2013 BRZ vs. 2017 86 (Everyday Driver)

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

Mainly that it didn't have any room for a car seat in the back. When I bought my car 4 years ago I knew that my wife and I were going to try and have a baby in the near future. Now I have a 3 year old boy who loves driving in the car with his dad.

The best reason I have ever heard not to buy a vette.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The only thing I want to point out is that this isn't some 'special' problem the 86 has.

While you're right.... it seems this car makes it more noticeable than almost any other car you have listed.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Summerwolf

While you're right.... it seems this car makes it more noticeable than almost any other car you have listed.

Well yeah, because none of those cars have ANY torque down low comparable to what's available in their powerband. The 86 is unique in that regard, that it gets a shove around 3k rpm where it makes nearly the same torque as it does at the peak of ~5k, that should be a positive, not a negative. Filling the dip would effectively mean you've got a 5,000 rpm flat torque curve which is insane, yeah a Ferrari 458 does it, but Porsche can't do it, a Nissan GTR can't do it, Chevy LSx can't do it, Dodge Viper doesn't do it, Ford Voodoo flat plane crank V8 falls off after just 2.5k, etc.

I won't begrudge anyone for not liking how the 86 feels through the powerband or wanting more torque across the board (hell I'll probably go FI someday), but it's no different than any other high revving engine, the torque dip is not a deficiency but rather a unique mark of a positive that's not typically found in low displacement high revving NA motors.

To spin it into some catastrophic design failure is just dumb imho, yeah it feels funky but focusing in on it like some do is missing the bigger picture of what is physically possible by large automakers.

The fact that you have enough torque out of a 2.0L 4-banger at 3.5k rpm to feel it drop off is almost a goddamn miracle unless you've got a turbo.

[Twin4Life]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Well yeah, because none of those cars have ANY torque down low comparable to what's available in their powerband. The 86 is unique in that regard, that it gets a shove around 3k rpm where it makes nearly the same torque as it does at the peak of ~5k, that should be a positive, not a negative. Filling the dip would effectively mean you've got a 5,000 rpm flat torque curve which is insane, yeah a Ferrari 458 does it, but Porsche can't do it, a Nissan GTR can't do it, Chevy LSx can't do it, Dodge Viper doesn't do it, Ford Voodoo flat plane crank V8 falls off after just 2.5k, etc.

Porsche has that sorted out....

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

Porsche has that sorted out....

Depends on the model...

[Twin4Life]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Depends on the model...

All flavors of 911's do, not concerned about the 918 (wink). So there are other models? lol

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

All flavors of 911's do, not concerned about the 918 (wink). So there are other models? lol

I don't see a 5k rpm flat torque curve here, do you? Ok maybe I was wrong to write off all of Porsche, but they certainly don't pull it off in every 911, let alone across their lineup.

991 Carrera S




Or here...

997 GT3


997 Carrera 4S



or here...

996 Carrera



996 GT2

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

Porsche has that sorted out....

Did they draw that in crayons?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Did they draw that in crayons?

1 data point per 500 rpms is totally adequate

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

1 data point per 500 rpms is totally adequate

LOL yes it is. Doesn't change the fact that it looks funny to see such a perfectly straight and wide line. It was a joke based on the appearance not a challenge of the data.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

LOL yes it is. Doesn't change the fact that it looks funny to see such a perfectly straight and wide line. It was a joke based on the appearance not a challenge of the data.

I was definitely being sarcastic and couldn't find the right smiley face

[mrg666]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I don't see a 5k rpm flat torque curve here, do you? Ok maybe I was wrong to write off all of Porsche, but they certainly don't pull it off in every 911, let alone across their lineup.

991 Carrera S

Or here...

997 GT3

997 Carrera 4S

or here...

996 Carrera

996 GT2

I just don't see the point of constant whining about the characteristic of this car when you can learn how to drive around the torque dip. I agree with everything you said about the torque dip and I believe you defended the point with solid evidence. But winning this torque dip argument is not possible, unfortunately. Some of us just expect acceleration by pushing the throttle without shifting as if downshifting is some kind of hassle in a "sports car".

[Somerandom18]

Gotta do a launch at 4500 every light and stop sign to avoid the dip!

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by mrg666

I just don't see the point of constant whining about the characteristic of this car when you can learn how to drive around the torque dip. I agree with everything you said about the torque dip and I believe you defended the point with solid evidence. But winning this torque dip argument is not possible, unfortunately. Some of us just expect acceleration by pushing the throttle without shifting as if downshifting is some kind of hassle in a "sports car".

It is not an issue of this car. It is a general issue of modern cars which provide one or even two overdrive gears. Reason is low consumption on highway. It is just that in our cars is more visible, because there is not a massive amount of torque. So, the top gear is more dead and you have to downshift. Good thing is that the new manuals have a shorter final drive ratio and this is now partially fixed.

C/D 2016 TEST RESULTS:
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 14.7 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 10.0 sec
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...aru-brz-review

C/D 2017 TEST RESULTS:
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 8.6 sec
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...al-test-review


Overall, as I said before it looks that Everyday Driver just lost their interest on this platform. You have to be stupid or ignorant to not understand that the new manuals are much better cars.