Why is it so popular to hate this car?

People hate what they can't have, other wise decent coupe, needs turbo , kinda like the rx8 needs more power to be good

>>14824379

Is there a turbo option off the line?

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>14824391
I don't think so, I think it gets the hate from having a shity power/performance to price ratio

I went the rx8 route bc I got mine for 1500 not 12k if your looking to get that kinda car and not afraid to rebuild nab one they are so cheap

>>14824391
>>14824391
I don't think so, I think it gets the hate from having a shity power/performance to price ratio

I went the rx8 route bc I got mine for 1500 not 12k if your looking to get that kinda car and not afraid to rebuild nab one they are so cheap

>>14824415
>>14824421

Mobile lel

File: 20151129_163624.jpg (922KB, 2240x1344px) Image search: [Google]

922KB, 2240x1344px

It's got beautiful lines, but is so underpowered that I went with the GTI instead...

>>14824435
That's nice, anything special done to it?

>>14824391
No, but in the States Crawford Performance has a 86 twin pushing out 430-480 whp on the FA20, it was on /DRIVE, but they didn't go into the specifics of whether the rotating assembly was stock or not, sounds mean as fuck and goes like stink

It's a gorgeous car but there's just too much shtiposting.

I'll always benchrace against it because I don't prefer it to other vehicles, but that doesn't mean I hate it. I appreciate that Toyota and Subaru built a car that is meant to be pushed to its limits. That is something I wish we had more of at its price range.

Why are cars made to appeal to underage weeaboos so popular on here? Nevermind.

>>14824374
Because it was hyped IMMENSELY before it was released and then everyone was disappointed when it came out so slow with a giant hole in its torque delivery.

Basically the hype machine led to people expecting more than was delivered.

>>14824374
Because
>200hp
>28,000-32,000 USD

Because half of /o/ loves or owns this piece of shit and refuse to admit it's slow to the point where they post modded versions and go "see its fast!!!!"

>>14824374
Subpar performance

Miata gets more of a pass because there are 25 year old floppy beat to shit miatas that poorfags can afford.

>>14824374
Jelosy.

>>14824500
Coilovers.... but, been thinking about a tune, but I like the car as it drives now.

>>14824653
pretty much this

because it's slow
it'll be the next miata once it dips below 10k used, but it wont be as easy to turbo/supercharge

>>14824653
Oh becasue it has more power and costs less than the ND. I can see why that would upset the homosexuals.

File: image.jpg (91KB, 640x482px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 640x482px

>>14824884
That's nice, I hope you didn't go race lands, I did and I sorta regret it

>>14824374

Because for the price of that I can buy an almost new V8 Muscle car which, even if you're slightly faster around the corners, is never going to win in a race.

>>14825007
For the price of an almost new V8 muscle car you can get an older 335i which is faster in every situation. Or an even m3

So yeah, new vs used is never an argument

>>14825030

>you can get an older money pit

ftfy

>>14824374
because it was marketed as a spiritual successor to a meme car

it would have zero hate if 86 wasn't in its name

>>14825034
Just another arugment for getting the slower car brand new

>>14825036
You come to /o/ far too much.

File: drivers_v_tuners.jpg (124KB, 1294x502px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1294x502px

The problem with the GT86 is that it tries to appeal to two different groups of auto enthusiasts, tuners and drivers. As a result it is a compromise which does neither job very well.

A driver's car is designed to be track capable right off the lot. Balanced weight distribution, light weight, and high-revving NA engines make such a car responsive and nimble. Practicality and upgradeability are secondary to making sure the car can provide the best experience in stock form. Most enthusiasts who buy these cars don't intend to daily them or modify them - it's a fun car for weekends and track days.

The GT86 tries to be many of these things. It has the weight distribution, the low center of gravity, and an engine that tries for high performance in stock form at the expense of being moddable. However, the overall design is hampered in a lot of ways. A driver's car doesn't need 2 extra useless seats, it needs to be light. It doesn't need the hood-line provided by a boxer engine, it needs double wishbone suspension. It doesn't need fuel economy, it needs to have a consistent torque band.

A tuner's car, on the other hand, needs to be cheap and have high "modding potential" - it should yield large performance increases from simple upgrades. Simple, durable engines with low compression ratios, spacious engine bays, a low base price, and cheap parts make tuner's cars a dream to work on. Stock specs and things like weight distribution and curb weight are secondary because most enthusiasts who buy these cars intend to modify them heavily.

