRZ is a good example of a reasonably priced car that holds it's value well, however the Cayman holds a percentage of it's value better than nearly all other cars and the M3 isn't bad either.

My point in all of this is simply that sometimes cheaper cars are more fun, or can be proportionally more fun than more expensive cars.

No we are arguing the same point. I was originally stating that I'm glad the BRZ gets compared to more expensive counterparts b/c of how well made the car is.
Others appeared to be failing to see why a car that cost 2.5x as much performed better in some peoples opinion and I simply stated I didnt understand their logic in thinking the twins were somehow better.

I welcomed the comparisons but I in no way expect a car that costs 26k to outperform a 60+ thousand dollar sports car.

I want our cars to be better, but I'm not gonna get upset when someone says an M3 drives better or a Cayman handles better....they SHOULD given their pricetag.

I really do appreciate the candor and the politeness Red, thank you.

[red bread]

Originally Posted by SuiSid3l

Why is everyone so insistent on arguing this with me? All I'm saying is a car that costs 2.5 times as much SHOULD perform better. Arguing the point makes zero sense. If you want a car to mod your generally not looking to buy a 70 thousand Cayman or M3 with a factory warranty. And if you are, you'd be comparing it to OTHER 70k cars, not a 200hp na 26k car. Unless your trying to buy a 5+ year old version thats similar in price.

Not arguing with you specifically. But how would you explain things like Aston Martins which aren't faster than much cheaper cars, or even something like the WRX being quicker to 60 than the STI (due to an extra shift for the STI)? Cars aren't simply the numbers they put down at maximum performance, but the sum of their driving experience.

I'm personally comparing the BRZ to a Cayman because they're both sub 3k pounds, they're both far from over powered and they both have chain driven motors and reasonably low long term maintenance costs (I realize Porsche labor is more than Subaru, but the Cayman, especially the 987.2, has relatively few large ticket repair issues).

[red bread]

We've probably derailed this thread sufficiently, but the BRZ represents something relatively rare these days, a light weight, rear wheel drive car. If they made a sedan version, there'd be a lot more trouble for the more expensive things out there too.

[orthojoe]

It really is impressive that the BRZ is frequently being compared to a cayman. Makes sense since the cayman was supposedly used as a benchmark for the BRZ. That being said, anyone who says the BRZ is overall a better car than the Cayman is just plain fooling themselves or trying to rationalize something. The only thing that I personally find better in the BRZ over a 987.2 is the steering wheel. Porsche wheels are too wide in diameter and the grip is too thin. BRZ steering wheel is perfect.

Originally Posted by MTCRX

I would hope that comparing a $70,000+ car to a $28,000 car you would notice the difference. I would be disappointed if I bought a Cayman and felt like it wasn't an improvement over the FRS. Not to mention license and insurance costs.

Insurance on my BRZ is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than insurance costs on my Boxster Spyder. You can thank the young asshats street racing and wrapping their cars around a telephone pole for that.

[red bread]

For what it's worth, the quote for a BRZ was $1/mo less than the quote for a 2010 Cayman S for me with the same coverage.