RE: Subaru BRZ ts launched (in Japan)

[BORN2bWILD]

Looks like a car that needs some Prodrive magic here in UK

[0000]

Bladedancer said:

There is a selection of aftermarket turbo and s/c kit available to take the power up to 280 bhp-ish.
So if you really feel the need to, you can have 50% (ish) more power for about 4-5k.

Plus insurance, plus resale issues. It's not an attractive prospect in the UK, sadly.

[IAJO]

I'm not power mad nor am I a fan of turbo cars but I do think the engine was chosen badly in this car.

A 1.6 turbo would have produced the same power, better mpg, lower emissions and better 0-60 all at similar power levels. It would also have allowed for a cheaper tuning route. All things that would help it sell IMO.

For the NA version a larger engine would have been more charismatic, produce better power and sound great. Nissans 3.7 v6 springs to mind or some kind of updated straight six similar to the na 2jz

For the 3 year refresh a turbo charged six halo car. Be like a light, well sorted baby Supra.

Then build a SUPRA. An unapologetic, apocalyptically fast, no hybrid nonsense SUPRA!!!

[Bladedancer]

0000 said:

Bladedancer said:

There is a selection of aftermarket turbo and s/c kit available to take the power up to 280 bhp-ish.
So if you really feel the need to, you can have 50% (ish) more power for about 4-5k.

Plus insurance, plus resale issues. It's not an attractive prospect in the UK, sadly.

Resale issues on a tuned jap car who is directed at people who like tuned jap cars? I don't think so. All those evos, imprezas, supras and skylines sell despite being heavily tuned.
If you put it on autotrader yes you might not get the response you hoped for. If you advertise it where enthusiasts looks then I don't think that would be an issue.
Insurance is going to be higher. But you don't know how much higher... and insurance on a factory turbo version would have been higher than N/A anyways.

[Bladedancer]

IAJO said:

I'm not power mad nor am I a fan of turbo cars but I do think the engine was chosen badly in this car.

A 1.6 turbo would have produced the same power, better mpg, lower emissions and better 0-60 all at similar power levels. It would also have allowed for a cheaper tuning route. All things that would help it sell IMO.

For the NA version a larger engine would have been more charismatic, produce better power and sound great. Nissans 3.7 v6 springs to mind or some kind of updated straight six similar to the na 2jz

For the 3 year refresh a turbo charged six halo car. Be like a light, well sorted baby Supra.

Then build a SUPRA. An unapologetic, apocalyptically fast, no hybrid nonsense SUPRA!!!

You're missing the point. This is meant to be a spiritual successor to Corolla AE86, not the supra.

1.6 Turbo, like all the French cars and many German small GTIs have would IMO not be the right thing. It would be the same power level with a turbo already, so with a far more stressed engine.
2.0 is the minimum IMO, turbo would be nice I do admit.
Sod emissions - if someone is worried about emissions they should buy a tree hugging Prius or something.

For me GT86 turbo would be a modern day 200SX/Silvia, so perfect coupe. Not too big or heavy and not that expensive.

This could be a baby supra in the same way as 200sx was baby skyline. Those are two different segments, performance and PRICE wise. When Toyota releases Supra it will be bigger, more powerful and far more expensive than GT86.

[IAJO]

Bladedancer said:

You're missing the point...

I didn’t say turn this into a Supra I said get on with building one, separate from the gt86. A new Supra will be GTR power levels and cost. There is room in the line-up between a £20k NA coupe and a likely £100k turbocharged hybrid monster. Having a halo performance model helps add legitimacy to the more reasonably priced sports cars and raises the manufacturers profile.

As for spiritual successor to the AE86 don't make me LOL, marketing BS at its best. You wouldn't go for a 1.6 engine? Have a gander at what was in the AE86. The AE86 was a Corolla, arguably more of a hot hatch with a coupe variant than a bespoke sports car like the gt86, think golf and scirocco.

The AE86 advantage was its cheap RWD platform back in the early 80s which made it a potent racing tool, further enhanced with tuning and engine swaps.

