2016 BRZ

[kerbal945]

Not sure about the US. 2016 BRZ is officially out in Canada, and officially nothing changed I was hoping at least for a backup camera from the factory.
http://www.subaru.ca/WebPage.aspx?We...ModelYear=2016
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jaBkh0G43M"]2016 Subaru BRZ Review - YouTube[/ame]

[sdot]

The 2016 WRB definitely looks lighter.

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by acetothermus

"...the 2.0-litre boxer 4-banger still develops a “measly” 197 HP and 200 Nm of torque."

While I agree that this car could do with another 50 or so HP, I think people need to realize that this wasn't meant to be a top fuel drag car. I'm getting a little tired of everyone banging on about how "underpowered" the car is. [/rant]

It's about as fast as my 2001 prelude sh. You can't really say your car is quick when youre losing to Camrys.

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by sdot

The 2016 WRB definitely looks lighter.

Think it's just his camera cause that red one looked washed out and pinkish as well.

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

It's about as fast as my 2001 prelude sh. You can't really say your car is quick when youre losing to Camrys.

Yeah, but you don't hear people banging on the Miata when it's well down on power compared to the twins. Think it's because the chassis is so good that it feels like it could handle more.

Also, a V6 Camry has always been a hilariously fast sleeper...

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by Poodles

Yeah, but you don't hear people banging on the Miata when it's well down on power compared to the twins. Think it's because the chassis is so good that it feels like it could handle more.

The new Miata is faster than the 86 in the quarter mile, even though it only has 155hp. Obviously neither car is built for drag racing, but the 86 is pretty darn slow for its time.

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

The new Miata is faster than the 86 in the quarter mile, even though it only has 155hp. Obviously neither car is built for drag racing, but the 86 is pretty darn slow for its time.

Supposedly faster. I'll wait for real world numbers and not numbers from press cars. Not to mention the radically difference in tires between the two cars can account for the difference.


The twins have been shown to be nearly as fast in the quarter when not hampered by economy tires.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by Poodles

Supposedly faster. I'll wait for real world numbers and not numbers from press cars. Not to mention the radically difference in tires between the two cars can account for the difference.


The twins have been shown to be nearly as fast in the quarter when not hampered by economy tires.

regardless they are both slow compared to most other cars. Let's all be honest with ourselves, and it's ok because most of us didn't buy this car for its power output.

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by raven1231

regardless they are both slow compared to most other cars. Let's all be honest with ourselves, and it's ok because most of us didn't buy this car for its power output.

Yeah, but only slow because you can get a normal family sedan with 400HP these days.


That's supercar territory from only a few decades ago.


Stock for stock, the twins are full second faster in the quarter than a MKIII Supra Turbo if that gives any perspective...

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by Poodles

Supposedly faster. I'll wait for real world numbers and not numbers from press cars. Not to mention the radically difference in tires between the two cars can account for the difference.


The twins have been shown to be nearly as fast in the quarter when not hampered by economy tires.

Originally Posted by Poodles

Yeah, but only slow because you can get a normal family sedan with 400HP these days.


That's supercar territory from only a few decades ago.


Stock for stock, the twins are full second faster in the quarter than a MKIII Supra Turbo if that gives any perspective...

You know a car is slow when it needs to be modified to beat a miata and you end up comparing it to 25 year old cars.

Hell, my 2004 srt4 was 20k new and it could run high 13s stock.

[industrial]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

You know a car is slow when it needs to be modified to beat a miata and you end up comparing it to 25 year old cars.

Hell, my 2004 srt4 was 20k new and it could run high 13s stock.

Oh you're one of those srt4 is fastarrr people. Why are you even here? Shouldn't you be off in mulletland drooling over hellcats or something? The SRT4 is all about quantitative numbers. The twins and miata are all about qualitative impressions. Entirely different purpose behind each machine.

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by industrial

Oh you're one of those srt4 is fastarrr people. Why are you even here? Shouldn't you be off in mulletland drooling over hellcats or something? The SRT4 is all about quantitative numbers. The twins and miata are all about qualitative impressions. Entirely different purpose behind each machine.

Ah, so you're going to make a judgement off me for one car that I used to own years ago? Back in 2004, the SRT-4 was a huge bang for your buck if you wanted something newer. It didn't handle on rails, but it fared pretty well on the track thanks to its factory LSD, 230whp, and sub-3000lbs curb weight.

I love the amount of driver involvement that the 86 delivers (which is why I bought one), but I also enjoy accelerating fast sometimes too. The extra power is nice to have during those long straights. You talk to me about qualitative impressions, but I wonder how many times you personally have taken your car to a track and pushed it to the limit?

Here is a partial list of the cars I've owned so you can continue to make future judgments about me.

1990 civic
1990 talon tsi
1994 tercel
1968 firebird
1992 laser awd turbo
2004 srt-4
1998 neon acr
2001 prelude sh
1994 miata

[industrial]

Ok, calm down. It's the internet, expect to be judged by the last thing you said. And you did pretty much say that the srt4 is faster. Which was a running joke on car boards for about a decade.

[Poodles]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

You know a car is slow when it needs to be modified to beat a miata and you end up comparing it to 25 year old cars.

Hell, my 2004 srt4 was 20k new and it could run high 13s stock.

...and I stomped all over SRT4's with my Supra, your point?


As already said many times in the Motor Trend comparison thread, the Miata is running high performance summer tires and is spec'ed with every upgrade. To be an equal comparison you'd have to compare it to a tS.


It's ok, I know you're just trolling now though...

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by industrial

Ok, calm down. It's the internet, expect to be judged by the last thing you said. And you did pretty much say that the srt4 is faster. Which was a running joke on car boards for about a decade.

I'm calm, you just came across like a condescending douche who reads too many magazines. The only reason I used the srt-4 as an example was because I owned one. I could have mentioned plenty of other cheap econoboxes that are faster than the twins too. Poodles made it sound like everything on the road is faster than the 86 because they are all packing 400hp.

Yeah, but only slow because you can get a normal family sedan with 400HP these days

The twins aren't slow because other cars have gobs of HP, they are slow because that's how Toyota made them.

Originally Posted by Poodles

...and I stomped all over SRT4's with my Supra, your point?


As already said many times in the Motor Trend comparison thread, the Miata is running high performance summer tires and is spec'ed with every upgrade. To be an equal comparison you'd have to compare it to a tS.


It's ok, I know you're just trolling now though...

Do you even know what trolling is?

My point is the same as it has always been. Relatively speaking, the twins are slow from the factory. The very fact that it might be just as fast as a Miata is further confirmation of this. There is nothing wrong with slow cars, some of the best cars I've owned had less than 150hp.