follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Delicious Tuning
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > FT86CLUB Shared Forum > FR-S / BRZ vs....

FR-S / BRZ vs.... Area to discuss the FR-S/BRZ against its competitors [NO STREET RACING]


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-22-2014, 02:39 PM   #141
DeeezNuuuts83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: 2006 Evo IX SE
Location: Southern California
Posts: 997
Thanks: 115
Thanked 254 Times in 170 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by glamcem View Post
As I mentioned earlier it's really argue about intangible things (people's preferences, needs, wants, ..etc) but when it comes to track data numbers don't lie ..our beloved AWD cars ( STI and Evo) are no longer value and this is really sad if you ask me.. I've been reading Nasioc and Evo forums since 2005-2006 and with each generation owners were demanding more power ..this is not 2000s anymore the newer muscle cars (made in the U.S) also perform better at the track.. (and this comes from someone who is originally from Europe and owned various European cars you name it VW, Audi, BMW, Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Seat ..etc ) ..
But regarding the American cars, I can totally vouch for the improvements that they've made in the handling department, but a big part of it is also the firepower that they have under the hood. If the Mustang GT didn't have the 5.0 Coyote motor but still the 4.6-liter V-8 from before, it would be A LOT slower. Similar, we've seen enough Top Gear to see what an Evo/STI can do with bigger guns. At the end of the day, it's not the American companies' faults that the overseas companies are less willing to or capable of making higher output production motors come into fruition, but it's a big part of how a lot of these cars are improving their track performance.
DeeezNuuuts83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 02:56 PM   #142
glamcem
Senior Member
 
glamcem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Drives: 2022 BRZ Limited
Location: Orange County
Posts: 1,553
Thanks: 997
Thanked 607 Times in 404 Posts
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83 View Post
But regarding the American cars, I can totally vouch for the improvements that they've made in the handling department, but a big part of it is also the firepower that they have under the hood. If the Mustang GT didn't have the 5.0 Coyote motor but still the 4.6-liter V-8 from before, it would be A LOT slower. Similar, we've seen enough Top Gear to see what an Evo/STI can do with bigger guns. At the end of the day, it's not the American companies' faults that the overseas companies are less willing to or capable of making higher output production motors come into fruition, but it's a big part of how a lot of these cars are improving their track performance.
It's true for the Ford but GM has been using their LS engines for a while (GTO, G8) so it's good to hear they come up with a sub $40k car that can keep up with sub $100k cars

It's a shame that BRZ or FRS are not offered in FI from factory since I believe it's the only downfall of these cars
glamcem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 04:47 PM   #143
WolfpackS2k
Senior Member
 
WolfpackS2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Drives: '12 C63 P31, '23 GRC
Location: NC
Posts: 3,199
Thanks: 2,934
Thanked 2,072 Times in 1,185 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83 View Post
But regarding the American cars, I can totally vouch for the improvements that they've made in the handling department, but a big part of it is also the firepower that they have under the hood. If the Mustang GT didn't have the 5.0 Coyote motor but still the 4.6-liter V-8 from before, it would be A LOT slower. Similar, we've seen enough Top Gear to see what an Evo/STI can do with bigger guns. At the end of the day, it's not the American companies' faults that the overseas companies are less willing to or capable of making higher output production motors come into fruition, but it's a big part of how a lot of these cars are improving their track performance.
But that's exactly what we're saying, lol. That the American brands aren't lazy and actually update their power plants. And so do the Germans. Really, it's just the Japanese that are reluctant/cheap/lazy about it.
@DeeezNuuuts83

Quote:
But the GT-R, 911 Turbo and Veyron also benefit a lot from aerodynamics as well as helping with their stability, from the GT-R having something like a 0.26 Cd to the 911 Turbo and Veyron both having wings that pop-up at speed. Take those away and drive them at speed, and you'll notice a difference, and it still applies in far less powerful scenarios
The 911 has a wing that pops up at speed. So does the Cayman. This is to offset the great amount of rear end lift that is inherent in that type of vehicle design. The 911 Turbo already has a "wing" as that hump is needed to help fit all the intercooler equipment. Either way Porsche's active aerodynamic devices for the 911s and 987s are mainly for lift reduction.
__________________
Current: 2023 GRC Circuit Edition, 2012 C63 AMG P31
Past: (2) 2000 MR2 Spyder, 2017 GTI Sport, 2006 Porsche Cayman S, Supercharged 2013 BRZ-L, 2007 Honda S2000, 1992 Integra GS-R
WolfpackS2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 05:18 PM   #144
OrbitalEllipses
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Attitude
Location: MD
Posts: 10,046
Thanks: 884
Thanked 4,889 Times in 2,902 Posts
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by glamcem View Post
It's true for the Ford but GM has been using their LS engines for a while (GTO, G8) so it's good to hear they come up with a sub $40k car that can keep up with sub $100k cars
Uh, have you scoped the LT1 in the new Corvette? It's pretty ridiculous what GM's done to the OHV engine...
OrbitalEllipses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 05:29 PM   #145
glamcem
Senior Member
 
