So what is the official weight?

[alex87f]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Final drive is 4.1, so it's an early model at least.

I can't find it for sure, but I'm pretty sure this was for one of the very early cars, model "A" based on what ichitaka says.

Originally Posted by ZDan

FF is a completely different configuration with different design needs. Given how much the driven wheels are unloaded on acceleration, they have to get a lot of static weight over them. Hence they mount it forward of the front wheels. Not relevant to us...

I'll repeat what I said:
The flat four is NOT particularly "set-back", but rather forward-mounted for an FR sports/sporty car.

This is just the truth. Any FR sports/sporty car worth its salt will have the engine mounted further aft. The FT86 engine sits with its geometric center quite forward. The only saving grace is that it is a very short engine fore/aft. But a big drawback of the flat-4 is that without steer-by-wire (ewww...) it has to sit forward enough to allow clearance for a steering shaft! Which scooted it rather forward... See below:



The engine is located rather far forward for an FR layout.

"Front-mid" is pure marketing B.S. anyway. Fact is that with an FR car you want the engine mounted as far aft as you can get it, whether or not some arbitrary part of the engine is forward or aft of the front wheel centerline. That said, the FT86's engine *is* set quite far forward for an FR sports/sporty car. Which did NOT help the weight distribution which is a craptastic 55F/45R. But that's also due to the rear wheels shoved ridiculously far aft. A 2-seat version with rear wheels moved forward a good 12" or so would get the weight distribution to 50/50.

I believe the engine placement has something to do with legroom. Mustangs are ginormous (both in length & width) and can afford having their engines set pretty far back without impeding on the size of the passenger compartment.

Having a very wide engine like a boxer in a front-mid position would mean a huge wheelbase, or a driving position pushed further back (and 2 seats).
Also, I'm pretty sure I read something about this layout helping to reduce the size of the gearbox tunnel & increase footwell width.

See the below image from an ND MX5, a narrow engine greatly helps creating a midship placement:



I don't know where your prior comment on a Miata weighing 1248kg comes from, but the NC 2.0 PRHT came in pretty close to 1200kg. And that's with two seats and a small boot.

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Yeah, they factor in driver to do weight ratio. Pointless to do no driver weight ratio. As for the vid, is that ratio w the driver? I just saw it quickly, but didn't mention anything about that. Not knocking on SG, but some days, I wish they tell more in-depth info when they show those numbers.

The autocar numbers mention a 55/45 distribution for an A model, wet, without driver with 50% fuel. A full tank would add about 20kg / 40lbs out the back and balance things out a little bit. Not sure what impact the driver would have.

Do you have any data on the differences between model types? I'd be pretty interested in that.

[SuperTom]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

iirc first yr is the only A model, cuz that's the lightest. They had to reinforce a lot of things... like the roof (due to owner bending it). After that, it's every other year. So it kinda go like this:
2012 ~ Early 2013: A
2013 ~ 2014: B
2015 ~ 2016: C
2017 ~ 2018: D
2019 ~ 2020: E

Model D and Model E doesn't have much difference iirc, but every other year, they tried to update.

So if you want the lightest 86, go buy '12 model. If you want the most updated 86, go buy '19 and up model.

About the roof im pretty sure ive seen bracing going front to back on roof of mine. Looking at pic of the TRD Griffon doesn't have a Front-to-back roof bracing, unless they removed it for weight reduction.






Also just looking at the rear engine/trans compared to firewall its looks there is a good 3" or so of space. So it looks like they could have moved everything back more but im sure they have their reasons why

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by alex87f

I can't find it for sure, but I'm pretty sure this was for one of the very early cars, model "A" based on what ichitaka says.



I believe the engine placement has something to do with legroom. Mustangs are ginormous (both in length & width) and can afford having their engines set pretty far back without impeding on the size of the passenger compartment.

I'm pretty sure the reason why the engine was sent pretty far up front was to guarantee the gearbox didn't cause legroom issues. Any tall guy who say in a Miata will know how that feels.

The engine is constrained forward to fit the steering column, per an interview back in 2012. V# and I# swaps can be fit right against the firewall for the most part. My understanding is that the bell housing was made extra long to put the transmission far enough back for the shifter to be in the right place. It's the price we paid for Subaru's involvement... Ahem I mean a low center of gravity. Frankly, I don't care how far forward the engine is, the total package wound up pretty damn good IMO and that's what really matters.

