Scion FRS RS 1.0

[Zaku]

Has anyone here ever owned a yellow car? How is the maintenance for the paint?scratches show up easily? Or is it a color that need constant care like Black, you can't leave it alone like say silver. thanks.

[2nd Gen Scion]

Originally Posted by Zaku

Has anyone here ever owned a yellow car? How is the maintenance for the paint?scratches show up easily? Or is it a color that need constant care like Black, you can't leave it alone like say silver. thanks.

I just purchased a Raven (Black) Monogram Series FR-S and traded in my RS 2.0 xB (Yellow). Already I'm noticing soo many more scratches on my FR-S than on my xB.

The black and other darker colors show so much more in terms of imperfections/scratches. The one thing that I noticed after owning it for 9 years is the rust is easier to see on a yellow car. The first 5 years I took very good care of my car but over time I grew tired of all the maintenance, now that I have this FR-S I'm back in the maintenance mood!

[Jegan_V]

Originally Posted by Zaku

Has anyone here ever owned a yellow car? How is the maintenance for the paint?scratches show up easily? Or is it a color that need constant care like Black, you can't leave it alone like say silver. thanks.

From what I've seen, yellow is a pretty moderate colour as far as maintenance is concerned. Its not like black where its shockingly easy to spot minor damages. Its not white where paint matching usually results in disappointment and its contrast to any other colour often makes it look dirty. I'd probably put yellow in the same category as the remaining colours as if you were getting blue, red, green, etc. Maintenance-wise though silver and beige generally are the ones that don't show lack of care, they often look fine even after dirty rain showers them.

[NemesisPrime909]

Originally Posted by Agnostik

When did that Snow/Sport rocker button between the TRAC and VSC Buttons show up??

it's standard on all Automatics

[NemesisPrime909]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

I don't consider it milking, since they're at least introducing something slightly different each time. Depending on how you spin it, these are really just new packages or trim levels for the FR-S. If anything, they're giving the consumer some new options that keep the lineup fresher than if it were just the same plain FR-S available for the past two model years. It's not because they're lazy either, and it should be expected, with Scion's history of introducing numerous limited editions specific to a certain model year.

Also when did releasing special editions become a mortal sin?

I mean the Dodge Challenger offers 9 different trims, 5 are special editions. this sort of thing isn't new.

The Jeep Wrangler has 4 trims and 6 special editions

my point is,

if you dislike it, fine.

if you love it, fine.

if you are indifferent, F-I-N-E fine.

but why must naysayers treat this like it's the worst mistake ever? I mean if you want the bare bones FR-S, it's there, if you wanted Silver Ignition with the more up-scale interior and HID headlights? Get the 10 series. you want a GT86? buy the monospec. You want a yellow FR-S with TRD parts? Buy the RS 1.0. It's not rocket science, so why get mad at Toyota for for actually trying to attract buyers?

this won't be the last Special edition, I GUARANTEE YOU THAT

so why waste your energy hating it, when you could be enjoying your cars in your own way?

[imag]

Originally Posted by NemesisPrime909

Also when did releasing special editions become a mortal sin?

I hear your point - no one has to buy the car. We do have choices. However, there are three legitimate reasons to dislike this special edition:

1. It actually makes the car worse, as a sports car.

It adds weight without adding performance. It adds show without adding go. This makes it less of a performance car, and more of a tarted-up ricer, the kind people make fun of out in streets and parking lots around the world. There are lots of people who resent aftermarket body kits and excessive exhaust pipes on cars that can't deliver any more performance. The RS 1.0 is the equivalent of a fake "Type R" badge from the factory. Why would you expect that enthusiasts would be okay with a car like that?

2. It is a missed opportunity.

They *could have* released a special edition that actually had performance enhancing mods. The tS may not have more power, but it has better suspension, brakes, and chassis bits. All it needs is an aftermarket S/C or turbo to make it epic. The RS 1.0, on the other hand, is a joke from a performance perspective. It craps all over the car's mission as a light weight sports car, in favor of flashy bits of extra fat. It is an indicator that Toyota is favoring posers over enthusiasts. That is a bummer.

3. It shows that Toyota is following the unsuccessful path of the RX8 and the S2K.

It looks like they will do just what Honda and Mazda did, releasing a mid-cycle refresh with a minor power bump. Near the end of the run, they will release the best, most track focused car. At that point, the car will be a has-been, and will not get the sales it needs.

Some of us were hoping that they would learn from the past and instead follow a model more similar to Porsche and Jaguar, where they release the base car, and then add at least one higher performance variant as quickly as possible. This supports sales of the base model by keeping interest high, and pulls image or performance conscious buyers up into a higher price category. This strategy also leverages the platform by making it more interesting to a wider variety of folks. Ford and Chevy have had success with that in the Mustang, Camaro, and Corvette. Mercedes and BMW do it with the AMG and M cars. It is a proven way to sell performance cars.

