FR-S vs. 370z, end all be all of discussions

[Turbowned]

Originally Posted by Jordo!

You, know, being low to the ground aside, the motor is really the Achilles heel of this car.

It makes limited power, not much torque (and then there's that big "death valley" dip), and seems to have cam issues (not clear if this is sensor based, mechanical, or both) right out of the box.

Toyota needs a better power plant for this thing. Everything else is fine to good.

I would argue that the motor in the 370Z is it's Achilles heel, also. It's so coarse and rough I found myself extremely disappointed after test-driving one. I couldn't even talk to the poor sales guy sitting next to me as I revved the motor up. I quite liked the rest of the car, but it's as if the Nissan engineers sacrificed all NVH and quality concerns in the name of squeezing out every last horsepower and foot-pound they could. I wish they would have left the 3.5L in there; I'd take the 32hp hit for a little bit of refinement. Seriously. I don't expect it to sound as good as the triple-carbed L-series in my 240Z, but come on!

As for the boxer engine, 100hp-per-liter is nothing to sneeze at. The torque dip can and has been tuned out with aftermarket parts. The cam issue will be rectified with a TSB and eliminated on the assembly line shortly, you can count on it. Just my .02

[Honesty]

Right but Honda's been hitting that figure with the B18, F20, and K20 for years. It's a sacrifice for bottom-end torque.

The Nismo 370 engine is identical in every way except for the ECU and exhaust, and it has 350 horsepower. I think Nissan built the engine to make as much mid-range as possible, and being a Z car, it had to have an engine bigger than the previous generation. But then they overcompensated with the NVH caused by the engine by sticking in transmission mounts that are way too squishy. The transmission knob vibrates like a Sybian. None of it transfers to the cabin, but you can feel how squishy the tranny (and diff) mounts are during hard shifting, namely hard downshifts.

[Turbowned]

This is true, my Toyota 1.6 does 100hp-per-liter as well. The FA20 is a small-displacement N/A motor, so I'm actually pretty happy it's on par with what the S2000 engines make. Considering what an S2000 cost new by comparison I'm not complaining. If they wanted to make a more powerful engine they certainly could have, it's not like Subaru and Toyota don't know how to build engines, but they had to meet a specific price point and with that, compromises had to be made.

It didn't have to have a bigger engine, necessarily. Look at the S30 280Z and S130 280ZX, and Z31/Z32 300ZX. They could have retained the same displacement and refined the engine somewhat to make a 350ZX. Or not, I mean I wasn't crazy about those name designations but whatever, lol. They should all just be called Fairlady Z's if you ask me! Either way, if there's a way to fix the coarseness of the Z motor then I'm all ears; the NISMO 370Z is pure sex in my eyes and I'm still half-considering one...

yumyumyumyumyumyumyum

[Jordo!]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

I would argue that the motor in the 370Z is it's Achilles heel, also. It's so coarse and rough I found myself extremely disappointed after test-driving one. I couldn't even talk to the poor sales guy sitting next to me as I revved the motor up. I quite liked the rest of the car, but it's as if the Nissan engineers sacrificed all NVH and quality concerns in the name of squeezing out every last horsepower and foot-pound they could. I wish they would have left the 3.5L in there; I'd take the 32hp hit for a little bit of refinement. Seriously. I don't expect it to sound as good as the triple-carbed L-series in my 240Z, but come on!

As for the boxer engine, 100hp-per-liter is nothing to sneeze at. The torque dip can and has been tuned out with aftermarket parts. The cam issue will be rectified with a TSB and eliminated on the assembly line shortly, you can count on it. Just my .02

Sound aside, the VQ is a pretty good motor, and churns out power and torque equivalent to a small V8.

Now the issues that matter -- the VQ37HR has some oil burning issues and oil temp issues -- the former being inexcusable, but rare, and the latter being manageable, but common.

A more refined engine wouldn't be a bad thing for the Z.

That said, it's not an Achilles heel -- the #1 purpose of an engine is to produce torque and make power, ideally, reliably, which the VQ does admirably. Even with the oil issues, it will still perform like a champ, although the reliability issues are indeed important to address.

Toyota's choice of a 4-cyl Subaru boxer motor leaves much to be desired on all three fronts, and that's why it's a huge limiting factor on an otherwise well designed car, and IMO a legitimate Achilles' heel.

