>Toyota makes the gt86(spiritual successor to the ae86) >manual

It's also slow, just like the AE86.

>lets subaru put in a boxer cuck engine in

>>16839129
Because
>no torkz
>unreliable gutless boxer engine
>tork dip
>stupidly high compression ratio so if you try to tarbo it it'll blow up, plus have to drink premium if you're a cheapskate
>"le u habe to tarbo it to make it really fast" mentality despite costing more than what you get, so in the end you end up spending lots of money when you could've bought something quicker and unriced with factory specs and warranty
there's probably more but i can't think of rn
now rev up those post quoting each point and proving me otherwise

File: ae111-black-beauty-5.jpg (129KB, 1000x668px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1000x668px

>>16839143
>lower
>better cog

Plus, it's not like Toyota is making any wonderful 4 bangers anyway.

>>16839183
>imfuckingplying
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2010/06/turbocharged-toyota-yaris-makes-350-horsepower-runs-12s-looks-mean.html/amp

>boxer
here's the flaw

File: ae101bomex.jpg (58KB, 800x579px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 800x579px

>>16839194
>the motor has been bored and sleeved to approximately 1.6-liters. Fully built with new pistons, rods and an overhauled head. The turbo kit was pieced together with a Garrett T28 as the heart of it and an AEM EMS controlling it all.
Any factory ones?

>>16839183
>Lower
No. Due to the oil pan and headers, a boxer engine cannot be lower than a V engine.
>Better CoG
Nope, see above.

>Doesn't mention ridiculous engine width
Boxers are too damn wide to fit in engine bays - which is why they had to use MacPherson struts in the front end, since they save room compared to double wishbones. Guess what, struts have a worse camber curve then wishbones, and any gains in CoG you might have gotten (but didn't get) are completely offset by that inferior suspension setup. The BRZ would've been superior with a V4 - and a lot better with a decent V6.

>>16839183
>inch lower
>fucking awful polar movement due to it spilling out its fat into the fenders

For an Fr car, it's truly retarded. Awd it's acceptable but still pretty stupid being in the front

>>16839129
It's a RWD economy car. It's self-defeating.

It's got a sports car look but is gutless and will get passed in a corner by a car that's known for not handling corners at all. You can't do that and brag about it being a "handling god machine" at the same time.

It's the car that can not decide what it wants to be. It's lost, and hopeless.

>>16839129
For me personally, it comes down to the tryhard "sporty" design, which overstates itself, while the original 86 was humble and understated in appearance.

If they some how managed to throw a 3sgte in it some how and made it emissions friendly they would have sold like cocane in the 80's

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

303KB, 960x711px

>>16839129

>>16839271
Polar moment isn't that much worse than a V though. The problem is the suspension problem I mentioned in >>16839269.

It could be brilliant in a front-midengined car, where the engine is completely behind the suspension points. No suspension compromise - but then again, a V wouldn't be any worse in that situation.

>>16839281
This. I want a fast car that looks slow, not the other way around.

>>16839129
/o/ shits all over it because they're mad their parents won't buy them one.

Would have been close to perfect running a 4GR as in the IS250. A 4GR turbo making a conservative 190kW would have made that car a winner.

>>16839297
Just get new camber plates.

>>16839356
>Camber plates fix camber curves
You should learn how mechanics work.

>>16839129
>doesn't look good
And you have other good options for the money.

File: come on now.jpg (78KB, 338x305px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 338x305px

>>16839129

>implying /o/ would be able to afford it anyway
>implying /o/ has even test driven a GT86 instead of just being bench racers and parroting what they've heard on the Internet from other bench racers

>>16839179

Bench Racer: The Post

File: 1488727733205.png (72KB, 640x490px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x490px

>AE86 was literally a sporty Corolla
>the XRS is literally faster as well as an actual Corolla and not a one off car named after a meme car

Then again, RWDs and manuals have been obsoleted by AWDs and autotragics respectively, so it being one of the few RWD cars with manual should be a blessing.

>>16839296
Imagine if Toyota really wanted to shill this car in Initial D. I bet they'd make an episode where Dagumi's wife's son comes from the fucking future with a GT86, and wants to race his dad with his AE86. Could you imagine how fucking crazy /o/ would get?

>Bloated design
>Boxer engine
>Premium gas

Those are the three issues I have with the car that is preventing me from buying one.

>>16839179
ricer

File: 2015.10.8-Toyota-S-FR-4.jpg (133KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1920x1280px

>>16839129
I'm waiting for the s-fr (and a decent color of course). I don't like the idea of the GT86 because it's big and it looks fast when it's not.

basically I want a miata but not a miata

>>16840924
>basically I want a miata but not a miata
you want something even gayer

>>16839603
>XRS
what are the odds they'll bring it back with the corolla if they're already doing it with the Yaris?

