memes aside, is it really that bad of a car?

>>16725613
A good car wouldn't be slower than a minivan

>>16725618

It's not slower than a minivan you dumb fuck

Its not a bad car but your boy racer fantasies will experience soul crushing disappointment.

Its not bad at all. Last i checked the ones fitted with factory TRD suspension where meming stock-slick class in United States Solo II (Autocross) really hard. I think its more a case that its basically just a pretty decent nice RWD sportscar but it was over-hyped like it was the Jesus reborn and everybody got burned out hearing how great it was from the press.

Friend who races at nationals and who has people asking him to drive their own cars since he can squeeze more out of it then they can 99% of the time basically said "its not bad in anyway but it isn't anything particularly special, i'd rather buy a lighter used RWD car from the 90s like a 1st gen Miata"

To put it in Initial D speak, any unique 'aura' it actually has was lost because the media over-hyped it so hard. Doesn't mean it isn't actually a great car, but it isn't the jesus of 21st century sports cars either.

File: image.jpg (45KB, 651x332px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 651x332px

They still haven't fixed this fucking torque dip.
>good car
>this dyno sheet
Pick one.

>>16725636
About $1K for headers and a tune and you remove dip and have +20whp. And you lose around 10lb. while you're at it. Yeah, it would have been nice to have those things stock when they did the refresh, but whatever.

>>16725613
It's astounding how ugly the new bumper cover is.

>>16726230
That's why you get a BRZ + performance pack.

>>16726241

or wait for the STi version

>>16726318
It sounds like the STi is just going to be a few cosmetic changes, a couple of useless chassis braces, and maybe a fart cannon. If that's the case, it won't be worth the additional thousands they want over the Limited + PP.

No, but it has no power and a torque dip.

For the money you can buy something better used.

>>16726473
>For the money you can buy something better used.
That's true for every new car

File: isf.png (788KB, 839x630px) Image search: [Google]

788KB, 839x630px

>>16726473
>For the money you can buy something better used.
You could say that about almost any car ever made.

File: is-f.png (796KB, 838x630px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 838x630px

>>16726491
>>16726494
mah nigga

>>16726494
>>16726497
>maserati body kit

for what purpose

>>16725613
i dont know, i dont care, i like it

It's certainly overrated. if you want muh feels you buy an old sports car for less money, you want to go faster you buy virtually anything else.

>>16725618
Find me a minivan that is faster than the 86
That would be fucking rad

>>16725618
Hey fuck you pal cavaliers are great cars

>>16726226
I shouldn't have to drop $1,000 right after buying a new car to fix some shitty issue that shouldn't exist in the first place.

File: caymangtsaveragev1.jpg (77KB, 800x553px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x553px

>>16725613
There is literally no reason to buy a new 86 over a new BRZ.

>>16725636
Ever seen a Cayman dyno?

>>16726903
Weird, motortrend rated it better than the M2, Focus RS, and Camaro v6 ILE in their last comparison. All those cars are way faster.

File: tmp_7206-1486839864427-600057523.jpg (1MB, 1652x2566px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1652x2566px

Daily reminder

>>16727550
kek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwPmkzZOhDI

File: 1000-hp-honda-odyssey-1088735-TwoByOne.jpg (161KB, 1080x540px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1080x540px

>>16726906

>>16725613
Going by the mountain of awards and glowing reviews, no, it is not a bad car.

It won't win dragraces stock, but that isn't what it's for. If you want an affordable FR drivetrain layout with (nearly) perfect weight distribution that can swing around tight corners doing 60, this is your car, because nothing else fits the bill.

no its not that bad, the only thing bad about it is its owners and lack of power + torque
The fact it's RWD is great and it looks pretty good
But owners get all hot and saucy if you tell them the truth, it's slow everybody knows it's slow except them and they will try to defend it's honor and get real annoying instead of just accepting it and moving on
>inb4
>IT IS FAST
>MUH RWD

File: 175469.jpg (40KB, 1024x614px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1024x614px

>>16726906
>>16727617
I raise your minivan to an actual van.

File: opel-zafira-ope_zaf_06_opc_5.jpg (72KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 630x420px

>>16726906

File: IMG_7380.jpg (175KB, 896x526px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 896x526px

>>16727666
No 86 owner over 20 years old will tell you this car is fast.

>>16725613
>instantaneously recognized by thumbnail as another shit worthless toyota

It's not a bad car. It simply looks much quicker than it really is.

