All-New 2022 Subaru BRZ Makes Global Debut

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Don't forget the crowd that literally has said they cannot daily drive the 86 because it doesn't have enough power.... I can't merge into traffic waaahhh, I was in 5th gear going 60kmh and stabbed the gas and almost died trying to merge, waahhhhh.

Can I have: 'what is a downshift for 100 points please'

Well yeah, my Skyactiv Mazda 3 (145hp?) does just fine in every driving scenario, except powersliding out of corners. I don't need 500hp, just enough to break the tires loose in 2nd gear easily and with a clutch pop in 3rd.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

Well yeah, my Skyactiv Mazda 3 (145hp?) does just fine in every driving scenario, except powersliding out of corners. I don't need 500hp, just enough to break the tires loose in 2nd gear easily and with a clutch pop in 3rd.

Low rolling resistance tires would do the trick then, and as a plus they'd last pretty long too... Usually... I don't advise burnouts.

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by Red-86

It’s still power that matters though. A torque figure in isolation tells you nothing, it is the torque x revs that provides the actual power that accelerates the car. Look at diesel engines for example, lots of torque, but with their relatively low redlines, often less powerful and slower than an ICE with less torque but a higher redline.

So the first version was correct, it is still ‘power to weight’ that matters. No race teams talk about ‘torque to weight’ as it is irrelevant and tells you nothing about performance in isolation. Power to weight is what delivers performance numbers.

But I'd argue torque to weight is what sells during a test ride. Non-car people say, "Wow, this thing has great pick-up." What they're feeling is aggressive e-throttle tuning and low end torque.

[Lelandjt]

Originally Posted by Red-86

It’s still power that matters though. A torque figure in isolation tells you nothing, it is the torque x revs that provides the actual power that accelerates the car. Look at diesel engines for example, lots of torque, but with their relatively low redlines, often less powerful and slower than an ICE with less torque but a higher redline.

So the first version was correct, it is still ‘power to weight’ that matters. No race teams talk about ‘torque to weight’ as it is irrelevant and tells you nothing about performance in isolation. Power to weight is what delivers performance numbers.

But I'd argue torque to weight is what sells during a test ride. Non-car people say, "Wow, this thing has great pick-up." What they're feeling is aggressive e-throttle tuning and low end torque. Jane and Joe average don't want to rev and don't want to hear or feel the tranny shift.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I often wonder about the huge difference between reported US 0-60mph times vs 0-100kmh (0-62mph) times achieved here in Australia or over in Europe.

Take the twins for example, various US sources report high 5s to 60mph. But instrumented testing here reveals 0-100kmh times of mid-high 7s. Nearly 2s difference cannot be explained by an extra 2mph, one extra gear change and not including 1 foot of roll out, can it? I’d expect all that to add 1s at most, but a 2s discrepancy is not uncommon.



Simple, cheap RWD cars like the twins will always suffer in 0-60 times vs sophisticated and over-engineered cars with dedicated launch modes and, especially, AWD. Wider, stickier rear tyres would help address some of the twin’s traction issues at least.

0-60 is a pretty irrelevant metric on a track or on the road once you are moving, but since the only ‘race time’ many road cars see are red light drag races from a dig, people obsess over it. For me it is in gear acceleration that matters and makes daily driving more pleasant.

Mid to high 7s for an auto usually. My car has open flash header and e85 tune. Day and night difference from stock. Again though, relevant acceleration numbers require hard launches with these things.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I often wonder about the huge difference between reported US 0-60mph times vs 0-100kmh (0-62mph) times achieved here in Australia or over in Europe.

Take the twins for example, various US sources report high 5s to 60mph. But instrumented testing here reveals 0-100kmh times of mid-high 7s. Nearly 2s difference cannot be explained by an extra 2mph, one extra gear change and not including 1 foot of roll out, can it? I’d expect all that to add 1s at most, but a 2s discrepancy is not uncommon.

I haven't seen a magazine figure under 6.2 seconds personally. That said, the auto is significantly slower, explaining the high 7s for those cars.

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

But I'd argue torque to weight is what sells during a test ride.

It still makes no sense to focus on ‘torque to weight’ instead of ‘power to weight’.

You could stick a John Deere diesel tractor engine in the BRZ that has 340Nm (250 lb-ft) which is 90Nm more than the 250Nm in the FA24D, but the JD engine would max out at 60kW (80HP) because the torque peaks early then drops away and the thing has a 2,300RPM redline. It would feel like a slug and be slow as hell compared to the FA24D in the new BRZ which only has 250Nm of torque but which makes torque all the way to 7,000RPM.

