This car having a 2.0 engine doesn't excuse the 200hp

>>16318464
it kinda does if it's N/A like it is.
The closest competitor, the Mazda MX5 Miata has a N/A 2.0L engine and makes 50 less HP.

File: MIATA-FRS.jpg (194KB, 2052x1189px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 2052x1189px

>>16318464
45 more than the top spec Miata Club

>>16318464
It's the same with the brz

There's nothing particularly special or amazing other than they're Rwd coupes. For the price and power this isn't worth it.

>>16318476
http://jalopnik.com/what-nobody-understands-about-the-subaru-brz-1698728189

" three years after its release, the BRZ remains best sports cars you can buy."

>muh powa

What if I don't care? I'm not going to the track every weekend, I just want to hoon on the backroads outside the city on warm Saturday afternoons in the summer. I don't need 900hp to do that.

The 86 is the kind of car you buy to look good and commute fast.

>>16318473
oh look a 2+2 Coupe has more space than a 2 seat roadster that weighs 2300 pounds.
also
>151lb/ft for 200hp
holy shit I didn't know that thing was so anemic

>>16318492
Aww is that salt flavored jelly you have there?

File: miatblueridge.jpg (788KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

788KB, 1920x1080px

>>16318496
nah I'm just pointing out they belong in different segments. FR-S is the better commuter, and this comes from an ND owner.

>find the Jeep in this photo

>>16318509
>FR-S is the better commuter
and track car
and general sports car

File: ktSqH2L.jpg (173KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1280x720px

>>16318476
>There's nothing particularly special or amazing other than they're Rwd coupes. For the price and power this isn't worth it.

have you actually driven one?

driving position, shifter/pedal/steering feel and the stock seats are pretty amazing

you won't get the same feeling in hopped up economy cars like hot hatches or older japanese GT cars. If there was factory FI (even as an optional trd/sti add on kit) i would buy one in a heartbeat.

>>16318515
I liked the gearing and torque curve in the miata more, plus it just felt more fun to me. honestly the only thing that makes the miata slower is the massive body roll, which can be fixed with sway bars

>>16318509
Shouldn't the better commuter car also have the better interior?

The BRZ doesn't even have steering wheel audio controls.

>>16318529
really? never thought to look during my test drive. it had more comfortable seats and better sound dampening (because not convertible)

File: ok.jpg (173KB, 2040x1360px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 2040x1360px

>>16318529

>>16318539
is this on the Toyota as well, or is this another reason to go BRZ over FR-S?

>>16318519
The brz is the same price as the wrx and the wrx is faster, more power, more torque, I can use it as a daily driver all year round thanks to awd so winters aren't off limits. Seriously the wrx has far better value than the brz, I don't care if the brz "feels different " because it's Rwd and shit, feels are not a metric

>>16318548
>feels are not a metric
angryitalians.jpg

>buying an frs/brz as a commuter
Really the wrong choice if that's your primary goal. It can do it, but after driving one a bit I thought the seats were pretty uncomfortable and the ride was a little stiff for a daily I would think.

I owned an s2000 at the time so the ride didn't bother me (my other vehicle was a lifted jeep), but the seats were still bothering me.

They're nice, but really could use a faster version. I'd pay 10k more for somethingwith a warranty and maybe 350bhp.

>>16318525

i prefer the deeper engine sound of the boxer vs the inline4 in the miata, also the way the wind screen is so close to the driver really bothered me (surprised this isn't mentioned in any of the reviews i've read)

>>16318485
What defines a "sports car"?

>>16318547
Yes the GT86 has them.

>>16318485
Ask them.

File: 1478484227389.png (38KB, 499x338px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 499x338px

>>16318548

the reason it feels different is because you're sitting much lower in the car and because the car weighs significantly less

>>16318552
Also the wrx gets a turbo which is probably why it's beating the brz which is lackluster in every fashion. Even the jalopnik article talks about why sales have slowed and interests have waned because it's so lack luster

>>16318555
I'm tall, so the windshield issue isn't as much of an issue when I have to have the seat all the way back to fit. as for the engine note, I came from a Honda so I was used to a shrieking motor.

>>16318567
And the wrx is still faster despite being "significantly heavier"

File: 1459995354743.jpg (102KB, 500x628px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 500x628px

>>16318579

yeah it's faster, but it feels like you're steering/rowing a boat in the WRX compared to the BR-Z

>>16318548
>I can use it as a daily driver all year round thanks to awd so winters aren't off limits

Lmao at the cuck who can only drive AWD in winter.

>>16318509
Jeep in the right wing mirror

File: 1471441944162.png (14KB, 399x391px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 399x391px

>/o/ wishes for the return of modestly powered low cost japmobiles
>Toyota/Subaru finally put one out
>/o/ completely sports out because it isn't a Japanese GT350 for 18k

>>16318608
ITS NOT FAIR I WAS PROMISED A SUPRA FOR 5000 GOODBOY POINTS

File: frank_aside.jpg (26KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 1280x720px

>/o/ wishes for the return of modestly powered low cost japmobiles
>Toyota/Subaru finally put one out
>/o/ completely spergs out because it isn't a Japanese GT350 for 18k

>>16318603
winrar

>>16318623
What do i win?

>>16318629
nothing
help me, it keeps following me
make it stop

>>16318616
this desu
i cant afford an frz but its still a wonderful car especially for the price

File: 2013-scion-frs-interior-01jpg[1].jpg (102KB, 1500x938px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1500x938px

>>16318529
Why the hell would you want all that shit slapped on to your steering wheel?

The fact that the toyobaru has a barren interior was a plus for me. I don't want my car looking like a spaceship.

>>16318473
And its still slower than the meyata

The only problem with the 86 is that it isn't a Miata. If Mazda hade made it and called it a Miata 2+2 everybody would love it.

