That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[Dzmitry]

Yes, the FA24 is going to feel better all around, no doubt. The linearity of it will make it feel... not very fast in some way, as is the nature of linear powered sports cars (I actually like the way it feels). But since I like the way the current gen feels, the new gen will probably feel incredible in comparison.

Some additional points I noticed when I did my data plot some time back.
1. Power for 22 BRZ is equivalent with power for 17 BRZ at approximately 3200 and 4200 RPM respectively. In other words, acceleration in the 22 at 3200 RPM will feel equivalent to that of the 17 at 4200 RPM where it starts to take off. Obviously, we can all agree that this will be a much better daily driver.
2. Peak power that's achieved in the 17 at 7000 RPM is achieved by about 6000 RPM in the 22.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by ZDan

FWIW here's my effort at plotting my '17's dyno results (178rwhp on Dynojet) vs. the dyno plot shown on the '22 BRZ dash scaled by the same rwhp/hp factor of 178/205 = 0.87:

Thank-you for plotting that out, great job!

[Blighty]

This was an interesting pov.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Yes, the FA24 is going to feel better all around, no doubt. The linearity of it will make it feel... not very fast in some way, as is the nature of linear powered sports cars (I actually like the way it feels). But since I like the way the current gen feels, the new gen will probably feel incredible in comparison.

Yeah, they should feel similar. Flat torque up to near peak hp is a good feeling. My 2.9 Cayman had a torque curve that had a broad peak centered on the midrange and fell off more noticeably with higher rpm though power still climbed. This felt *boring*, I wasn't even sure if I should continue revving past 6500ish. Don't have my dyno plot handy, but it looked similar in shape to this curve for the Cayman R:


Ah, found it, leaving Cayman R plot above so people know how boring that car's output characteristics are too. 2.9 Cayman dyno below...

Power for 22 BRZ is equivalent with power for 17 BRZ at approximately 3200 and 4200 RPM respectively. In other words, acceleration in the 22 at 3200 RPM will feel equivalent to that of the 17 at 4200 RPM where it starts to take off.

What this means is that the '22 will pull harder from 45mph *in 4th gear* (3300rpm assuming same trans ratios but taller 4.1 diff) vs. the current model *in 3rd gear* (4200rpm). That's something! And of course you can still leave it in 3rd and accelerate faster still


2.9 Cayman dyno:

[alex87f]

Originally Posted by ZDan

What this means is that the '22 will pull harder from 45mph *in 4th gear* (3300rpm assuming same trans ratios but taller 4.1 diff) vs. the current model *in 3rd gear* (4200rpm). That's something! And of course you can still leave it in 3rd and accelerate faster still

You're confusing engine torque and wheel torque. The torque @3200rpm should indeed be similar to a first-gen car at around 4200rpm, but you'll still be in a gear with a lower reduction ratio, and have less wheel torque.

So yes, it has more torque, but no, MY22 4th gear acceleration =/= MY20 3rd gear acceleration

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by alex87f

You're confusing engine torque and wheel torque. The torque @3200rpm should indeed be similar to a first-gen car at around 4200rpm, but you'll still be in a gear with a lower reduction ratio, and have less wheel torque.

So yes, it has more torque, but no, MY22 4th gear acceleration =/= MY20 3rd gear acceleration

We don't even know the individual gear or final drive ratios for the 22 yet. Yes it can be assumed that they will be the same and can be compared but all the numbers could be very different once we have the actual ratios.

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by Blighty

This was an interesting pov.

Gosh, why did I watch this video!? I had never noticed the front license plate mount, incoherent fascia lines, etc. before! Now I can't unsee them! Duck wing was the only thing that bothered me before.

Hopefully they'll change a few things before mass production after looking at public response. Or maybe a tS version or 2026 facelift might solve them!

[Ultramaroon]

Meh. I figured they would ruin it. Now even more, when I look at my '13...

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by alex87f

You're confusing engine torque and wheel torque. The torque @3200rpm should indeed be similar to a first-gen car at around 4200rpm, but you'll still be in a gear with a lower reduction ratio, and have less wheel torque.
So yes, it has more torque, but no, MY22 4th gear acceleration =/= MY20 3rd gear acceleration

At 45mph, the '22 in 4th, even with a taller 4.1 final drive, will out-pull the current model in 3rd. But not for long as the earlier model is coming out of the torque dip...

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No no they didn't.

I knew this was a waste of time.

The original static image on the dash in the 2017+ followed the same shape (including dip) of actual dynos from stock engines. Do you really find it that far of a stretch that they used an actual dyno chart as the base for the static image or do you think the whole chart just coincidentally follows the shape of real dyno charts of our engine? And going off that, do you really think it's a stretch they followed the same technique when creating the static image on the new car? The peak torque on the new static image is at least inline with the specs that Subaru has released.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

The original static image on the dash in the 2017+ followed the same shape (including dip) of actual dynos from stock engines. Do you really find it that far of a stretch that they used an actual dyno chart as the base for the static image or do you think the whole chart just coincidentally follows the shape of real dyno charts of our engine? And going off that, do you really think it's a stretch they followed the same technique when creating the static image on the new car? The peak torque on the new static image is at least inline with the specs that Subaru has released.

Did you read further or just assume?

What they did not do was take the mule and throw it on a dyno and go "close enough".

I have not once disputed that graphic as accurate. For a lab tested engine under ideal circumstances and atmosphere as per ISO testing standards.

I get to watch the pretty line follow the printed graph on my 2020. It does the same thing no matter what the weather conditions. That is not real world data since the car does NOT perform the same in 90 degree humid weather and 30 degree dry.

What I have tried to get across is that it is not representative of what is at the wheels. We have zero clue how much of that will put to the ground. Those two numbers mean nothing to me till I see how the car uses them.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

It is a 10% drop for a fraction of a second when accelerating through it.

Maybe a fraction of a second in 1st but where it's really annoying is on the highway (~65mph) when you want to pass. In 6th there is no power, dropping to 5th puts you in the dip and dropping to 4th or 3rd turns it into a boy racer feeling pass. In 5th or 6th the dip last much longer than a fraction of a second.


Casual driving at low speeds in city traffic the low end torque is perfect. The dip doesn't bother me at all in those conditions. I spend 90% of my time on the interstate running between 65mph - 95mph so that is where it's annoying. Obviously none of this is an issue in racing conditions where you can keep it above the dip.


E85 cures it enough that it doesn't really bother me anymore.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Did you read further or just assume?

What they did not do was take the mule and throw it on a dyno and go "close enough".

I have not once disputed that graphic as accurate. For a lab tested engine under ideal circumstances and atmosphere as per ISO testing standards.

I get to watch the pretty line follow the printed graph on my 2020. It does the same thing no matter what the weather conditions. That is not real world data since the car does NOT perform the same in 90 degree humid weather and 30 degree dry.

What I have tried to get across is that it is not representative of what is at the wheels. We have zero clue how much of that will put to the ground. Those two numbers mean nothing to me till I see how the car uses them.

Literally everyone knows the graph on the dash isn't live data. You do realize no one is this thread suggested otherwise right?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

Literally everyone knows the graph on the dash isn't live data. You do realize no one is this thread suggested otherwise right?

You do realize that the whole thread was based on exactly that belief!