Why would more power ruin the car??

[new2subaru]

Originally Posted by Harey

Ok still interested to hear why.

I just remember that they said the car changed the way it felt. Some comments were nose heavy, delayed throttle responses, etc.

I think it was Swarb? that had three different FI setups on track and said he was faster NA.

Mike at CSG may remember.

[new2subaru]

Originally Posted by Sapphireho

Sorry, I thought the thread was about more power ruining the car. It doesn't, track or street, unless you don't know how to drive. More power as many have said needs proper support. That's my point. I can't imagine someone properly boosting and getting shity times unless they have more car than they can handle.

Just putting in my $.02.

TBH, I can't either, but I'm about to find out haha

I will need considerable seat time before i will need more power. That I do know.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

More fun is an OFT flash away, for cheap. The V4 tunes and E85 is impressive.

That's my current set-up. The v4 e85 is nice

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

Recall what got us onto this subject in the first place:

I still stand by the original statement. Zero proof shown that boxer is responsible for the handling success of this car...just marketing buzzwords.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by venturaII

I still stand by the original statement. Zero proof shown that boxer is responsible for the handling success of this car...

That wasn't the original statement.

Originally Posted by venturaII

This car's handling has zero to do with 'boxer'.

Glad to see you are backpedaling away from that and now recognize that while it isn't solely responsible for the handling, it does play a part.

[venturaII]

If you're trying to dice up my posts and spin them in some other direction, let me be clear: boxer is not responsible for this car's handling. Believe what flat-brimmed marketing hype you like, but a lowly $25K MX5 has already proven that wrong.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by venturaII

If you're trying to dice up my posts and spin them in some other direction, let me be clear: boxer is not responsible for this car's handling. Believe what flat-brimmed marketing hype you like.

That's like saying the shocks aren't responsible for the handling because the tires matter too.

Without the boxer layout, given everything else is the same (coupe, 2+2, FR, steel body, DOHC, wheelbase, track), the CG would be higher and handling therefore worse or harder to tune for, wether it fits your narrative or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[venturaII]

And here come the excuses...

Done.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by venturaII

If you're trying to dice up my posts and spin them in some other direction, let me be clear: boxer is not responsible for this car's handling.

But you're not being clear. First you said it had zero impact on the car's handling, then you implied it's not solely responsible, leaving open the possibility that it might contribute to it. Which is it?

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

But you're not being clear. First you said it had zero impact on the car's handling, then you implied it's not solely responsible, leaving open the possibility that it might contribute to it. Which is it?

Don't think I ever threw in the caveat of 'solely'. That was your own addition.

Now, really done.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Don't think I ever threw in the caveat of 'solely'. That was your own addition.

Then clarify instead of playing word games. Are you saying that the boxer configuration contributes nothing whatsoever to the handling of the car, or are you leaving open the possibility that it does contribute along with other factors?

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

That's like saying the shocks aren't responsible for the handling because the tires matter too.

Without the boxer layout, given everything else is the same (coupe, 2+2, FR, steel body, DOHC, wheelbase, track), the CG would be higher and handling therefore worse or harder to tune for, wether it fits your narrative or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's speculative and likely not true. That super wide engine isn't placed very low because it would occupy space that suspension and the steering rack (not sure) occupy. An inline or v configuration means it can be put in the car much lower. Why didn't Porsche go on endlessly about cog? Probably because the Cayman is closer to a gtr than a miata or other impressive cars (brz included)

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by fatoni

That's speculative and likely not true. That super wide engine isn't placed very low because it would occupy space that suspension and the steering rack (not sure) occupy. An inline or v configuration means it can be put in the car much lower.

The low end of the engine might end up lower, but the high end might also end up higher.

[Cole]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

When you are working on weight reduction of rotational and non-rotational parts and not just on power, then it depends also with what you compare it. The acceleration comparison I did last time it was based with a '13 year UK car which is around 1230kg (2712 lbs). The latest cars and especially in US are known to be much heavier pretty close to 1280-1290 kg (2822-2844 lbs). It depends also the trim level. If you do a simple math equation, then you'll find that weight to power ratio gives an equivalent from 240hp to 251hp if you compare it to the heavier car. I said feels like 250-260hp, because we cannot even agree if the first cars had an actual 200hp or a 190hp power figure.


Do your research better next time.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahaha