Track Test: Edmunds 2013 Scion FR-S with Upgraded Wheels and Tires Pulls 1.0g!

[Laika]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

I wonder then what 38.5psi hot translates to when cold. Maybe around 33?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

You can calculate this pretty easily but you need some hypothetical temperatures to go off of.

[Draco-REX]

Originally Posted by Turbowned

This is interesting, compared to the results of testing the Z1 Star specs on stock wheels, where the 215-width tires improved lap times by 2.x seconds, and the 235-width tires actually decreased performance. The difference must be in the weight reduction of the Volk wheels.

If you're talking about the Road and Track test, the wider tires were also 1" taller than stock. So it's a completely invalid test. Just forget it exists.

As for this review they went only 2mm larger, so gearing isn't an issue.

From my experience going to the same tires in 235/40-17 size, they'd get an even better result if they just install crash bolts and get some negative camber up front. With just tires and a real alignment this car is no doubt a "G" car.

[SuperDave]

i don't understand this 1g lateral pull number, can someone explain this?

[p911gt3]

I think it would be very useful for someone to take an FRS and have a day full of wheel/tire comparisons. Imagine a single test that could answer questions regarding height, weight, width of various wheels and an appropriate spread of tires on each of these... I can see it now, a world where we have enough evidence to know how each variable affects performance on this car, and we can zone in on some ideal ranges...

StockW, StockT = x g's,
StockW, TireA = y g's,
StockW, TireB ...
(Yes I would measure more than just g forces)

::zoning out into fantasy land::

[#87]

I think that test would be impractical unless they also had more than one car because the brakes would get too much work. It's a good idea but probably prohibitively expensive unless someone donated/sponsored specifically for it. Which I can't really see happening.

[Draco-REX]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

i don't understand this 1g lateral pull number, can someone explain this?

1 "G" is acceleration equivalent to the acceleration of gravity. In this test, it's the amount of force acting sideways on the car. Think of the old bucket of water on a rope experiment. You spin it around and the forces keep the water in the bucket. In this case, the forces are trying to pull the car off line.

So this car, with just a tire change, is capable of resisting a WHOLE FR-S on a string trying to pull it off line in a corner. Not many cars can do that on the stock suspension. And those cars tend to cost multiple TIMES what the FR-S does.

[ML]

Was the guy in the video severally cross eyed or did he just not like looking at the camera? I had no idea where he was looking and I felt awkward.

[exmayol]

Originally Posted by whitejdm

I really thought the acceleration numbers would be improved with the lighter wheels and more grip, guess not haha.

Well perhaps higher grip tires are heavier that stock ones hence negating the weight advantage of Volks.. I am too lazy to look up the weight of the tires thhough hence can't claim this is really the case.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by justaquestion

This is not true at all, if you go look at tirerack test figures, MANY cars, that weren't even built for performance driving, can pull 1G with a wheel/tire upgrade on stock suspension.

Also, unless you are testing all the same cars on the same surface or a very similar surface, its hard to compare the lateral g's accurately. Different surface compositions and textures can give different results.

I bolded the contradiction in your argument. Why would you state it's difficult to compare lateral g's from different test tracks, then compare Edmunds' results against Tirerack's? Anyway Draco-REX is right, very few cars are pulling 1.00 g or greater on Edmunds' test track.

I posted this on a different thread, but thought this might be useful to see here (skidpad / slalom / 60-0). All tests done by Edmunds on their test track, i.e., same location and methodology.

As someone else on the forum pointed out, the FR-S is VERY close to the Elise in the three metrics of handling measured. And the Elise is wearing better/stickier tires. The FR-S on similar tires (A048 or similar DOT-legal competition tire) would likely match the Elise, that's crazy if you think about it.

Very impressive showing by the FR-S. I would guess it was tested on summer performance tires during development.

