So what is the official weight?

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by alex87f

I'm a little late to the party, but being both a sucker for precise data and bored, I though this would be interesting:
In case the image goes dead, it gives a verified weight of 1235kg (2 722lbs) for a RHD pre-FL euro-spec 86, with GPS / Leather / HIDs / etc. That's with all fluids and 50% of the tank. No luggage or driver.

nits to pick with that info:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.
55/45 weight distribution is NOT "good" for an FR sports/sporty car, especially considering a 2.0 n.a. powerplant. Notoriously nose-heavy Mustangs with ginormous DOHC V8s up front have the same f/r weight distribution.
No stock Miata ever weighed 1248 kg/2752 lb.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Savagegeese just did a video on a 2020 86 TRD and he weighed it at 2795 lbs (1268 kgs) (weight figure at 6:19). I would assume his weight is wet (but can't guess at the fuel amount). The TRD is reportedly heavier than base by quite a bit.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

The TRD is reportedly heavier than base by quite a bit.

Those brakes and wheels are most of it.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by ZDan

nits to pick with that info:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.

Nitpick on your nitpick - the engine is definitely not forward mounted (just pop the hood of any FWD car and you'll see the engine is well in front of the suspension towers - that's forward mounted). The debate about whether or not you can call the Twins front-mid depends on your point of view, but I doubt anyone called it forward mounted before. The engine is more or less inline with the wheels, and probably a few inches more to the back would have satisfied the front-mid purist. Then again, the "real" mid-engine purist will scoff even at that... (what with the driver being behind the engine and all. I wonder what they would say about the first gen Previa...).

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Nitpick on your nitpick - the engine is definitely not forward mounted (just pop the hood of any FWD car and you'll see the engine is well in front of the suspension towers - that's forward mounted). The debate about whether or not you can call the Twins front-mid depends on your point of view, but I doubt anyone called it forward mounted before. The engine is more or less inline with the wheels, and probably a few inches more to the back would have satisfied the front-mid purist. Then again, the "real" mid-engine purist will scoff even at that... (what with the driver being behind the engine and all. I wonder what they would say about the first gen Previa...).

No. the engine CG is way in front of the shock towers

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Nitpick on your nitpick - the engine is definitely not forward mounted (just pop the hood of any FWD car and you'll see the engine is well in front of the suspension towers - that's forward mounted).

FF is a completely different configuration with different design needs. Given how much the driven wheels are unloaded on acceleration, they have to get a lot of static weight over them. Hence they mount it forward of the front wheels. Not relevant to us...

I'll repeat what I said:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.

This is just the truth. Any FR sports/sporty car worth its salt will have the engine mounted further aft. The FT86 engine sits with its geometric center quite forward. The only saving grace is that it is a very short engine fore/aft. But a big drawback of the flat-4 is that without steer-by-wire (ewww...) it has to sit forward enough to allow clearance for a steering shaft! Which scooted it rather forward... See below:



The engine is located rather far forward for an FR layout.

The debate about whether or not you can call the Twins front-mid depends on your point of view,

"Front-mid" is pure marketing B.S. anyway. Fact is that with an FR car you want the engine mounted as far aft as you can get it, whether or not some arbitrary part of the engine is forward or aft of the front wheel centerline. That said, the FT86's engine *is* set quite far forward for an FR sports/sporty car. Which did NOT help the weight distribution which is a craptastic 55F/45R. But that's also due to the rear wheels shoved ridiculously far aft. A 2-seat version with rear wheels moved forward a good 12" or so would get the weight distribution to 50/50.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Mike_ZN6

How can I find out which model I have A-E?

iirc first yr is the only A model, cuz that's the lightest. They had to reinforce a lot of things... like the roof (due to owner bending it). After that, it's every other year. So it kinda go like this:
2012 ~ Early 2013: A
2013 ~ 2014: B
2015 ~ 2016: C
2017 ~ 2018: D
2019 ~ 2020: E

Model D and Model E doesn't have much difference iirc, but every other year, they tried to update.

So if you want the lightest 86, go buy '12 model. If you want the most updated 86, go buy '19 and up model.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

No. the engine CG is way in front of the shock towers

Originally Posted by ZDan

I'll repeat what I said:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.

So you both are basically looking at the engine location from a FR sports car perspective. That's cool, but it's the same as calling the Twins heavy when compared to pure(r) sports cars like the Elise. That would be technically true, but kinda missing the point. Comparing the Twins to an Elise or a Miata is just as valid as comparing to a GTI or a 230i. I'm not comparing the Twins to a pickup or a supercar, but in the general category of relatively cheap, sporty, fun to drive cars.

Originally Posted by ZDan

"Front-mid" is pure marketing B.S. anyway.

So what constitutes a mid engine car? That the engine is behind the driver and in front of the rear axle? What if it's on top of the rear axle? When does a mid-engine turn into a rear-engine? The same exact answer is for front vs. mid-front. It's just a matter of were you draw the line. You can measure between the engine's center of gravity and the center line of the wheels, you can require that no part of the engine (short block? long block?) intersects the wheel center line. It's pure semantics, and at the end of the day if you're happy with the car, why do you care where the engine is at?

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

So you both are basically looking at the engine location from a FR sports car perspective. That's cool, but it's the same as calling the Twins heavy when compared to pure(r) sports cars like the Elise. That would be technically true, but kinda missing the point. Comparing the Twins to an Elise or a Miata is just as valid as comparing to a GTI or a 230i. I'm not comparing the Twins to a pickup or a supercar, but in the general category of relatively cheap, sporty, fun to drive cars.



So what constitutes a mid engine car? That the engine is behind the driver and in front of the rear axle? What if it's on top of the rear axle? When does a mid-engine turn into a rear-engine? The same exact answer is for front vs. mid-front. It's just a matter of were you draw the line. You can measure between the engine's center of gravity and the center line of the wheels, you can require that no part of the engine (short block? long block?) intersects the wheel center line. It's pure semantics, and at the end of the day if you're happy with the car, why do you care where the engine is at?

The answer you seek is all over google.

I think it's pretty obvious that the 86 is not a "front-mid" engine car, unlike the midship S2000.

It's not really semantics either; maybe in your mind.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by ZDan

nits to pick with that info:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.
55/45 weight distribution is NOT "good" for an FR sports/sporty car, especially considering a 2.0 n.a. powerplant. Notoriously nose-heavy Mustangs with ginormous DOHC V8s up front have the same f/r weight distribution.
No stock Miata ever weighed 1248 kg/2752 lb.

I thought the distribution was something like 53F/47R ...

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

The answer you seek is all over google.

Sure, with 10 different ways of differentiating them, and some rear-mid-engine thrown in to the mix

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

I think it's pretty obvious that the 86 is not a "front-mid" engine car, unlike the midship S2000.

It's not really semantics either; maybe in your mind.

I was referring to the "front-mid is marketing BS". I know that the Twins aren't front-mid.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

I thought the distribution was something like 53F/47R ...

Correct... but I think, he's just round it up to make it easier. Also it might of changed a bit since then. That was '12 model and since '17 model, they've updated a lot of rear area, so it might be close to 52:48 or even 51:49 (depends on wet or dry weight).


Not gonna go into where engine sit nor 50:50 weight ratio, cuz tbh 90% of owner out there can't tell the difference between 50:50 or where the hell engine sit under the hood. Let's face it 50:50 ratio goes into more than just weight. There's tires, brake, suspension and aero down force factor goes into it. Most ppl say 50:50 is ideal for no reason, fact or why. If you want, Tada-san said you can push back 4~6" back and 2" down the engine (forgot exact number) plus replacing the battery w lighter one (or move it into the trunk) and take off few pointless parts from the front, will make it 50:50 easily.

But the reality is doing that won't do much. If it truly did, Tada-san and other engineer would of already done it.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Correct... but I think, he's just round it up to make it easier. Also it might of changed a bit since then. That was '12 model and since '17 model, they've updated a lot of rear area, so it might be close to 52:48 or even 51:49 (depends on wet or dry weight).

Interesting that the graphic mentions that the weight distribution is measured with 2 people in the car. Looks like the seats are positioned closer to the rear of the car, so that probably helps with weight distribution. I think most other places measure weight distribution without people. The aforementioned savagegeese clip has it as 55.16/44.84 for the 2020 TRD.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Interesting that the graphic mentions that the weight distribution is measured with 2 people in the car. Looks like the seats are positioned closer to the rear of the car, so that probably helps with weight distribution. I think most other places measure weight distribution without people. The aforementioned savagegeese clip has it as 55.16/44.84 for the 2020 TRD.

Yeah, they factor in driver to do weight ratio. Pointless to do no driver weight ratio. As for the vid, is that ratio w the driver? I just saw it quickly, but didn't mention anything about that. Not knocking on SG, but some days, I wish they tell more in-depth info when they show those numbers.