>>16318650
>2+2 miata
ahaha no it would cause outrage

>>16318590
The wrx is more agile if it accelerates and goes faster than the brz. It can't feel like a boat if it objectively moves faster

>>16318593
Good luck trying to drive a brz in the winter with it being that low to the ground

>>16318608
It's worse in every objective way than every other comparable vehicle in it's price segment.

>>16318670
not in aftermarket support, which to be honest should be the reason you buy the car, otherwise you're wasting your money

>>16318675
I honestly do not believe for even a second that this mememobile has more aftermarket support than the ND

>>16318682
Do you live under a rock or are you willfully that ignorant?

>>16318661
There are loads of them around here, and the owners just bang on snow tires and keep going.

Good weight distribution + good snow tires + non idiot drivers, gets you farther than AWD + all seasons + idiocy.

>>16318694
The wrx comes with winter tires when you purchase one after the summer is over, this isnt an issue

Awd+ all seasons > Rwd with winter regardless

>>16318661
Holy fuck get over yourself and you're wrx. It sucks ok? Learn to live with that.

>>16318709
>gets proven wrong on every aspect
>flips out over his post purchase rationalization

Gg no re

>>16318717
1. I am not the guy you were talking to

2. I don't drive a subie

Continue to be so insecure in your purchase that you have to shitpost on a Chinese checkers support blog for self validation.

>>16318738
>no u: the post
K, stay mad fsggot

>>16318745
if u reply to this ur mum will die in her slep. get rkt fsggot

as someone who had the frs in manual and automatic along with a slew of other cars

the frs was a car to fall in love with
but the evo was better than it in every way other than drifts

>/o/ fawns over the S13/240sx
>2.4L
>2800Lbs
>155HP
>160lb-ft torque
>$19k when new

>/o/ hates the 86 twins
>2.0l
>2800Lbs
>200HP
>158lb-ft torque
>$26k new

Is the only real reason for the hate the fact that it's a bit too expensive for the type of buyer that wants it (young men)? Because in all fairness $19000 in 1995 is equivalent to just over $30000 in 2016 money, and $19000 in 1990 is equivalent to just over $35000 in 2016 money.

>>16318705
Nice me.me
https://youtu.be/STaximkaQxo

File: Ford-Mustang-2016-(5).jpg (92KB, 1140x643px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1140x643px

Whoever considering a BRZ should get save some money and get a 2016 mustang or camaro.
Doesn't even have the be the V8 version; the base models are more powerful and faster than a BRZ

>inb4 hurrr durrr but american cars I crap! I have never owned a modern american car, but oh boy those are crap LMAO!!!! I saw a picture online of a lemon Corvette failing after 6 miles hahaha!

File: RWD_Cuckold_1.png (322KB, 551x897px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 551x897px

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>16318761
Really the only people hating on it are people that can't afford any type of car, or benchracers who are so obsessed with millisecond differences that they can't understand the metric of 'fun'

This was supposed to be a purpose built cheap sports car, and I think they have hit their niche just fine

>>16318778
Have fun trying to mod an engine that has had every ounce of performance already squeezed out of it with ecoboost

>>16318464
who cares
>drivers car
>great handling
>looks good
>spiritual sucessor to 86
>massive aftermarket
>built for fun
>easy to mod
Don't like the engine? Just like increase power

>>16318802
>spiritual sucessor to 86

spotted the weeboo

File: 1474169850347.jpg (39KB, 477x479px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 477x479px

>>16318797
>b-but muh rice

>>16318815
It's got '86' name badges on it, you don't need to be a weeb to understand that its a spiritual successor. Why else would they name it that?

Also
>goes on Peruvian clay molding forum
>complains about Peruvian clay content

>>16318831
not sure what your point is

>>16318761
>/o/ fawns over the S13/240sx
>$19k when new
The difference being they started to be fawned over once they were beat to shit and 4000 bux.
The American Silvias were always hot garbage and their success is wholly due to the aftermarket.

The same might eventually be true of the 86's but the boxer and its engine bay make it significantly harder.

>>16318797
>Getting lapped by a commuter car with a worse power/weight ratio

Yeah, mod that engine. Can't make up for the fact that your beloved shitbox can't turn.

Just buy a fucking mustang.

>GT86 fanboy vocabulary
>drivers car: slow car
>looks good: looks like a retarded mustang because that's what i wish i had. if only i weren't a weeb.
>spiritual successor to 86: piece of garbage that might be somewhat fast after investing twice its value in mods
>massive aftermarket: ebay supercharger kits
>built for fun: it can't turn but it's rwd so you can do burnouts
>easy to mod: some forum fag made a write up on replacing the shift knob with a dildo

It's a good sports car but you'd have to be an idiot to buy one now that the S-FR has been announced.

Just buy a fucking Supra when it comes out and BTFO all the Cuckstangfags and Cuckmarofags and Cuckvettefags and they cry and use their tears as as fuel haha stay mad

>>16318929
On the other hand ideally that pushes down the used market price more. It's not terribly far off from the competition if you don't want to have to sift through beat up old private sales.

>>16318761
The problem is that every other type of vehicle has seen improvements. SUVs, trucks, econoboxes, landbarges, all of them have seen improvements in power and mpg....except for sports cars. You can argue till you die of exhaustion but the modern entry sports car is easily 20+ years behind. I fully understand the purpose of sports cars but that doesnt mean you cant have power as well as well as handling. I mean look at this shit right here >>16318778. Even the fiesta has a high power version that matches the bench racing specs of the toyburu and for 5k+ less. I fully understand what the toyburu is trying to do but I think for 26k there are better options. I mean thats getting into slightly used Mustang 5.0 country there, what 18 year old guy would choose a fucking brz over a 400+hp mustang? If i wanted a sporty-ish car with the specs of a brz Id just get a FiST and leave the rest of the cash I saved in the bank m8.

>>16318911
Careful there man, I sense that your jimmies have been rustled.

The only legitimate point you made out of all of that is that it can't turn, which is completely wrong.

I don't have to defend myself here, I have nothing to prove and completely enjoy my car. I will, and have, taken your advice to mod my engine and have had a blast doing so.

