Toyota 86 to get power boost with 2015 refresh

[imag]

I was just thinking...

If Toyota wants to do a follow-up sports car without the boxer or Subaru as a partner, there is a perfect solution. They can pair up with Mazda and do a Toyota version of their 2017 rotary powered 2+2 version of the ND Miata. It's perfect - Mazda needs more volume and development money. Toyota could benefit from working with a truly sporting company. Bring on the Toyazda!

And yes - I am joking.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Deslock

The 427 to 454 represented only a 6% increase in displacement (vs a 25% increase from a 2L to a 2.5L) and the FA20 has less material to bore out.

Just a "ferinstance", like my 240Z example, in which I went from a 2.4 liter to a 3.1 liter, +29%, without gaining any weight.

I'm not saying it's definitely possible to punch the 2.0 out to 2.5, but if it *is*, I am saying that the weight gain would be minimal, possibly zero.

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Just a "ferinstance", like my 240Z example, in which I went from a 2.4 liter to a 3.1 liter, +29%, without gaining any weight.

I'm not saying it's definitely possible to punch the 2.0 out to 2.5, but if it *is*, I am saying that the weight gain would be minimal, possibly zero.

Sure, and I've not done an engine swap in any of my vehicles nor do I know the details of your 2.4 to 3.1L swap (so I don't know jack when it comes to this). But based on what I've read, weight gain is often offset (when owners do swaps themselves or when manufacturers move to a larger displacement motor) for reasons such as:

• go to a newer generation engine
• move from an iron to aluminum block
• use a lighter tranny
• change other components to lighter versions
• remove stuff (back seat, etc)
• bore out

I don't see any of that applying here since the FT86 and FA20 are so new (an FA25 would likely be a very similar design) and it doesn't look like there's much to bore out.

I'm not claiming a 2.5L would significantly increase curb weight. I simply wanted to know why jcX4ever thinks an FA25 is unlikely to add any weight:

Originally Posted by Deslock

Why don't you think using a 2.5 is likely to result in a heavier vehicle?

Again, I really don't know much about this, and am genuinely curious.

[Allch Chcar]

If history is any example, the actual weight difference between the engine will be 10lbs and they'll add 140 lbs of whatever. I can't remember a single car that had a small weight difference between the base and bigger engine. They always find something else to add for reasons.

[imag]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

If history is any example, the actual weight difference between the engine will be 10lbs and they'll add 140 lbs of whatever. I can't remember a single car that had a small weight difference between the base and bigger engine. They always find something else to add for reasons.

To be fair, adding horsepower does usually mean strengthening the driveline components, and should involve adding brakes.

Everyone online wants to act like it's all about the horsepower number, but a car without the rest of the hardware is often unreliable and useless when driven hard.

That's why the WRX STI costs so much more than the WRX. The WRX has a lot of cheap horsepower, but it wouldn't last the morning at a track day.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

If history is any example, the actual weight difference between the engine will be 10lbs and they'll add 140 lbs of whatever. I can't remember a single car that had a small weight difference between the base and bigger engine. They always find something else to add for reasons.

The Corvette Z06 is considerably lighter than the base Corvette, Z51 and Gran Sport models.

The WRX has a lot of cheap horsepower, but it wouldn't last the morning at a track day.

I'm curious to know why you think that. Track pads and that car should be fine (possibly needs an oil cooler?) If I"m wrong please tell me what's up.

[emutcfut]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

The Corvette Z06 is considerably lighter than the base Corvette, Z51 and Gran Sport models.

I'm curious to know why you think that. Track pads and that car should be fine (possibly needs an oil cooler?) If I"m wrong please tell me what's up.

That would probably have to do with the Z06 having an aluminum frame compared to the base steel frame.

[WolfpackS2k]

No doubt. However it still proves the other statement wrong, and that things can be done to offset weight gain from a more powerful drivetrain.

[Aki]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

No doubt. However it still proves the other statement wrong, and that things can be done to offset weight gain from a more powerful drivetrain.

Nobody is arguing that weight gain can't be offset from a stronger engine. The key issue is offsetting weight gain costs $$$. A FR-S can always be lighter if it had a carbon fiber monocoque shell, carbon ceramic brakes, titanium exhaust, etc. Losing weight isn't the issue--losing it while still keeping it affordable, is. If they listened to all the forum people wanting turbo + better brakes + the kitchen sink, you're looking at a $32,000+ car.