200HP at the crank is really about 50 horses too few.

File: yMFW4UlqIJi5r9AbanPCBEjgx_GdM_U1ZN8wVvQuft4.jpg (54KB, 388x766px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 388x766px

>>16727777
>Able to identify cars by a thumbnail

Wow anon, you must know a lot about cars!

>put a 2jz in it
problem solved

>>16728101
>putting an iron block behemoth over the front wheels to completely fuck the handling

i prefer 2j's over ls's, but i'll take an aluminum block ls3 any day.

not to mention 2j transmissions are retarded expensive because of stupid niggers & their jdm tax

File: 1473081255070.png (308KB, 492x419px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 492x419px

>>16727550
>muh nurmenburger

>>16727617
>>16727685
>>16727690
Actual minivans, not some one of a kind, racing versions or yuropean limited editions

>>16728182
looks like somebodies moving the goal post :^)

>>16728193
(^:
but to be honest, i can only think of dodge caravan turbo, but then again i don't know how fast these things were as everyone makes them out to be

>>16728138
I like Toyota but any fucking engine from Toyota that makes more than 100 horsepower gets sold for stupid amounts of money even the black top 4age is being sold for stupid amounts of money now

>>16728182
The zafira isn't any of those things.

It's marginally quicker than a car with the same sized engine but no turbo, so it's obviously better in every way.

>>16728290
Levin BZ-Rs are like 2-3k here.

>>16728317
When was the last time you saw a Zafira OPC?

>>16727639
/thread

>>16726870
The bodykit is standard....it just has Tom's tail lights and a Hachiroku badge at the back and old school Toyota badge at the front

>>16727639
>nothing else fits the bill.

but thats wrong, child

>>16726230
It's quite attractive irl. Pictures don't do it justice.

>>16728729
Find me a new car that is this cheap, handles the same and is a 2+2?

File: 86cb.png (791KB, 842x629px) Image search: [Google]

791KB, 842x629px

>>16728373
Slightly less often than I see 86s.

Anyway my point was that it doesn't matter that more powerful cars are more powerful than the 86 because that's no the point of a 200hp sports car.

>>16728693
And what look like IS-F exhaust tips.

File: 2013-Ford-Mustang-V-6-Premium-front-three-quarters-in-motion.jpg (1MB, 1500x938px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x938px

>GT86
>Memes aside

Then there is nothing to talk about.

>>16728795
Is that a JDM only 86 bumper or something?

>>16728804
>MUH V8 MURICAN HORSEPOWER
the Mustang is more of a meme than the 86.

>>16728815

Read the filename, newfag.

>>16728828
Ik, too lazy to search up whatever the fuck cb is

File: 2015-toyota-86-style-cb-rims.jpg (81KB, 728x485px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 728x485px

>>16728805
Yeah, some kinda weird luxury model I think.

Called the cb.

>>16728847
Looks like a fish and seems it belongs in a bond film.

File: 7581355774_55d34588a9_b[1].jpg (178KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1024x683px

>>16728805
some nip special edition

>>16728853
Looks more like a catfish than that meme Camaro

>>16728854
nips love their special editions

if the alfa 4c can get 240hp out of a 1.8l engine why can the gt86 only 200hp out of a 2l engine?

I mean sure the 4c is full of turbos but still there should be a little bit more possible.

>>16728795
>>16728847
ayy lmao

>>16727550
why is the hyundai genesis doing bad too

>>16730256
>gook car
Don't expect much son

>>16727587
That guy's a very good driver.

>>16729002
100hp/liter on N/A is gud.

>>16727639
I like it how fags like you keep crying "but that's not what it's for!" and never ever can actually describe what it IS for without using flowery shit language with feels and emotions

>>16728101
this

>>16731250
It's a fun car to be enjoyed on technical roads, is that so hard to grasp?

>>16726446
They're not attaching a turbo?
Weak dude.

>>16731268
>technical roads
So is nurburgring too technical or something?

What the fuck does "fun" and "technical" even mean? Fun is a buzzword you use when you can't figure out or come up with a reason why something is good so you fall back on subjectivity

Just add a normal engine instead of the flat meme shit

>>16731275
Dude, are you the same WRX shitposter that gets a hard-on beating Civics and 86's at the stoplights? Let other people enjoy their cars the way they are meant to rather than circlejerking at the local car meets

>>16731291
>can't rebut
>talks about some meme

OK so what exactly makes a road technical and how is the brz somehow better than other cars despite being significantly slower?