glamcem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Drives: 2022 BRZ Limited
Location: Orange County
Posts: 1,553
Thanks: 997
Thanked 607 Times in 404 Posts
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses View Post
Uh, have you scoped the LT1 in the new Corvette? It's pretty ridiculous what GM's done to the OHV engine...
please elaborate ..
glamcem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 05:39 PM   #146
OrbitalEllipses
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Attitude
Location: MD
Posts: 10,046
Thanks: 884
Thanked 4,889 Times in 2,902 Posts
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette-sports-cars.html
OrbitalEllipses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 05:39 PM   #147
chrisl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: 2006 Cayman S, 2007 Outback 2.5i
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,116
Thanks: 116
Thanked 455 Times in 303 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses View Post
Uh, have you scoped the LT1 in the new Corvette? It's pretty ridiculous what GM's done to the OHV engine...
I still think that my favorite of the GM OHV engines is the LS7 - high revving, naturally aspirated, and tons of torque at all RPMs.
chrisl is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to chrisl For This Useful Post:
Deep Six (04-27-2014)
Old 04-22-2014, 05:45 PM   #148
DeeezNuuuts83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: 2006 Evo IX SE
Location: Southern California
Posts: 997
Thanks: 115
Thanked 254 Times in 170 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k View Post
But that's exactly what we're saying, lol. That the American brands aren't lazy and actually update their power plants. And so do the Germans. Really, it's just the Japanese that are reluctant/cheap/lazy about it.
I wouldn't say that. But a lot of the American brands have been working with platforms that had a ton of room for improvement. People have been saying for a long time that a lot of American-made engines are pretty inefficient, in terms of specific output. So they had a lot to work with, and now they're reaping the benefits -- which is great for the American companies along with consumers.

When dealing with cars that already have high specific outputs but are for more mass-produced cars, it's a little more difficult to push the envelope further. If you're someone like Ferrari or Porsche, sure, you have the funding for it along with the clientele who will gladly buy it regardless of how much more it will cost to make it a sensible investment. But if you have a Honda motor or a Mitsubishi/Subaru engine with a big turbo on it, sure, you can get more power, but there will be more compromises to be made during the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k View Post
The 911 has a wing that pops up at speed. So does the Cayman. This is to offset the great amount of rear end lift that is inherent in that type of vehicle design. The 911 Turbo already has a "wing" as that hump is needed to help fit all the intercooler equipment. Either way Porsche's active aerodynamic devices for the 911s and 987s are mainly for lift reduction.
And that all helps with stability, does it not? Whether it's for reducing lift or adding downforce, the end goal is extremely similar with those two different approaches to aerodynamics aiding performance.
DeeezNuuuts83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2014, 06:07 PM   #149
DeeezNuuuts83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: 2006 Evo IX SE
Location: Southern California
Posts: 997
Thanks: 115
Thanked 254 Times in 170 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisl View Post
I still think that my favorite of the GM OHV engines is the LS7 - high revving, naturally aspirated, and tons of torque at all RPMs.
Yeah, and that definitely helped it get pretty decent highway mpg too. Which brings me to my question...

AMG's 6.2-liter was just a hair less torquey given the slight displacement deficit but even in its M156 tunes (rather than the M159 tune in the SLS AMG, which isn't really a fair comparison), it still matched or beat its hp and torque numbers in most applications above the standard C63. How come its highway mpg was so poor in comparison? I'd assume that the car had enough bottom torque to keep the car moving at highway speeds without needing too many revs (like the LS7 or even the LS3, which was also a 6.2), yet its gearing wasn't really as tall as it could've been, especially with a seven-speed transmission.
DeeezNuuuts83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2014, 10:19 AM   #150
WolfpackS2k
Senior Member
 
WolfpackS2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Drives: '12 C63 P31, '23 GRC
Location: NC
Posts: 3,199
Thanks: 2,934
Thanked 2,072 Times in 1,185 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
^I honestly can't figure that one out either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83 View Post
And that all helps with stability, does it not? Whether it's for reducing lift or adding downforce, the end goal is extremely similar with those two different approaches to aerodynamics aiding performance.
Yes, but that's not the point you were arguing really. Those aids are there so the car doesn't spin out taking a turn at 100 mph due to rear end lift. Has nothing to do with horsepower or what AWD can do for a car. Same reason Audi had to retrofit all those ugly trunk lid lips to their first gen TTs.

