86 Japan Live - Tons of GR86 and BRZ

[falcon_wizard]

The only official subaru reference I could find on 13.5 is on subaru america relative to the turning ratio. And toyota Canada specs out 12.5 compression ratio for the gr86. I’d be very surprised they would have built and certified two different engines between the brz and 86… it just would not make any financial nor engineering sense. It must be a mistake. The difference of 4 HP between japan and North America due to « emissions regulations » could be as simple as adjusting the redline a bit, which would change max power on a high revving engine.

Anyone saw other data points ?

[Transport3r]

Originally Posted by Red-86

Each market is different, I suspect. Here in Australia we get the Ecoboost Stangs as well as the GTs, but the sales ratio is like 90% GTs to 10% Ecoboosts. Not sure what it is in North America, but here the prices are close enough between them that cashed up petrol heads just get the V8.

It’s the opposite in the US lol. 90% 4Bangers.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by falcon_wizard

The only official subaru reference I could find on 13.5 is on subaru america relative to the turning ratio. And toyota Canada specs out 12.5 compression ratio for the gr86. I’d be very surprised they would have built and certified two different engines between the brz and 86… it just would not make any financial nor engineering sense. It must be a mistake. The difference of 4 HP between japan and North America due to « emissions regulations » could be as simple as adjusting the redline a bit, which would change max power on a high revving engine.

Anyone saw other data points ?

You're thinking too hard. These subjects have all been beat on. 99.99% chance both are 12.5:1 CR. As for the HP difference, it doesn't even matter how they did it, it's just a regulation difference. The power difference has been the case for so many cars in the past in different regions. Not sure exactly what other data points you would be looking for.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

You're thinking too hard. These subjects have all been beat on. 99.99% chance both are 12.5:1 CR. As for the HP difference, it doesn't even matter how they did it, it's just a regulation difference. The power difference has been the case for so many cars in the past in different regions. Not sure exactly what other data points you would be looking for.

Yep.
The CR difference could be as simple as somebody doing a typo on a marketing news release. The 4hp difference could be explained by a dozen different things. Besides it is 4 bloody HP not 40. The rated HP is just a numbers game at the best of times since that is not even close to what is actually going to the wheels.
It is only meaningful for bench racing and even then it is questable since not all manufacturers use exactly the same methods to get their rating. Most are done on an engine stand in a climate controlled lab under perfect conditions that nobody will ever actually see on the streets. There is an ISO Standard they could use but there is nothing that forces them to use it.

If the 4HP is that big a deal to people they can just add in an auxiliary engine!

[falcon_wizard]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Yep.
The CR difference could be as simple as somebody doing a typo on a marketing news release. The 4hp difference could be explained by a dozen different things. Besides it is 4 bloody HP not 40. The rated HP is just a numbers game at the best of times since that is not even close to what is actually going to the wheels.
It is only meaningful for bench racing and even then it is questable since not all manufacturers use exactly the same methods to get their rating. Most are done on an engine stand in a climate controlled lab under perfect conditions that nobody will ever actually see on the streets. There is an ISO Standard they could use but there is nothing that forces them to use it.

If the 4HP is that big a deal to people they can just add in an auxiliary engine!

Lol… indeed… I don’t care for the HP rating difference, it means nothing… my interest was more on the CR from an FI potential standpoint.

Cheers

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by falcon_wizard

Lol… indeed… I don’t care for the HP rating difference, it means nothing… my interest was more on the CR from an FI potential standpoint.

Cheers

I hear you. When they first threw that number out I was a bit concerned for anybody wishing to go FI. Have to either have super low boost or expect a time bomb!

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by timurrrr

But somehow you're making definite conclusions already.?

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Certification costs millions. The sales numbers in Europe just don't justify that.

One only needs to go back 20 years to see numbers that justify everything @Tcoat has said: Nissan S13/14/15 WW sales numbers.

I have this constant, running debate with 240SX owners on Facebook/Zilvia/etc, and everyone somehow thinks the world revolves around their idea of what sells. Instead, I throw hard numbers back at them so they can see what the market was willing to support at that time.

Here's quoted text from a post I made about SR20DET engine availability and why it wasn't exported out of Europe vs sourcing primarily from Japan:

https://www.sxoc.com/vbb/showthread....1-Did-you-know

There was 5772 S14s TOTAL sold in the UK.

I think all of Europe there was less than 10k S14s sold in total. Let's be generous and say there were 40k S13s sold in Europe total...

By comparison, you have these numbers out of Japan:

180SX total: 74925
S13 Silvia total: 302761
S14 Silvia total: 81076
S15 Silvia total: 38741

Total 240SX sold in the US was around ~251k units across 9 model years.

Keep in mind that used car pricing also drives sales of motors (as a part out). When cars are cheap and not worth much on the resale market, parts become a more lucrative market for junkyards and car lots. Cars in Japan were dirt cheap, when I went to Japan in 2005 and even 2008 I was seeing modified S13s and S14s easily under $5k, and there was no export market for the cars back then because it was illegal to import even into Canada.

So that's why there's no motors out of Europe, at least no one cares to export them out of Europe. No money to be made...

The caveat with the above numbers is that only about 20% of the total cars sold actually had turbo engines (example, ~23k of the 100k total PS13 2WS Silvia made was with SR20DET). Even on that basis alone, for a cheap, entry-level econobox sports car there is very little incentive for manufacturers to do more than what's needed to hit the product placement/spec/MSRP/sales targets.

The same with the Volvo V60 and other groups that I'm on. Those groups have an entirely different discussion, primarily revolving around the general market shift to crossovers/SUVs. One of the stats posted was a bizzare ~70% of all vehicles sold being some type of truck/SUV/crossover.

