|
I think it would have been more interesting on the Autoclub Speedway roval. It shows them doing straight line and g-force testing there, why did they drive out to willow springs? The speed limiter on the mustang would kill its lap times there. Autoclub Speedway probably wants moneys.
Longpig Bard fucked around with this message at 01:24 on May 4, 2012 |
#
?
May 4, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
mattdizzleZ28 posted:Numbers game or not, "Slower than a v6 mustang on a track" is a hard pill to swallow for a car that is so focused. I think the cross-shopping of the mustand and BRZ is more likely than many think. That number is highly, highly dependent on what track we're talking about here. Also, very few of you are race car drivers, so I wonder just how much performance per price really matters compared to the related metric of perceived performance per price. The point of the car is to be small, fun, and engaging to drive, not to put up the highest numbers possible. Not to mention the fact that it is probably going to be highly competitive in events such as autocross, which is just about the most accessible sort of motorsport you can get into short of stuff like drag racing.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
Internet Meme posted:To me, it's a price/performance ratio. According to that video, I can get a car that's faster both in a straight line and on the track, with a superior aftermarket, room for a turbo, the same gas mileage, and cheap parts, for exactly the exact same price. Cheaper, I got a 2012 v6 premium Mustang with the pony package and comfort package for 23k. I was going to hold out for the FR-S, but when I realized I'd be paying 4000 more for a bone stock interior I had to make the call. Now, I'm not saying the toyobaru is a bad car, I'm just saying that in three years you'll be able to buy a new one at invoice that will probably be better than the first year model. You gotta look at your pocketbook and think about what really matters to you. Also, I had them down to 26,900 on a 2012 V8 premium but didjt want to pay an arm and leg for gas and insurance.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
mattdizzleZ28 posted:I just dont want to sit back and see people rushing in with "it doesnt count because its got less power", or "it doesnt count because its not the right configuration of racetrack". I'm no mustang fanboy by any means (see name), but credit where credit is due, it wins on the track. If it cant make up for its lack of power with momentum its simply a slower car. A car on grand touring all seasons loses to a car with a superior power to weight ratio and max performance summer tires why you don't say 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:03
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:If the S2000 weren't so loud it would be pretty easy to do, the S.Drives don't make much noise. False. You don't drift an S2000, it spins you into a tree and you explode. Don't you know, only the FR-S contains the burning soul of Akina.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:13
|
|
|
I was all about comparing the Toyobaru to the Mustang until I got to drive a 5.0 for 4 days (Hertz has them). It was fast and made glorious noises but that was about it. It just felt too big. I'm not sure if it was the bad visibility or the meh steering or just the size/weight of the thing. If anything the Mustang has more in common with cars like the 300C and Charger. This is the sort of car that most drivers are never going to race against anything, they'll be used for tearing down traffic free back roads on a weekend afternoon. For that purpose, if the BRZ is anything like what the reviewers are talking about (I'm imagining an AW11 MR2 with 20 years of refinement), it'll be hands down a better option. I want to drive one badly after seeing that review. sanchez fucked around with this message at 02:18 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:16
|
|
|
Did that video really change anyone's mind? It just confirmed what we've been told over and over again: this car is built for fun, not speed, and it has low power compared to modern sports cars.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:16
|
|
|
bidikyoopi posted:Did that video really change anyone's mind? It just confirmed what we've been told over and over again: this car is built for fun, not speed, and it has low power compared to modern sports cars. BUT IT'S NOT AS GOOD OF A PRICE/PERFORMANCE RATIO AS THE MUSTANG!!!!!!! The Mustang is basically a monster in terms of price for performance. The Mustang GT is on the same performance level (though definitely not refinement level) as a BMW M3 for gently caress's sake. I would love to have either a new Mustang GT or* this car, because they're both amazing machines, but they're pretty different animals. I'd still love to have a BRZ even with the knowledge that even my sorry rear end could probably get around a track faster in a Mustang. * and Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 02:36 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:30
|
|
|