Instead, it looks like Toyota will follow the "one size fits all" Japanese sports car model that was so unsuccessful in the past. That is a shame for the car, and it is a shame for those of us who don't want to wait three more years for the "good" version.

tl;dr: There are legitimate reasons to dislike the RS 1.0, even if we have a choice not to buy it.

[Quentin]

Originally Posted by imag

I hear your point - no one has to buy the car. We do have choices. However, there are three legitimate reasons to dislike this special edition:

1. It actually makes the car worse, as a sports car.

It adds weight without adding performance. It adds show without adding go. This makes it less of a performance car, and more of a tarted-up ricer, the kind people make fun of out in streets and parking lots around the world. There are lots of people who resent aftermarket body kits and excessive exhaust pipes on cars that can't deliver any more performance. The RS 1.0 is the equivalent of a fake "Type R" badge from the factory. Why would you expect that enthusiasts would be okay with a car like that?

Don't worry, all the stupid shit people are doing to the twins makes this factory rice pale in comparison. Step over in the member gallery and you'll see allll sorts of mods that ruin performance for the sake of looks. Also, you can still buy the regular version with more subdued look. With 1500 of these things running around, most people will just think it is someone who painted their car and added a kit.

Originally Posted by imag

2. It is a missed opportunity.

They *could have* released a special edition that actually had performance enhancing mods. The tS may not have more power, but it has better suspension, brakes, and chassis bits. All it needs is an aftermarket S/C or turbo to make it epic. The RS 1.0, on the other hand, is a joke from a performance perspective. It craps all over the car's mission as a light weight sports car, in favor of flashy bits of extra fat. It is an indicator that Toyota is favoring posers over enthusiasts. That is a bummer.

And that version could/would have cost $33k and people would be like "IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE MORE POWER! WHAT A RIP11!!!!1!!11"

This aero kit weighs practically nothing. I'd say 30lbs tops. If you are overweight, you better not buy this car because apparently any extra weight craps all over the mission of the car. Only people with 5% or less body fat are worthy of driving this car!/sarcasm Major brake, suspension, and chassis mods are a warranty liability without getting enough R&D miles. High performance brakes usually dust badly. Then you have someone that came in, bought the car because they liked the color or the pretty brakes, and now they are beating up the service manager because their wheels look like shit every 3 days. Performance mods require a LOT of R&D from an OEM perspective.

Originally Posted by imag

3. It shows that Toyota is following the unsuccessful path of the RX8 and the S2K.

It looks like they will do just what Honda and Mazda did, releasing a mid-cycle refresh with a minor power bump. Near the end of the run, they will release the best, most track focused car. At that point, the car will be a has-been, and will not get the sales it needs.

Some of us were hoping that they would learn from the past and instead follow a model more similar to Porsche and Jaguar, where they release the base car, and then add at least one higher performance variant as quickly as possible. This supports sales of the base model by keeping interest high, and pulls image or performance conscious buyers up into a higher price category. This strategy also leverages the platform by making it more interesting to a wider variety of folks. Ford and Chevy have had success with that in the Mustang, Camaro, and Corvette. Mercedes and BMW do it with the AMG and M cars. It is a proven way to sell performance cars.

Instead, it looks like Toyota will follow the "one size fits all" Japanese sports car model that was so unsuccessful in the past. That is a shame for the car, and it is a shame for those of us who don't want to wait three more years for the "good" version.

Performance variants cost a shit load more money to develop than making a limited run special edition that is effectively a color, interior toys, and some bumper plastic. The Mustang and Camaro are bigger vehicles. Bigger vehicles = broader appeal = more sales = easier to justify multiple tiers. Merc and BMW charge you an arm and a leg for everything and they are playing in a whole different field.

Again, the pennies that it cost to create this RS1.0 (in R&D) is an order of magnitude smaller than what it would cost to offer a higher performance version. Your hatred of the RS1.0 is that you think that spending money on the RS versions prevents the performance version you want to see from materializing. That is completely untrue because if there was a ROI on a performance version, they'd offer it. There is some limitation... be it sales, capacity, etc... that prevents a higher performance version from coming. There is obviously an ROI on RS Scions because they keep offering them. Small changed (paint, body work, interior stuff) and small numbers (batch run or modify at some sort of processing center) mean that they can actually make something a little different and make money on it. Throwing mechanical changes (coil overs, brakes) can turn into a warranty nightmare if they don't/can't spend enough time developing the vehicle. That time in R&D costs money. It isn't like you and I that can throw a suspension under the car and live with the improvements and the detriments. They have to sell a car that doesn't leave them and their customers with unwelcome surprises.

