Car and Driver is F-ing Stupid

[Train]

It seems to me that whoever wrote this article had their own expectations for the vehicle and its upcoming refreshes only to be disappointed when Toyota and Subaru sticked to their original agenda and kept the twins as a momentum car much like Miata. Current cars are so packed with power that 200 may seem average to low when compared to other sports coupes in the market. Just like how interior/exterior aesthetics and quality mattered more than power to a good number of people, the reverse is also the case. This is evident by people who mod/tune the car's powertrain as well as those who choose to keep it stock or only do aesthetic mods. So, in regards to their statement about meaningless change, I'm going to have to disagree.

One point I agree with is that I worry this platform will be cut from the lineup within the next decade (not for the same reason the article brought up though). Its a great car/platform and my personal wish is for it to last long and build a large fan base much like the Miata platform (but looking at Toyota's history, its highly they'll cut the twins due to low sales volume).

[Speed2th]

simply the writer never watch or read "initial D". But I think his point is valid for general AMERICAN readers - it needs a turbo. But they just don't know that 86 never intended to be FI or high output. It is suppose to a be fun and nimble eocno sports car allow every driver to approach their limit easily. people kept forget AE86 was a COROLLA

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Train

It seems to me that whoever wrote this article had their own expectations for the vehicle and its upcoming refreshes only to be disappointed when Toyota and Subaru sticked to their original agenda and kept the twins as a momentum car much like Miata.

I don't think that Toyota and Subaru didn't listen. Dynos of the new engine show that there was a considerable effort to change this. However, somehow this effort was lost(*) by contradicting arguments from other departments. Some engineers in one department were struggling to get 10-15 more horses on the wheels and other engineers were trying to make the car more trendy and to add weight. Maybe sales was a reason and the idea that no matter how they'll improve performance, people won't buy it if it is not in par with some other brands in comfort etc.


(*) Only real improvement is the acceleration on the top gear and this is only for the people who don't know how to drive or they are thinking they bought a GT car and they are bored to downshift.

[davmandave]

Originally Posted by Speed2th

simply the writer never watch or read "initial D". But I think his point is valid for general AMERICAN readers - it needs a turbo. But they just don't know that 86 never intended to be FI or high output. It is suppose to a be fun and nimble eocno sports car allow every driver to approach their limit easily. people kept forget AE86 was a COROLLA

This. 100% this. The AE86 GTS debuted with ~125 HP, IIRC. It became a legend because it was balanced. It was an absolute monster downhill because it weighed almost nothing, and until the release of the 86, was still one of the only lightweight coupes in RWD configuration. At release, it was in every show room because it was (is) gorgeous.


Today, the 86 shines because it is lightweight, balanced, RWD, and looks fantastic. Oh, and it drives downhill like it is being chased by the devil. And it has found widespread success for the exact same reasons it did back in '83.


As everyone else said, haters gonna hate.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by VTEC

Except for this guy. So if anything maybe you can say Josh Jacquot is fucking stupid. I'm ok with that lol.

I didn't even put 2 and 2 together until you stated this. He used to be with Sport Compact Car in the early 2000's. Him and David Coleman (who used to write specifically about vehicle handing / dynamics and now works with Mazda) probably had some small part in a lot of people's current hobby! I always remember the editorials and when I spent 3.99 every month as a teenager I read those magazines cover to cover, lol.

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by Summerwolf

I didn't even put 2 and 2 together until you stated this. He used to be with Sport Compact Car in the early 2000's. Him and David Coleman (who used to write specifically about vehicle handing / dynamics and now works with Mazda) probably had some small part in a lot of people's current hobby! I always remember the editorials and when I spent 3.99 every month as a teenager I read those magazines cover to cover, lol.

I still have a couple of old SCC magazines stashed away somewhere. One of my favorites was the Lotus Elise Vs. a swapped MR-S.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Zaku

hmm pretty sure he was told to write up something "bad" about the car by C&D

at his old job at Edmunds.

He loved the BRZ

http://www.edmunds.com/subaru/brz/2013/road-test1.html

To Quote him:



calls it refreshing, and loved it. sounds like a huge change of tone.