Possum Launcher posted:Not even. The Mustang was 1.23 seconds faster, which is only about 1.5% faster with a 50% power advantage. To me, that means the BRZ made up a huge amount of ground with some combination of lighter weight, cornering ability and driver confidence. That sounds like a win to me. Power doesn't work that way, the car isn't immediately 50% better or even 50% faster. To add to that you aren't accelerating while breaking or turning, and the extra weight, higher center of gravity and less amount of effort/money put into the suspension means that the BRZ should have more of an advantage on a slow speed track with a bunch of turns. But it didn't and it got beat, so I don't really know what you are expecting to come out of this, because the BRZ will get demolished on a faster track. edit: Bumming Your Scene posted:I think it would have been more interesting on the Autoclub Speedway roval. It shows them doing straight line and g-force testing there, why did they drive out to willow springs? The speed limiter on the mustang would kill its lap times there. Autoclub Speedway probably wants moneys. The track is "Streets of Willow Springs," which is a much smaller track that has a longest straight of 1000' and an entire size of 1.8 miles. Compare this to Willow Springs proper that has a 1/2 mile straightaway. ppp fucked around with this message at 03:00 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
I'm shocked how anyone can watch those videos and how Pobst clearly loves the BRZ/FT and think the mustang is the better car.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:A car on grand touring all seasons loses to a car with a superior power to weight ratio and max performance summer tires why you don't say Yeah, the BRZ come stock with 215/45R17 Michelin Primacy HPs. It doesn't necessarily need wider tires - there's not that much power to put down - but stickier rubber would make a huge difference. Especially considering Pobst raved about the P-Zeros on the Mustang. Bottom line, though, n8r posted:I'm shocked how anyone can watch those videos and how Pobst clearly loves the BRZ/FT and think the mustang is the better car.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 04:33
|
|
|
n8r posted:I'm shocked how anyone can watch those videos and how Pobst clearly loves the BRZ/FT and think the mustang is the better car.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 04:34
|
|
|
Every five pages, Mustang V6.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
That Mustang was a baaaaad colour. also i would still buy the BRZ, only because a mustang isnt sold here for any reasonable amount of money.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 05:09
|
|
|
The only people who buy a mustang in the UK are idiots who think they're american (they're not) fat old men who think they're cowboys (they're not) and people who want a muscle car regardless of fuel being £1.45/l. They are not bought for performance here.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 05:55
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:The only people who buy a mustang in the UK are idiots who think they're american (they're not) fat old men who think they're cowboys (they're not) and people who want a muscle car regardless of fuel being £1.45/l. They are not bought for performance here.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Bogging. The term "no low end torque" is thrown around a lot. How do you think acceleration tests are done, by idling off the line? The BM video clearly shows low-mid 14s launching with considerably less revs than the Ignition test, and both results point to a car that is comfortably quicker than originally suggested by various sources. No one is suggesting 14s are quick, but for a car like this it's respectable at least ROFLBOT fucked around with this message at 06:56 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 06:47
|
|
|
ROFLBOT posted:That sure is an odd way of looking at things- a car that does better than expectations even with a poor launching technique, and yet that counts for nothing? What it will do in real life is an odd way to look at a car? Have you ever dropped the clutch at 4600rpm in anything you own? edit: you are aware there's middle ground between idling out and 5k clutch dumps. look at the way they launch the mustang in the comparison video. You're arguing over 2/10ths of a second in a scenario this car is never going to win at. Powershift fucked around with this message at 07:09 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 06:58
|
|
|
coolskillrex remix posted:0-60 times are a useless rubric in manual transmission cars and i dont know why people get so hung up over them. 99.999999% of people going off of stop lights arent going to dump their clutch at 4600rpm.  face.My Jeep's got pretty much the same straight-line performance as the Toyobaru. Doesn't mean it's a comparable sportscar.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 09:40
|
|
|
People have started getting their VINs and ETAs. No such luck for anyone in Texas though 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 13:23
|
|
|
Powershift posted:What it will do in real life is an odd way to look at a car? Have you ever dropped the clutch at 4600rpm in anything you own? Plenty of times, and it usually results in wheelspin and less than optimal acceleration, amazingly just like it did in the FR-S test. Presumably then, with less revs and a smoother clutch release the car would easily better the high 14 it got, no? quote:edit: you are aware there's middle ground between idling out and 5k clutch dumps. look at the way they launch the mustang in the comparison video. You're arguing over 2/10ths of a second in a scenario this car is never going to win at. What exactly is your point? 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are measured by finding the optimal revs to launch at, it doesn't matter whether that's 1000rpm or 5000rpm, and if I need 5000rpm to win a stop light grand pix then that's what I'll rev it to!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
e: nevermind I want an FR-S and have never given a poo poo about Mustangs so v  v
Splizwarf fucked around with this message at 14:47 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 14:29
|
|
|