The GT86 claims to be a tuner's car as well, but it doesn't deliver. It has cheap stock brakes, tires, and suspension, but the engine is notoriously difficult to make power out of, and the car's starting price approaches that of much more capable rivals, which pushes potential buyers to buy used.
(cont)

File: brz.jpg (472KB, 1300x975px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1300x975px

Love mine, nothing I dont like about it.
Its not fast in straight lines, but so damn fun in the corners.
thats why i bought mine.

File: RWD_corolla.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>14825217
To make the GT86 a good driver's car would be simple - cut the back seats, trim ~200lbs, ship with better stock tires, brakes, and suspension, and push the engine to ~220hp, with no torque dip. If this makes it a little more expensive, it's not a huge issue - the people who want that kind of car are willing to pay for it.

To make it a good tuner's car is harder. It needs to be more like a RWD economy car than a sports car.
I think something like a RWD tC would serve the purpose better. Put whatever Toyota's most durable, turbo-able i4 is in it and sell it for ~19-22k and it would be really successful. Regular people would buy it because it has an actually usable trunk and back seats, and enthusiasts would buy it to turbo and hoon around.

>>14824374
all show no go.

File: 4agze.jpg (80KB, 787x500px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 787x500px

>>14824374
No glorious 4AGZE.

>>14824374
toyota and subaru are neutered companies that aren't willing to make real sports cars

god bless american auto companies, they are keeping the fun alive. they take risks

The car was hyped up, but it's not powerful enough.

It came so close to being perfect. Obviously nobody was expecting it to have something like 400hp. But to only have about 200 is just a shame, especially since it looks like a car that would have a lot more.

>>14824374
Insanely over hyped
Marketed to young people who don't know any better
"Looks fast bro"
Isn't.

>>14824653
Where do people come up with these numbers? It starts at around 25,000. The same price as a gti. Nearly the same power as a gti.

It's priced perfectly. Stop being poor.

because why buy this piece of shit when you can get a brand new wrx for the same price

>>14824653
For that money you can almost buy the new rs

>>14825036
I was really hoping for them to resurrect the Celica lineage, perhaps leading to a "Supra"/STi version with FI.

Giving it the Scion moniker (even though it's going away) really killed it for me.

>>14825730
No you can't. The first RS orders are just now getting filled, I would guess if you put in for an RS today you wouldn't take delivery for about a year maybe longer. You can't buy a product that isn't available.
Also, I haven't heard of a dealer selling an RS for MSRP, everyone is buying them for $5k over MSRP.

>>14825537
FR-S starts at 26k MSRP.

A GTi is turbocharged and has a much more linear power band with more torque off the line. It's also wrong wheel drive, so if that's not an issue you could get a Focus ST for the same price.

If you have to have RWD you can get a new Miata starting at 25k, or a V6 Mustang / Camaro for less. Hell, the WRX starts at 26.5k.

So that's the problem for the FR-S. For the price, absolutely nothing stands out from the rest of the field other than the "Toyoburu" brand.

>>14825537
>nearly he same power as a GTI

Yeah no, maybe on paper at crank, but not on dyno at wheel.

File: 2010 gti vs 2013 frs.jpg (30KB, 485x323px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 485x323px

>>14825981
Sure, higher peak numbers. But damn look at dat gap until higher RPM's

>>14825977
If you're going to mention the Miata at least compare with the one with the LSD. Also the mustang and camaro are fat pony cars that no one would cross shop. Yeah the twins may not be the car for all people but you all need to stop acting like it doesn't have value compared to what's out there. ~200 hp for the low 20s is industry standard pricing.

>>14826048
>fat pony cars that no one would cross shop
Beg to differ considering the majority of complaints are a lack of power. So obviously some people in the market are looking for a car that will go fast in a straight line, which a V6 Mustang / Camaro will do MUCH better than a FR-S.

>>14826087
Then maybe buyers and haters alike are fucking retarded. No one compares a Miata to a pony car. Why is anyone doing this with the frs? What the fuck is up with this car and its ability to make people throw away all logic or reason?

File: image.jpg (165KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1280x720px

>>14824374
No one hates THAT car. THAT is the car everyone was hoping for. Pic related is the car people "hate". Probably because it costs WRX money for lesser performance. Maybe if it was closer to or under $20k, more of the people that were asking for this type of car could have afforded to / wanted to buy one.

>>14826181
I'll also add that I'd take the FRS/BRZ as it is if I could afford to.