Drop the 2.5 in there, sort out the cam issues, and now we're talking.

Defending the merits of an engine that produces modest power and torque (and lacks a flat torque curve), and has major reliability issues cropping up within the first few hundred miles makes no sense.

It's also not especially fuel efficient, requires premium fuel, and has been compared to a tractor in sound -- if we want to get nitpicky.

It sits low in the chassis and isn't too heavy -- that's the about all the 2.0 boxer has going for it.

Oh, and to be fair, it has a far better torque curve than the 2ZZ -- but then so does an electric pencil sharpener.

[Zaggeron]

Why can't we like both the 370z and the Twins? I've got both and love both. I look at it this way. The 370 aimed high and fell short a few places. Paraphrasing Jeremy Clarkson -- It's a bit nasty. There were compromises to hit that price point. But really nothing at its particular price point has both the performance and the handling combination the Z has.

The twins on the other hand, aimed a bit lower and, I believe, surpassed that lower bar it set. It's a great upgrade from your typical economy box -- it looks great and has the handling chops to be extremely fun to drive, but it's lack of torque is extremely apparent off the line -- especially at a stop light below a hill. Did this kill the deal for me? No. Not at all. In fact I wanted something lower powered for every day driving. It gets better gas mileage than my Mazda 3 did (abeit it is a wash because of the premium gas requirement) and it is better appointed (at least the BRZ) and not much more than a top trim Mazda 3.

[crazyyankeefan]

Originally Posted by Zaggeron

Why can't we like both the 370z and the Twins? I've got both and love both. I look at it this way. The 370 aimed high and fell short a few places. Paraphrasing Jeremy Clarkson -- It's a bit nasty. There were compromises to hit that price point. But really nothing at its particular price point has both the performance and the handling combination the Z has.

The twins on the other hand, aimed a bit lower and, I believe, surpassed that lower bar it set. It's a great upgrade from your typical economy box -- it looks great and has the handling chops to be extremely fun to drive, but it's lack of torque is extremely apparent off the line -- especially at a stop light below a hill. Did this kill the deal for me? No. Not at all. In fact I wanted something lower powered for every day driving. It gets better gas mileage than my Mazda 3 did (abeit it is a wash because of the premium gas requirement) and it is better appointed (at least the BRZ) and not much more than a top trim Mazda 3.

I do like the twins. The only problem I have is that apparently some of the FRS/BRZ owners think their cars is the best sports car ever produced (not referring you in anyway), which is obnoxious in my opinion. You would never hear any Z owner saying the Z is better than Ferraris, Lambos or Porsches.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by justaquestion

Don't get mad at me because you have mixed up priorities.

I'm not mad, just amused. Enjoy your SUV and sedan.

[sho220]

Originally Posted by crazyyankeefan

The only problem I have is that apparently some of the FRS/BRZ owners think their cars is the best sports car ever produced (not referring you in anyway), which is obnoxious in my opinion. You would never hear any Z owner saying the Z is better than Ferraris, Lambos or Porsches.

[Honesty]

Originally Posted by Jordo!

Sound aside, the VQ is a pretty good motor, and churns out power and torque equivalent to a small V8.

Now the issues that matter -- the VQ37HR has some oil burning issues and oil temp issues -- the former being inexcusable, but rare, and the latter being manageable, but common.

A more refined engine wouldn't be a bad thing for the Z.

That said, it's not an Achilles heel -- the #1 purpose of an engine is to produce torque and make power, ideally, reliably, which the VQ does admirably. Even with the oil issues, it will still perform like a champ, although the reliability issues are indeed important to address.

Toyota's choice of a 4-cyl Subaru boxer motor leaves much to be desired on all three fronts, and that's why it's a huge limiting factor on an otherwise well designed car, and IMO a legitimate Achilles' heel.

Drop the 2.5 in there, sort out the cam issues, and now we're talking.

Defending the merits of an engine that produces modest power and torque (and lacks a flat torque curve), and has major reliability issues cropping up within the first few hundred miles makes no sense.

It's also not especially fuel efficient, requires premium fuel, and has been compared to a tractor in sound -- if we want to get nitpicky.

It sits low in the chassis and isn't too heavy -- that's the about all the 2.0 boxer has going for it.