Idiot race posted:What exactly did they criticise? Wierd realy seeing as most reviews have been fairly positive. Yeah, as posted since basically complete lack of torque. That weight and a 200hp output should make it quick anywhere, but they called it gutless, saying it was constantly caught out on corner exit. To me the blindingly obvious question was why it didn't seem to occur to them that this is what you get when you test a car (especially one with a bias towards top-end power) with a torque converter box. You're down ~10% immediately over the manual even if the shift logic is good, and presumably it carries a weight penalty. Possibly more on point, they said it has too much grip. Basically the chassis setup + LSD generates huge grip at the back, even with the primacies, yet under braking the rubber up front can't cope. So unless the corners are very flowing, it's untidy on the way into the corner and then refuses to break grip on the exit. Only way to deal with that is to break it loose on the entry and carry that through, but on the road even EVO reviewers didn't think you could be expected to do that safely on a regular basis. Mind you, that's what I have to do with my N/A Impreza  and it has to be said they're right, if the corner doesn't have a nice wide entry and exit (e.g. roundabouts) I'm hardly going to flick it in anyway and hope I don't end up in a ditch. I think where they may have missed the point, as with Metcalfe's Prius hate, is that many UK enthusiast buyers don't want constant power oversteer in the dry, and might actually want a proper sports coupe that doesn't cost as much as the Zed and won't kill them on road tax, insurance or tyres. Oh, and they probably won't be stupid enough to buy the auto.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
Apparently I'm going to have to be getting my test drive out of Subaru because someone just wrecked Alberta's only FR-S demo car. I wonder if they will even have test drive demo cars available when shipping picks up or if they've already sold their allocation for Canada. Here's evo comparing the BRZ to the Megane 265 Trophy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNUL9eQO5Q0
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
Why in the name of all that is loving holy did they test an auto?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
Saga posted:To me the blindingly obvious question was why it didn't seem to occur to them that this is what you get when you test a car (especially one with a bias towards top-end power) with a torque converter box. You're down ~10% immediately over the manual even if the shift logic is good, and presumably it carries a weight penalty. Actually, the modified Aisin TL-80SN that it's claimed is used is a full lock-up torque converter for second gear and up. Same for all the other high-end RWD Aisins. Also, the mfr curb weights for manual vs. auto are 1255 vs. 1276 kg (or 1259/1280 optioned out), which is less than a 50 pound difference. Modern automatic transmissions have advanced a lot in terms of weight and efficiency. Although it is true that the 1:1 ratio is on fourth gear in the auto instead of fifth in the manual, which on a pretty low-power car like this is definitely more for fuel economy than performance since that's two overdrive gears. According to this speculation, the gearbox in the BRZ is an Aisin AZ6, which apparently is a "medium torque capacity RWD 6-speed manual" and probably can't handle much over 200-210 lb/ft of torque under production conditions, which is another reason that a turbo option will take some serious re-engineering if they want to make one. Also, it will add to the cost, which will probably leave a potential BRZ turbo competing in the $30-34k range, which is kind of nuts and way too expensive. I also have a bit of a suspicion that, behind the scenes, there was some sort of deal regarding suppliers since all the drivetrain parts except for the engine itself were sourced from Toyota's private suppliers like Aisin and Torsen. This might also constrain the availability of a higher-powered version since the next higher RWD manual from Aisin is (I believe) significantly more expensive, and Subaru might not be able to switch to Getrag or some other supplier for political or contract/informal contract reasons. Ratios: pre:manual automatic 1 3.626 3.538 2 2.188 2.060 3 1.541 1.404 4 1.213 1.000 5 1.000 0.713 6 0.767 0.582 R 3.437 3.168 Final D 4.100 4.100 OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 19:02 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:50
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Apparently I'm going to have to be getting my test drive out of Subaru because someone just wrecked Alberta's only FR-S demo car. I wonder if they will even have test drive demo cars available when shipping picks up or if they've already sold their allocation for Canada. A FWD was more fun to drive? Yeah okay. The guy (riding bitch as opposed to driving the car himself) looked like he was going to throw up the whole time, I don't believe for a second that he had any fun in either of those cars. EVO has also said that the Miata is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
emoltra posted:A FWD was more fun to drive? Yeah okay. The guy (riding bitch as opposed to driving the car himself) looked like he was going to throw up the whole time, I don't believe for a second that he had any fun in either of those cars. Typical English. I smell a little rage at the death of the entire British auto industry considering his fawning over the Lotus Elise. Also, the snobbish lack of concern for the difference in price between those cars. Basically he's saying "the Miata isn't as good as the less popular, more expensive, low-volume Lotus Elise so waaah".