Quote:
People have been saying for a long time that a lot of American-made engines are pretty inefficient, in terms of specific output. So they had a lot to work with, and now they're reaping the benefits -- which is great for the American companies along with consumers.
Despite all that, for the last 20 years or so GM's small block Chevy has more or less beaten everyone with power per engine size (external dimensions). And that's honestly all that really matters when it comes down to packaging for a sports car.
__________________
Current: 2023 GRC Circuit Edition, 2012 C63 AMG P31
Past: (2) 2000 MR2 Spyder, 2017 GTI Sport, 2006 Porsche Cayman S, Supercharged 2013 BRZ-L, 2007 Honda S2000, 1992 Integra GS-R
WolfpackS2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2014, 11:53 AM   #151
DeeezNuuuts83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Drives: 2006 Evo IX SE
Location: Southern California
Posts: 997
Thanks: 115
Thanked 254 Times in 170 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Except in their home markets. Remember that in Japan, there are some taxes associated with the engine displacement, so they had no choice but to push the envelope before going bigger.
DeeezNuuuts83 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DeeezNuuuts83 For This Useful Post:
SirBrass (04-24-2014)
Old 04-23-2014, 12:35 PM   #152
GotMunchies?
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Drives: '14 WRB BRZ 6MT Limited
Location: United States
Posts: 105
Thanks: 4
Thanked 75 Times in 39 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83 View Post
Yeah, and that definitely helped it get pretty decent highway mpg too. Which brings me to my question...

AMG's 6.2-liter was just a hair less torquey given the slight displacement deficit but even in its M156 tunes (rather than the M159 tune in the SLS AMG, which isn't really a fair comparison), it still matched or beat its hp and torque numbers in most applications above the standard C63. How come its highway mpg was so poor in comparison? I'd assume that the car had enough bottom torque to keep the car moving at highway speeds without needing too many revs (like the LS7 or even the LS3, which was also a 6.2), yet its gearing wasn't really as tall as it could've been, especially with a seven-speed transmission.
I think its indicative of just how absurdly tall the gearing in the 'Vettes is (also being relative feather weights helps). Most cars with that 6.2L AMG V8 weigh quite a bit more than a Corvette.

My father runs a C6 Z06 and the motor is turning about 1200 RPM at freeway speeds in 6th gear. Mechanically, redline in 6th gear is somewhere north of 300mph.
GotMunchies? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014, 11:13 AM   #153
Sport-Tech
Senior Member
 
Sport-Tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Drives: TBD
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,583
Thanks: 665
Thanked 685 Times in 386 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k View Post
Despite all that, for the last 20 years or so GM's small block Chevy has more or less beaten everyone with power per engine size (external dimensions). And that's honestly all that really matters when it comes down to packaging for a sports car.
Depends on how narrowly you define packaging. I'd include low weight and low COG as engine packaging essentials for sports cars, not sure how well Chevy does on that front...
Sport-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014, 01:15 PM   #154
chrisl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: 2006 Cayman S, 2007 Outback 2.5i
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,116
Thanks: 116
Thanked 455 Times in 303 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sport-Tech View Post
Depends on how narrowly you define packaging. I'd include low weight and low COG as engine packaging essentials for sports cars, not sure how well Chevy does on that front...
Quite well - the pushrod V8 is quite a bit lighter than an OHC engine of similar displacement (an LS7 is around ~450lb), and it fits pretty low in the car as well. The center of gravity of a recent corvette is somewhere around 17.5-18", which puts it in the same ballpark as the BRZ/FRS.
chrisl is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BRZ/FRS vs 2015 WRX Djratrap FR-S / BRZ vs.... 185 09-14-2015 11:47 PM
First look at 2015 Subaru WRX dtrop Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 232 05-11-2015 10:33 AM
2015 Subaru WRX STI vividracing Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 112 02-11-2014 09:48 PM
Thoughts on 2015 WRX vs 13/14 BRZ Antheezy FR-S / BRZ vs.... 286 01-13-2014 05:45 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.