GR86 Real World Road Tests & Reviews

[Ash_89]

Originally Posted by ayau

I could see Toyota/Subaru giving the 2017+ final drive for the mid year refresh. Wish they would just give us the more aggressive FD right off the bat. I hate modifying cars and don't want to modify the FD myself.

Maybe it was a matter of balance when considering the ~7K RPM redline, in the the SG review above they already wish it revved higher.

[knapper]

Looks like Savagegeese put out a nice video today:

Promising dyno results: 209HP and 175lbft torque!

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by knapper

Looks like Savagegeese put out a nice video today:

Promising dyno results: 209HP and 175lbft torque!

Welcome to the thread!

It looks like a massive improvement, but I’m wondering about the lower half of the 1st Gen’s plot. Where’s the torque below the dip? There’s supposed to be a high torque area around 3k.

Originally Posted by mazeroni

What's interesting is the dyno of 209hp/ 175 torque vs the 162hp/ 130 torque of the new vs 2020.



That's a massive 47hp - math is hard /45ft-lb improvement. Well above what is shown on paper.

The engine must be making a lot more power than advertised.

[weederr33]

Originally Posted by knapper

Looks like Savagegeese put out a nice video today:

Promising dyno results: 209HP and 175lbft torque!

I am pleased about those numbers. I really want to drive one now. Also this video made me want to jump back to team Toyota after I began liking the BRZ

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by mazeroni

What's interesting is the dyno of 209hp/ 175 torque vs the 162hp/ 130 torque of the new vs 2020.



That's a massive 47hp - math is hard /45ft-lb improvement. Well above what is shown on paper.

The engine must be making a lot more power than advertised.

Not convinced that the new car makes more power than advertised. If they dyno'ed both cars on the same day, then something is wrong with the '20 model (out of scale MAF mapping?). These models were reading close to the 177-178whp range and this particular dyno looks to read quite HIGH too.


Btw. there was a video comment that the old engine felt like a repurposed economy car engine. It was certainly a smaller displacement engine and it was based on a fuel economy engine design (FB20), but it was totally redesigned. I would say much more redesigned comparing to the 2.4lt family of Ascent engines.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by mazeroni

What's interesting is the dyno of 209hp/ 175 torque vs the 162hp/ 130 torque of the new vs 2020.



That's a massive 47hp - math is hard /45ft-lb improvement. Well above what is shown on paper.

The engine must be making a lot more power than advertised.

Something is not right. We are talking 21% drivetrain loss vs rated crank HP for the 20' compared to 9% vs rated crank HP for the 22'. The torque curve for the 20' doesn't look like any I have ever seen posted before on a stock car. It is either different dyno, different day, dyno'd in different gear. Something is up.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by knapper

Looks like Savagegeese put out a nice video today:

Great video, but I'm not sure I understand the conclusion. Basically, "the Miata is the better car, well except all these issues when you drive it on the street, and oh yea, it sucks on the track" (OK I'm paraphrasing). So it goes back to what I said earlier, the Miata is the best car as long as you don't want to really drive it.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

Something is not right. We are talking 21% drivetrain loss vs rated crank HP for the 20' compared to 9% vs rated crank HP for the 22'. The torque curve for the 20' doesn't look like any I have ever seen posted before on a stock car. It is either different dyno, different day, dyno'd in different gear. Something is up.

My best bet is that the dyno pull for the 20' starts late. You can see the buildup is well into the RPM's and doesn't get to the flat torque range until past the dip (probably not 100% throttle until around then). Why it was done that way, I'm not sure.

I believe it was simply to see the peak numbers difference, not so much to see curve comparisons.

EDIT: Also, the 21% drivetrain loss isn't unrealistic for the twins. Some of the highest power numbers the first gen twins get on dyno's that read high are in the 180's. Some of the lowest are in the 120-130's. Another bet here - that the rated power of 200/205 was a bit "high" compared to the actual power our cars produced. Hence the long complaint for lack of power in this car. My 115HP 1.7L civic feels almost as quick at times (mostly a butt dyno feeling, obviously it's much slower). Not here to start that conversation though, I believe the twins have adequate power, I'm just speculating these power numbers you are talking about. And it's quite possible that crank HP isn't really 200 as advertised... but I don't know.