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
Harris likes the FR-S. It's a bit strange because most other reviewers have liked both the FR-S and the Miata and compared the two favorably. Not sure what threshold the Miata is not meeting for him.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
Headroom.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:06
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:A car on grand touring all seasons loses to a car with a superior power to weight ratio and max performance summer tires why you don't say In all fairness it sounds like he didn't have to lift much on the BR-Z so the (admittedly awful) tires still weren't being stretched too hard. I'm so torn because I want to love the Toyobaru but man that price point is just a little too high for my tastes. This is coming from someone who lusts after RX-8s, so I don't know what that even means. I wonder how the V6 Camaro stacks up handling-wise.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
Detroit Q. Spider posted:I wonder how the V6 Camaro stacks up handling-wise. Who cares, the thing is a coffin. Have you sat in one? On the other hand, if you're a stick-man who is 4 inches taller than me (he was 6'11") you'll fit really well in one, one of my classmates had one.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:32
|
|
|
Is it still really tight? I've only ever sat in a last generation (late 90s) Camaro and it was definitely snug. I guess I'm not too bothered by that but it blows my mind that my tiny-rear end Acura has a more accommodating interior than a number of larger cars.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
Elbow room is a touch tight in the NB as well during long trips.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
It was a 2010 Camaro. I was uncomfortable in the car because it was not even slightly snug, there was too much room. I'm not sure if you remember what I look like from earlier in the thread, but I am 6'7" and 330 pounds with wide shoulders and a wide pelvis. I'm a big guy, and finding a car with too much room is bizarre. e: /\/\/\/\ Yeah, that was the thing, the only place it was cramped was there was no place to put your left arm at all. The windows are also literally shorter than the chin-to-hair height of my head, the beltline is neck-height (good luck putting your elbow out the window), and the blind spot from the B pillar is huge. Add in the huge long hood and it was a nightmare car. The only way I could imagine enjoying it would be solo at a track, which brings us back to the current conversation.  I really like the way every previous generation of Camaro looked, and while I think the current Mustang is a nice modernization of a classic look, the current Camaro is a herpes-laden dick in the eye. It's an obvious attempt to match the Mustang's retro-mod flavor but fails miserably, partly because the Camaro they based the look off of is obscure, and partly because it's a fat loving piggy. That works for the Mustang because the Fastbacks were rad, but when I think of a Camaro I expect it to be sleek like a 'Vette. Splizwarf fucked around with this message at 21:35 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
Just sat in the press car at subaru halifax. Despite knowing the dimensions I was still surprised at how small it was, and how low you sat to the ground. The bolstering on the seats seemed pretty good, better than my e36 or e46 sport seats. Interior seemed good, but I was in the top of the line BRZ. It definitely looks great in person from almost every angle. They're apparently getting 3, and are trying to get another 3 allocated. They've sold on so far. Haven't been to the scion dealer yet since it's across the bridge. Canadian price is still a killer though, almost 32k with tax.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
Let the games begin!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
Crustashio posted:Haven't been to the scion dealer yet since it's across the bridge.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
Welp, I just put down my deposit for an FR-S at the local Toyota megadealer.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
jamal posted:Manual racks are slow as poo poo and not good from a performance driving standpoint. That's a fairly overarching comment. Elise has a manual rack.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 03:51
|
|