Oh, and to be fair, it has a far better torque curve than the 2ZZ -- but then so does an electric pencil sharpener.

The boxer is unique though. And it's very well suited to the car. The VQ is more or less a parts-bin special, tweaked and massaged to "work" in a sports car, but not really excel in one. My L28 was more suited to my last Z imo, which was, being an I6, as smooth and balanced of an engine as they come.

I think specialty engines in sports cars are what make them... well... special. The Z has a good engine imo, but it's not as much of a specialty engine as the FA20. The VQ37 is better than the VQ35 by leaps and bounds, and an extremely different engine inside and out, top end and bottom end.

Oil heat - my engine is at a steady 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and will climb to 220 on a warm day or during a single 4th gear pull. Obviously Nissan thought it was a problem as the 2013 MY have a factory oil cooler. The undershroud that makes the car more aerodynamic prevents any underside ventilation. Sucks.

Oil consumption - my car had its engine replaced by Nissan because of this actually. Same problem was in the early VQ35s. But after looking at the TSB/Warranty section and the 10-mile CELs and catastrophic engine failure issues the FA20 has, I have no reason to believe this is that big of an exception. Early production engines have issues. It happens. This is why I'm not interested in buying any early Fiat 500 Abarths (hecho en Mexico).

Between engines, I'd say the FR-S/BRZ has a cooler, more unique, and better suited engine than the Z, even if it has smaller numbers.

[Turbowned]

Boo, they make the Abarths in Mexico, too? I suppose it makes sense.

I've got no qualms about the power output of the BRZ/FR-S. I mean, rumors originally had it at 250, 200, and 150, so we made out right in the middle. The target weight rumored between 2500lbs, 2750lbs, and 3,000lbs and again, we made out right in the middle. While not exactly a step forward numbers-wise (my 1990 RX-7 TurboII and 1994 MR2 Turbo had similar performance numbers), I'm thrilled because it's like all the cars I've owned in the past, except I bought them all when they were 15-25 years old. This one will be brand new and warrantied, and I can enjoy driving it and not worry about fixing it all the time! The aftermarket is churning out tons and tons of parts for the car, and the FA20 is responding very well to forced induction so far (I heard they just hit 430whp over at ECUtek!), so those with a hunger for more power can be appeased. Sure even with that much power we'll probably be spanked by any 370Z running an S/C or twin turbo kit, but that's not why most of us bought this car.

[Honesty]

Exactly. And sadly most of the time people are going to "street race" the car, rather than bring it to a track where it shines. Its closer competitor is a Miata, which I think it stomps in every single regard. It's not made to compete with the Genesis/G37/Mustang/370Z/Camaro group. They're all in the 30k range, and are making around the same amount of power.

But when compared to the Z, it's a much lighter car with an engine that I think is a lot neater. It won't responded to a turbo like an I4 would, because you can't mount the turbo as closely to the exhaust ports, but it'll still do well. And with that high compression ratio, it won't take much boost to get it making decent figures.

Even then, I like the car n/a. It doesn't need 400 horsepower to be fun or thrilling or an excellent car. It's great n/a, and maybe even better than it would be if it had 300 horses from a f/i engine.

[Embarrassed]

Originally Posted by Honesty

Its closer competitor is a Miata, which I think it stomps in every single regard.

Depends entirely what regards you are thinking of. For instance, I live in SoCal. the miata has it all over twins when it comes to cruising up and down the beach.
If the awesome rise in the twins aftermaket proves out, it will still be a shadow of the miata world. The miata's aftermarket support is simply stunning.

Also, I think the its worth considering street price rather than MSRP. The miata is clearly superior if you look at a lower real price as a benifit, since they can be had for less than MSRP all day while even getting MSRP is a bit of a novelty for the twins. That's before you even get to the availbilty of even less expensive slightly used models.

When I picked up a 2012 370 lease, it was 330/month out the door, vs over 400/month OTD for the twins. How's that for a comparison! A 370 for 20% less than the twins!

Of course, despite the twins pathetically sized rear seats, it does indeed stomp both cars in that regard.

O

[Jordo!]

Originally Posted by Honesty

The boxer is unique though. And it's very well suited to the car. The VQ is more or less a parts-bin special, tweaked and massaged to "work" in a sports car, but not really excel in one. My L28 was more suited to my last Z imo, which was, being an I6, as smooth and balanced of an engine as they come.

