>> Next Generation 86 - WISH LIST

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Clutch Dog

Im not sure what Im missing


T56 Magnum 700 ft lbs
T56 standard viper 550 ft lbs
CD009 cant find official numbners but its commonly known 500 "whp" with sloppy shifting can bend em up
AC6 450 ft lbs
AZ6 250 ft lbs (the one we use) though people are suggesting its more like 300 ft lbs

250 Nm, not ft-lbs, which is 184 ft-lbs


Yes, the transmission holds more than 184 ft-lbs because I am at 12psi with E85, but many people have broken the transmission hard-shifting on the track at stock torque. At my torque, the life/reliability of the transmission will be much shorter/compromised.


At 450 Nm or 332 ft-lbs of torque, the AC6 would be a good improvement and adequate.

[Clutch Dog]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

250 Nm, not ft-lbs, which is 184 ft-lbs


Yes, the transmission holds more than 184 ft-lbs because I am at 12psi with E85, but many people have broken the transmission hard-shifting on the track at stock torque. At my torque, the life/reliability of the transmission will be much shorter/compromised.


At 450 Nm or 332 ft-lbs of torque, the AC6 would be a good improvement and adequate.

Ahhhhhh thats what I was missing


the Ay6 holds 345 ft lbs or "468" nm which would be the next step and its already available. in the USDM markets

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I don't know about that. Did the extra 5hp in the MY17+ models sway more people to buy manual transmissions instead of automatics? Would another 5hp sway anyone to consider the 86 platform over something else? This motor is close to being tapped for NA power.

No +5HP (2.5%) isn't going to help sales and is basically a rounding error. +50HP (25%) would help sales.

Personally, I'm not enamored with the whole NA thing like Toyota engineers seem to be. I just don't understand their intent with that. (I know they have their reasons, and they have the option to be wrong). I do prefer superchargers over turbochargers for low end increase, but if someone wants to stuff a Blackwing into my FRS I'll hand them the keys.

[flyboy2160]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

Corolla?

No, like this

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

No +5HP (2.5%) isn't going to help sales and is basically a rounding error. +50HP (25%) would help sales.

Personally, I'm not enamored with the whole NA thing like Toyota engineers seem to be. I just don't understand their intent with that. (I know they have their reasons, and they have the option to be wrong). I do prefer superchargers over turbochargers for low end increase, but if someone wants to stuff a Blackwing into my FRS I'll hand them the keys.

I think the whole NA vs FI, from the manufacturer, is a well marketed excuse to keep the prixe point low.

People need to remember that the twins are the cheapest RWD manual sports coupe in the market.

Adding FI would up the cost, significantly, in doing so they would lose "alot" of sales.

They (Subaru/Toyota) "could" throw out some real special/limited editions (not crap body kits or stickers) with boost, BUT, and it's a really big butt, LOL, to accomplish this, and still give a warranty, that won't bite Subaru and Toyota on the arse, would require a full new and improved power train and drivetrain.

How much extra will this cost?

Here in Australia a base Impresa costs $25kAUD, a base WRX costs $45AUD.

I would assume pricing for a FI twin over a NA would be typical.

A base 86 here costs $35kAUD.

Of course they wouldnt boost the base GT model, they would boost the GTS, which cost $45k AUD.

Here in AU that would make a factory boosted twin around $60kAUD.

How do these "rough and hasty" calcs work for you guys in the United States and Canada?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

No +5HP (2.5%) isn't going to help sales and is basically a rounding error. +50HP (25%) would help sales.

Personally, I'm not enamored with the whole NA thing like Toyota engineers seem to be. I just don't understand their intent with that. (I know they have their reasons, and they have the option to be wrong). I do prefer superchargers over turbochargers for low end increase, but if someone wants to stuff a Blackwing into my FRS I'll hand them the keys.

I think it is hard to have an 86 that is true to the AE86 with a turbocharged platform. They want light weight, RWD, responsive, high revving.


If they go FI then it'll be a turbo, and I would prefer that platform to a supercharger, even though I have a supercharger. I do like my supercharger for the fact that it feels NA and that it requires me to rev it out to get the torque, but I can't see it coming from the factory. Even though I like the power, there is still a difference between my setup and the NA setup that has me missing the NA setup. I don't know. Maybe I can squash that nostalgia by getting in a stock 86 again and feeling how less powered it is.