Jesus. Did a BRZ run over his puppy or insult his mother between those two reviews?


I just thought he was a guy with a strong opinion when I read the first review on this thread but in light of what he says in this one I have to wonder what was up.


This is why I do not trust most blogs or other "car reviews" and such on the internet (no offense Zak) since most are half fiction or very biased one way or the other.

[Fishbed77]

I love my 2013 FR-S, but I believe there is a lot of truth in this article.

The comparison to the 240SX is especially on-point. If there were at least an option (you don't have to buy it) for an OEM turbo, it would bring more buyer attention to the platform.

At this point, we all know Subaru's excuse about packaging is BS. The last vehicle I drove on a daily basis that had this much open space under the hood was a 1989 full-size Chevrolet 1500 pickup.

[DarkSunrise]

I dunno. It comes off as a negative piece overall, but his only complaint about the car was the lack of midrange torque which he thinks should be remedied by a turbo. He didn't really have anything bad to say otherwise. At one point he admits the rest of the car is unparalleled in its class:

Even so, the Subaru’s steering response, overall balance, and compact packaging encourage hard driving in ways that other coupes at this price simply do not.

And that's really the point of these cars and why we bought them.

His point about the power is his opinion. Either you enjoy revving a small NA engine out or you don't, but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to want a turbo (even if I don't personally agree).

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

2017 Subaru BRZ manual
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.2 sec

2013 Subaru BRZ manual
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 8.0 sec

It's interesting to see how much faster the updated car has gotten from 5-60. Looks like the improved overall torque and aggressive gearing makes a fair difference.

FWIW it's now faster than an AP1 S2000, which did it in 7.3 seconds.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review

[Tcoat]

I don't think that what the dude says is such a big deal. It is the way he says it!
Be OK if it was an editorial piece but he is a tad too passionate about more HP for a review.


There are indeed a pile of guys that would like a turbo option but the writer's assertions that they should be able to just slap another engine in and be done are absurd.

[venturaII]

This is exactly like what happened when the Pontiac Fiero was released. GM specifically stated that they were making a stylish commuter car, targeted at someone similar to a single, mid-thirties female secretary-type who wanted something that was reliable and looked good, and who would be driving it back and forth to work. Meanwhile, every one of the car magazines latched onto the sporty styling and immediately stated complaining that the performance didn't live up to the looks, despite that being GM's intention from day one. It was only due to pressure from the media industry and the associated complaints from it's readers that GM completely revamped the Fiero's performance (the '88 model was actually a pretty damn good car for it's time), though they'd lost so much on the car already (no help from poor sales due to aforementioned 'bad' reviews) that they just decided to axe the entire project..

[Train]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

I don't think that Toyota and Subaru didn't listen. Dynos of the new engine show that there was a considerable effort to change this. However, somehow this effort was lost(*) by contradicting arguments from other departments. Some engineers in one department were struggling to get 10-15 more horses on the wheels and other engineers were trying to make the car more trendy and to add weight. Maybe sales was a reason and the idea that no matter how they'll improve performance, people won't buy it if it is not in par with some other brands in comfort etc.


(*) Only real improvement is the acceleration on the top gear and this is only for the people who don't know how to drive or they are thinking they bought a GT car and they are bored to downshift.

I agree. I didnt mean to say Toyota and Subaru didn't listen but rather they worked on keeping the car as a momentum car while addressing some of its downfall the owners and reviews have brought to their attention in the past 5 years or so. They've clearly worked on the creature comforts and bringing the car "upto date" with new displays, materials, steering wheel controls and etc while attending to the performance needs much like you mentioned with HP and torque increase. I, too, feel that sales was a reason, especially when most cars on the market are packed with bunch of luxurious options and most people are basing their purchases on how much of these features they can get.

[FX86]

i remember being on the Z forums and people complained about how the 370Z is slow and need 400 horsepower and 300lbs of torque to compete with the muscle ponies

it already has a V6 with 332hp and 270lbs of torque which was up there with the Porsche Cayman around that time and people still bitched about it

you can't please everyone