RE: Driven: Subaru BRZ
Discussion
moskvich427 said:
I'm just thinking "second-hand Boxter"...
That's a good point, used cars *are* much cheaper than new ones, so for the same money you could buy something the someone else paid a lot more for new. It's good that people point this out, personally I often forget. But why settle for a Boxster when for roughly the same amouunt you could have this lovely Ferrari 456GTA or maybe a Maserati Gransport? After all, it's not as if the running costs of some cars are more than others.otolith said:
moskvich427 said:
I'm just thinking "second-hand Boxter"...
That's a good point, used cars *are* much cheaper than new ones, so for the same money you could buy something the someone else paid a lot more for new. It's good that people point this out, personally I often forget. But why settle for a Boxster when for roughly the same amouunt you could have this lovely Ferrari 456GTA or maybe a Maserati Gransport? After all, it's not as if the running costs of some cars are more than others.Evening!
Few things to respond to here so bear with me...
ArosaMike: I wouldn't blame the car for any inherent lack of driftability, more the driver - Harris I ain't. His video on the GT 86 should answer any questions here!
daveknott5: Hmm, the MX-5 question. Well, I like a roadster. But I'd say the BRZ/GT 86 is probably a step up over a standard Mazda. But I'll get back to you on that!
Kambites: The pic below should illuminate on the CoG question - it's a ropey iPhone pic from the press conference but puts that figure in context a bit. They didn't have the Boxster/Cayman on there but I did ask and they said it was comparable with the BRZ, depending on suspension. Give or take in other words.
Cheers!
Dan
Few things to respond to here so bear with me...
ArosaMike: I wouldn't blame the car for any inherent lack of driftability, more the driver - Harris I ain't. His video on the GT 86 should answer any questions here!
daveknott5: Hmm, the MX-5 question. Well, I like a roadster. But I'd say the BRZ/GT 86 is probably a step up over a standard Mazda. But I'll get back to you on that!
Kambites: The pic below should illuminate on the CoG question - it's a ropey iPhone pic from the press conference but puts that figure in context a bit. They didn't have the Boxster/Cayman on there but I did ask and they said it was comparable with the BRZ, depending on suspension. Give or take in other words.
Cheers!
Dan
Dan Trent said:
Kambites: The pic below should illuminate on the CoG question - it's a ropey iPhone pic from the press conference but puts that figure in context a bit. They didn't have the Boxster/Cayman on there but I did ask and they said it was comparable with the BRZ, depending on suspension. Give or take in other words.
Ah I read the article as the BRZ had a CoG 46cm lower than the Mazda, not that its CoG was at 46cm off the road. That makes much more sense. So it's actually about 3 or 4cm lower than the Mazda. Clearly I just can't read. 
5lab said:
i was a big fan of this car but the final performance details disappoint. its no faster than a 5k cheaper mx5 and the fuel consumption is pretty poor too. can anyone comment on if the performance is due to 3rd gear for 60? that made the 944 look slower than it was..
Autocar test should be out soon I reckon - they're pretty comprehensive
The sound is certainly disappointing - which is surprising, as NA engines give a good shot at an excellent sound, and Subaru have not disappointed with their sound tracks previously. I imagine a decent induction kit and a sports exhaust will work wonders, but with that twin exhaust style that is stuck into the body work (something I personally despise, and that will no doubt annoy BRZ owners thinking on similar lines to me) it will be somewhat more difficult than just bolting a new system on.
I love the concept of this car, and would consider buying one in future, but I'm with IAJO on the fuel economy and performance. I've got an unmodified Rover 200vi and the specifications of the GT-86 do not impress.
The K-series was introduced in 1988, the VVC variants were introduced in 1995. Yes the K-series has a bad reputation, and yes mine is a little incontinent in it's old age (15 years/133k), but it still feels good for the claimed 0-60 (7.5 seconds) and it still regularly gives real world fuel economy in the high thirties (occasionally well into the forties/teens;)).
I know the Toyobaru weighs a bit more, but comparable performance and 31.7mpg?! You'd have thought that a smaller frontal area and 17 years of engine development would result in something a bit more impressive? 31 mpg is dangerously close to the fuel consumption of far more exotic machinery. Even a Mustang will come close to that..