[NemesisPrime909]

Originally Posted by imag

I hear your point - no one has to buy the car. We do have choices. However, there are three legitimate reasons to dislike this special edition:

1. It actually makes the car worse, as a sports car.

It adds weight without adding performance. It adds show without adding go. This makes it less of a performance car, and more of a tarted-up ricer, the kind people make fun of out in streets and parking lots around the world. There are lots of people who resent aftermarket body kits and excessive exhaust pipes on cars that can't deliver any more performance. The RS 1.0 is the equivalent of a fake "Type R" badge from the factory. Why would you expect that enthusiasts would be okay with a car like that?

2. It is a missed opportunity.

They *could have* released a special edition that actually had performance enhancing mods. The tS may not have more power, but it has better suspension, brakes, and chassis bits. All it needs is an aftermarket S/C or turbo to make it epic. The RS 1.0, on the other hand, is a joke from a performance perspective. It craps all over the car's mission as a light weight sports car, in favor of flashy bits of extra fat. It is an indicator that Toyota is favoring posers over enthusiasts. That is a bummer.

3. It shows that Toyota is following the unsuccessful path of the RX8 and the S2K.

It looks like they will do just what Honda and Mazda did, releasing a mid-cycle refresh with a minor power bump. Near the end of the run, they will release the best, most track focused car. At that point, the car will be a has-been, and will not get the sales it needs.

Some of us were hoping that they would learn from the past and instead follow a model more similar to Porsche and Jaguar, where they release the base car, and then add at least one higher performance variant as quickly as possible. This supports sales of the base model by keeping interest high, and pulls image or performance conscious buyers up into a higher price category. This strategy also leverages the platform by making it more interesting to a wider variety of folks. Ford and Chevy have had success with that in the Mustang, Camaro, and Corvette. Mercedes and BMW do it with the AMG and M cars. It is a proven way to sell performance cars.

Instead, it looks like Toyota will follow the "one size fits all" Japanese sports car model that was so unsuccessful in the past. That is a shame for the car, and it is a shame for those of us who don't want to wait three more years for the "good" version.

tl;dr: There are legitimate reasons to dislike the RS 1.0, even if we have a choice not to buy it.

!.you say it makes the car worse

TRD released complete vehicles in Austrailia (TRD Aero, wheels, breakes, springs, etc.) and from what i can tell the owners of said vehicles adore them.

if you love the car, you love it period

2. you said missed opportunity

to add to my last statement. This is as close to a full TRD 86 they've offered as of right now. the way I see it the hard part's been done. All I need to do is Buy the rear louver, and some Tom's tail lights. then I can focus fully on performance.

I've loved every TRD car that's been released thus far (retro 86, griffon, etc.) and I've always wanted to own a full TRD car. way back when the twins were announced I've wanted to own one. for a while I wanted an FR-S but like so many of you, i was bummed by the sheer lack of options, so for a while i leaned to the BRZ side because Subaru was more generous, I loved WR Blue, and the sti BRZ's were nothing to sneeze at either. but low and behold, after a few years Scion is giving us the the RS 1.0 and in yellow as a bonus. Yellow has been on my wishlist for as long as they've been released.


3. you say missed opportunity, I say opportunity is knocking

so

tl;dr

The Glass is half-full for me^^;

[Idriveft86]

It looks better in person NY AutoShow.

[imag]

Originally Posted by Quentin

If you are overweight, you better not buy this car because apparently any extra weight craps all over the mission of the car. Only people with 5% or less body fat are worthy of driving this car!/sarcasm

It is a purist sports car. Four pipes add to the weight, and the kit is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Quentin

Performance variants cost a shit load more money to develop than making a limited run special edition that is effectively a color, interior toys, and some bumper plastic.

Agreed, but they have already developed this stuff for the tS.

Originally Posted by Quentin

Your hatred of the RS1.0

Hatred is far too strong a word. Please don't ascribe it to me. I think it is merely a bogus special edition, built for posers. That is not worth hating. Disappointed might be more appropriate.

Originally Posted by Quentin

Throwing mechanical changes (coil overs, brakes) can turn into a warranty nightmare if they don't/can't spend enough time developing the vehicle.

Agreed, but again, they have already developed this stuff for the tS, and now have almost a year's worth of reliability data on it. Also, I have no doubt that they will develop a track edition, but they are just going to wait until the end of the run. My point is that they would be much better off doing the performance variants from the beginning instead of putting out body kits.

Look, Mazda and Honda have tried this strategy in this segment. It didn't work. Porsche is making record profits, admittedly in a more expensive segment. I see multiple people on the board looking at much more expensive cars because Toyota won't build a performance variant of this one.

As important, a performance variant is an advertisement for the whole line. It wins car reviews, gets people excited, and increases sales across the board. Since the 86 is basically a marketing exercise to begin with, this has value.

I agree that there are studies showing they shouldn't do it. There were studies that predicted that building the twins was not a good idea from a revenue perspective. Would you prefer that they had listened to the bean counters and not built the car?

[mikko86]

^^

[Ponwh]

everyone chillax, shet. Everyone has their own opinions.

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by imag

It is a purist sports car. Four pipes add to the weight, and the kit is ridiculous.

Have you weighed it yourself? Or do you at least have the specs of the exhaust? Not all exhaust upgrades weigh more than factory, you know. It's not uncommon for it to be the opposite when factory exhausts get replaced by either aftermarket options or manufacturer upgrades.

And even if it does weigh more, it's likely not going to be a lot more weight anyway, unless they are using iron. Plus look at where it is... down very low, and being carried by the rear tires.

Originally Posted by imag

Look, Mazda and Honda have tried this strategy in this segment. It didn't work.

Mazda and Honda's efforts faced difficulty because the cars were a bit difficult to live with on a day-to-day basis, and I'm not referring to their packaging. People still speak highly of both of those cars when discussing their capabilities, but as a daily driver, nobody truly wants to have to rev up to 5,000 rpm just to keep up with traffic, even if the cars are fun to rev high and have nice shifters.

The updates that Mazda and Honda threw at their cars were more than a few years into both cars' lifespans, and a little to late to keep things fresh. The RX-8 update made it look nicer, but didn't really make the car easier to live with, especially not with its oddly high oil consumption and fuel economy of a Mustang GT but without the power. The S2000 update also made it look nicer while its additional displacement gave it a little more torque, but it wasn't really that significant of a change, plus it came with a lower redline. It reminds me of the Civic Si engine change from the K20 to the K24... about the same hp, more displacement, more torque, but in the end a little less satisfying.

Luckily, the twins aren't faced with those kinds of hurdles as a DD, despite not having explosive power at redline (unlike the RX-8 and S2000, both of which were pumping out ~240 hp north of 8,000 rpm). But why not introduce some limited models in the meantime? Yes, we'd like something more interesting, but there really aren't any drawbacks. If there are, then guess what, you can get the "regular" one that you didn't have a problem with, and it'll be available in far greater numbers than these limited editions.

Originally Posted by imag

Porsche is making record profits, admittedly in a more expensive segment. I see multiple people on the board looking at much more expensive cars because Toyota won't build a performance variant of this one.

But if everyone on the board who has stated that and actually purchased a more expensive car instead (meaning not just people complaining about it but not having been in a position to actually get a car at that moment) had actually gone with a higher-performance variant had it been available, that might have added a handful more sales. Nothing significant.

Yes, the hunger for more performance is something that feeds the desire for a performance variant, but that alone isn't keeping the FR-S from going to the next level. Just look at the Miata, which has been relevant for the past 25 years and been regarded as an excellent sports car with the sales to back it up, despite generally having a horsepower figure that started with a 1 throughout its entire lifespan. And while it was a cool model, the Mazdaspeed variant of it with a turbo strapped onto it didn't really one-up the regular model.

You mention Porsche... and this is not to stereotype Porsche owners or speak negatively of them (as I know quite a few personally and love them to death) or speak on their behalf, but I would think any Porsche has a lot of appreciation for a good badge on the hood. It's still a stretch for a lot of them to bring themselves to buy a Scion (and not even a Toyota -- and I will leave Subaru out of this, as this is in the Scion section), even if you throw some more performance at it. I'm reminded of an old Road & Track comparison between the Cayman S and an Evo IX MR, where the Cayman beat the Evo by the end of the quarter by a tick (and also had better handling and braking stats) but was clearly slower through the track that they used. And I remember on the Porsche forums, people posting about the articles would talk about how they could never bring themselves to buying a Mitsubishi, regardless of the performance (or the fact that it was just a handful of ponies short of the Cayman S but had a mountain of torque in comparison).

There are some 911 owners who will not buy a Boxster or a Cayman, even if at this point the car actually handles better and has greater potential. And it's not because it doesn't have the same engines as what is available in the 911, even if Jeremy Clarkson has mentioned his displeasure of the car being based on the fact that Porsche has purposely held back from giving it the better motors from the 911. So it's probably not too much of a stretch to think that some guys who have a Boxster/Cayman but don't post on this forum may certainly appreciate the car but might not think it's for them regardless of its pony count.

[raven1231]

God this frs edition ruined my life