>>16731291
>I enjoy being so slow I'm slower than minivans. Lemme be slow if I want to its my right to be retarded

>>16731291
>Let other people enjoy their cars the way they are meant
What or how is the brz meant to be driven? Because all I still see is all the things it isn't meant for and nothing as to what it is meant for

>>16731268
Because every other car is better than the brz86
>>16727550
See

File: 1487968736083.jpg (303KB, 960x711px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 960x711px

>>16731291
>Getting triggered by WRXfags
kek

>>16731297
Where did I mention the brz being better than any car? I simply said it's an enjoyable toy for curvy roads. Do you have all freeways if so sorry for your loss.
>>16731309
Can you not read? I said curvy technical roads, do you not have any?
>>16731316
Nobody is triggered they are completely different cars that shouldn't even be compared

It's a nice looking car, but Toyota royally fucked up by not giving it more power.
It's marketed as a "sports car" but it has less power than their mid-range sedan.

The 86 is a 2-liter, 4-cylinder, 200HP.
The Camry is a 3.5-liter, v6, 268HP.

In case you're wondering, the Sienna, the minivan, is a 24-valve, 300HP v6.

File: static1.squarespace.comz.jpg (240KB, 1500x844px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1500x844px

>all they had to do is drop the turbo flat four found in the levorg

are toyota and subaru stupid?

>>16731321
>technical roads
so nurburgring isnt technical?

>>16731324
Yes but the sienna weighs a lot more than the 86 so the comparison makes no sense

>>16731329
Nurburgring is a road your shitbox will never see

>>16731291
I love racing slow cars in my WRX.

File: 1487888628003.jpg (59KB, 500x456px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x456px

>>16731321
C'mon, you and I both know the WRX is better for both. Just enjoy your car dude, who cares what some fags on the Internet think? You're getting way too insecure about this.

>>16731340
But I'm not insecure about it, just letting people know facts. Brz handles better than a wrx and has way more direct steering. WRX has speed and stability at higher speeds

>>16731321
>Where did I mention the brz being better than any car?
I don't car if you weren't talking about it because I know you simply can't. It seems your ONLY thing you can write home about is subjectivity and you have no objective things to point out in anyway.

>Can you not read? I said curvy technical roads, do you not have any?
This isn't some magical feature of the brz being somehow excellent or better at curvy roads because this has nothing to do with the car. You're purposely being obfuscation pointing out these pointless things like "curvy roads" which based on the nurburgring being an excellent example of a turn saturated track with over 170 turns, the brz isn't great at those at all. So your association between the brz and curvy roads is shit.

People bring up the wrx because the wrx is the same price as a brz and the wrx is better in every single metric

File: 27054789061_c24c197f15_o.jpg (421KB, 1600x764px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1600x764px

>>16731328

yes

although mazda is pretty stupid too

>>16731330
I'll race you in my Sienna.

>>16731349
>Brz handles better than a wrx and has way more direct steering.
It physically can't, the fact that it's so slow the wrx out performs it in every way. It can't be more agile it can't take turns faster in any situation

File: 1487919931475.jpg (235KB, 627x562px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 627x562px

>>16731354
Get ready for my 170 hp shitbox anon

>>16731353
Yes but they get a pass because the mazda 3 and 6 are very good looking

File: 20161004_151124.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>16731352
>wrx is better in every single metric
That's where you are mistaken
>>16731358
Wrx/sti has loose noodle steering and poor seating position as well

>>16731369
>Wrx/sti has loose noodle steering and poor seating position as well
Oh boy it's this seating nonsense again. Face it kid the brz is slow and not good at literally any and everything. The wrx is faster the steering being a "noodle" doesn't mean shit and you're just making up excuses now

>>16731358
nigger are you pretending to be autistic?

the toyobaru has one of the best centers of gravity in a production car, & you're gonna tell me it doesn't handle well compared to a fat camry?

you're literally saying that because the wrx is faster it handles better than the toyobaru.

using that logic a fucking drag car handles better than a miata.

>>16731369
WRX has better seating position than the EVO at least. The steering is only bad on center.

>>16731375
I own both cars, what the fuck do I know... I'm giving an unbiased of the two cars and you can't accept that your WRX isn't perfect. Calm down your autism

>>16731369
For clarification, pre 2015 STIs had shit steering amd WRXs have always had shit steering

>>16731418
Except I test drove new wrx's/sti's before buying my 2005 in September. It was LITERALLY the same loose indirect steering

>>16731377
>the toyobaru has one of the best centers of gravity in a production car
That doesn't help it at all because its still got awful agility and speed. Its evident everywhere.