I don't think they can get an extra 50hp from an extra 400cc of displacement if they use the FA24, but I could be wrong, yet if they didn't then what is there alternative? Is there a Subaru 1.5-1.8T?

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by flyboy2160

No, like this

It seems what the US call hatchback variants is different to other parts of the world.

I believe the F type you posted is a Fastback Coupe.

The S13 is classed as a Fastback.

The Supra was a liftback.


When people say hatchback, myself, and google, think of this > https://www.google.com/search?q=hatc...ih=530&dpr=4.5

Which is why that Shooting Star thing comes to mind.

I wouldn't mind seeing what a twin fastback/liftback looked like, although I do prefer the notch back (American term, thanks google) versions.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

I think the whole NA vs FI, from the manufacturer, is a well marketed excuse to keep the prixe point low.

People need to remember that the twins are the cheapest RWD manual sports coupe in the market.

Adding FI would up the cost, significantly, in doing so they would lose "alot" of sales.

How do these "rough and hasty" calcs work for you guys in the United States and Canada?

Did you forget something? Not to mention the turbo alternatives that are not RWD like the FWD Civic Si or AWD WRX.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Did you forget something? Not to mention the turbo alternatives that are not RWD like the FWD Civic Si or AWD WRX.

Do you mean the Fiat 2 seat convertible with 1.4L "125kW" MultiAir Turbo? That would be lossing 30kw from the current 152kw.

Subaru does have the 1.6 turbo from the Levorg, but, 125kw, it does have 250kn though, but the engine makes it power down low and doesn't really like to rev.

And no I didn't include any AWD or FWD, or convertables, or station wagons because they are not a RWD Sports Coupe.

If my pricing of what a FI twin would cost is way out then explain it , calc it out for your location, our explain where my calcs are flawed.

Please though, I'm talking RWD sports coupe with an option for manual transmission.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

Do you mean the Fiat 2 seat convertible with 1.4L "125kW" MultiAir Turbo? That would be lossing 30kw from the current 152kw.

And no I didn't include any AWD or FWD, or convertables, or station wagons because they are not a RWD Sports Coupe.

If my pricing of what a FI twin would cost is way out then explain it , calc it out for your location, our explain where my calcs are flawed.

Please though, I'm talking RWD sports coupe with an option for manual transmission.

That Fiat puts out 184 ft-lbs, so you lose horsepower, but gain torque.


Obviously, RWDs are not very common, so it is worth mentioning turbocharged cars in the same class that are often cross-shopped. These would include FWD compacts and hatches. The VW GTI, Hyundai Veloster, etc. Is there something inherently expensive about RWD?


The Ecoboost Mustang is another example if you need one... 2.3L turbocharged engine that puts out 310hp and 320tq and is...wait for it...RWD! I have more examples like the Camaro 2.0T or Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

That Fiat puts out 184 ft-lbs, so you lose horsepower, but gain torque.


Obviously, RWDs are not very common, so it is worth mentioning turbocharged cars in the same class that are often cross-shopped. These would include FWD compacts and hatches. The VW GTI, Hyundai Veloster, etc. Is there something inherently expensive about RWD?


The Ecoboost Mustang is another example if you need one... 2.3L turbocharged engine that puts out 310hp and 320tq and is...wait for it...RWD! I have more examples like the Camaro 2.0T or Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T.

Mustang Eco $55kAUD (big fat boat that needs a V8, LOL, 4cyl Mustang)

Don't get the 2.0 Camaro here

Golf GTI $45 (but FWD and fugly hatch or wagon)

Hyundai Veloster turbo $35k (cheap but FWD and fugly).

I didn't cross shop any FWD car when looking at the 86.

I sold a AWD (2015 STI) because I didn't enjoy the characteristics of the car.

My cross shopping

I was looking at getting back into a RWD manual light-ish car that was fairly cheap and fun to thrash, plus it needed to look good, so not like Kia or Hyundai or VW Golf hatch.

I have owned a MX5 and didn't want a 2 seater convertible (I wasn't sold on the look of the arse end of the ND).

The Mustang 5.0 was too expensive at around $65k AUD (I personally wouldn't even contemplate buying a 4 pot Mustang)

I looked at some low km older cars as well, S15's, (I've owned a few Nissan Skylines but they are a bit boaty), some FD's, but, in the end, they were really old, and for a mint one I would be paying new 86 money anyway.

