2013 Scion FR-S Priced at $24,200 ($24,930 after destination)

[roningtmo]

Then shit is gonna really hit the fan when the cars magazine star making full test on this car, a lot of people are gonna get really shock of how slow this car is in that price range.

[Spaceywilly]

Originally Posted by roningtmo

Then shit is gonna really hit the fan when the cars magazine star making full test on this car, a lot of people are gonna get really shock of how slow this car is in that price range.

Not really. Here's a quick thing I whipped up comparing the BRZ/FRS to other cars it will be competing with:



In the price range, only the GC has better HP/LB, but it weighs 592lbs more which will definitely affect handling. I would put the WRX in the same category as faster but also too heavy, and it's also more expensive.

[witchatookie]

Originally Posted by roningtmo

You are short of the amount of cars that you can get in that price range. I posted and i knew it that toyota WILL FUCK UP THIS CAR BIG TIME IN THE PRICE. Now let's see ho many they sale, i was been saving money for this car for abouth 1 year, no i convince that toyota will never see a penny of my money.

Dude if you buy a velocetor, genesis coupe, mini, or a mustang over the 86 you will be kicking yourself in five years when everyone is having fun without you.

[Want.FR-S]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

Not really. Here's a quick thing I whipped up comparing the BRZ/FRS to other cars it will be competing with:



In the price range, only the GC has better HP/LB, but it weighs 592lbs more which will definitely affect handling. I would put the WRX in the same category as faster but also too heavy, and it's also more expensive.

Spacewilly, would you mind to add another row to calculate weight-to-torque ratio (lb/lb-ft) and compare the differences? You might be able to find something different. Thanks in advanced.

EDIT: and 2012 WRX comes with 244 lb-ft torque according to the subaru CA website.

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by mankarn86

LOL if you are a student with debt you shouldn't be looking a brand new car! I find it funny how people think this car is made for a student budget just cause it's a Scion!

I was not talking about me. I was talking about many of the hopefuls that post on these and other forums. According to Toyota they were the taget demographic for this car. I am not a student. I am now retired. I could pay cash or finance the car easily. I expected it to be 25K unlike many here. Although I love the premise behind the engineering and design and I think it is a great looking vehicle, at this time, it just does not have enough to offer for the money they are asking. Of course, that is only my personal opinion. I have seen it in person but I have yet to drive it. I will do that at some point. Maybe then, I will be blown away and absolutely have to have one. But, I doubt it.

[Phaedrus29]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

Not really. Here's a quick thing I whipped up comparing the BRZ/FRS to other cars it will be competing with:



In the price range, only the GC has better HP/LB, but it weighs 592lbs more which will definitely affect handling. I would put the WRX in the same category as faster but also too heavy, and it's also more expensive.

VT is supposed to have 201hp, not 208. http://hyundainews.com/us/en-us/2013...fications.aspx

[gaveup]

Originally Posted by val_lixembeau

Haha maybe, but the FR-S is likely a better DRIVER's car than the Rex :P

I considered getting a WRX256 for a while to replace a Mazda3 hatch (before they put all the crazy STi bits on it) but I just couldn't pull the trigger on either one since in my heart I'm really in the market for a sports car.

To me, the WRX just has too much of a high and upright seating position, too much roll+squat+dive while not really being especially quiet and comfortable, vague-ish shifter and steering, wider turning circle, and too many doors. It's not even close to being in the same class of car so I can't imagine cross-shopping it with an FR-S unless price was the only criteria.

*likely*

Until you drive it, you never know how good of a car it is. Everyone can speculate how fun the car is to drive based on what they imagine or what videos show them, but keep in mind that initial impressions of a car aren't the best thing to go off of.

I've owned a wrx (2007, bigger turbo, bolt ons, tuned, whatever) and can tell you that car was a blast to drive. I definitely see the WRX as a competitor as it falls into the same category as a sporty car that is fun to drive. When the automags start reviewing this car or compare it, what do you think they will compare it to? Miata (less power)? 370Z (more power)? Or what? You're going to see it compared to the cars listed above, and numbers wise, I don't see it being able to hang with many of them.

Everyone has said it's not about the power or acceleration, but let's be honest with ourselves, after a while, you will get used to the car and want it to go faster. If the acceleration didn't matter, why are there so many 500whp S2000's or miatas with 5.0's in them out there?

When I look at buying a car, I make sure it has some modibility to offset the feeling of being bored with the car. I don't feel that you're going to be able to get the performance out of the fr-s vs other cars in it's price range. Mainly due to it being NA, and a good chunk of them are turbo.

It just sucks that not only is it not as quick as it's main competitors, it's interior also pales in comparison (unless you're talking BRZ, but in that case, you need to bump the price up. How much? Who knows, but it's probably going to be 26k+).

But, I hope I am wrong and this car can make the power consumers want it to make quite easily.