I think specialty engines in sports cars are what make them... well... special. The Z has a good engine imo, but it's not as much of a specialty engine as the FA20. The VQ37 is better than the VQ35 by leaps and bounds, and an extremely different engine inside and out, top end and bottom end.

Oil heat - my engine is at a steady 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and will climb to 220 on a warm day or during a single 4th gear pull. Obviously Nissan thought it was a problem as the 2013 MY have a factory oil cooler. The undershroud that makes the car more aerodynamic prevents any underside ventilation. Sucks.

Oil consumption - my car had its engine replaced by Nissan because of this actually. Same problem was in the early VQ35s. But after looking at the TSB/Warranty section and the 10-mile CELs and catastrophic engine failure issues the FA20 has, I have no reason to believe this is that big of an exception. Early production engines have issues. It happens. This is why I'm not interested in buying any early Fiat 500 Abarths (hecho en Mexico).

Between engines, I'd say the FR-S/BRZ has a cooler, more unique, and better suited engine than the Z, even if it has smaller numbers.

Objectively, it's not especially well suited, except in regard to weight and potential for positioning once mounted to the frame. It does out perform some of their past small displacement motors (e.g., the generally good 2ZZ and woefully terrible 1ZZ), but its not a great motor.

From a technological standpoint, the DI is nice, but you still end up with limited power, a wonky torque curve, the need for premium fuel, and some major design issues causing cam sensor errors -- that's not well suited to anything except the trash bin.

It would be interesting to see what the difference in cost/weight/torque would have been going with the 2.5 boxer with a nice Yamaha DI head, for example.

The VQ isn't a bad motor -- just doesn't make a very pleasing sound. The VVEL heads are a nice touch, but it probably contributes to the oil cooling issues the car is notorious for.

It's not without it's flaws, and a refresh is in order.

That said, it's been around a while, so it should be less flawed than the relatively new DS-4 engine, and it is, for the most part.

It is possible to love something, and yet accurately note its short comings...

Am I not bitching enough about the Z? Okay -- the seating position isn't great (I agree with that one reviewer on that!), it could stand to lose about 200 lbs, and it should have come with an oil cooler from the factory.

The side mirrors are too big and interfere with forward visibility on left hand turns. The VLSD is adequate, but not fantastic, and even the sport package brake kit isn't as good as it should be (here I'm being super nitpicky, but then one car mag did manage to put a Nismo edition with the sport package brakes into a wall!)

That said, it rivals a Cayman on overall performance and beauty at about half the price, which is probably why Motor Trend said, if memory serves, it is the best sports car under 40K.

I like the twins -- I want Toyota/Subaru to make me love one and therefore want to own one, but they haven't.

Clap them on the backs for what they got right (e.g., well sorted chassis, good handling and braking for a sub 30K car), but by no means do they deserve anything but criticism for their choice of motor.

Expect that to be the first thing they update, starting with its reliability and followed by its anemic performance, especially in the mid range of the torque curve.

And that is a good thing.

P.S.
Yes, the FA20 is supposed to be a very good motor, all the way around, even though it makes limited low end torque.

[KnwsAThngOr2AbutAThngOr2]

Originally Posted by crazyyankeefan

...apparently some of the FRS/BRZ owners think their cars is the best sports car ever produced (not referring you in anyway), which is obnoxious...

This.

I would go as far as to argue they aren't sports cars at all. "Sporty", yes, but nothing more than that. This is the part where someone brings up a 20+ year old sports car and compares the FRS/BRZ to it. Today's sports cars have both speed and handling.

Also, yes, the performance numbers do matter (when considering a cars performance capabilities). The same way FE numbers matter when talking about FE.

Originally Posted by Jordo!

That said, it rivals a Cayman on overall performance and beauty at about half the price, which is probably why Motor Trend said, if memory serves, it is the best sports car under 40K.

No, it doesn't, and no, it isn't.

They've gotten into your head too. Brilliant marketing. "Performance numbers aren't relevant when considering performance", "speed/power is not prerequisite of sports cars", "a 200hp car with absolutely no torque is not only more *fun*, but will blow the doors off any current sports car and most super cars".