Which left really only 1 car, or two really, a 86 or a BRZ.

So, after me cross shopping all my available options there was only one real option.

I got my little manual sports coupe RWD in the form of a limited edition 86.

And with a little AVO turbo it now flys (only running 8 psi), and some good suspension (MCA) it now handles great, it is now as fun as 10 fun things and looks really really good.

So basically a new, turbo, RWD, manual sports coupe that handles great for around $45.(the cost of a fugly FWD GTI), it's also faster than my old 2015 STI, so there's that to.

I'm in Australia, AWD isn't really an advantage here, unless it's raining, which it is now......

As for being inherently expensive, anything that sells in limited numbers claims a premium, the twins are not really big sellers number wise to justify a lower cost.

Meh, personal preferences and all.

Opinions may vary

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

Mustang Eco $55kAUD (big fat boat that needs a V8, LOL, 4cyl Mustang)

I'm in Australia....

As for being inherently expensive, anything that sells in limited numbers claims a premium, the twins are not really big sellers number wise to justify a lower cost.

It is fat, but it is faster 0-60 than the 86 and in other metrics, and it does it at a price that competes with the 86 with a turbo and an engine with good potential that is cheap to extract more power.

Sorry Australian prices are so different, but your statements don't apply here.

All the cars I mentioned are $25k +/- a few thousand and are turbocharged or even AWD. There is no reason why Toyobaru couldn't do a turbocharged engine in the 86 from an economics perspective. If the Hyundai Genesis Coupe can sell less cars than the 86 and make a 2.0T then Toyobaru could do it.

Adding a turbo system to the current platform and doing a tranny upgrade and everything puts the engine/car closer to the Civic Type R in price and performance, which would make the 86 more expensive, but the Civic SI has a similar price and performance to the 86 with a 1.5T that makes 205hp/192q, so Toyobaru could have done something like that. Some might prefer the higher displacement NA engine over the more torquey turbo, but the turbo is a better platform for easy, cheap power gains, so the 86 could be moved to a turbo engine at the same price, and it could be seen as an improvement.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

It is fat, but it is faster 0-60 than the 86 and in other metrics, and it does it at a price that competes with the 86 with a turbo and an engine with good potential that is cheap to extract more power.

Sorry Australian prices are so different, but your statements don't apply here.

All the cars I mentioned are $25k +/- a few thousand and are turbocharged or even AWD. There is no reason why Toyobaru couldn't do a turbocharged engine in the 86 from an economics perspective. If the Hyundai Genesis Coupe can sell less cars than the 86 and make a 2.0T then Toyobaru could do it.

Adding a turbo system to the current platform and doing a tranny upgrade and everything puts the engine/car closer to the Civic Type R in price and performance, which would make the 86 more expensive, but the Civic SI has a similar price and performance to the 86 with a 1.5T that makes 205hp/192q, so Toyobaru could have done something like that. Some might prefer the higher displacement NA engine over the more torquey turbo, but the turbo is a better platform for easy, cheap power gains, so the 86 could be moved to a turbo engine at the same price, and it could be seen as an improvement.

My statements apply here in AU though, other countries, I don't know, Japan, Europe not sure what they have.

I'm also NOT comparing against AWD or FWD.

As for America, that's your neck of the woods, I'm more concered about what is released here and Asia.

As for cost, I only put in costs to compare, relating the AUD and the USD is the same as relating rhe USD to the Yen.

I am keen on cost comparisons though.

How much more do you think a 86 would cost in USD with a factory turbo vs the NA version?

[Clutch Dog]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

My statements apply here in AU though, other countries, I don't know, Japan, Europe not sure what they have.

I'm also NOT comparing against AWD or FWD.

As for America, that's your neck of the woods, I'm more concered about what is released here and Asia.

As for cost, I only put in costs to compare, relating the AUD and the USD is the same as relating rhe USD to the Yen.

I am keen on cost comparisons though.

How much more do you think a 86 would cost in USD with a factory turbo vs the NA version?

not to pip in but i wanted to stab at this last point


I firmly believe a truely well sorted out turbo build for the 2nd gen 86 would push starting costs over 30k USD and higher trim models into 40K USD

and a sub compact 2 door thats smaller than the mustang ( or what have you in aussieland)
is in the same price bracket and while you migh tnot get the same feel or performance. the common folk see that as "more car" for the money.



also the Brisbane is up in these neck of the woods. hows about that