[alex87f]

Originally Posted by Spuds

The engine is constrained forward to fit the steering column, per an interview back in 2012. V# and I# swaps can be fit right against the firewall for the most part. My understanding is that the bell housing was made extra long to put the transmission far enough back for the shifter to be in the right place. It's the price we paid for Subaru's involvement... Ahem I mean a low center of gravity. Frankly, I don't care how far forward the engine is, the total package wound up pretty damn good IMO and that's what really matters.

Amen to that .

I didn't mean to create a whole debate (though it is interesting), just to post some verified, measured data on our car's weight, since I could not find any!

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Do you have any data on the differences between model types? I'd be pretty interested in that.

Sorry, don’t have all the updates & diagrams you wish for... but here are some photo & diagram updates.

There are long several hundred of pages on every updates & haven’t seen all the pages. I was lucky to get some info on sum of em & not all of em.

Originally Posted by SuperTom

About the roof im pretty sure ive seen bracing going front to back on roof of mine. Looking at pic of the TRD Griffon doesn't have a Front-to-back roof bracing, unless they removed it for weight reduction.

Hm... it should have it. I remember seeing one.

Found it. Member replacing the roof w cf.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Amen to that .

I didn't mean to create a whole debate (though it is interesting), just to post some verified, measured data the our car's weight, since it could not find any!

That is normal lol. Welcome to the club!

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

There are long several hundred of pages on every updates & haven’t seen all the pages. I was lucky to get some info on sum of em & not all of em.

Are all the technical docs in Japanese? Would be pretty cool to leaf through those, but I doubt Google Translate will handle that well

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

Are all the technical docs in Japanese? Would be pretty cool to leaf through those, but I doubt Google Translate will handle that well

Correct. There are some have been translated & used in Toyota/Subaru marketing to use it for auto journalists to have, but not detail info.

If I can get a hand on it, I’ll gladly scan em & keep em in PDF plus share it w everyone... BUT sadly it doesn’t go that way. They think, it’s boring and not worth sharing to the public. I get that, they wanna hide some tech & all... but gearhead, this is better read than Stephen King or other books.

[SuperTom]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Sorry, don’t have all the updates & diagrams you wish for... but here are some photo & diagram updates.

There are long several hundred of pages on every updates & haven’t seen all the pages. I was lucky to get some info on sum of em & not all of em.







Hm... it should have it. I remember seeing one.

Found it. Member replacing the roof w cf.

Right was just wondering why the Griffon didn't have it. I know it was an early model maybe the 2013's don't or it was just something they did

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by SuperTom

Right was just wondering why the Griffon didn't have it. I know it was an early model maybe the 2013's don't or it was just something they did

From the pic you posted, you can see lil arch in the mid of ceiling, my guess is, it’s still there, or sub w something different

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

So you both are basically looking at the engine location from a FR sports car perspective. That's cool, but it's the same as calling the Twins heavy when compared to pure(r) sports cars like the Elise.

No, it's not.

So what constitutes a mid engine car? That the engine is behind the driver and in front of the rear axle? What if it's on top of the rear axle? When does a mid-engine turn into a rear-engine?

Mid-engine = engine behind driver/passenger and in front of rear axle. If engine is on top of rear axle, there has been a very serious design failure which may have resulted in a gorgeous and extremely desirable car (365bb/512bb/512bbi)! Of course this does not make an S2000 or a C3 Corvette "mid-engine" or "midship" or "front/mid-engine" or any other such nonsense...

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

I think it's pretty obvious that the 86 is not a "front-mid" engine car, unlike the midship S2000.

The S2000 is *classic* front-engine/rear-drive sports car layout. It is NOT a mid-engined car.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by ZDan

The S2000 is *classic* front-engine/rear-drive sports car layout. It is NOT a mid-engined car.

The Cayman is not a mid-engine car. It's a rear engine car. Same with the Elise. Engine is behind the driver, not in the middle of the car. The driver in in the middle.

The Viper isn't a midship either while we're at it.

The only things that exist are front and rear engines, no such thing as mid-engine.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

The Cayman is not a mid-engine car.

???
Ok...

The only things that exist are front and rear engines, no such thing as mid-engine.

That's where you're wrong! The only thing that exists, is empty space, and YOU. And YOU, are but a thought...

“Nothing exists; all is a dream. God—man—the world—the sun, the moon, the wilderness of stars—a dream, all a dream; they have no existence. Nothing exists save empty space—and you!”
― Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger