Motortrend: 1989 BMW E30 M3 vs 2013 Scion FR-S vs 2013 Volkswagen GTI!

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by vtmike

Did Pobst drive the gti there. Because then your looking at a pro driver in the brz and an amateur in the gti.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

I don't recall if he did or not, but the host in that vid seem to had eluded to the fact that a better driver drives the Twins faster than the GTI. Two amateurs in both doesn't make it better or more real world. How about an amateur in an FR-S with stock power, keeping up with another amateur in a Porsche GT3 at a track? It's not going to dictate what the better car is.

On top of that, there is just WAY to much contradiction in that video it made me wanted to stop watching in the first 30 secs of them talking.

[prophecy0]

I was on the verge of getting a BRZ when I ended up going with a GTI. The torque of the GTI plus the overall refinement is what sold me. A fully loaded GTI ended up costing me less than $2k more than a fully loaded BRZ.

That doesn't mean the GTI is a better car. In fact, I would argue that neither car is "better" - it all just depends what you want out of a car. Both cars are absolutely excellent for varying reasons.

Also, to everyone in this thread that is saying "for 7k I could turbo the BRZ and be faster than the GTI for cheaper!" Please realize that a base GTI can be had for less than $25k and has the exact same HP/Torque as a fully loaded GTI. For around $500 you can have the ECU modded to get 230+ HP and 260+ lb-ft of torque. Granted, the GTI will always be "wrong wheel" drive, but that's still quite a bargain.

All of that said, the GTI fanboy in the MotorTrend video is a complete tool.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by vtmike

Did Pobst drive the gti there. Because then your looking at a pro driver in the brz and an amateur in the gti.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Yeah he drove all three and the GTI was the slowest. The Brit guy in the video was just being a tool.

Randy Pobst @ Willow Springs:

BRZ 6MT (Michelin Primacy HP) - 1:30.3
FR-S 6MT (Michelin Primacy HP) - 1:31.2
GTI DSG (Dunlop SP Sport 01 AS) - 1:31.5

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

[MattF]

Originally Posted by Dorb

Factor in the GTI is just ugly. Believe me, drive that in town it will go unnoticed. No one will care you will just fit in. If that is what you want... For some reason. Lol.

This argument is invalid.

[vtmike]

Originally Posted by prophecy0

I was on the verge of getting a BRZ when I ended up going with a GTI. The torque of the GTI plus the overall refinement is what sold me. A fully loaded GTI ended up costing me less than $2k more than a fully loaded BRZ.

That doesn't mean the GTI is a better car. In fact, I would argue that neither car is "better" - it all just depends what you want out of a car. Both cars are absolutely excellent for varying reasons.

Also, to everyone in this thread that is saying "for 7k I could turbo the BRZ and be faster than the GTI for cheaper!" Please realize that a base GTI can be had for less than $25k and has the exact same HP/Torque as a fully loaded GTI. For around $500 you can have the ECU modded to get 230+ HP and 260+ lb-ft of torque. Granted, the GTI will always be "wrong wheel" drive, but that's still quite a bargain.

All of that said, the GTI fanboy in the MotorTrend video is a complete tool.

Have they sorted out the carbon build up on the valves with those engines? I'd hate to have to have that cleaned every 30k miles.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[MVJ1975]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Oh and the follow up discussion.

There is no way on earth I would buy a 30 year old BMW E30 over a new car, with a warranty, with modern safety features, and Japanese reliability, for the same money, or over the GTI for that matter.

I love the E30. I owned an E30. But it was a rattletrap and required constant attention to keep running, and that was in 1996.

The E30 is fine for a project or a toy car, but not as a daily driver.

[Turbowned]

All the FR-S needs is better tires to become "the better car" in brit boy's logic.

[prophecy0]

Originally Posted by vtmike

Have they sorted out the carbon build up on the valves with those engines? I'd hate to have to have that cleaned every 30k miles.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Not to my knowledge. This is a problem inherent with all cars that solely utilize direct injection. From what I've read on the Golf forums the GTI will need to have the valves cleaned every 50k miles or so.

[quasi86]

You can totally tell that the guy from Europe wanted to hate the FR-S. But he could not help himself smile like 7 different times during the lap. his attitude greatly changed by the end. Also he commented on how good a driver the other guy was. You could tell the other
Wanted to tell him it was all the car, bit didn't want to rub in that he was wrong and just smiled.