I don't want a hatchback. I want a sedan or at least something closer to a fastback

why are these fast rally cars always a hatchback anyways

>chassis code only has one digit

>>16839179
all of those are shared with the original AE86 stop crying you filthy ricer

File: 17265152_1220372241417604_6701818537037899138_n.jpg (7KB, 196x313px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 196x313px

>>16839179
>>stupidly high compression ratio so if you try to tarbo it it'll blow up, plus have to drink premium if you're a cheapskate
>car was designed as an N/A
>be surprised when it doesn't take a turbo without compression reduction
>take that as a negative

>>16839269
>No. Due to the oil pan and headers, a boxer engine cannot be lower than a V engine.
Wrong.

The exhaust manifold WILL take some space but you can easily have something stupid like a dry sump system and an exhaust manifold that sits as flat as possible and you can have an insane low COG

>>16839129
It's because it costs 30k instead of 3k.

/o/ hates everything they can't afford, which is everything.

>>16839335
This 1000%

>>16841002
Yes, the original AE86 is garbage. Were you dropped on your head as a child?

>>16841002
And the AE86 was a three quarters the weight.

>>16842746
and just 60% the power.

>>16842753
There are <$20k family sedans with more power than an 86

>>16839279
That's what the AE86 was too

>>16839441
could get one.
Getting an mr2 instead because as nice as a successor of ae86 is, it doesn't have snap oversteer

>>16842762
Provides a sedan the same enjoyment driving it?

>>16839143
without subaru there would be no 86

>>16840931
>haha le gay is bad xddddd

File: 1450106430794.png (437KB, 635x608px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 635x608px

>>16839129
>cheap

>>16842993
it is though
just because you can't afford it on minimum wage doesn't make it expensive

>>16839129
Because right now it seems expensive and boo slow, wait until 20 years time.
All cars will be electric, AWD, almost driving themselves. The amazing purity, manual gearbox and RWD will have people remembering this as a classic,.

>>16843019
basically the same thing as the fucking silvia

>>16843035
100%
New cars are getting more and more detached from the experience.
90s cars will end up super rare collectibles, this will be that cool classic car which was "how it used to be" that will hold value but never be super expensive

>buy an RX-8 and all the apex seals and oil in the world for the money you spend on a new Toyobaru
>have an actual sports car
>???

>>16839635
They shilled it in the reanimation movie when Inital d anime series Takumi races Movie Takumi.

>>16843003
>29K after taxes and fees
>Still slower than a M3, s2000, boxster, and a 6th gen acura tl w/ a slushbox

>>16839134
/This
Expecting the real life version of a fictional car to be anything like the 2d car is like expecting construction equipment to form a giant robot.

>>16843019
>All cars will be electric
7 years ago people said everyone would be driving electric in 2020. an inferior technology with no potential will never become mainstream unless the better technology is outlawed.

>>16843096
>new car costs more than used cars
SHOCK! HORROR!

>>16843105
used BRZ are still shit value/money

>>16843108
>2-5 year old used car costs more than 20-30 year old car
please keep dropping these truth bombs on me

>>16839129
That's because it's more Celica than an ae86

>>16839129
/o/ is full of retards.

>>16839129
>200hp
>$26k+ starting price
>cheap
lol

File: BRZS2000.jpg (67KB, 582x565px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 582x565px

>>16843096
Slower than an S2000? Nope.jpg

>>16843142
>$26k
Not cheap? How poor are you?

>>16843143
Inflation adjusted what did the S2000 cost new?

>>16843147
$26k before taxes for 197 horsepower is a fucking joke and a rip off.

>>16843155
According to autotrader $45k
Hmmm

File: _P__5802.jpg (66KB, 900x596px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 900x596px

>>16843160
£17k for 80hp is a fucking joke and a rip off

>>16843172
At least that 80hp is actually fast :^)

>>16843143
>Post image showing s2000 is faster around the only real track
Kek

>>16843160
Only if you are stupid, and poor.

File: kllkllk.png (193KB, 634x447px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 634x447px

>>16843185
tsukuba?

>>16843186
>waste your money on no power, o-or your p-poor!

>>16843111
>implying the underpowered 4 banger with the boring design will be desired in 10 years when you can still have a 90's shitbox with more power and a better design

>>16839335
This

>>16839179
Arnt high compression ratios better for a turbo?