You can’t really feel torque, you can only feel the power that the combination of torque x RPMs is creating. 200HP is 200HP to the butt dyno, regardless of how the engine makes it.

For example.

Engine A makes a peak of 200HP as follows:
203Nm x 7,000RPM

Engine B makes a peak of 200HP as follows:
406Nm x 3,500RPM

If engine A revs to 7k as quickly as engine B revs to 3.5k, both will accelerate the same car at exactly the same rate. Sitting in both cars, blindfolded and with earplugs in, your backside could not tell engine A from engine B, because physics. All you would feel is 200HP and without a tacho or any engine noise to tell you what the RPMs are, you have no way of knowing the precise torque to RPM equation that is moving your car down the road.

Non-car people say, "Wow, this thing has great pick-up." What they're feeling is aggressive e-throttle tuning and low end torque.

Let’s leave throttle tuning out since that is just perception based on pedal travel and response.

It is true that an engine that makes more torque sooner will as a general rule provide more low end power depending on how quickly the engine can rev. But again, it is the low end power you are feeling, not the torque.

If I made you an incredibly fast revving engine, like an LFA V10, and it has bugger all peak torque but a huge RPM redline and the ability to rev to that redline in a split second, it would still give you the instant shove that a higher torque, lower revving engine would.

This actually brings up one of the performance characteristics that isn’t mentioned enough, which is how quickly an engine can rev to redline. You don’t need huge torque if you have a fast revving engine with a high redline. The reason some NA sports car engine feel gutless is that it takes too long for them to rev out into their powerband.

Another way of looking at this is sportbikes. Anyone who has ever ridden a supersport bike would know they are incredibly quick, and give you all the shove you could want. Even though some big cruisers have way more torque, the supersports are way quicker because they rev so quickly compared to the cruisers more tractor like engines. Power (torque x RPMs) is what matters and what you experience through your butt.

Tl;dr summary - torque is important in the equation but it doesn’t tell the story in isolation. Power is what you actually feel and what actually moves the car down the road more or less quickly.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I often wonder about the huge difference between reported US 0-60mph times vs 0-100kmh (0-62mph) times achieved here in Australia

Your cars are upside down so don't have the traction to launch as fast.

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

Mid to high 7s for an auto usually.

I’m referring to manual.

PDrive here have tested numerous manual twins downunder for 0-100kmh and always get mid-high 7s. And they don’t exactly exactly launch them with mechanical sympathy.

Examples:

2015 86:

7.4s

2017 86:

7.79s

2019 BRZ:

7.77s

Maybe Australia gets the Friday afternoon builds.

[Quentin]

I can get more torque through gear multiplication... I can’t do the same with power. A hypothetical 150hp, 200lb-ft 86 would get absolutely smoked by a 200hp, 150lb-ft 86 on everything other than 0-30.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stokeless]

glad I went for the 2020 BRZ PP model, not feeling gen 2

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Red-86

I often wonder about the huge difference between reported US 0-60mph times vs 0-100kmh (0-62mph) times achieved here in Australia or over in Europe.

Take the twins for example, various US sources report high 5s to 60mph. But instrumented testing here reveals 0-100kmh times of mid-high 7s. Nearly 2s difference cannot be explained by an extra 2mph, one extra gear change and not including 1 foot of roll out, can it? I’d expect all that to add 1s at most, but a 2s discrepancy is not uncommon.



Simple, cheap RWD cars like the twins will always suffer in 0-60 times vs sophisticated and over-engineered cars with dedicated launch modes and, especially, AWD. Wider, stickier rear tyres would help address some of the twin’s traction issues at least.

0-60 is a pretty irrelevant metric on a track or on the road once you are moving, but since the only ‘race time’ many road cars see are red light drag races from a dig, people obsess over it. For me it is in gear acceleration that matters and makes daily driving more pleasant.

The new Twins feel even better. More tq lower in the rev range vs gen 1.

[black bnr32]

So...what do we know about this new rear suspension?

[ElijahF]

I'm overall satisfied with the specs of the new BRZ, but the styling is still growing on me. I like the front and sides, but the rear reminded me of one of those Accord coupe things (although it reminded some people of an NSX so to each their own).

The new engine should feel great with more HP and torque and that torque peaking at 3700 RPM. Suspension improvements should make the car handle better than it did before too.