>>16318473
lmfao, what kind of retarded chart is this. so it's heavier and slower than the miata and the author also decided to fabricate a random top speed for the miata. (closer to 140)

brz fags btfo

File: 240sx s13.jpg (95KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 800x533px

This car having a 2.4L engine doesn't excuse the 150hp

>>16318958
>what 18 year old guy would choose a fucking brz over a 400+hp mustang?
An 18 year old should not be driving either of those vehicles

>>16318988
Maybe a loser 18 year old wouldn't. Mustangs are cool and none of your contrarian hivemind opinions will change that fact.

>>16318988
That may be true most of the time, but what 18 year old wouldn't want the mustang?

Who knows? Maybe it would inspire people to be better drivers. I know I shaped the fuck up after getting into an accident.

File: 1424156718837.png (26KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x500px

>>16318773
>hey you want a japanese sports car made by toyota that is the spiritual successor of the 86 that is designed to be a drivers car mostly for fun with MASSIVE aftermarket
>yea buy this meme

>>16319006
>>16319004
>want
>cool
>image
Found the 18 year olds, have fun totaling you "sick new mustang brah"

>>16319013
Enjoy fapping over 80s shitboxes and pretending you're different for doing it

>>16319013
I'd rather not have the image to be honest. More fun to have most of the performance in a sleeper package. Part of the fun of 80s shitboxes is you can drive the fuck out of them and people just figure you're a middle aged woman on the rag or something.

>>16318464
I'm getting pretty tired of this "it needs a ton of power to be good" idea. One of the purest joys in driving is taking a lightweight car and pushing it to the limit. If you had a 500hp FRS, you wouldn't be able to use half that at any given time. But you can use all 200 of that HP on your daily drive and back road shenanigans.
Lurn2fun you fucking plebs

>>16319081
this.
Most fun I've had in a car were when I took my shitbox crossover to the track and tamed the body roll or when I drove around an anemic mr2 in the snow

>>16319026
Way to miss the fucking point retard. Never said I don't like mustangs. I do.

I still maintain that teenage dipshits don't belong behind the wheel of a 5.0

>>16319006
18yo here.

I don't want any American car; they're all trash.

Dreamcar is a Lexus LFA Nurburger Edition.

Attainable dreamcar is a BRZ.

>>16319187
Well yeah I mean in an ideal world were american cars were great again.

And if I were your dad I'd want to see you proving yourself in something good and lame for a few years before you get a BRZ.

>>16318464
>>16318476
It's cheap and the aftermarket options are limitless.

>>16318548
So get the WRX.

>>16318485
>Jalopshit

>>16318464
Remember the last Celica?
The top version of it got constantly shit on by everyone for being to slow and having not enough power.

That was 17 years ago. The 86 only has 12hp and 18lb·ft more and is slightly heavier.

Every fucking gay hothatch today has more power.

File: 35fe06d4-d4a3-41f8-bac7-975b03bc5bd5..jpg (4MB, 4128x3096px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4128x3096px

>>16319205
Liiiike.... a 95 Camry with a dent in the left rear quarter panel?

I used to work at a used car stealership and some guy traded in his silver brz with 14k miles for a WRX wagon with 120k miles. He said he wanted something that doesn't need to be put in 2nd gear to overtake someone on the freeway.

After test driving it, I confirmed that it is in fact a heap of shit. A camry would pull on this car with ease.

>>16319252
Sounds like he was full of shit and needed to lower his monthly expenses by trading in a fairly new car for a beater.

>>16319252
This
The BRZ is cool and all if you live near mountain twisties or a track, but the reality is 99% of people mainly drive on highways or cities

>>16318788
It doesn't drive like a sports car at all, I've driven one multiple times. It just handles well, I expect a sports car to have power. This is just an economy car with zippy handling.

>>16319244
Sure! Did a good bit of time in a 97 Camry in high school. Really good way to learn how boring appliance cars are, but at first it was fun enough just to be on the road.

>>16319262
He was making good money, the only responsible car buyer I saw in the 3 months I worked in that hell hole. He repaired pianos and organs for a living and he said even putting luggage in the BRZ would cause a big difference in power.

It's a shit car bro, there is no need to defend it. By 2016 standards it is way too under powered for the price they are charging.

>>16319252
meh i dd a FRS (mostly hwy) and I dont have any problems over taking your average shitbox. Althugh some more power certainly wouldnt hurt. 32mpg mixed is p nice tho :^)

>>16319285
What about dragging from red lights? A base Veloster would probably beat the FRS.

>>16319252
Obviously you two guys are not the prime demographic of this car. The prime demographic is the type of driving enthusiast who likes the way the controls and handling feel. The fact that he said he doesn't like using the manual transmission tells me he wants an appliance rather than a sports machine.

>>16319270
Did you totally ignore the low seating position and center of gravity? Would you say a Porsche 550 is not a sports car because it only has 110hp? Would you say the mx5 is not a sports car because it's fucking slow? A car is about the feeling it provides you, not what's on the paper.

>>16319262
WRX had full service records, clean title, and was babbied by 1 owner who happened to be a middle aged guy.

>>16319298
Where did I say he doesn't like using the manual transmission lol. If you have to downshift to 2nd gear to overtake someone on the fast lane, your driving a slow car. Just because someone likes power doesn't mean they aren't a driving enthusiast. Not everyone is a babby you know.

>>16319297
admittedly when driving normally/conservatively and unrushed you do seem to fall back. But if i "launch" against one of my buddies its not too horrible. And no a base veloster would not keep up

>>16319310
Its not really a slow car. But its definitly a slow sports car.

>>16319315
Yeah it wakes up quite a bit when you push it. Not saying I wouldn't like power but realistically if you're using it as a daily driver it's plenty. I mean if you wanted a real sports car you wouldn't get what clearly is a compromise car.

Actually I'm a little disappointed that the handling isn't more sprightly, but I have to wait for non-snow-tires and an alignment when it gets warmer.

