Is weight no longer an issue in sports cars?

[JR]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Hey now, if tiny ass Mazda can manage to sell the Miata with 2 engine choices worldwide, you know damn well that Toyota could have done the same.

I agree. Aren't they doing this with the Supra?

[ermax]

Originally Posted by JR

I'm curious to know how many Miata owners have decided to upgrade to the 2019 model since it has more power. The torque figures are roughly the same though. I know if the twins received 25 more hp, I would NOT be rushing to the dealership to purchase one. In my opinion, 25hp would not be enough to attract new buyers or make current buyers throw money at you, which is probably why Toyota and Subaru have decided not to upgrade the power anytime soon.

The HP went up due to the increased redline. HP is a product of torque vs RPM. You don't need more torque to make more power. So in daily driving were you aren't winding to redline the ND2 would probably feel much like the ND1. I know I would be pissed if I just got an ND1 and then saw what they did on the ND2 but I wouldn't be running to the dealer to replace it. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't attract new customers. 12.9lbs/hp isn't a bad ratio. Much better than our cars.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

You might be more of an expert here than I am but here's my reasoning:

I assume the Mazda MX-5 is a financial success and not a money lose for Mazda (although it might be I don't know). Due to this, I assume Mazda succeeded in delivering a lightweight, reasonably satisfactory performance sports car into market while turning a profit. So the argument of a modern light weight sports car that sells does is valid. So in effect, the MX-5 made everyone happy. The general consumers get a good looking sports car that can keep up with the times, and the hardcore car enthusiasts get a light weight sports car. Everyone's happy.


Now the reason why I believe the MX-5 ND is a success story is that they will try to respond to market demand while keeping on trying to cater for the sports car enthusiast. This is by introducing the right small increments needed to answer market demands. This is the same strategy followed by the 911 and Mclaren but on a different scale.

The FT86 on the other hand, is going on 7 years now and the incremental changes are too small to keep up with the market. Sales will go down because of this and the car will die. Next thing you know, there is no second generation FT86 which would be really sad.

Incremental meaningful changes to satisfy the overall market while keeping an eye on the very small segment of car enthusiasts that by themselves would not finance the existence of the vehicle but by playing it smart, enthusiast sports cars can continue to exist.

You are making a lot of assumptions there. Let's start with the improvements.
You are comparing the Miata's current improvements to the lack of significant ones on the 86.
Well over the years the Miata went through an 8 year cycle with no significant changes. Even when changes were made it rapidly plummeted back down until the next changes. If we consider this data then the 86 is not out of line with no major changes in 6 years.



Now to your thoughts that "everybody's happy"


No. No I do not think everybody is happy at all. Not only did it not see the big rebound that it did with the previous upgrades it started reducing in numbers faster.


Now, sales numbers are a horrible horrible measure of the success of a car since we have no idea how many were made and what went unsold or unbought because sold out but you see the pattern there? Yes Miatas are still around but they certainly are not a leader.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by JR

How much money did Toyota and Subaru save by removing torque at 3.5K to 4.5K?

they probably saved quite a bit of money by not engineering it out.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Fuck man, does this mean I'm that bad of a driver? Under-utilizing my car THAT much? I'm usually one of the harder/later brakers out on track too

Going further up your quote, yeah that guy's track cost analysis seems a bit ridiculous.

Back to heavy cars and cost, I suppose it's all anecdotal but I've got a college buddy of mine that probably makes 4X what I do. And he's always had a Mustang GT. He's a car guy, but has never gone to the track. And never will. His reason (at least what he tells me)? Tires and brakes are too expensive. Another friend, used to have a 350Z and went to the track with me every time I went. Also makes considerably more than me. Now owns a (pre-owned) C63 AMG. His reason for no longer wanting to go to track? Tires cost too much.

Maybe they're lying to me, or maybe it's just their excuse since their prioritizes in life have changed (or have always been different). Still, it's the reason they give me.

Haha just much lighter on the throttle! I'll let you know next time I'm at VIR so you can experience massive fuel consumption!

Changing life situations is the reason most track guys I know left the hobby. Often they've come back as well once their life situation changed again.

And plus, you don't need to be running the most expensive tires and crap to have fun.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by JR

I agree. Aren't they doing this with the Supra?

Because Mom (BMW) said no.

[WolfpackS2k]

^^Heh, I guess! Going as fast as the car can handle at most spots...or so I thought .

Running cheaper tires can be nice on the wallet, but I get too competitive for that. I know it's not about who is fastest, but I hate getting passed by a GTI lol. If something like that happens I usually try to find out later what tires they have, to possibly remove the damage from my ego. "Oh they're running RE-71Rs, thank God."

Originally Posted by ermax

The HP went up due to the increased redline. HP is a product of torque vs RPM. You don't need more torque to make more power. So in daily driving were you aren't winding to redline the ND2 would probably feel much like the ND1. I know I would be pissed if I just got an ND1 and then saw what they did on the ND2 but I wouldn't be running to the dealer to replace it. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't attract new customers. 12.9lbs/hp isn't a bad ratio. Much better than our cars.

And yet peak torque only went up from 4000 to 4600 rpm. Pretty good trade off I think

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Hey now, if tiny ass Mazda can manage to sell the Miata with 2 engine choices worldwide, you know damn well that Toyota could have done the same.

Oh you mean the company that was already cramming those engines into econo-boxes and crossovers before the ND was even revealed?