I'd prefer a similar route to the MMC of the S2000, a minor increase in displacement (say 2.0 to 2.2) with a better torque curve.



If anything that's bolstering the argument that the FA20 is a boring engine. 7k and up is what makes the Si engine (8th-gen K20Z3) fun. That hiccup in horsepower/torque was intentionally programmed into the ECU to make the cam profile switch more noticeable, and it works.

I've said it before, but the FA20 has adequate power. The problem is the *sensation* of the power. That torque dead spot from 4-5k is what's irksome. And I'm tired of the knee-jerk, "needs boost" line. Once upon a time 200hp was considered a lot--you don't hear people with E30 M3s saying "needs boost." The whole point of a FR-S was that it's enjoyable while being (relatively) slow. There are lots of nice, fast RWD options, like a 370Z, or 135is.

[regal]

Originally Posted by Aki

.

I've said it before, but the FA20 has adequate power. The problem is the *sensation* of the power. That torque dead spot from 4-5k is what's irksome. And I'm tired of the knee-jerk, "needs boost" line. Once upon a time 200hp was considered a lot--you don't hear people with E30 M3s saying "needs boost." The whole point of a FR-S was that it's enjoyable while being (relatively) slow. There are lots of nice, fast RWD options, like a 370Z, or 135is.

I agree it has "adequate" power but not for its price range. If you followed the history of the car prior to its release Subaru was saying this would be a 300hp car. It was never conceived to be a slow 15 second 2800lb car, it was meant to be a direct competitor to the Porsche Cayman for half the price.

If Subaru can sell the WRX for <$30k then they can sell this car with their FA20T and have no price increase, the wrx is a much more expensive car to build with more steel and AWD. The only reason we have an NA FA20 with D4-S is Toyota's corp. politics.

Subaru didn't want D4-S and have proved that the DI FA20T in their Japan Legacy is a better configuration.

When Subaru is cut loose with the BRZ, bye bye Toyota 86 and Scion FRS. Hence all the recent high hoping from him. They see the handwriting on the wall. The tough part to swallow is going to be the low trade-in for our cars when the turbo BRZ is released.

[mit_peid]

Originally Posted by regal

I agree it has "adequate" power but not for its price range. If you followed the history of the car prior to its release Subaru was saying this would be a 300hp car. It was never conceived to be a slow 15 second 2800lb car, it was meant to be a direct competitor to the Porsche Cayman for half the price.

If Subaru can sell the WRX for <$30k then they can sell this car with their FA20T and have no price increase, the wrx is a much more expensive car to build with more steel and AWD. The only reason we have an NA FA20 with D4-S is Toyota's corp. politics.

Subaru didn't want D4-S and have proved that the DI FA20T in their Japan Legacy is a better configuration.

When Subaru is cut loose with the BRZ, bye bye Toyota 86 and Scion FRS. Hence all the recent high hoping from him. They see the handwriting on the wall. The tough part to swallow is going to be the low trade-in for our cars when the turbo BRZ is released.

All your points don't sound valid but I dont feel like wasting my effort making counter points

[thill]

Originally Posted by mit_peid

All your points don't sound valid but I dont feel like wasting my effort making counter points

He has to be the most bitter person who has ever owned this car.

[regal]

Originally Posted by mit_peid

All your points don't sound valid but I dont feel like wasting my effort making counter points

Well in a couple years when a turbo BRZ is on the lot for $27k MSRP and we can't get $10k trade-in for our 2013's things will start sounding valid.

If Subaru can sell a WRX for that today with its turbo, AWD and bigger more expensive to manufacture chassis well its just common sense what's in store.

Right now we already see new BRZ limiteds selling for FRS prices. Subaru has the upper hand with this car they just have to pay back the capital investment from Toyota.

[mit_peid]

Originally Posted by regal

Well in a couple years when a turbo BRZ is on the lot for $27k MSRP and we can't get $10k trade-in for our 2013's things will start sounding valid.

If Subaru can sell a WRX for that today with its turbo, AWD and bigger more expensive to manufacture chassis well its just common sense what's in store.

Right now we already see new BRZ limiteds selling for FRS prices. Subaru has the upper hand with this car they just have to pay back the capital investment from Toyota.

You should consider a career in automotive journalism.