File: cb2.png (598KB, 773x581px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 773x581px

>>16843183
Neither of those cars are fast

>>16843194
In ten years time there will be plenty of good examples of cheap 86s, those 90s cars are only getting more expensive and less common

>>16843199
No, because it increases the chance to go kaboom. Compression ratio refers to the ratio at which the air in the cylinder gets compressed from tdc to bdc. You are thinking of boost, which is a measure of how much the turbo compresses air.

>>16843194
But 90s shitboxes are underpowered too?
>>16843210
That kit is hideous and makes it look like a frog

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

791KB, 842x629px

>>16843214
Nah it's more of a catfish

>>16843199
You want a high dynamic compression ratio, this can be accomplished by a high static compression ratio and low boost or a low static compression ratio and high boost. The former drivers better the latter is preferred by TFATF types because big boost gives a big kick when it comes in.

>>16843225
Thanks

>>16841104
No, you can't have a dry sump on a 30k economy car.

Even with a dry sump, you still can't get the crank axis any closer to the ground than a V engine. Exhaust will always be the limit, and C's don't intrude on suspension design. You can flatten the exhaust system all you want, you'll lose flow and it'll choke your engine. Meanwhile, the V engine would have none of the problems a boxer has.

>>16843081
>Buy a decent RX-8 for 5K
>25K budget for a 2.3 DISI swap
>No apex seals problems
>Actual sports car

I swear to god, if this "MX-8" came from the factory with the MPS3 motor, they'd be S2000-tier in terms of holding value.

>>16843239
>dump 25k into rx8...
for what exactly? so it lasts another 50k miles? what a fucking waste

>>16843225
>The former has better throttle response because you don't have to wait for your turbo to spool
>The latter makes more power because it isn't using crank energy to compress the air - it uses waste energy instead
Ftfy

>>16843239
what 200+ hp engine can be swapped into rx8 with minimum work?

>>16843142
>$26k

That would be reasonable, cheap for a sporty car.
Here it starts from €48k

>>16843261
For 25K, you can get a perfectly functioning swap from a shop. Won't just last 50K miles, it'll last as long as you can drive it, unlike the Remesis.

>>16843296
Most inline fours would probably fit. Keep it in the family with the 2.3 turbo - or maybe a K-series V6.

>>16843279
No turbo uses crank energy regardless of static compression ratio, you still use the waste energy to spool the turbo but a high static compression engine will need less boost to make the same power, thus require a smaller lighter turbo to make it, thus passing the boost threshold sooner giving a better driving experience, it's also better off boost but doesn't feel as fast because there is not sudden increase in power over a short rev range.

>>16839269
Sitting lower != Lower CG
How much mass is concentrated on the headers, and much is on the block?
Do you seriously think Porsche and Subaru have been marketing their flat engines wrong for so long?

>>16839129
why did Toyota need to team up with Subaru with this? same shit with the Supra.

The incoming hot yaris is probably going to be their only true race car.

>>16843323
>a high static compression engine will need less boost to make the same power
No. A high static compression engine will not make the same power as a well-optimised turbo setup. If everything but compression stays the same, you simply can't exceed the power of 2-3 bars of boost. This problem is twofold: you can cool the compressed air in an intercooler - you can't do that with the air being compressed inside the cilinder with a higher CR. This higher temperature leads to an early knock point. The second point is that you're always using the crank to compress air in the cilinderd, instead of waste energy. This causes a lower output at the crank, even if you had identical cilinder pressures.

>>16843359
An engine sitting higher still has a higher CoG.
Less mass is in the headers of course, but the headers push the block upwards on a boxer, which causes a higher CoG.

They've been marketing them absolutely brilliantly - but in engineering terms, they're far from ideal.

>>16843374
Totally wrong. If you have identical cylinder pressures you will have an identical force acting on the piston, this will generate an identical torque in the crank at an identical speed resulting in an identical power output.

>>16843391
Consider what happens on the next cycle then. On the turbo engine, the crank only had to compress the mixture, say, 9 to 1. The rest of the compression is created from wasted exhaust. On the high compression n/a motor, the crank had to compress it, for example, 13 to 1, which takes a lot more power. Learn2 physics.

As a side-effect, you can add ridiculous amounts of boost, cool it, and end up with way higher cilinder pressure without running the risk of detonation. In terms of raw power, boost > n/a.

>>16842961
A Miata is more fun

>>16843235
it would still have a higher COG. Like it or not. And no. V engines do not have a lower crank axis.

>>16839335
Not wrong

File: 1401060438746.jpg (25KB, 320x545px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 320x545px

>>16843143
Its funny cause everything else form that website says the s2000 is the better car.

