GR86 ACTUAL 0-60 and Weight

[WolfpackS2k]

If we're going to be honest with ourselves, the real life measuring stick is 5-60 mph. How often does someone decide to do a full bore launch from a stop light on public roads? Almost never, and we don't even need to mention how irresponsible that is.

Most of the time, the urge to NAIL IT comes after you've already started moving a bit.

[rawpoly]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Why does it say "Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec."? I was aware that timing for a quarter mile starts from a standstill. So is it not really a 14.0 sec , but more likely a 14.3 sec?

It looks that C&D changed this procedure back in '19:

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...hange-rollout/


I believe that it is not an apples to apples comparison with the older S2k timings.

Lol.

You really seem to have an issue(across multiple threads and topics) with the new car being much faster than the old car.

Seems like a rather specific axe to grind.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by rawpoly

Lol.

You really seem to have an issue(across multiple threads and topics) with the new car being much faster than the old car.

Seems like a rather specific axe to grind.

Buyers remorse

[Lantanafrs2]

We saw it physically beat the miata and s2k in the video. Good enough

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

If we're going to be honest with ourselves, the real life measuring stick is 5-60 mph. How often does someone decide to do a full bore launch from a stop light on public roads? Almost never, and we don't even need to mention how irresponsible that is.

Most of the time, the urge to NAIL IT comes after you've already started moving a bit.

Sure... Yeah.... Totally never did that...

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Why does it say "Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec."? I was aware that timing for a quarter mile starts from a standstill. So is it not really a 14.0 sec , but more likely a 14.3 sec?

It looks that C&D changed this procedure back in '19:

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...hange-rollout/


I believe that it is not an apples to apples comparison with the older S2k timings.

The old way they did it, starting from 3mph, is 100% fine for cars with around the s2000 and twins acceleration times. I wouldn't be surprised is the 1ft rollout was a tiny bit slower than the 3mph starting point.

EDIT: In fact it is more beneficial to the s2000. They measured the BRZ at 1ft rollout as .3 seconds. That means they effectively started timing when the car was going ~2.27mph, whereas they would of started timing a bit later (with a lower overall time) if they timed it @ 3mph.

The example they used was the C8 Corvette, which gained .1 second in the new drag race method. The new system was to be more accurate in this upper level tier of super car performance.

[alphasaur]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Why does it say "Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec."? I was aware that timing for a quarter mile starts from a standstill. So is it not really a 14.0 sec , but more likely a 14.3 sec?

It looks that C&D changed this procedure back in '19:

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...hange-rollout/


I believe that it is not an apples to apples comparison with the older S2k timings.

This is how dragstrips do it and it's pretty much the standard so it's easy to compare across different platforms. Look at what stockm s2000s are hitting in the 1/4 on forums.

"The new brz is shockingly quick up a canyon road"

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by rawpoly

Lol.

You really seem to have an issue(across multiple threads and topics) with the new car being much faster than the old car.

Seems like a rather specific axe to grind.

Axe to grind because I don't believe that the new car outputs 245+hp at the crank or 209whp? Ok!

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

We saw it physically beat the miata and s2k in the video. Good enough

Pretty fine with the miata. Mileage of the s2k?

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by alphasaur

"The new brz is shockingly quick up a canyon road"

Matt Farah's review is much better and up to the point. I really like it. Not sure why some tubers still prefer to compare the platform with a car from the late '90s or early '20s. It was an icon at that period, but times are now different.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Matt Farah's review is much better and up to the point. I really like it. Not sure why some tubers still prefer to compare the platform with a car from the late '90s or early '20s. It was an icon at that period, but times are now different.

They compare it simply because pretty much every 'cheap' modern 'sports' car has ditched all of the basic things this car has. Its using a sports car design template from a bygon era.

Perhaps for you and I nikitopo we dont notice it, but it would be particularly noticeable for car journalists, who drive all the modern cars.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Blighty

They compare it simply because pretty much every 'cheap' modern 'sports' car has ditched all of the basic things this car has. Its using a sports car design template from a bygon era.

Yup. The 86/BRZ and the Miata are the only cars to adhere to the classic sports car formula since the S2000 went away. There’s just nothing to compare it to in the current market besides the Miata, and that’s a convertible. You could include the 350/370Z, but it’s more of a grand tourer than a sports car.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Yup. The 86/BRZ and the Miata are the only cars to adhere to the classic sports car formula since the S2000 went away. There’s just nothing to compare it to in the current market besides the Miata, and that’s a convertible. You could include the 350/370Z, but it’s more of a grand tourer than a sports car.

Not sure what is the classic sports car formula that other car manufacturers don't have nowadays. Maybe cars like the 86/BRZ and the MX-5 belong to the entry level sports car category while others play higher?

If that's the case, then the S2000 was considered already by its introduction a level up comparing to the MX-5. Here is a review article of related cars back in '03 :

Nissan 350Z: $30,000
Honda S2000: $33,060
Audi TT: $39,660
BMW Z4 3.0: $40,945
Porsche Boxster: $43,365

The base price of a MX-5 was $22,363 at that time. A S2000 was closer in price to an Audi TT or a BMW Z4 than a MX-5. Same can be said about performance figures like quarter-to-mile from standstill at that time

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...parison-tests/

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Not sure what is the classic sports car formula that other car manufacturers don't have nowadays. Maybe cars like the 86/BRZ and the MX-5 belong to the entry level sports car category while others play higher?

If that's the case, then the S2000 was considered already by its introduction a level up comparing to the MX-5. Here is a review article of related cars back in '03 :

Nissan 350Z: $30,000
Honda S2000: $33,060
Audi TT: $39,660
BMW Z4 3.0: $40,945
Porsche Boxster: $43,365

The base price of a MX-5 was $22,363 at that time. A S2000 was closer in price to an Audi TT or a BMW Z4 than a MX-5. Same can be said about performance figures like quarter-to-mile from standstill at that time

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...parison-tests/

It's definitely a more subjective definition than I'd like. To nail it down I'd call it the lightweight F/R segment. Where is the cutoff for lightweight? Who knows, but I'd place it somewhere around 3200lbs.

Wiki's sports car definition:

A sports car is a car designed with an emphasis on dynamic performance, such as handling, acceleration, top speed, or thrill of driving.

It's pretty broad, and 'thrill of driving' allows for plenty of personal interpretation.

[alphasaur]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Not sure what is the classic sports car formula that other car manufacturers don't have nowadays. Maybe cars like the 86/BRZ and the MX-5 belong to the entry level sports car category while others play higher?

If that's the case, then the S2000 was considered already by its introduction a level up comparing to the MX-5. Here is a review article of related cars back in '03 :

Nissan 350Z: $30,000
Honda S2000: $33,060
Audi TT: $39,660
BMW Z4 3.0: $40,945
Porsche Boxster: $43,365

The base price of a MX-5 was $22,363 at that time. A S2000 was closer in price to an Audi TT or a BMW Z4 than a MX-5. Same can be said about performance figures like quarter-to-mile from standstill at that time

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...parison-tests/

The forumula is literally just simplicity. Rwd, decent engine, good transmission, good driving dynamics. The simplicity makes it lightweight. The only other car that may hit it as well are maybe the boxster and evora but they're priced quite a bit higher.