>>16731377
>you're literally saying that because the wrx is faster it handles better than the toyobaru.
Yes I am. It accelerates faster, it takes tighter turns quicker, it negotiates chicanes and hairpin turns WAY faster. The fact that its better than the BRZ in all these ways proves its far more agile and can move better. The lesser weight and lower center of gravity doesn't help the BRZ enough to compete at all.

I'm comparing them because they're the same price by the same manufacturer and its retarded to buy something that is literally inferior in every way.

>>16731384
No you fucking don't. You're the one faggot that is in every BRZ86 thread shilling out your ass. You yell at everyone saying "thats not what its meant for" or "thats not what it was made for" or "thats not how its meant to be" and all the things you shill for that it isn't and yet you can't name one feature or facet of the car where it is superior than another. All of its statistics from center of gravity and weight don't help it. An AWD car that weighs some 500 pounds more is beating you at the things that low weight and low center of gravity should give you advantage at which tells me that its poor in those same fields.

So yea when I compare them and we see them on tracks like the nurburgring

https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/

The WRX STi from 2010 gets 7'55 and the BRZ gets 8'44 thats a GIGANTIC difference. This shows how the WRX is beating the BRZ around the slow, high complexity turns in the beginning to the tight high speed turns in the northern parts and who cares about the straight away because we already know. The WRX is faster, more agile, and better in every way. But it seems all you have going for you is seating position.

>>16731451
Jesus look at this triggered sperg, "laptimes" don't even care

>>16731377
People compare the WRX and BRZ because they're the same price but the BRZ is worse in every way

>>16731455
>you're a sperg for calling out all the bullshit

>laptimes don't matter
don't claim shit like the BRZ is more agile when its proven it doesn't

>>16731455
>gets btfo
>can't retort so he cries "sperg"
enjoy post purchase rationalization you shill

>>16731461
>>16731464
I said the brz has better direct steering but you guys get butthurt over that. Go ahead and post your cars so you at least have some point of reference rather than laptimes on a track our cars will never see

>>16731297
>>16731275
THE CAR FEELS GOOD TO DRIVE, IT HAS GOOD BALANCE, GOOD STEERING, IN A PACKAGE THAT MAGNIFIES HANDLING OVER SPEED. A MUSTANG OR EVEN A CHALLENGER CAN BEAT IT ON A TRACK BUT WHEN YOU DRIVE THOSE CARS, IT FEELS LIKE AN SUV DESPITE GOING FASTER THAN THE 86 . IS THAT SO HARD TO GRASP YOU FUCKING MORON

t. Still wouldn't buy one new

>>16725613
I saw one of these outrun a state trooper the other day

>>16731481
>better direct steering
>I paid the same to be worse in every way but at least my car's seat is in the right spot and my steering FEELS better

>>16731482
>feels
nothing objective I guess.

>>16731490
I got the brz first, they are both great cars. Would you mind posting your car?

>>16731490
No, no. Of course it's not objective you daft cunt, driving a manual is neither objective over modern autos it's called personal preference, but you wouldn't know about that because your screeching autism denies your brain the ability to comprehend different views

File: backinblack_zps9el9yelw.jpg (218KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 800x450px

>>16731485

he was probably backing off because there's a road block ahead and there was no point in agitating the driver even more

I am a bit of a track fag but I did notice one thing. I used to fill my tires to about 30psi, however I noticed that the pressure on my tires was as high as 39psi after a good sprint and I lost noticeable traction after about 5 minutes into a drive and my average speed suffered as such. I thought that it must be my tire pressure so what I did was I lowed all 4 tires by 10% to 27psi. The tires are definitely considered under inflated at this point and I would never drive on 27psi tires in the streets but on my laps my times got better and my average speed did to about 3% faster from previous times. This only equates to a few seconds overall but the tire pressure only reached a max of about 35psi and by the very end I was just touching 36-37. The front tires definitely heated up much quicker than the rear which is strange since my rears are the drive wheels.

Anyway just wanted to share this tidbit of info. If you're going to the track under inflate your tires a bit for better handling!

File: 1397766404924.gif (826KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

826KB, 320x240px

>>16731580
>thinking people here track their cars

>>16727550
this kills the brzfags

>>16731585
When you have access and you like cars, yes I would hope people did support their local race fair

>>16731580
Are you running the Prius tires?

>>16731599
Yes because I don't have the money yet to replace these things. I haven't done anything internally to my 86 yet either. I'm researching good turbo units to invest in without blowing more than a few thousand because I believe that will help performance more than slicks

i don't even own an 86 but i don't get why everyone shits on them, i wouldn't buy one but i respect what it is

>>16731611
people shit on them because its an overhyped car and overpriced for what it is.

Sure RWD 2 door coupes aren't exactly common but this thing is a bad example. In the last 5 years these things haven't gotten much faster kind of like the STi's haven't

>>16731621
only other comparable coupe is ecoboost right? no way i'd buy a cuck'd mustang. all in all i'd probably go with a used 2007+ 350z

>>16731621
It's the same when people irrationally hate the challenger for not being a sub 3000 pound racecar. You just don't have autism

>>16731631
Well other comparable coupes would be the miata or the genesis or a 370z.

>>16731633
I guess but a notable flaw of the challenger and helcat is that its a 2 ton monster which causes it to have very slow turn ins. Its not exactly an agile car despite its speed, the weight it has to throw around is difficult

>>16731621
Nah

>>16731611
It's really because their owners kick down the door on every thread feeling butt hurt when people call their car slow. If they would just accept the meme and enjoy the feels I think the car would be more respected.

But the community seems to be a lot of boiracers who think their shit is FASSSST.

>>16731641
>If they would just accept the meme and enjoy the feels
that's what most do, shitposters disregard feels

File: Grey c5z.jpg (215KB, 1024x650px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1024x650px

>>16725613
DAILY REMINDER
the c5 has twice as much hp and a proper v8.

>>16731638
You're also missing the point that it's just a highway/cruising missile. Better handling would sacrifice it's comfiness

>>16731661
I don't think I'd ever buy a used vette, they've been proper destroyed and if they weren't, they sell for ridiculous amounts

>>16731704
C5's are pretty accessible honestly, personally I'd want an FRC or a Z06 though.

File: wrc52.jpg (34KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x400px

>>16731704
>the only car almost exclusively purchased by seniors, kept in a heated garage only to be taken out every second sunday for brunch with wifey

>destroyed

>>16731661
Hard finding these things anymore and new c7's are 55k

>>16731796
C5 Z06 and FRCs are not hard to find at all?

>>16731802
Well yea, the car is 13 years old since its last models made in 2004. People hold onto them, the people that sell them are either the old farts who put very little mileage on them and they're in great condition but want a fortune and the other are idiots who didn't maintain them, ran them like shit and don't want nearly as much but they want to pass the problem onto you.

Comparatively trying to find this car vs any other 2 door coupe sports car is difficult

>>16731661
Daily reminder that a C6 is a better platform than the c5 zo6.

>>16731718
Nigga I love the vette but id only buy new. Same for any proper sports car

File: 12717394_944528225584543_7666343504555428141_n.jpg (11KB, 350x400px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 350x400px

>>16731661
>Comparing a 20 year corvette to a brand new Japanese economy car

>>16727130
Are you an idiot? HP != torque

>>16731328
>>16731353

You turbo cucks are hilarious.

>>16725613
Drove one not long ago.
It was kinda fun but it's not strong by any means.
It's bicycle wheels made it easy to "power" slide, but it got about 0.28x the power of my Estate SAAB.

File: toyota-86-rc-specw.jpg (34KB, 700x399px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 700x399px

>>16725613
Why do you treat 86/brz like a complete car?
It was made as a base car for tuners to mod it as they need. You get well balanced chassis and tuning ready engine. You decide how many turbos you need and what engine setup suits you. They even sell stripped down versions in japan because tuners will change everything anyway.
And for those who only needs sporty looking car they have normal 86/brz even with AT transmission. You get the look, the decent power for road car and decent gas mileage.

File: Top.jpg (323KB, 1200x799px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1200x799px

>>16733298
I mean like a complete sports car.

>>16731897
>brz
>economy

>>16732129
yes but its the torque that makes you accelerate quickly

That torque dip is basically synonymous with a lack of acceleration at those rpms

>>16733298
because for the price of the car you can find other "tuners" or what ever you wanna call this thing for less money or more power. Saying toyota/subaru made this car to lean on the third party market pretty much admits that they're cashing in on your shit by purposely overpricing their really weak car at your expense.

Sure the third party prospects of the car are wide but when you have to dump 7k into a slow car to make it fast it begs the question of why not buy a faster car at a similar price and then dump the equivalent money into it and make it even faster beyond that?