Subaru bears the burden of production costs, the FA20 is unique to the 86 and shares minimal costs with the rest of Subaru's lineup (very few parts are shared with the turbo motor). Subaru builds fewer cars than Mazda does, Toyota's just writing the check to buy some of the cars when it comes to production.

Subaru ~941k cars built in 2018
https://www.subaru.co.jp/en/ir/finance/performance.html
Mazda 1.195 million cars built in 2018
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...on-since-2006/
This targets 1.6 million for Mazda.
https://www.automotiveworld.com/news...t-record-year/

Same deal with BMW, the B48/B58 has been on the road for 5 years or more, the cost of cramming it another chassis is peanuts compared to developing a whole new engine for a niche car. BMW is also a much bigger automaker than Subaru or Mazda, they can absorb the work a lot more easily than the small companies can.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Oh you mean the company that was already cramming those engines into econo-boxes and crossovers before the ND was even revealed?

Subaru bears the burden of production costs, the FA20 is unique to the 86 and shares minimal costs with the rest of Subaru's lineup (very few parts are shared with the turbo motor). Subaru builds fewer cars than Mazda does, Toyota's just writing the check to buy some of the cars when it comes to production.

Subaru ~941k cars built in 2018
https://www.subaru.co.jp/en/ir/finance/performance.html
Mazda 1.195 million cars built in 2018
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...on-since-2006/
This targets 1.6 million for Mazda.
https://www.automotiveworld.com/news...t-record-year/

Same deal with BMW, the B48/B58 has been on the road for 5 years or more, the cost of cramming it another chassis is peanuts compared to developing a whole new engine for a niche car. BMW is also a much bigger automaker than Subaru or Mazda, they can absorb the work a lot more easily than the small companies can.

Solid post, with good points.

Which I'll counter with by pointing out that Mazda made an entirely new bespoke chassis for the ND. Meanwhile Subaru's BRZ platform is shared with Toyota and borrows design heavily from other Subaru products.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Solid post, with good points.

Which I'll counter with by pointing out that Mazda made an entirely new bespoke chassis for the ND. Meanwhile Subaru's BRZ platform is shared with Toyota and borrows design heavily from other Subaru products.

engineering >> chassiseering

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by JR

I'm curious to know how many Miata owners have decided to upgrade to the 2019 model since it has more power. The torque figures are roughly the same though. I know if the twins received 25 more hp, I would NOT be rushing to the dealership to purchase one. In my opinion, 25hp would not be enough to attract new buyers or make current buyers throw money at you, which is probably why Toyota and Subaru have decided not to upgrade the power anytime soon.

No that's not what I really meant.

It's difficult to explain I know but it's sort of like a status symbol thing? If the car is viewed as being competitive and current and not outdated, sales continue to go. As opposed to not introducing these incremental upgrades and having reviewers bring down the car and than sales slump badly and then there is no second gen to upgrade to in the long run.

What I mean to say is: Mazda upgrading the 2019 ND with 27hp will insure there will be an MX-5 NE waiting for the guy who bought the 2016 ND to upgrade to.

Whereas the FT86 with no significant upgrades and sales threatened to slump to dangerous cut off levels will not have a gen2 to upgrade to.

I don't know if I'm getting my message across but this is the best I can do.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Solid post, with good points.

Which I'll counter with by pointing out that Mazda made an entirely new bespoke chassis for the ND. Meanwhile Subaru's BRZ platform is shared with Toyota and borrows design heavily from other Subaru products.

Neat that cuts cost in one department but doesn't help add the hundreds of millions of dollars required to develop a second bespoke engine for the chassis and hit a price point similar to a low option Camry.

Yes, absolutely hundreds of millions of dollars to develop an FA25 or FA22 and sell it as a production engine in just a few regions.

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

Whereas the FT86 with no significant upgrades and sales threatened to slump to dangerous cut off levels will not have a gen2 to upgrade to.

I don't know if I'm getting my message across but this is the best I can do.

The NC was largely unchanged for 10 years.
The 370Z is going on 10 years right now.

I would be surprised if the 86/BRZ sees any changes until 2022 model year and that could be it's swan song, blowing money on minor tweaks in the interim years only serves to take budget away from a true second generation. Let it languish imo, recoup the costs so they can actually bring an improvement to the table, none of this 5 hp here 10 hp there bullshit.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

No that's not what I really meant.

It's difficult to explain I know but it's sort of like a status symbol thing? If the car is viewed as being competitive and current and not outdated, sales continue to go. As opposed to not introducing these incremental upgrades and having reviewers bring down the car and than sales slump badly and then there is no second gen to upgrade to in the long run.

What I mean to say is: Mazda upgrading the 2019 ND with 27hp will insure there will be an MX-5 NE waiting for the guy who bought the 2016 ND to upgrade to.

Whereas the FT86 with no significant upgrades and sales threatened to slump to dangerous cut off levels will not have a gen2 to upgrade to.

I don't know if I'm getting my message across but this is the best I can do.

I think what you are trying to say is people don't want to buy a new car that looks and has basically the same specs as the past 7 years.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Let it languish imo, recoup the costs so they can actually bring an improvement to the table, none of this 5 hp here 10 hp there bullshit.

It would be interesting to see what sort of impact on the bottom line it would have been if the original Twin had more like 165HP without Toyota's dual injection... then years later add that for a bump to the 200 we have now. 100hp/l is a good number and hard to go past that without a displacement bump or FI. If they intentionally crippled the engine at initial release they would have had some growing room. The question is who would buy a 165HP car that is 2750lbs? Probably not many even back in 2012.