Jason Cammisa 2022 BRZ Hagerty Video

[RToyo86]

Originally Posted by ZDan

???
It looks lower to me. Specs say it is indeed 0.4" lower in height, and for sure the fenders are lower as well.

I worded that wrong. I agree.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Doesn't look that bad to me - but then I can't stand the slammed look.

Check out the Miata if you want some gaptastic.

I just want even wheel gap all around, i dont like the slammed look either.

[WolfpackS2k]

Mostly good video. But he's definitely spouted a bunch of naysayer BS about cost escalation for a turbo.

Blah blah, need a beefier rear diff and brakes. Huh? Rear diff is from the IS350 and the brakes (brembos) are already way way oversized for this car's power.

[ML]

didn't realize after 8 years that 1st gen sounded bad. :eyeroll:

[Racecomp Engineering]

The turbo debate is silly to me because it was just never going to happen, no matter how much anyone argued about it. Same with moving to a Toyota platform or using an inline Toyota engine. None of those things were going to happen.

EDIT: Sorry if that sounds harsh. Just knowing Subaru after all these years...I'm happy with the FA24 (in theory).

- Andrew

[brainf18]

Originally Posted by weederr33

God that wheel gap lol

The wheel gap is definitely excessive...but that's easily remedied with Eibach's or coilovers. Most 'serious' driving enthusiast are going to do that upgrade anyway

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by ML

didn't realize after 8 years that 1st gen sounded bad. :eyeroll:

I dont think the FA20 sounds particularly great, but its not awful.

But i wouldn't want piped in synthetic engine noise from the speaker though....

[etherdude]

My 2020 Hakone sounds much nicer than the 2015 FR-S. Has a nice growl without sounding buzzy. Difference in the plastic vs. aluminum intake? Difference in exhaust between 2013-2016 and 2017+? More insulation? In both cases, I block the sound port and am comparing stock exhaust and tune.

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by brainf18

This is a great video...especially if you like math! I can't wait to drive one

Thanks for posting, what a fun video!

But... piped in artificial engine sounds.... are the end of the world. I HATE synthetic electronic engine sounds. I might be crazy, but unless there's a way to turn that off (whether by factory option or aftermarket hack), it would be a deal-breaker for me. It's the ultimate in fakery that I just couldn't live with, in a world with way too much bogus, phony BS already.

As I and others have said, the 'numbers' sound good, and the new engine looks very promising. Now it's all down to a test drive (hopefully several long test drives) to see if the improved driving experience will out-weigh the blander looks.

[PulsarBeeerz]

So the main take away of the video I gather from this thread is wheel gap.

[Irace86.2.0]

My critiques are:

--Wheel torque matters more than engine torque, so I wonder if he normalized for gearing when he normalized for weight. For all I know the gearing is identical, just saying.

--The turbo debate is overdone. The car was never going to get a turbo, and I totally get the benefits of a factory turbo, but I also think it is much harder to take off a turbo system and add compression than it is to add a turbo system to a high compression motor. What he said was factually wrong that a turbo would necessitate more expense or trigger a cascade of events that would increase the weight beyond the added weight of the turbo. The fact that the WRX comes with four doors, a turbo and AWD for a similar price or that the Civic SI comes with a turbo negates his statement. The turbo system would be mildly heavier, and if it didn't add anymore power than adding displacement then nothing really needs to be strengthened.

--Subaru can develop a higher revving engine, and they could do so with this motor, but part of the higher revving nature of the JDM STI with the 2.0T is the shorter stroke, among other things.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

--Subaru can develop a higher revving engine, and they could do so with this motor, but part of the higher revving nature of the JDM STI with the 2.0T is the shorter stroke, among other things.

For me, 2.4 liters with a (slightly) *higher* rev limit is a huge WIN!

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by ZDan

For me, 2.4 liters with a (slightly) *higher* rev limit is a huge WIN!

I agree. I would rather there exist a NA option in the market besides the Miata and have the extra displacement for forced induction if someone wants to add that.

I get the turbo argument; it is typically cheaper and easier to make more power, and it is more low profile for CARB and the CHP, and the motor is already designed for boost/torque.

[D20Z]

Appears to retain major driving characteristics of first gen model, with improvements(power, stock tires now PS4) and brakes. Low CG. Should be a pleasing drive overall. I like the looks as well. Will be happy to test it.