The K-series was introduced in 1988, the VVC variants were introduced in 1995. Yes the K-series has a bad reputation, and yes mine is a little incontinent in it's old age (15 years/133k), but it still feels good for the claimed 0-60 (7.5 seconds) and it still regularly gives real world fuel economy in the high thirties (occasionally well into the forties/teens;)).
I know the Toyobaru weighs a bit more, but comparable performance and 31.7mpg?! You'd have thought that a smaller frontal area and 17 years of engine development would result in something a bit more impressive? 31 mpg is dangerously close to the fuel consumption of far more exotic machinery. Even a Mustang will come close to that..
Dan Trent said:
Kambites: The pic below should illuminate on the CoG question - it's a ropey iPhone pic from the press conference but puts that figure in context a bit. They didn't have the Boxster/Cayman on there but I did ask and they said it was comparable with the BRZ, depending on suspension. Give or take in other words.
Cheers!
Dan
Hmmm. Which RX8 did they use? Mazda made a big deal about the RX8 having a much lower CoG than the MX5 at launch and I know the PZ, R3 and Anniversary models were all under 440mm. Indeed, the DC2 ITR is 455mm with an inline 4, so it doesn't seem to be THAT low despite all the hype.Cheers!
Dan
Also, are Subaru going to make the pistons out of something that doesn't fall to pieces after 40,000 miles in this engine?
Tested: 2013 Subaru BRZ Hits 60 MPH in 6.4 Sec, Quarter Mile in 14.9 Sec @ 95.5 MPH
http://wot.motortrend.com/tested-2013-subaru-brz-h...
I have just been on a rival car mag website and they publish the following figures for the Toyabaru:
BRZ: 0-62mph: 7.6sec; Top speed: 140mph; Economy: 36.2mpg; CO2: 181g/km
GT-86: 0-62mph: 7.7sec; Top speed: 137mph; Economy: 40.9mpg (combined); CO2: 160g/km
I think PH must have quoted the urban fuel consumption, not the combined consumption as stated. 181g/km implies about 36 mpg (combined) for a petrol car (it's about 41 mpg for a diesel).
The GT-86 and BRZ must have different engine mapping and/or gear ratios - I wonder if there is any real world difference between the two?
BRZ: 0-62mph: 7.6sec; Top speed: 140mph; Economy: 36.2mpg; CO2: 181g/km
GT-86: 0-62mph: 7.7sec; Top speed: 137mph; Economy: 40.9mpg (combined); CO2: 160g/km
I think PH must have quoted the urban fuel consumption, not the combined consumption as stated. 181g/km implies about 36 mpg (combined) for a petrol car (it's about 41 mpg for a diesel).
The GT-86 and BRZ must have different engine mapping and/or gear ratios - I wonder if there is any real world difference between the two?
Edited by gweaver on Thursday 29th March 00:08
Ali_T said:
Hmmm. Which RX8 did they use? Mazda made a big deal about the RX8 having a much lower CoG than the MX5 at launch and I know the PZ, R3 and Anniversary models were all under 440mm. Indeed, the DC2 ITR is 455mm with an inline 4, so it doesn't seem to be THAT low despite all the hype.
Also, are Subaru going to make the pistons out of something that doesn't fall to pieces after 40,000 miles in this engine?
Thats what I thought. Anyone know ?Also, are Subaru going to make the pistons out of something that doesn't fall to pieces after 40,000 miles in this engine?
This looks like one of the most appealing new cars in ages and I'm really glad they've resisted the temptation to beef it up too much and turn it into a juniour supercar that you can't enjoy driving on anything but a deserted country road.
But what I'd like to see is a head-to-head comparison with the MX-5 because with its lowish power figures and fixed roof I'm just a bit concerned it might turn out to be significantly less fun, and just becomes a flash in the pan that Toyota and Subaru lose interest in developing further, with the result that it will sink without a trace - like the Honda S2000 for example.
But what I'd like to see is a head-to-head comparison with the MX-5 because with its lowish power figures and fixed roof I'm just a bit concerned it might turn out to be significantly less fun, and just becomes a flash in the pan that Toyota and Subaru lose interest in developing further, with the result that it will sink without a trace - like the Honda S2000 for example.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff