Yaris GR engine into an 86

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Just for a few simple reasons. They want a low CG to say it has a low CG and it does improve handling to a certain extent (how much, I don't know). They also want to keep it N/A for the simple reason that they say it's what it was built to be, and it keep costs down. No matter HOW GOOD any other solution might sound out there, they were NEVER thinking turbo to begin with and it stayed crossed off the list. That makes their final options much more simple in terms of what they could give to the public. They want to be able to tell you that they built it for a certain purpose, and they stuck to that purpose. So that's what we have, and I'm fine with it.

The irony with their "keep costs down" reasoning is that this FA24 is apparently not just an FA24 turbo with the turbos removed. From what i read it seems like its somewhat of an exclusive motor to this car. Obvioiusly i dont know what that means (For all i know when they say its a new motor, an FA24 with the turbos removed but added D4S just fits that definition of "new motor").

I just find it a little funny that they wanna keep costs down but they give this car its own exclusive motor and not a parts bin piece.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

The irony with their "keep costs down" reasoning is that this FA24 is apparently not just an FA24 turbo with the turbos removed. From what i read it seems like its somewhat of an exclusive motor to this car. Obvioiusly i dont know what that means (For all i know when they say its a new motor, an FA24 with the turbos removed but added D4S just fits that definition of "new motor").

I just find it a little funny that they wanna keep costs down but they give this car its own exclusive motor and not a parts bin piece.

Well the turbo FA24 isn't 13.5:1 CR and nor does it rev as high, so they definitely made modifications at the least.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

The irony with their "keep costs down" reasoning is that this FA24 is apparently not just an FA24 turbo with the turbos removed. From what i read it seems like its somewhat of an exclusive motor to this car. Obvioiusly i dont know what that means (For all i know when they say its a new motor, an FA24 with the turbos removed but added D4S just fits that definition of "new motor").

I just find it a little funny that they wanna keep costs down but they give this car its own exclusive motor and not a parts bin piece.

It is direct and port injected using the Toyota D4S fuel system on a Subaru base engine. It is the only new Subaru engine using this Frankenstein combo and will be exclusive to the Quintuplets as with the FA20D.
These engines were developed just for these cars to get them lower than any of the other Subaru standard engines. The biggest differences are a smaller oil pan and lower intake manifold, the bump up in compression ratio and of course the addition of port injection.
The costs would not be significant since they used the basic design for the FA20 and FA20F (less the changes in the FA20D) in all sorts of vehicles so the development costs are more than covered.
There are all sorts of bespoke parts in the Quintuplets that could be replaced with parts bin but then you end up with a glorified Impreza. They recouped a pile of their development costs by using newly designed parts from the first gen in other cars so they aren't losing money in the long run.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by salty_91

Yes, I agree the engine CG will move higher, but I don't think it will change things substantially for the whole car since it's just 3 cylinder not even 4. There's a bunch of rwd cars with longitudinally mounted inline engines that have great handling, I don't see why things should go wrong for 86.

"The unit is in fact the largest-capacity and most powerful three-cylinder engine currently in production, yet it is also the smallest and lightest 1.6 turbo unit." that's what they write on it.

It is a low displacement 3 cylinder, so it is high strung to get to that power/torque, which means it likely doesn’t have as much overhead for more power. Think about it. The piston/rods have to be stronger/heavier than on an equal 4 cylinder because each cylinder has to do more work. It has a larger bore and stroke than the FA20 and longer stroke than the FA24, which is likely why the redline is lower, besides the potential extra piston/rod weight.

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Off topic... but:
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...600-horsepower

Not sure on it being light or anything though, but certainly no weakling for a 3 cylinder.

It is light because it has Freevalve and exotic materials and engineering.

There are billet block four cylinders running 4,000hp. Anything can be done with enough money and the right fuel. What has been done with a low displacement 3-cylinder shouldn’t necessarily influence anyone’s opinion about a three cylinder having a high power potential. I’d rather have more displacement and more cylinders with more potential for power up to a point.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

It is light because it has Freevalve and exotic materials and engineering.

There are billet block four cylinders running 4,000hp. Anything can be done with enough money and the right fuel. What has been done with a low displacement 3-cylinder shouldn’t necessarily influence anyone’s opinion about a three cylinder having a high power potential. I’d rather have more displacement and more cylinders with more potential for power up to a point.