[1.00-1.04 g]
1.04 g / 71.3 mph / 102 ft -- 911 Carrera S (Pirelli P Zero P-spec)
1.03 g / 71.6 mph / 109 ft -- Elise (Yoko A048 LTS)
1.00 g / 70.3 mph / 107 ft -- FR-S (Yoko AD08)

[0.95-0.99 g]
0.99 g / 72.3 mph / 102 ft -- Boxster Spyder (Bridgestone RE050a P-spec)
0.99 g / 70.7 mph / 112 ft -- Evo X GSR (Yoko A048)
0.98 g / 71.0 mph / 103 ft -- R8 (Pirelli P Zero A-spec)
0.98 g / 69.7 mph / 103 ft -- Corvette (Eagle F1 Supercar)
0.98 g / 69.1 mph / 109 ft -- Shelby GT500 (Eagle F1 Supercar G:2)
0.97 g / 71.3 mph / 105 ft -- Cayman R (Bridgestone RE050a P-Spec)
0.96 g / 74.0 mph / 98 ft -- GT-R (Bridgestone RE070R)
0.95 g / 73.3 mph / 100 ft -- E90 M3 Coupe (Michelin PS2)

[0.90-0.94 g]
0.93 g / 70.4 mph / 105 ft -- 370z (Bridgestone RE050a)
0.91 g / 71.1 mph / 119 ft -- MS3 (Dunlop SP Sport 2050)
0.91 g / ???? mph / 109 ft -- E46 M3 Coupe (Yoko AD07)
0.91 g / 70.4 mph / 115 ft -- Nismo 370z (Yoko Advan Sport)
0.90 g / 70.2 mph / 112 ft -- STI (Dunlop SP Sport 600)
0.90 g / 69.7 mph / 108 ft -- 135i (Bridgestone RE050a)

[0.85-0.89 g]
0.89 g / 69.6 mph / 112 ft -- GC 2.0t R-Spec (Bridgestone RE050a)
0.88 g / 69.3 mph / 131 ft -- NSX (Bridgestone RE730)
0.88 g / 68.5 mph / 114 ft -- GC 3.8 Track (Bridgestone RE050a)
0.87 g / 67.1 mph / 121 ft -- Civic Si (Michelin PE2)
0.87 g / 66.1 mph / 112 ft -- Mustang V6 PP (Pirelli P Zero)
0.86 g / 64.9 mph / 110 ft -- NC Miata (Bridgestone RE050a)

1) Only compares cars with performance summer tires (no R compounds or all-seasons).
2) Only uses numbers from Edmunds track tests to keep methodology and venue the same.
3) FR-S and competitors bolded.

[normanb21]

Originally Posted by exmayol

Well perhaps higher grip tires are heavier that stock ones hence negating the weight advantage of Volks.. I am too lazy to look up the weight of the tires thhough hence can't claim this is really the case.

I figured it out. the tires weigh 6lbs more than stock and the wheels weigh 5.6 less than stock. total weight gain of 1.6lbs, well worth the added grip imo

[arbnpx]

Hehe, this is about two weeks after I finally got these:


Volk TE37 17x8 +38
Toyo Proxes R1R 235/40/17 (140 treadwear rating)

Yeah; not quite as wide as 17 x 8.5 / 245mm, but pretty close, and it feels like lots more traction. I could easily make the Primacy tires scream in VSC Sport mode, but not these; in public road driving, they stay glued to the road. With the Primacy tires, I could easily pull of a 1st-to-2nd shift tire chirp; with the R1R's, I could only get them to chirp once, when I was accelerating as hard as I could. As for the offset, I love the look of "10 out" (10mm out toward the fenders), and it does seem to offer more cornering stability, at the cost of being off-center; I know that I'm going to have some people criticize that setup, but back when I ordered these wheels, no one knew about the fitment, so I was going safe, trying to make sure the tires wouldn't rub on the inside, against the front springs. It turns out that the insides are exactly as far as the stock fitment, but the outside of the wheels are just barely inside the wheel wells.

Yes, I Need Moar Low, but first things first: I need to learn how this car handles in this new configuration. I have autocross coming up on Sunday.