All-New 2022 Subaru BRZ Makes Global Debut

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

Do you think the aftermarket will sell non-moving headlights that drop significant weight? I'll be looking to cut any weight I can ahead of the front wheels.

Your not gonna drop enough weight to warrant the costs

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

I may be using the wrong wording then. By saying the ratios are closer through the multiplier, I am referring to how quickly the car will rev through the gear vs what the RPM drop will be at the shift. I am aware that the RPM drop is the same no matter what diff.

"Closer ratios" means the ratios are, closer... Less rpm drop between gears.

You've stated that *actually* you want TALLER 1st and 2nd gears, giving 5mph more in 1st, a bit more in 2nd, with other overall ratios remaining the same. So what you really want is a closer-ratio transmission.

Anyway, 4.1 vs. 4.3 doesn't make any difference to me in the 13-16 and 17+ cars, I've driven both, there's not much in it as far as enjoyment on the street.

New car with 20% more displacement and torque is gonna be a lot of fun anyway, with a 4.3, 4.1, 3.9, or even taller (which I don't expect). 3.9 diff certainly wouldn't kill the character of the car, far from it.
FWIW 3.77 diff would give the desired +5mph in 1st with the existing transmission ratio!

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by ZDan

"Closer ratios" means the ratios are, closer... Less rpm drop between gears.

You've stated that *actually* you want TALLER 1st and 2nd gears, giving 5mph more in 1st, a bit more in 2nd, with other overall ratios remaining the same. So what you really want is a closer-ratio transmission.

Anyway, 4.1 vs. 4.3 doesn't make any difference to me in the 13-16 and 17+ cars, I've driven both, there's not much in it as far as enjoyment on the street.

New car with 20% more displacement and torque is gonna be a lot of fun anyway, with a 4.3, 4.1, 3.9, or even taller (which I don't expect). 3.9 diff certainly wouldn't kill the character of the car, far from it.
FWIW 3.77 diff would give the desired +5mph in 1st with the existing transmission ratio!

Yes, and a 3.77 would also be something near 12-15 mph difference after 3 gears to redline. To me, that's very noticeable, as I would be waiting much longer to shift, especially by the 3rd gear. It would also make any gears above that pretty much useless as road legal speeds would have already been far exceeded. Now I know that these speeds are already exceeded after 3 gears even with a 4.3, but with a 3.77 I could go through 2 gears and already be riding on highway speeds, and that's just no fun to me. The reason I mention the 1st and 2nd gear being taller for the second gen (particularly the 1st gear) is because it has a good bit more power, and it is already a BIT short for me now, so it will feel even shorter now with how quick the car will get up to redline from the power bump. This is why I believe a 4.1 would match the new gen pretty well and be comparable to gen1 with a 4.3.

Again, this is all subjective. I just love changing the gears 5-6 times in 10-15 seconds... it's fun!

[dodj]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Makes me wonder how we ever managed with the old three on the tree!

I learned to drive in a 1965 Dodge Fargo with three on the tree! No doors. In the Haliburton Highlands.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Again, this is all subjective. I just love changing the gears 5-6 times in 10-15 seconds... it's fun!

It is fun when the ratios are good and the mechanism is sweeet, which is the case with the current-gen I don't think they'll screw it up...

You would have *hated* my 987.2 Cayman! Geared so tall... But the mechanism was not nearly as good as the BRZ's so not as much of a loss.

I may have given the impression that I *want* taller gearing, but as far as I'm concerned if they stick with 4.3 I'm fine with that. Given the big increase in torque combined with need to keep mpg reasonable with the bigger engine I bet they make overall gearing ~10% taller, whether they do it with transmission ratios or diff ratio.

[JesseG]

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

They have built the GR Yaris on their own and no it’s not just a Yaris with a better engine. Basically it has its own chassis, unique engine and different body panels. It’s a new sports car with a Yaris looking body on it.

I’m very impressed with the GR Yaris, and I really hope it’s a sign of things to come from Toyota. I’m worried that North America won’t get cars like this though. Imagine how awesome a GR 86 could be. Give the car to a division of the company that can take it to the next level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No they didn't.

Yes they did.

https://citroenvie.com/why-citroens-...e%20law%20also.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by JesseG

Imagine how awesome a GR 86 could be. Give the car to a division of the company that can take it to the next level.

... you sure you want to imagine how awesome it will be?

because Toyota did produce a GR 86...

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122663

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by AnalogMan

My 2019 WRX (in the US) has adaptive headlights. They turn in the direction of the front wheels. Mine has a manual transmission so it doesn't have the Eyesight package. The turning headlights are a noticeable improvement over fixed beams, especially on dark, twisty country roads.

And?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

Yes they did.

https://citroenvie.com/why-citroens-...e%20law%20also.

A whole article from a Citron website that reeks of conspiracy theory. Now show me the law they cite.

"Whenever the US makes such a ruling, it applies as well in Canada as Canada has a habit of rubber-stamping the US rules to allow for efficiency in manufacturing in Canadian auto industry branch plants. It ended up that as of Jan. 1, 1971, any new Citroën brought into Canada or the U.S. had to have a modified straight-ahead lighting system with no covering shield."

"In effect, Citroën’s headlight engineering had been stifled until 1975 when the U.S. manufacturers could catch up and market their “new invention”
Oh look they likely changed the law in 1975 so if it was in Canada at all it lasted a whole 5 years.


They have every excuse in the book why Citron failed here except for the fact that they were total crap death machines back then.

One way or the other if the law ever did exist in Canada it hasn't been on place for 45 years or so and is not relevant now.

[Tokay444]

I’m not arguing that they weren’t shit. The lights weren’t allowed. The end.

[Tokay444]

Here.
https://mashable.com/2015/07/20/ford-smart-headlights/

[Tokay444]

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cul...eadlight-tech/

[Tokay444]

https://blog.dupontregistry.com/merc...al-in-the-usa/