Oh yes, I don't disagree. Was just throwing that link out to troll Toyota's statement in saying their engine is the worlds most powerful 3 cylinder engine ever produced.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Oh yes, I don't disagree. Was just throwing that link out to troll Toyota's statement in saying their engine is the worlds most powerful 3 cylinder engine ever produced.

In their defense, they made that statement before the Gemera was ever announced, and in every metric that matters to the 99.9% of us, the Gemera isn’t a production car.

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

In their defense, they made that statement before the Gemera was ever announced, and in every metric that matters to the 99.9% of us, the Gemera isn’t a production car.

Ah.. was not aware when this statement was made, assumed it was recent based on the date of that article. Also, probably a poor link to be using for an official meaning, but I always get "production car" confused in terms of its true meaning.
https://www.motor1.com/news/402027/k...seat-unveiled/
I am aware these cars are limited production, but would that still not be considered a production car?

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Ah.. was not aware when this statement was made, assumed it was recent based on the date of that article. Also, probably a poor link to be using for an official meaning, but I always get "production car" confused in terms of its true meaning.
https://www.motor1.com/news/402027/k...seat-unveiled/
I am aware these cars are limited production, but would that still not be considered a production car?

By definition it is.

But the requirement for "production car" is just a stupidly low number.

[dpfarr]

I wonder what sort of number the increase is on having a turbo twin. If that’s the limiting factor in how they will sell and what sort of sale price they could expect with a turbo car?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

Ah.. was not aware when this statement was made, assumed it was recent based on the date of that article. Also, probably a poor link to be using for an official meaning, but I always get "production car" confused in terms of its true meaning.
https://www.motor1.com/news/402027/k...seat-unveiled/
I am aware these cars are limited production, but would that still not be considered a production car?

Like I suggested, it isn’t a production car to the 99.99% of us. These are hand built cars in very limited numbers with price tags more than most people’s lifetime salary. On the other hand, the GR Yaris is very attainable. I would be comfortable saying the Yaris has the most powerful 3 cylinder production car.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by dpfarr

I wonder what sort of number the increase is on having a turbo twin. If that’s the limiting factor in how they will sell and what sort of sale price they could expect with a turbo car?

Subaru sells a sedan called the WRX for a similar price as the BRZ. It has a turbo, AWD and four doors. It doesn’t have D4S or a LSD. Seems to me that cost is not the problem. Toyota has a turbocharged sporty car. They want a light weight, high revving, good handling, NA, sporty car. The lack of a turbo is intentional. It is a free world. There are aftermarket solutions for FI.

[dpfarr]

I feel like it was addressed in the unveiling video that having a turbo would make the car too expensive.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by dpfarr

I feel like it was addressed in the unveiling video that having a turbo would make the car too expensive.

Why? The competitors to the 86 are cars that are similarly priced with turbocharged engines like the Honda Civic Si, the Miata counterpart the Fiat 128 spider, WRX, hot hatches like the Golf GTI, etc. They could mean the development costs for a unique turbocharger system for the platform would make the price too high. Who knows?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by dpfarr

I feel like it was addressed in the unveiling video that having a turbo would make the car too expensive.

I think the "too expensive" reference isn't so much that the price of the car is too high but that it removes it from their target market. There are loads of more expensive sportscars (I am not going to list them) out there for the market that is looking for big power.
I know many get insulted by the term but what Toyota was targeting with this car was the entry level buyer and the people looking for a nice sports coupe to drive around every day and have fun with once in a while. They asked what the public wanted way back in 2007 and were told that what was really missing was an inexpensive, light weight, NA, great handling car. That is exactly what they designed, built and sold and what they still plan to continue with. Never once in the history of the car did they promise anybody anything but that.People need to understand that this car was never going to be a Fast and Furious line up contender.


The very thought that all they have to do to make the car the Mustang beater so many scream for is to throw a turbo on it and sell it for $1,000 more. That is not as simple as it sounds. By the time they made all the other changes needed to support that turbo it is a whole different car and now enters the already crowed segment of the more costly existing makes.


They have upgraded the car to what I hope proves to be the right amount of power to meet the increased expectations (in 20012 a 200HP NA 2 liter was actually a marvel) but to stay within their original vison and goals. This does not impress the crowd that wants a sub $30K car with the power and performance of a $60+K one and oh well since they were not the target demographic to start with.