Just shows you even enthusiasts have fallen into a trap where cars have to have this certain level of practicality. IT'S TERRIBLE. I mean how many non-luxury brands have a convertible model that they sell. In the early 90's you would have had a choice of more than a dozen models, now all I can think of is the beetle, Mustang and Chrysler Sebring. Sorry no thanks. Maybe an open to 370z but Nissan is just not a good car. I think people give then way to much credit for a reputation of reliability that they don't live up to. Not even close.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by MVJ1975

There is no way on earth I would buy a 30 year old BMW E30 over a new car, with a warranty, with modern safety features, and Japanese reliability, for the same money, or over the GTI for that matter.

I love the E30. I owned an E30. But it was a rattletrap and required constant attention to keep running, and that was in 1996.

The E30 is fine for a project or a toy car, but not as a daily driver.

That and you can't finance an E30 in the same fashion as a new car.

[tennisfreak]

The brit is a complete idiot.

He states (over and over and over) while driving the GTI and Subaru that the "better" car is the faster car and that is all that matters.

Then when driving the e30 he says its the "better" car vs the subaru even though its over 2 seconds slower.

Like changing your argument to suit your needs??? Kind throws your opinion and credibility right out the window.

If I was the other guy I would have had a hard time not throat punching the SOB.

[Saber_TRD]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

All the FR-S needs is better tires to become "the better car" in brit boy's logic.

Originally Posted by mad_sb

FR-S still had the stock prius tires... the gti comes with better and wider stock tires.... equal tires the FR-S would have had a better lap time.

My good friend owns a gti with suspension work (shocks, springs, sways, alignment), reflash, intake, etc... he drove my FR-S with 225 AD08's on it and said it had WAY more grip and much nicer handling than his gti. His GTI would walk me in the straights but in the corners it was no contest.

I have to agree the GTI is a better (well, lets say more practical) daily driver... my buddy can fit his road bike in the hatch without taking off the front wheel (he is 6' tall so it's not a tiny frame). Even so, if he did not have 2 young children he would have gotten an FR-S or BRZ.

Originally Posted by CBR600RR

they should have put the same tires on all three cars. I would bet money that the FR-S had the hardest tires.

give all the cars the same tires and I bet the FR-S would be on top.

Originally Posted by vtmike

I think toyota and subaru really made a mistake not offering the twins with a high performance summer tire option. How many times have we seen this that an inferior car with better tires runs a faster lap time.

It's already been shown that the twins are significantly quicker with better rubber even in the stock size (quicker than mazdaspeed3 and wrx)

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Saying it's the tires is the worst excuse ever. My case in point? SRT's Ralph Gilles was not happy when the new Viper lost to the Corvette ZR1 in Motor Trends comparison. The ZR1 actually beat the ACR's record for fastest car around Laguna Seca during this comparison. Ralph accused GM of sending a "ringer" but MT pointed out they were almost identical in power and weight. He then complained about tires, the ZR1 had better tires, MT said they didn't think it was the tires.
So Ralph made the TA (Time Attack) package for the Viper. He kept the original tires and only tweaked the aero, brakes, and suspension. The Viper TA ended up beating the ZR1 on the "rematch".

TLR: Corvette beat Viper in Motor Trend test. Viper came back with same tires after saying the tires were what did it in. Viper won rematch with same tires and tweaks to aero, brakes and suspension only.

Tires are not an excuse.

Here's the article:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...a/viewall.html

Originally Posted by Dorb

Factor in the GTI is just ugly. Believe me, drive that in town it will go unnoticed. No one will care you will just fit in. If that is what you want... For some reason. Lol.

"Sleeper car" all I'm going to say.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Well this devolved as expected.

Pretty much, yeah lol.

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by Saber_TRD

Saying it's the tires is the worst excuse ever. My case in point? SRT's Ralph Gilles was not happy when the new Viper lost to the Corvette ZR1 in Motor Trends comparison. The ZR1 actually beat the ACR's record for fastest car around Laguna Seca during this comparison. Ralph accused GM of sending a "ringer" but MT pointed out they were almost identical in power and weight. He then complained about tires, the ZR1 had better tires, MT said they didn't think it was the tires.
So Ralph made the TA (Time Attack) package for the Viper. He kept the original tires and only tweaked the aero, brakes, and suspension. The Viper TA ended up beating the ZR1 on the "rematch".

They also reduced the weight of the Viper.

[Saber_TRD]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

They also reduced the weight of the Viper.

" Sure, there's that weight difference, but there's no way 25 pounds equals 2.15 seconds on a 2.2-mile track. What does? A better-handling car.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2RUQsO4ab"

That's quoted from the article. It's not an impressive weight difference.