[Spaceywilly]

updated



I think lb/hp would have a better correlation with lap times than lb/tq. lb/tq will tell you the peak acceleration at a specific point in the RPM range, but it tells you nothing about how that engine behaves over the entire powerband. A car can have a ton of torque down low but then run out of steam up high, and get beat by a car with less torque but more hp which allows it to continue to accelerate after the other car has run out of steam, even if initially the higher torque car is faster.

[86fanatic]

So many numbers being tossed around in this thread. This car isn't about numbers. How do you put a number on throttle response? How do you put a number on turn in, handling, steering feel, chassis dynamics, center of gravity?

This car is a reaction to the numbers game you are all trying to play. An enjoyable sports car doesn't need a fast 0-60 time or a competitive showing in auto cross, or a fast lap time.

[tripjammer]

Originally Posted by Verge

Seems like for most people the sweet spot for this car is 22.5-23.5 makes sense considering its the base model.

P.s maybe toyota should have spent less money building concepts that we were never going to get and saved us all some extra money.

I agree they are off by about $1000 to $1500. The price is really around $25k not $24k since you got to add the delivery fee.

There is no way they will sale a butt load of these. Its going to be a niche car at best. I am in but I was hoping this car was going to be supra hot for years to come. Its only going to get more expensive from hear on out.

Just think, a $25k Scion! If they were going to price it so high, it should have been a Toyota 86, then nobody would be complaining and we all could have gotten what we wanted.

But if you look at it another way...its only $3k more than a Scion tC release 7.0...or almost $6k more than the base Scion tC.

But I am in because their ain't nothing else quite like the FR-S\BRZ. Hopefully the BRZ is only $1000 or less more than the FR-S. I just get it when they allow the VIP discount.

[tripjammer]

Originally Posted by gaveup

*likely*

Until you drive it, you never know how good of a car it is. Everyone can speculate how fun the car is to drive based on what they imagine or what videos show them, but keep in mind that initial impressions of a car aren't the best thing to go off of.

I've owned a wrx (2007, bigger turbo, bolt ons, tuned, whatever) and can tell you that car was a blast to drive. I definitely see the WRX as a competitor as it falls into the same category as a sporty car that is fun to drive. When the automags start reviewing this car or compare it, what do you think they will compare it to? Miata (less power)? 370Z (more power)? Or what? You're going to see it compared to the cars listed above, and numbers wise, I don't see it being able to hang with many of them.

Everyone has said it's not about the power or acceleration, but let's be honest with ourselves, after a while, you will get used to the car and want it to go faster. If the acceleration didn't matter, why are there so many 500whp S2000's or miatas with 5.0's in them out there?

When I look at buying a car, I make sure it has some modibility to offset the feeling of being bored with the car. I don't feel that you're going to be able to get the performance out of the fr-s vs other cars in it's price range. Mainly due to it being NA, and a good chunk of them are turbo.

It just sucks that not only is it not as quick as it's main competitors, it's interior also pales in comparison (unless you're talking BRZ, but in that case, you need to bump the price up. How much? Who knows, but it's probably going to be 26k+).

But, I hope I am wrong and this car can make the power consumers want it to make quite easily.

I agree. Everybody keeps saying this car is better than slice bread but they have not driven it yet. They are going by reviews of pre-production units. I hope that it measures up. I think it will.

And yeah for $25k, the FR-S interior should be a bit better. But I was under the impression that the interior of the FR-S is the same as the BRZ limited beside the DualZone AC and the leather\alacantara seats and maybe leather trim on the door panel. The soft touch plastics are the same in all models.

[Tainen]

lol @ the people that think performance numbers have anything to do with the definition of a sports car.

sports cars are generally defined as two seat, potentially 2+2 coupes, and many debates usually talk about it having to be a convertible/roadster to also fall into the sports car category. Performance has *zero* to do with the definition.

websters definition:
sports car

 
noun a small, high-powered automobile with long, low lines, usually seating two persons.

[Want.FR-S]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

updated



I think lb/hp would have a better correlation with lap times than lb/tq. lb/tq will tell you the peak acceleration at a specific point in the RPM range, but it tells you nothing about how that engine behaves over the entire powerband. A car can have a ton of torque down low but then run out of steam up high, and get beat by a car with less torque but more hp which allows it to continue to accelerate after the other car has run out of steam, even if initially the higher torque car is faster.

Spacewilly, thank you for compiling the numbers. I have no objection w.r.t. the lb/hp numbers. The reason I want to see the lb/tq number is trying to see the drive-ability on the street, not on circuit. As you said, the strong suit of BRZ/FR-S is not based on numbers, but based on how high you can rev. That is fine and dandy if the situation allows you to do so.

Just look at your chart, you can see that once you calculate the weight/torque numbers, any cars with inferior weight/power number suddenly have better numbers in terms of torque. I hope this may tell us something about how this car compared with other cars.

[Draco-REX]

Weight to torque is irrelevant. Torque can be multiplied through gearing (that's the point). Which is also why we have a horsepower rating which takes gearing into account.