>>16319315
You sound so sure about that....

https://youtu.be/3ZbGdkyrAis

>>16318473
>tfw my 2.0 focus makes more hp than the miata

lol

>>16319344
Your focus is heavier than the miata.

>>16319270
>This is just an economy car with zippy handling.
Congratulations, you just described the car it's supposed to be succeeding. That's all it was ever supposed to be. You think anyone at all was impressed by the HP rating of the stock 86, Silvia, etc?

Fucking morons up in this bitch. You're supposed to do with the new 86 exactly what everyone did with the old cars and wait until they're all beat up and dirt cheap and throw mods at it until you slam it into a wall

you autists will argue about anything

>>16319360
>mfw you won't be able to find a clean, unmolested FRS to DD quietly in the streets then violently in the sheets in 10 years

>>16319360
Hey, you dicksucking faggot. The 240sx was released years and years and years ago, don't compare it to a car that was released just a few years ago. By that same logic the mustang should have the same amount of horsepower as the old 5.0 foxbody mustang right?

Kill yourself you fucking ricer dick sucking homosexual.

>>16319367
No we fucking won't you bitch.

>>16319377
You might. I wasn't really even considering one except that I came across somebody's old hoonmobile priced right and seemingly in pretty damn good condition.

>>16319385
Yes we do!

>>16319360
The last Silvia had 250hp. That was 1999.

>>16319343
'base veloster' not the turbocharged one (and its still a race even with the frs missing a turbo)

>>16319399
Don't bother explaining to that faggot piece of trash. He expects cars from 2016 to be compared to cars from the early 90s.

How does a honda s2000 have more power? It came out a long time ago and it is faster, how does that work? Are the engineers at Toyota and Subaru really this retarded?

>>16319444
It revs up to 9000 and runs big cams once it hits 6250 rpm.

>>16319399
We haven't hit the last 86 yet, 2nd gen is confirmed. Still time left for an increase, possibly other engine options. Wouldn't be surprised to see Toyota throw that 2.0 turbo they're putting in all the Lexuses, though that would also be underwhelming

>>16319381
>By that same logic the mustang should have the same amount of horsepower as the old 5.0 foxbody mustang right

Except the mustang is actually a sportscar and not an economy car with a relatively successful sport trim

>>16319426
That Turbo Veloster stayed in front of the FRS the entire time, and the Turbo isn't that much faster than the base.

>>16319491
>We haven't hit the last 86 yet, 2nd gen is confirmed.
What kind of thinking is this?

You dont start at zero with a new product. The world has moved on. Budget sporty cars have much more power today. The 86 is totaly outclassed in this regard by everyone except the mx5.

>>16319491
>Lexuses

Nigger, "Lexus" is plural for Lexus.

>>16319517
Stopped giving a shit about nomenclature when I nearly got t-boned bringing an RC200t in for for a PDI because they actually thought it was a good idea to throw that weak ass 4 pot into such a heavy car

>>16319559
Probably still out-drags the FR-S.

>>16318509
>blue ridge
VAfag? You take this near Staunton?

>>16319514
stock car power is only important for benchracers
If you're a real racer 86 is an extremely good choice and has been chosen by many racing teams because it's a great handling car and has massive aftermarket.

gt86 is one of the best rwd sportscars out there right now.

>>16319566
Which is exactly why it should go in the Gen2 86

>>16319574
Horsepower alone doesn´t mean shit on the track, better tires are much more important.

>>16319582
You can't be this retarded

>>16319598
User skill will always be more important than equipment performance. Good luck passing a shitbox that spends the whole race sideways

>>16319604
I'd agree with you if we were talking about a race where all cars were the same like IROC, but this isn't the case in SCCA

>>16319598
You can brake later, keep more speed in the corner and accelerate earlier.
Wich gives you better average speeds and therefore better laptimes.

>>16319631
Gutless shitbox is a great way to learn this without even having to use a track. It soon becomes very apparent that if you can't figure out how to stay on the gas most of the time and not waste traction then you won't keep up.

>>16319631
That makes no sense, weight/suspension and gearing would be the issue in those scenarios than hp

>>16319598
Some youtuber calculated that a car with duoble the horsepower would lose against a car with 10% more grip.
https://youtu.be/S2S6MJt0998

>>16319655
>some YouTuber

into_the_trash_.webm

>>16319642
If we talk about the GT 86 a increase in power would give you less benefits on a actual track than better tires.
Suspension upgrade and weight reduction would also gain more for less money than a turbo on that car.

If it would be about straight lines or burger ovals a more powerfull engine would be the way to go.

>>16319679
>calculated using actual physic
>by a former engineer
>trash

>>16319681
Yeah nah, you're still going to run into scenarios that can only be fixed with more power and not just the straights but for exiting corners as well

>>16318464
The only thing preventing the FRS from being a perfect automobile is the lack of a turbo inline 4. Everything else is perfect, and then they go and slam the worst kind of engine into it. Subaru flat 4's are the dumpster fire of engineering.

>>16319685
>former engineer
>doesn't publish study
>instead, posts YouTube video

Yes, the trash

>>16319689
You can accelerate earlier and drive the corner at a higher speed with more grip.
You would exit the corner faster than with more power and less grip.

>>16319692
He calculated that, it wasn´t a study, retard.

>>16319702
You still wouldn't exit the corner faster than if you had the grip + power though, no matter what mental gymnastics you perform, you can't dodge the obvious truth that power is necessary

>>16319706
>based on calculations
Cause real world scenarios ALWAYS follow a model with no variables whatsoever

>>16319708
Indeed, but more grip alone gives you more than more power alone.

Do /o/ mainly use their cars on tracks?
I don't know about you guys, but I mainly use my car on public roads and sometimes the drag strip.

You guys are lucky if you have access to a quality track close to where you live

Why does every bitch on /o/ think a YouTube video is a fact that backs up their opinion?

I'm getting tired of YouTube links.

>>16319713
You always have centrifugal force in corners and the amount cour car can handle will always be based mainly on its tires and aerodynamics.

>>16319717
I'm still going to disagree

>>16319734
If it would be about a Na MX-5 you´d be correct, but this car already has 200hp.
Also this depends heavily on the track.

>>16319718
No I mainly roll up next to people at a light, drop my cock out the window, and then laugh at them when their pathetic cars can't keep up.

>>16318981
That's Nissan for you m8

>>16319573
was on a weekend trip in Asheville. Live north of Charlotte

File: IMAG0069~01.jpg (3MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2688x1520px

>>16322003
Concord fag here
/o/ NC meet in Boone when

>>16318464
I'm totally okay with 200 hp, but they still dropped the ball with it. If it was 2.5L working on 95 ron instead of 98 it would have been a bit better to own (also more torkz). But I understand that Toyota didn't have a suitable drivetrain so they just borrowed Subaru's engine. Even in the 90s, they didn't design their own S-chassis, instead they repurposed Camry into SW20.

>>16318761
>some weird USDM version
>relevant
Compared it to SR20DET.

>>16322850
Wanting more torque not more revs. This is why /o/ is fail.

>>16322939
A 20V TRD/STI version of this engine would be nice.

>>16318778
that's just because of the tires tough
[spoiler]the clio 3 is a better hothatch anyway[/spoiler]

File: really makes you think.png (177KB, 436x361px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 436x361px

>>16323168

File: 1469391805069.png (958KB, 1125x575px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1125x575px

>>16318464
a 4thgen 3sgte would make a lot of sense for this car

>>16318464
it should have shipped with 200hp at the WHEELS

screw this '200hp' that the engine makes at the crank dyno with a happy tune without econ taken into account and probably no accessories.

It should have had 250hp at least and had a supercharger from the factory.

Toyota have had what 4 years to come up with something AND subaru and yet they do nothing.

>Muh aftermarket
Horseshit if this was Nissan people would be ripping them apart.

File: image.jpg (16KB, 443x332px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 443x332px

>slower than a V6 Honda Oddessey
>sports car

Pick one

>>16323264
>without econ taken into account and probably no accessories.
It's not american only septics pull that bullshit.

File: 1469668866453.jpg (528KB, 1386x780px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1386x780px

>>16318464

This is properly a meme car now.

1.5T in my FWD CVT Civic and I can launch faster and stay ahead to the next light easy.

>>16318470
the closest competitor is the s2000 and it makes 240hp/160tq.

>>16325719
but y ou don't have that driving feel bro

>>16325719
How is this not an accord? It looks huge

>>16325880
For you

>>16318464
>engine isn't front mid mounted
>wheelbase too long

Only reasons I won't buy one

>>16318464
200hp is pretty good for a naturally aspirated 2.0 liter 2bh famalam. a lot of 2.0 liters out there (especially older ones) need a turbo to make 200hp, pic related

File: image.jpg (52KB, 640x624px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x624px

>>16325973
whoops forgot to attach pic, here you go

>>16318929
s-fr looks like crap though

File: 20161126-DSC_0919.jpg (1MB, 1920x1275px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1275px

This car has been out for 4 years and it's still rustling /o/'s jimmies.

>>16323258
>a 30 year old engine design would make sense

>>16326009
and thats y u kno its gud

File: a634a7ec4e4a4e25b79a74e46cb311c3.jpg (289KB, 1536x1038px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1536x1038px

>>16326073
/o/ will love them when they are under 10k

>>16326181
What car should I get o?

>2fubu for 10k

>>16325880

The accord is ocean liner huge now. It's still older in style then the gen 10 civics. Still have analog dashboards and have an older styling and construction.

>>16326242
To be fair when pretty much everything on your dashboard is made of things like clicky buttons, flippy switches, potentiometers, and cable-driven levers, dials, and indicator lights, everything in life is instantly better.

>>16326053
completely besides the point but a new revision or related I4 Turbo engine would be better I guess?

http://mywikimotors.com/toyota-3s/
3S-GTE Gen 4 (1999 – 2007)

File: image2_1.jpg (102KB, 1013x675px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1013x675px

>>16326262
Agreed

>>16318464
It's also ugly. Looks like a chihuahua

File: 2016-honda-civic-sdn_100530670_m.jpg (56KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 640x426px

>>16326262

Dunno, i like have a MFD touch screen. You do have 2 knobs and some buttons.

>>16326296
I've only had mine for a few weeks and so far I have to say that as overly-electronic as the controls are they are mainly lead out well and easy to use.

Main offender being the radio inside the touch screen. I want tinker with the radio by feel alone moving it just slightly from resting position, not have to hold my arm all the way up on some flashy dashboard thing where I have to keep looking at it for mundane tasks like fiddling with the radio stations or whatever else. At least the volume knob is easy and obvious even if you have to swing it around a lot to make quick changes.

File: 2013-scion-frs-interiorjpg.jpg (886KB, 1500x938px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 1500x938px

>>16326329
Swap in a MY13-14 FRS stereo. They go for like $50-100. You could sell your current radio for more.

>>16326341

That looks uncomfortable even the bong STI looks better and the interiors of STI subbies have always been bad.

>>16318464
shit car for people that don't know shit about cars

>>16326359
I was kind of surprised at how comfortable it is for the most part and I'm relatively tall. It's not like a "nice" car and surely not even a cheap luxury car, but it hits an odd balance between kind of nice, effective, and look I bought a kid's cheap semi-rice thing but it's fun anyway.

Kind of wish I could turn down the brightness on red footwell lights. That's a little much rice for me. Maybe I'll tape some lighting gel over them or something.

File: 1CJgEXR.jpg (821KB, 4611x3648px) Image search: [Google]

821KB, 4611x3648px

>>16326360
Teach me about cars senpai!

>>16326381
>I went to a track day once

File: 28930679665_ad5406e73d_h.jpg (263KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1600x1066px

>>16326410
That doesn't sound like teaching anon.

>>16326360
idk bout dat

>>16326360
u seem to maybe one of those individuals with a lot of opinions but nothing to show for it

>>16326329
Auto! WTLF?

>>16323782
then how comy the fa20 only puts out 180hp to the wheels?

>>16318553
My commute is backroads with almost no cars on it. A GT86 would be the ideal commuter for me.
Not everyone's commute involves bumper to bumper traffic.

>>16322939
>wanting a car not to literally have the power and feel of a base corolla unless stressed to 9000
>failz
faggot

>>16325973
it has a terrible torque dip, no power in the lower rpms, sounds like shit, makes cricket noises.

its objectively a bad engine. all it needed was to have the wrx turbo on it... 250-300/250-300 wouldve been so good

>>16327299
The same reason every RWD car has 10-20% transmission losses friction.

>>16325867
>closest competitor
>something not even in production anymore

That's now how it works, stupid.

>>16325867
And cost an equivalent of $47k.

>>16318548
I dislike the BRZ but WRXs are hideous, pigfat, and overrated.

lol at poorfags who can't buy a dedicated fun car and another car for people moving/winter/etc.

>>16322003
Fuck off Robbie

>>16318661
>wrx is more agile if its faster

No, that's some grasping at straws if I've ever seen it.

File: 1479332060212.jpg (17KB, 286x380px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 286x380px

>>16319300
Jesus that's like finding a unicorn. Next you gonna tell me it was bone stock.

File: EMBARRASSING.jpg (17KB, 334x393px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 334x393px

>>16319655
>>16319679
>>16319685
>>16319692
>>16319706
>>16319706
>>16319708
>>16319713

>BENCHGINEERING EXPLAINED
IN THE FUCKING TRASH IT GOES

>>16327292
Auto? Hell no man. I wouldn't even have considered getting it if it weren't manual.

I want my levers and knobs and pedals and shit. I even tried out the cruise control for a few minutes but it felt like being in a straight jacket riding in a train car to Dachau.

>>16326289
Yes, it's called the 8AR

>>16327310
I found it to be surprisingly entertaining through CBE traffic. You really keep working around the gears and clutch, and it darts into the gap in the next lane like a champ.
>uh oh, it's uphill now? shit, the 2-1 final boss shift!
>HEEL AND TOE
>MULTI-PEDAL STEPPING
>MUST NOT LOOK LIKE A DOUCHE

But even that is a curvy, hilly road full of aggressive drivers. This would be a terrible choice of vehicle for a long straight road with or without traffic. You'd only ever get the bad parts and never the good parts.

>>16327329
isn't the torque dip a fault that naturally comes with any boxer engine though?

I have to agree however, the engine is pretty dull. the car deserved better

what toyota should've done is commission yamaha to bring back the 2zz and update it to make more power. that would've been a godly engine

>>16328154
No it's down to the map and headers, it is to keep the emissions down.

>>16328154
>any boxer engine
No, layout doesn't matter. My other one was pleasantly flat except that it dipped pretty fast in the last few hundred RPM before redlining.

Torque dip in these really is annoying because if you don't have a reason to be stuffing your foot into it then you're either sitting right in the dip or you're about to be sitting right in the dip, and then if you need a little bit more you put your foot down and nothing happens. It's one of those sort of minor but important things that they should have fixed early on.

>>16328165
If you are driving round in normal traffic you are always below the dip, if you are pressing on you are above it, it isn't a problem.

>>16328168
Yeah if you're just cruising on a straight then you're below. But if you have hills, turns, other drivers, unfamiliar roads, and fun things like that then you're going to be into it more often.

Yeah when you're above the dip it's brilliant, but if your target market is half DD half racecar dorifto then that's an important consideration. Shifting to be in the powerband is fun and all but it's not so fun when you're stuck working around the nonpowerband where the throttle feel is all wonky.

>>16318473
The difference is that the Miata has a proper torque curve, gearing, and is much faster.

Oh, and its engine isn't mounted 8 inches above the center axle. That's a pretty fucking big deal, too.

>>16318509
>FR-S is the better commuter, and this comes from an ND owner.
Depends on how you define that.

I daily drove an FD 20+ miles to and from work for a few years.
It made the long distance tolerable. It was always an enjoyable drive. Always fun, exciting. The engine and turbo always sounded beautiful. The fuel cost sucked, but whatever, I made okay money.

I'm not someone that gets by listening to the radio or some shit.
Now if you're someone that wants to relax and listen to audiobooks or some shit on the commute, or really enjoys listening to music, why the hell would you go for the FR-S over some used luxobarge or econobox, anyway?

>>16318519
>driving position, shifter/pedal/steering feel and the stock seats are pretty amazing
Here's the thing: everything you listed is inferior to the 10 year older RX-8.

That's the big reason these cars aren't held in high regard. They have a car that would have been a direct competitor if they were on sale at the same time, and the only way that it's better is in fuel economy and being more reliable than the pre-2009 models.

Compared to the RX-8, it feels inauthentic. It feels like if emotionless aliens, who know nothing of our cars, driving culture, what it's like to be human, took one of our real drivers sportscars and tried to make their own. It feels like Toyota ticked a bunch of boxes on an engineering report, but they didn't actually repeatedly test it, refine it, put passion into it.

It's okay... It's no Camry - but it's also no RX-8.

>>16318773
I know this post is days old but I have no idea why someone would spend that much on a mustang. Everyone fucking has one. It's not cool or unique at all. It's definitely the more practical choice in america but you can't deny these frsbrz86 have a nice styling to them. It's best feature is that it's not a mustang/350z.

>>16319252
>2nd gear on the freeway

sounds scary as fuck

>>16328233
Yep. That's what makes a subaru a subaru. And then you wind up thinking oh but this isn't too shabby and besides it's got all these checkboxes!

>>16328262
2nd is too short to feel nice, and you wouldn't need it unless you got stuck behind something that had it's flashers on. 3rd is where it's at. But you definitely have to accept downshifting unless you're running lazy circles around people.

>>16327310
That has nothing to do with my comment. Why would you want a cramped coupe with shit mpg and a stiff suspension for a commuter?

Much better choices out there for stuff like that, it's about practicality and comfort to me.

>>16325872

I find it does and it's very comfy. But right now it's winter, everything is bleak,colder than the surface of mars and slippery. Come summer I'll focus on it more.

>>16325973
Why does it matter how many liters it has? It's completely irrelevant. It would have been better with lower compression bigger displacement just for cheaper gas. It's not like extra 0.5 liters would add any weight to it.

>>16328262
Had to do that in my S2000 all the time. 2nd topped out at around 65mph, so for your average freeway driving in this slow as fuck city that I live in, I'd have to drop to second to get VTEC to kick in (yo) and pass someone. At slightly higher speeds I could go to third, which was easier because the gearbox's synchro setup means that you don't have to double-clutch when skip shifting to third. You don't really have to double clutch when skipping down to second, either, but it helps keep the wear off the synchros.

It was always pretty fun though, if only because of the violent VTEC switchover.

>>16328587
Have you even driven an 86? There's just no way a CVT Civic would be able to compare, especially a modern one with the MacPhearson struts.

>>16328815
I assume they kept it at 2L because of faggot country displacement regulations. It gets points for getting that kind of MPG for that kind of gearing.

But it really leaves one to wonder if bigger than 2L and regular gas might have been one of those little things that would come out even on paper but also make it a better car.

>>16328876
>>16328815
A 2.5 V6 making 200 honest hp would have been boss

>>16328876
What I don't get is why they made it a high compression motor.

They could have lowered the ratio and made it a 2.2L that was just as quick but also ready to accept a bolt-on turbo. Instead we have this bullshit that you have to tear apart to boost. Or if gubbmint constrictions on displacement are really an issue, the same 2 liter with lower comp pistons and a price cut.

Or a fucking modern BEAMS engine, which was basically the S version of a 4age...

>>16328898
Make it a 120deg V6 with a dry sump so you can get the CG lower down than a boxer since then you still have room to pipe the headers under it.

I'd still rather it be more of a hoot rolling at 15MPH with the clutch in on a sunday country drive; it's easy enough already for cheap thrills sideways around the ramp.

>>16318464
It's really inexcusable that a turbo isn't standard on this.

>>16328968
>>16328925
The have the engines from Lexus IS, 200 hp 2.5 V6 and inline 4 turbo with 250. Either of those would have been fine although they only come with automatic trannies so it's not like they would have been able to repurpose the whole drivetrain.

>>16318646

Thank god someone else feels like this. If there's one thing I absolutely hate about modern cars it's the number of distractions and unnecessary SHIT EVERYWHERE.

>screens
>buttons
>32 hvac buttons

If I literally just want the driving dynamic with modern car technology I don't want to pay more for superfluous garbage like a 7" touch screen, heated seats, cruise control, whatever. Just more shit that's going to break in the future, too.

I genuinely feel like the FRZ is a fantastic car and that stock / minimally modded cars will hold their value very well in the future. I mean look around guys, what other car in this price range right now is going to exist in 20 years? There's very clearly a decline in affordable sports cars and I think the BR86 could potentially be one of the last ones.

>>16328968
I disagree with a standard turbo, however having no factory performance upgrade with a supercharger or turbo is asinine. Think of all the other cars you could get for 30k...

>>16329144
Miata, ecoboost Mustang and?

>>16329143
>friend gives you a ride in his Impala rental
fuck these seats are sweltering
>turn the heat seater and 3 dials and buttons worth of independent climate on in your brz
10 minutes later heh I feel like a wanker now

I seem to recall that GERMAN ENGINEERING fell for the blitz of add-on meme once. Can supelior nippon do better? It's got to be a driver's car if you want to give me factory rice.

>>16329143
Thing is, if you're making a performance car now it's almost inevitably gonna fall into the luxury category due to it's price unless it's made in the USA (because only rich people in Europe can afford good cars). So if rich people are gonna be the ones to buy it, you might as well add some luxury staff to make it proper luxury car.

>>16328154
>bring back the 2zz
Had the european Celica with the 2zz (the non gimped one with the 8250 limiter)

While it was fun hitting the lift at ~6400 and accellerating up to 8200 and quickly shift to land again above the ~6400.

It was a pure slog when it was not in lift. It also was not always (most times) managable to keep the car in the right rpm spot, especially on non straight roads.

>>16329162
A wrx which is faster

File: Fiat-Abarth-124-Spider-front-three-quarter.jpg (2MB, 2040x1355px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2040x1355px

>>16318473
Can't the Miata make like 200bhp with a tune? The Fiata should make even more since it's using a 500 Abarth engine

File: PORSCHECaymanS-987--3822_12.jpg (376KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 1024x683px

987 Cayman S
>same price as an FRS/Miata
>reliable
>easy to maintain if you aren't a retard
>2800lbs
>300bhp
>mid engine
>stiff as fuck chassis
>nice interior
>2 freaking trunks

>>16329231
>and none on the used market for cheap
>i wonder why

File: file.png (528KB, 997x1258px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 997x1258px

>>16329241
Que?

>>16329231
and better than the 981

>>16329241
People don't want to sell theirs?

>>16329246
>$25000 CAD is $19000 USD

>>16329246
>buying a $30k Porsche
>looking for a $10k beaterbox and you find a $15k ok why not

>>16329246
How much costs a gt86/brz/miata with 125000km?
How much are the parts for the porsche?
How high is the insurance for the porsche?

The Porsche isnt:
>>16329231
>same price as an FRS/Miata

>>16329256
>How much costs a gt86/brz/miata with 125000km?
Mileage isn't really an issue for a flat 6 Porsche, in fact higher mileage Porcshes are more likely to be problem free than lower mileage Porsches
>How much are the parts for the porsche?
Not that expensive if you're aren't stupid and go to a dealership for everything. Even then the guy at the parts counter told me I was better off getting o-rings at Home Depot than ordering from there
>How high is the insurance for the porsche?
It was cheaper for me to insure my Boxster than to insure a Miata or FRS, lel

>>16329162
Golf GTI, WRX, A3, Ford ST cars, etc. Some of those are AWD btw, also you should think about used cars too bud.

>>16329256
I guess it depends on area, but I only found one boxter remotely in the price range of miatas, kias, somebody's old truck, and a busted corvette.

Best of luck to the one who gets it if it isn't shit. 2flashy4me.

>comparing it to used cars that aren't produced anymore
I hope you guys are just pretending to be retarded.

I have a 4 door sedan which handles well but it weighs 1500kg - 1600kg and only puts out 153rwkW and 450Nm of torque. Is it borderline acceptable?

>>16329372
What's that in American?

>>16329372
Does Putin change how much it weighs depending on the microphone in the foot pedal?

For kg you can multiply it roughly by 2.2 but more. So 16kg comes out to 35k lbs. I assume communist yuropians learn maths in school.

This is the first I've heard of rear wheel kw (are they getting jelly?) but used to be pretty close to HP. I guess not any more. Better take it to a dyno.

Nobody cares about torque unless looking at a torque curve.

>>16329441
>Nobody cares about torque
hp sells cars
torque wins races

>>16329467
My tractor must be faster than a GTR despite only having a whopping 60bhp

>>16329467
Eurotorqs don't win races

Only in America do you have the freedoms between the torques and the hourse pours.

>>16318492
>implying needing torque in a lightweight sports car. its not a thing to tow your boat hillbilly.

>>16329485
it just needs a cvt

>>16329380
330 Ameritorques
205 Burgerpowers

It's just an Aussie family sedan and for towing and burnouts and shit but I like to throw it around the track.

>>16329441
Those figures shouldn't have got you so upset unless you drive an mx-5 or some other anaemic shitbox.

>>16329467
The funny thing is, peak figures are just wank really

>>16329539
>The funny thing is, peak figures are just wank really
True that. How often do you regularly shift at redline anyway (assuming peakHP/lb-ft torks are up there)? For most commuting I shift at about 3k for dem MPGs and I'd imagine most other people and autotranny computers do as well.
It makes sense to make a big hullabaloo about it for track cars though.

>>16329539
Having driven the 500 ft-lb old Duramax for about several thousand miles for the fun of it, I'll tell you it moves a heavy ass like a motherfucker. That thing was amazing.

205 burgerpowers is somewhere about right for hauling the family around. It all depends on gearing, feel, and whether or not you can easily get grandma and the kids to fit in.

>>16329507
>wanting your car to feel like a corolla in normal driving conditions
>"b-but muh revs, that's the point"
>not wanting your car to always feel powerful

>>16318491
You do that in a mustang. Or a STI. Or anything that does everything that better than this shit.

>>16318773
yes but anyone who is considering an 86 isn't considering a pigfat mustang.

>>16329276
you didn't answer one question properly. big fucking surprise.

>>16318797
Cobb stage three maps at 23% more hp.
Have fun tuning an n/a 2 liter boxer that wasn't made with the internals to handle boost.

Also, the fiesta ST is significantly cheaper than the BRZ and is a fucking hatchback, so it's actually practical.

Faster
Cheaper
More practical

Get fucked brz fags, you bought a car with NO UPSIDES

>>16328908
This

File: file.png (709KB, 1008x786px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 1008x786px

>>16329750
About $5k-$10k less you fucking reject

>>16330682
>NO UPSIDES

>not being a FWD cuckbox
>not an upside

>>16329224
The Miata? No, it needs a little more than a tune. The 124 can hit 200 using a piggyback ECU, but I think that the ceiling for that engine is around 250 even after you replace the tarbo.

The problem with the 124 is that you'll never get rid of that shitty turbo lag. And why the it's not available in more interesting color combos in the US is beyond me.

File: toyocuck.jpg (77KB, 716x1102px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 716x1102px

>>16318473
>more hp
>still slower

go lose LeMans, toyocuck

>>16331442
I'm sad I wasn't here on /o/ when that Le Mans loss happened.

Almost the 2nd time Japan ever won, but it's still Mazda as the only Japanese winner.

File: 20208_m.jpg (248KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 600x600px

>>16331456
LEMANS NOT FOR TOYOTA

>>16329555
Torque heavy cars usually have 90% of the peak torque in less than 2.5k rpms.

>>16331427
But turbo lag is fun, like a 930 or F50 except affordable. Even better when it sounds like a group B rally car

>>16326009

I know its pretty fucking hilarious how its been a nonstop debate. Bought mine right at the start of 2013 and its been NONSTOP.

Also, the new style looks nice in white. I was against the new wheel styling but it works well with that paintjob.

>>16318476
>For the price and power this isn't worth it.

This pretty much. Really nice cars to drive, look great, CAN sound pretty good, but just not worth spending the money to buy one new. Will be a good used purchase in 5-10 years when they can be picked up cheap, but right now they're just not worth the money.

I've got an GT86 for about 3 years, yes the lack of torque and power in 2-3 instances was felt, but i fucking love the thing.

I've kept it bone stock since its my DD

>>16318548
I just came from a trackday on a track covered with snow and the other car was an BMW.

RWD is fun in winter.

Here we commute RWD cars all year round through black ice, 3 feet of snow and go on frozen lakes/seas with them for fun.

Any configuration is fine for winter.

Gotta say I'm liking the brakes tho. Not overboosted and bitey. You can do things all gentle, coast in, come to the perfect joltless stop all with a calm coax of the toe.

And yet then they'll slow things down in a controlled hurry when you firm up on them.

>>16329231

>987 Cayman S
>same price as an FRS/Miata

in what universe? seriously, i see this claim regularly and have no clue where you people are getting this from? an FRS is like 26k, a cayman is like 60k and an S is like 70k