>>16733379
What are you putting against brz? What car is equally reliable and tuner ready? Also balanced chassis with low center of gravity.

I drove one of these GT86's Friday evening and I don't wanna blog post but I'll sum up what I got out of it

pros:
- its quick in turns and stuff probably because its so light
- it does feel very slim and close to the ground like a sports car would
- handles like a dream, very responsive, doesn't feel like I can throw it around and lose control easily

cons:
- poor acceleration, this thing is definitely lack luster in the raw performance field
- poor body roll, I feel like the suspension isn't stiff enough for this car to stop this body roll I'm feeling
-its a bit of a screamer, despite nearly red lining and the car getting so loud I really wasn't going anywhere. Theres no feeling or rush of speed
- road noise: its not well insulated, gets difficult to hold a conversation beyond 40mph
- it feels sluggish because its not quick in speed or torque.

>>16733403
a fucking 370z is much faster and costs about 29k and has the same profile. A WRX in the same respect costs the same and has 70 more HP for what you're getting and has an equally massive third party market. Lancers are in the same market, so are RX8's and their market I'd argue is even bigger.

If this car was cheaper I wouldn't complain at all because its performance matches its price bracket but in this case its awful. Very very poor power:weight ratio and you get very little for what you're buying which means you're forced to get more shit ontop of that and before you know it, you blew 7k and made this 26k car a 33k car when you could have just bought an ALREADY SUPERIOR 33k car

the cost it'll take to make this worth it doesn't outweigh the benefit

>>16733403
>What are you putting against brz?
my stock 370z making 150 more HP. It costs 3k more but to make the BRZ as fast as my stock 370z you'll have to blow like 8000 which obviously puts you at a way higher price bracket than my 370z

>>16733404
slower than a miata then?

>>16733436
The miata is actually faster

>>16733439
wow. interesting.

>>16733442
the mx5 is anyway

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

289KB, 1536x1038px

>>16733428
>>16733417

370z base at 29k doesn't even have an LSD.

You can get a new BRZ for 24k. For that difference you could buy some lightweight wheels, nice tires, header and a tune.

How about comparing the 86 to another 2+2 car instead of a 2 seater like the Miata/Z/s2k/Cayman?

>>16733623
>370z base at 29k doesn't even have an LSD.
the BRZ is 26k, much fucking slower and the 370z without an LSD is still more agile and can turn quicker

>>16733623
>For that difference you could buy some lightweight wheels, nice tires, header and a tune.
and it would still be significantly slower and less agile. The lack of LSD doesn't stop the 370z from out doing the brz

>>16726226
>buy car for £25k
>still has the same faults after around 5 years of development
>need to give 3rd party aftermarket unofficial tuners hundreds to reprogram the ecu because toyota suck massive dick and can't be bothered
>possibly voiding the warranty and potentially having to waste even more money in the future if anything goes wrong

>all so a 200hp 1300kg mcpherson strut shitbox has a half decent powerband that doesn't look like something out of a 90s turbo converted garage-tuned shitbox

>>16731328
>roughly 50kg more front weight
>10k or more extra msrp
>"omg why didn't they release a simple n/a 2l car????? fuck turbos reeeee - /o/"

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

821KB, 4611x3648px

>>16733630
MSRP is 25,495. You are silly if you pay MSRP.

>>16733634
If I wanted a fast car I wouldn't be buying an 86. I doubt there is a huge difference in agility between the 2 cars.

>>16725613

No it's a really good car. But as sports cars go, it is slow.

>>16731718
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdw4jiieWjI

>>16733721
>I doubt there is a huge difference in agility between the 2 cars.
the old 350z is a whole 12 seconds faster than the brz on nurburgring, thats pretty big

>>16733790
a stripped down 370z weighing the same or roughly as the brz, would completely destroy it

>r34-derived brakes and suspension
>double wishybones f&r
>stiff chassis and good suspension oem
>not a cuck engine

>>16733790
The Cobalt SS is 4 seconds faster than the Z on the ring. Does that mean it's the superior car?

I own one. I love it. I don't care that it's slow, it's fun.

I have a bike for going fast.

File: steelies.png (595KB, 639x424px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 639x424px

>>16733917
Any modifications?

>>16731375
Are you comparing the modern wrx/sti to the brz's steering.
I like the brz in that department more compared to the current wrx, but the old hydraulic racks are all better.