(GR86) Second Generation FR-S/BRZ insider info...

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

They can have the info all they want but they can't use it unless your policy states they will. At least that is the law in Canada. So far.

Sure, but as a consumer you are still limited to the insurance providers in your area, and no doubt over time they will all want to make use of this technology and will update their policies to require access to any data logs on your driving. Of course, it will be pitched as allowing them to offer the lowest premiums to ‘good and responsible’ drivers. But it may leave enthusiastic sportscar drivers out in the cold. No doubt you will still be able to get a policy from someone somewhere without having to consent to handing over your driving data, but you’ll probably pay through the nose for the privilege.

I guess the takeover of the autonomous EVs ain’t so bad after all, since the fun cars are disappearing anyway and it will save lots of money on insurance premiums.

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

You mean like OnStar? GM started in 1997 and now it’s included as standard in all their cars since ~2010? A similar system has been standard in every BMW since 2009. Every single luxury brand has an SOS function like OnStar. A SIM card is dirt cheap. The data they harvest is more than worth the cell connection.

Just seems like it would be pretty expensive to equip tens millions of cars with a cellular device that the company needs to pay for out of it's own pocket if the consumer isn't interested.

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by JesseG

Toyota makes strange decisions sometimes, and they have been reluctant to add more turbo engines for some reason.

To speculate, I think it comes down to maximising simplicity and reliability, and minimising parts and servicing costs. Turbo engines are great for performance, but add complexity, cost and risk. Toyota will use them in some premium or high performance products (Supra, GR Yaris, some Lexus models) but for the bulk of their cars and customers they probably consider NA safer, cheaper and more reliable for their typical customer (especially lazy owners who don’t service their cars on time, turbo engines are much more sensitive to proper routine servicing than NA).

They make sense because you can achieve good emissions and good power.

Power yes, but the economy/emissions benefits of turbo engines are sometimes overstated, notoriously so with the tiny turbo engines in European cars. Whether you can achieve the official numbers in real world driving is heavily dependent on personal driving style. Drive like granny and the turbo engines get great economy as they are not staying on boost all the time. Drive like Fangio and kiss your economy goodbye and possibly get worse economy than a larger NA engine, since you are using the boost all the time to force lots more air and fuel to go bang than in an equivalent atmo engine.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

So far.

Originally Posted by Red-86

Sure, but as a consumer you are still limited to the insurance providers in your area, and no doubt over time they will all want to make use of this technology and will update their policies to require access to any data logs on your driving. Of course, it will be pitched as allowing them to offer the lowest premiums to ‘good and responsible’ drivers. But it may leave enthusiastic sportscar drivers out in the cold. No doubt you will still be able to get a policy from someone somewhere without having to consent to handing over your driving data, but you’ll probably pay through the nose for the privilege.

I guess the takeover of the autonomous EVs ain’t so bad after all, since the fun cars are disappearing anyway and it will save lots of money on insurance premiums.

[reeves]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Here's the description straight from Toyota. Yea, not something I want. I guess I'm going to have to go back to driving cars from the 60's and 70's.

I particularly like this part:
Your Responsibilities
Your responsibilities include: (1) informing passengers and drivers of your vehicle that data is collected and used by us, and (2) notifying us of a sale or transfer of your vehicle. If you do not notify us of a sale or transfer, we may continue to send data about the vehicle to the subscriber’s Personal Information currently on file, and we are not responsible for any privacy related damages you suffer.

I just find it ironic because Toyota held up installing Android Auto in their cars for years because they didn't agree with Google about how much info they were collecting from AA.

Who knew it was Google who was the 'conservative' data collector... or at least Toyota makes them look that way now.

[JesseG]

Originally Posted by Red-86

Well, “pulls hard” is always relative, it is still limited by its low torque max of 212Nm/156 lb-ft (post-2017s). Remember, HP = (Torque in lb-ft x RPM) ÷ 5252. It may feel like it pulls harder than it really does at high RPMs for two reasons. 1) you have just exited the infamous torque dip, so the non-linear increase toward max torque (and thus renewed surge of power) feels more special than it would in an engine with a flatter torque curve and thus more linear increase in power through the rev range. 2) the twins are relatively light for modern cars, so they do OK with what is in reality not much power, since it is power to weight that really matters for performance.

Unfortunately, the NA FA20 does not pull hard at all in comparison to competitor NA sportscar engines such as the VQ VHR, the Coyote, the LS etc. How could it, it is much lower displacement and less cylinders, with no turbo. Heck, even the MX-5’s newly uprated 2.0 feels as though it pulls harder through the mid range, with a more linear torque curve, even though ultimately it has a bit less top end power.

Not bagging the FA20, its a workhorse that when left unmolested and not subject to valve spring recall failures, is reliable and economical enough and supports the twins’ real wow factor, the handling. But I personally never could gel with it, the engine remained the weakest link and most disappointing aspect of my 86 owning experience.



That’s all that really matters, what you feel like when you drive it. After all, some folk still thoroughly enjoy driving old classic British roadsters around with just 100HP. Performance and fun are not always synonomous.



Of course! There is a reason Porsche flat engines (especially the sixes) perform so well and sound as amazing as they do, and it requires the kind of engineering know how and development $$$ that would not be justified in a low volume budget sportscar from Toyota and Subaru. Toyobaru did OK with what they had to work with, and I’d say their efforts paid off insofar as the twins are much more as a sportscar experience than the sum of their humble parts. I just can’t share the affection for the FA20, sorry.

I get what you are saying, the torque dip probably makes the surge of power feel more pronounced. It almost, to me, feels like turbo lag. But think about the engineering and technical prowess of Toyota and Subaru. I don’t think the torque dip is just a big oversight by them. It’s impressive what they did for the price. A lightweight and efficient engine. I average almost 33 mpg! And it’s fun when you feel like revving it out, and won’t land you in jail. I imagine if the twins had a powerful engine most would be wrapped around trees or in ditches. And like you said in a light platform you don’t need crazy power. I think more effort could have been put into evolving the little FA20, but for a car that sells in small numbers it probably didn’t make sense. Toyota and Subaru aren’t making Porsche levels of profit on each car. I don’t have any seat time in the Miata, and I know it’s a really good sports car. Probably the most successful sports car of all time, but the convertible thing is one of its biggest pluses. I don’t think it’s ever praised for its engine. And that does bother me the Miata gets a pass but not the twins.

We agree completely that having fun when you drive is the most important thing. I always look forward to driving my car, and I find reasons to drive. The twins strike a perfect balance between fun to drive, and affordable running costs. While also being capable of daily driving. Let’s face it the Miata is not a daily driver, it’s a second car. And the 86/BRZ don’t have any direct competition. The 370Z is probably the closest, but it’s not meant to be lightweight and tossable. And Porsche of course makes awesome cars, but we know the price range of their current offerings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by WildCard600

When we bought my wife's car it had this thing as a "feature". We discussed our concerns with the sales guy and he opted us out of the program. At least he didn't set us up in the system to have the "feature" activated.

What the car is actually doing and may or may not still be sending back to toyota I have no idea.

I wonder what kind of system is in place to even report that data back to toyota. Seems like it would be immensely expensive to equip every vehicle with a cellular communication device and keep it active without payment/involvement with the vehicles owner.

it's not really as involved as you make it out to be.

this device connects to a few different LTE networks, with data plans starting at around $1.50/mo + $0.40/mb
https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials...d-hookup-guide

how many companies would salivate at the concept of getting direct access to user data for about $2-3 a month?

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by soundman98

it's not really as involved as you make it out to be.

this device connects to a few different LTE networks, with data plans starting at around $1.50/mo + $0.40/mb
https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials...d-hookup-guide

how many companies would salivate at the concept of getting direct access to user data for about $2-3 a month?

I guess I don't fully understand how that data can be monetized by the company that it would offset the millions of dollars a month it would cost to keep active cell service on millions of cars (potentially).

[soundman98]

this is the same way those OBD2 insurance dongles work as well. which they always say saves the customer money. user data is invaluable.

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by soundman98

this is the same way those OBD2 insurance dongles work as well. which they always say saves the customer money. user data is invaluable.

Toyota sold 2,383,349 cars in 2019. Let's say for the sake of argument that every one sold had a cellular transmitter and cost $2 for the company to keep it active.

That would cost $4,766,698 a month to harvest that user data and $57,200,376 a year. Over 5 years those same 2.3 million cars sold just in 2019 would cost the company $286,001,880 in cell charges alone.

Is there really that much money in random people's driving habits ?

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by WildCard600

Toyota sold 2,383,349 cars in 2019. Let's say for the sake of argument that every one sold had a cellular transmitter and cost $2 for the company to keep it active.

That would cost $4,766,698 a month to harvest that user data and $57,200,376 a year. Over 5 years those same 2.3 million cars sold just in 2019 would cost the company $286,001,880 in cell charges alone.

Is there really that much money in random people's driving habits ?

Google’s entire revenue stream is over 90% selling people’s data. There is way too much money in personal data. We should be getting paid for it.

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Google’s entire revenue stream is over 90% selling people’s data. There is way too much money in personal data. We should be getting paid for it.

I get that, but google is also accessing a lot more details than how Suzy soccer mom drives to Aldi on wednesday and to the sportsball field on saturday.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

You mean like OnStar? GM started in 1997 and now it’s included as standard in all their cars since ~2010? A similar system has been standard in every BMW since 2009. Every single luxury brand has an SOS function like OnStar. A SIM card is dirt cheap. The data they harvest is more than worth the cell connection.

Theoretically you can change out the OnStar antenna or something for something that won't transmit. My GM-addicted buddy has done it. It's on the short list for my Buick.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Theoretically you can change out the OnStar antenna or something for something that won't transmit. My GM-addicted buddy has done it. It's on the short list for my Buick.

Yeah on some cars it’s actually as simple as popping the SIM card out. Nowadays they don’t use physical SIM cards, but they used to.