9% loss for the 22' could speculate that they actually put out a good bit of power compared to what's advertised.

This is definitely just speculation, but it's certainly not impossible. I don't think that dyno plot is making anything crazy up, it may not be perfect, but I doubt it's off by much.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by daiheadjai

LOL. I just dropped off my AP1 for paint restoration, dent repair and paint protection film - my wife doesn't want me to sell it as it's "our" car, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't feel some paranoia driving that around - and the concern about getting replacement parts is real.
Really hoping to get into a GR86, especially once the little ones can climb in the back themselves....

Yeah, I always kept the car in my line of sight and never parked it outdoors for extended periods of time.

Both me and another S2k owner who tracks as much as I do (our cars see more on track miles than street miles, if not double) both went through tough times with engine fires and the rebuilds for both of us were painful. He was out for 3 years and me, one. That alone means the car is not worth it to really drive this hard without massive financial repercussions (moreso than a new, still-in-production, car).

So... I sold the car and am moving on.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

My best bet is that the dyno pull for the 20' starts late. You can see the buildup is well into the RPM's and doesn't get to the flat torque range until past the dip (probably not 100% throttle until around then). Why it was done that way, I'm not sure.

I believe it was simply to see the peak numbers difference, not so much to see curve comparisons.

Even starting late, it is not what we have seen on other dyno charts. I can believe the gen 1 peak numbers, they seem to very low 160's to low 170's depending on the dyno and the conditions. But the gen 2 numbers seem way high when you look at the percentage of loss from the dyno'd wheel output vs factory claimed crank HP. They wouldn't have been the same, but the delta should have been closer.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Great video, but I'm not sure I understand the conclusion. Basically, "the Miata is the better car, well except all these issues when you drive it on the street, and oh yea, it sucks on the track" (OK I'm paraphrasing). So it goes back to what I said earlier, the Miata is the best car as long as you don't want to really drive it.

As someone who tracked a ND2, my own AP2 S2k and a twin on the same track on the SAME day, I gotta say I think I know what he means.

The ND2 is fun but not serious. Think of it like a night out for bowling, beer and wings. Great time? Sure. Best time of your life? Hardly.

The S2000 is the ND2 "grown up". More serious engine, more serious suspension tuning, better equipped for track shenanigans out of the box (full adjustable corners ftw). This is your night out in Paris, the kind of night you might consider to propose to your significant other.

The GR86 sounds like a night you fall in love with him/her and MIGHT consider (s)he is the one. Might not be proposal night but it is special.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

Even starting late, it is not what we have seen on other dyno charts. I can believe the gen 1 peak numbers, they seem to very low 160's to low 170's depending on the dyno and the conditions. But the gen 2 numbers seem way high when you look at the percentage of loss from the dyno'd wheel output vs factory claimed crank HP. They wouldn't have been the same, but the delta should have been closer.

Agreed that it's slightly odd. But he mentions they did 3 pulls that were all consistent with the lowest number coming out to be 206whp. So unless there some hidden scaling they did with the 22', I can't see how the data would be skewed. I also don't expect Savagegeese to even try and skew something like this, as it would make no sense. But I guess just for additional proof, it will be interesting to see how the BRZ comes out on the dyno in comparison.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Agreed that it's slightly odd. But he mentions they did 3 pulls that were all consistent with the lowest number coming out to be 206whp. So unless there some hidden scaling they did with the 22', I can't see how the data would be skewed. I also don't expect Savagegeese to even try and skew something like this, as it would make no sense. But I guess just for additional proof, it will be interesting to see how the BRZ comes out on the dyno in comparison.

I don't think he did anything but review the cars he was given. This isn't me calling him out for doing something shady. He even says in his own post a couple pages back it is a preproduction car and could be a "ringer." It just looks odd given what we have seen and know about the first gen car.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Frost

As someone who tracked a ND2, my own AP2 S2k and a twin on the same track on the SAME day, I gotta say I think I know what he means....

Which for me boils down to the ND2 not being the "better car". In the end its subjective and I understand my opinion seems to be the minority, but my opinion is the one thing I'm truly an expert on, so there's that!