>>16844864
There are a couple of ways that the S2K falls short. One is that its tail gets unsettled far too easily, which is kind of fixable via a lot of experimentation with chassis mods. Honda themselves didn't figure out how to fix it until the CR. The other problem is that the the steering feel is numb as fuck, which isn't fixable unless you replace the whole steering rack or something. The BRZ has neither of those problems, so it's more competitive than it should be on paper. It's a lot less exhausting to drive, too.

>>16844913
The GT86 isn't a real sports car, only a ''sporty'' car. Comparing it to the S2000 is fucking disrespectful. Also, the twitchiness of the rear isn't a problem as long as you're not shit.
>>16844864
Just noticed even the freaking 9k redline S2000 engine has more torque than the BRZ. Fucking lol.

>>16839129
>Cheap
Wew lad. There are quite a few cars you can get that are rwd with more horsepower in that price range.

>>16844951
The twitchiness of the rear bites people who aren't shit, due to issues like bump steer. Admittedly that can be easily fixed these days, but ultimately the chassis' love of oversteer means that part of not being shit with the car is taking certain corners slower than you otherwise might. There's a reason why the CR can be multiple seconds per lap faster than any year of the AP1/AP2, and it's not the weight savings.

>GT86 isn't a real sports car
Why? Because of POWAAAAAAAAAA?

>>16840924
Buy a Miata and have FM put a fastback kit on it.

>>16843319
>Remesis

>>16844913
I think this falls down to driver preference here.

Truth be told, they're both pretty good cars and im glad both of them exist. But to go back to your points, I never have the problem with the rear getting unsettled. The car has always (save for 2 spin outs) gone where i wanted it even when drifting. As for steering, I've always thought it was super light and easy to control, but very responsive to input.

As far as actual issue goes, my friend's brz has a horrible heat soak issue with the throttle or something. Every time its hot, that engine losses tons of power.

>>16844951
dont forget the ap2 8k engine with 6 more lbs of torque

>>16845079
Well to be fair, the CR also has some aero on it too that does help. There's a few things pretty different with the CR. Even so if i was going to make either a race car i wouldn't be using the factory shocks/spring and struts.

>>16843296
>what 200+ hp engine can be swapped into rx8 with minimum work?

ls1

>>16845079
Apparently it is very easy to fix that flaw of the S2000 because it's really popular as a tuning base for a race car. Not the same could be said for the GT86 on the other hand. Don't take it from me, Ichishima-san, founder of Spoon said that.

>>16843319
>Won't just last 50K miles, it'll last as long as you can drive it, unlike the Remesis
the rensis already lasts 200k
why dump 25k into a swap that will go like 250k? 25k is 20 rebuilds!!!

File: weds3.jpg (287KB, 1024x650px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1024x650px

>>16845161
>Not the same could be said for the GT86 on the other hand.

But there are several race series that consist only of the 86, toyota sold models with roll cages in order for them to be raced, and loads of tuners make aftermarket parts for them?

>>16845247
and mazda sold miatas with roll cages from factory too. A brand trying to push its car to be a "level sports series" isnt the end all that its perfect.

Thought i dont quite agree with that other dude either. With enough time and money you can fix any car.

File: exhaustcover2.jpg (275KB, 1024x663px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1024x663px

>>16845262
No, but it does show that it's a popular tuning base for a race car.

>>16839129
Poorfags can't afford it and the lap times aren't great. Also America is flat and cheaper, better alternatives (Mustangs, Camaros, V6 Camrys) for stoplight racing are offered.

>>16845348
You have to swap the engine for it to be good.

File: i-L4C8ZQp-M.jpg (110KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 600x450px

>>16839269
the oil pan and exhaust header issues arent inherent to the boxer design, just that particular design. old air cooled vw flat 4's (and even the water cooled "wasserboxer") have horizontal exhaust ports and the sump is part of the engine block providing better cooling and more clearance.

>>16845348
oh no doubt about that, but on the flip side, it is a new and in production car currently. Never the less, im glad they're make it. the more sport cars made the better. Prolonging the "all cars become boring and bland" thing.

>>16845262
>With enough time and money you can fix any car.
One more thing Ichishima-san said is that it takes significantly less money and time to turn an S2000 into a race car than a GT86

I drove the FR-S briefly and I liked it. The shifter is great and it was very easy feel when you're about to oversteer. It definitely doesn't pull as much as it should though.

The only sporty cars I have extended time on are miatas and modern muscle cars so I can see how it hits a happy medium for me. The interior even as a Scion was pretty comfy to me as well. If I owned one I would have to immediately tune it though.

>cheap
>over 40k yuros
i hate this fucking socialist land

>>16843088
Oh boy.