Needless to say, the general car buying trend is completely opposite of owning a car like the 86/BRZ.

Originally Posted by HuntingtonFRS

This whole thread is stupid as nobody has any data, but knows everything about the topic. Sounds like uncles arguing on Facebook.

See above.

I don't have hard data for the ZC6/ZN6 sales in all territories but someone will make it for us as time passes...

Originally Posted by Red-86

I’m surprised they even sell the 2.0 Supra in North America. Here in Australia they don’t even offer the 2.0 as it would cost nearly as much as the 3.0 and almost no-one would buy it as a result.

I'm going to guess Toyota/BMW needed to make a certain number of engines due to production constraints with Magna Steyr, so the excess 2.0L engine had to be offered somewhere to make it work for other territories.

Originally Posted by Red-86

For comparison I think they sold around 20,000 twins in Australia between 2013-2018, or around 3,300 a year (given the AU population is just 26M vs the 500M in the EU, that shows how each market reacted to the twins).

To put that in perspective, if the twins had sold at the AU per capita rate in the EU they would have sold around 64,000 a year in the EU. That would have gotten Toyobaru’s attention for sure!

1999-2002 Nissan S15 Silvia/200SX

https://gtr-registry.com/en-s15-silvia-200sx.php

43.1k total sold WW
3879 sold in Australia (less than 10% of total)
477 sold in NZ (about 1% of total)

In Australia/NZ they only offered the SR20DET, DE was not offered. Even with this emphasis on the turbo engine, the S15 Silvia had about 50% of cars sold with DET and 50% with DE.

Fundamentally we can compare this car to other sports cars, but there are simply not many that are sold worldwide in different territories. We can compare the car to a Mustang GT 2.0L but there's no Mustang GT sold in Japan nor Europe in any meaningful numbers.

Only real data points to compare are Miata, and other RWD sports cars from the 1990s, of which the most high profile one is the S13/14/15 chassis. If the sales numbers are anywhere close to what the S13/14 achieved at its peak, then I'm sure 2 engine offerings is easy to do. But as it stands, the platform is lucky to hit 100k annual sales worldwide.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by timurrrr

I wonder if they could sell the 2nd gen with FA20.
Perhaps with minor changes to share more stuff with FA24.

This would be the best option, but it is more expensive to offer 2 engines.

[GoKimiGo!]

The 99 Thrust/GReddy is pretty clean. The rest all gaudy as hell, looks like a bunch of eBay gimmick aero bits stuck on.

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Nice sticker pack I guess?

I assume its got a lot of tricked up suspension and engine mods, otherwise this is a minimum effort to show something aftermarket imo.

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

I agree, not that it looks bad, but it looks like a bunch of stickers and fuck all else. Unless I’m missing something?

Yeah, having consulted for Cusco in the past, it’s their culture. They rally in FIA APRC Rally and All-Japan Rally, do Super Taikyu Endurance, and lots of participation in motorsports. Their culture is more about proving themselves on complete functional cars for street and competitions, and preparing chassis mainly.
They don’t do much in the way of styling parts which they usually collaborate with aero parts makers and wheel manufacturers historically in racing.

For initial launch cars like this, there really weren’t accessory makers who had access to pre-production mules, except a very few who got contacted and selected by TMC/GR. Therefore, most body kit people didn’t have access to make anything yet.

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I’m surprised they even sell the 2.0 Supra in North America. Here in Australia they don’t even offer the 2.0 as it would cost nearly as much as the 3.0 and almost no-one would buy it as a result.

Yes 👍 it’s interesting indeed. I do know a lot of dealership franchise level groups (all independent firms in North America) went into long discussions on this, and one thing they opted was for it to have a much lower MSRP. Hence I believe the 4 cylinders were chosen to fill the gap for buyers with credit limits at $50,000 or less, and wanted to cater to them too. So the North American 2.0L are priced aggressively low compared to the 3.0L and void of many luxury items.

On the flip side, the 2.0L has significantly more centralized center of mass, less overhanging weight, and dynamically very agile and different. I guess it worked out for consumers because there are more choices. It’s rare for Toyota to offfer a choice on a A90/91 like this today with such small market. But I guess the Supra was that important to the company as flagship sports car.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Moto-P

Yes 👍 it’s interesting indeed. I do know a lot of dealership franchise level groups (all independent firms in North America) went into long discussions on this, and one thing they opted was for it to have a much lower MSRP. Hence I believe the 4 cylinders were chosen to fill the gap for buyers with credit limits at $50,000 or less, and wanted to cater to them too. So the North American 2.0L are priced aggressively low compared to the 3.0L and void of many luxury items.

On the flip side, the 2.0L has significantly more centralized center of mass, less overhanging weight, and dynamically very agile and different. I guess it worked out for consumers because there are more choices. It’s rare for Toyota to offfer a choice on a A90/91 like this today with such small market. But I guess the Supra was that important to the company as flagship sports car.

I thought it was because Americans are just more superficial - its a cheap way to look rich right...?

[WorldRallyB]

Originally Posted by falcon_wizard

The only official subaru reference I could find on 13.5 is on subaru america relative to the turning ratio. And toyota Canada specs out 12.5 compression ratio for the gr86. I’d be very surprised they would have built and certified two different engines between the brz and 86… it just would not make any financial nor engineering sense. It must be a mistake. The difference of 4 HP between japan and North America due to « emissions regulations » could be as simple as adjusting the redline a bit, which would change max power on a high revving engine.

Anyone saw other data points ?

I'm surprised no one has done this yet. Plenty of online HP calculators. A 13.5 CR gets you 252hp. Who wants to be the head gasket delete mod guinea pig?

[PrayForRain]

Teasing us with that dyno