The gt86 isn’t all that cheap and it’s got much better FWD competitors than the AE86 ever had, not to mention 4WD turbo cars from VAG and RWD turbos from BMW. I appreciate the ethos and love Japanese cars, I also prefer NA cars but for non-enthusiast sales the car needs to be competitive on paper. VED, CO2, MPG, HPI etc... Matter to people more now than ever. Strange thing for me is why not offer some choice?

I'd love to see them sell a few more as maybe this would be a viable second hand purchase for me one day. After a test drive my 350z and the gt86 are not comparable on driving poise but would I swap? No. 280BHP and v6 soundtrack would be too hard to live without. A combination of the two might be really interesting though.

I’m probably still missing the point.

[LordGrover]

The GT86 is a very cheap car, just not in the UK.
Japan, US and Australia have far more 'competitive' pricing.

[Bladedancer]

IAJO said:

I didn’t say turn this into a Supra I said get on with building one, separate from the gt86. A new Supra will be GTR power levels and cost. There is room in the line-up between a £20k NA coupe and a likely £100k turbocharged hybrid monster. Having a halo performance model helps add legitimacy to the more reasonably priced sports cars and raises the manufacturers profile.

As for spiritual successor to the AE86 don't make me LOL, marketing BS at its best. You wouldn't go for a 1.6 engine? Have a gander at what was in the AE86. The AE86 was a Corolla, arguably more of a hot hatch with a coupe variant than a bespoke sports car like the gt86, think golf and scirocco.

The AE86 advantage was its cheap RWD platform back in the early 80s which made it a potent racing tool, further enhanced with tuning and engine swaps.

The gt86 isn’t all that cheap and it’s got much better FWD competitors than the AE86 ever had, not to mention 4WD turbo cars from VAG and RWD turbos from BMW. I appreciate the ethos and love Japanese cars, I also prefer NA cars but for non-enthusiast sales the car needs to be competitive on paper. VED, CO2, MPG, HPI etc... Matter to people more now than ever. Strange thing for me is why not offer some choice?

I'd love to see them sell a few more as maybe this would be a viable second hand purchase for me one day. After a test drive my 350z and the gt86 are not comparable on driving poise but would I swap? No. 280BHP and v6 soundtrack would be too hard to live without. A combination of the two might be really interesting though.

I’m probably still missing the point.

I know exactly what powered AE86. I also know times have moved on, as you yourself pointed out. Cars that had 150 hp back then have 250 now.
GT86 isn't cheap? 22k doesn't sound like a lot for a 200bhp RWD coupe. And it *is* a platform for building racing (or fast road) cars.

As for FWD competition - now you're making me LOL. FWD is not RWD. Different market.

GT86 is a car for an enthusiast, that much is glaringly obvious. And I think there are still enough enthusiasts to go around.
Non-enthusiast will buy a Golf GTI. And Golf is 27k. Before you start ticking options.
RWDs from BMW - for 200hp 22k? Seriously? Which one? I can see that 125i is over 26k. Again, before you add kit. By the time its anything like a civilised car it will probably be 30k.
I'm not sure which 4WDs from VAG you mean. Golf R? That's 30k or something around that. Audis I won't even mention as their prices are silly.

GT86 is not a 350/370Z equivalent. It is 200SX equivalent - a car Nissan doesn't make any more. The new Z'd are one level up from that, just as 300ZX was in its time.
GT86 isn't meant to be and upgrade for you. It's meant for a person who doesn't need 300is hp V6 to have fun.

Lastly - the sales. There are 2 GT86 parked within 100meters from my house. And I don't live in a posh place. Far from it.

Funny enough you are still missing the point. I don't really understand this whole "lets beat up GT86" thing.
It is a cheap 200bhp RWD coupe. There aren't too many cars like it on the market and not for similar money, not in this day and age when everyone wants a SUV or a hot hatch. Sure you can splash for a german RWD/AWD but look at the prices. 23k will get you what, 2/3 or 3/4 or the car?

Edited by Bladedancer on Friday 3rd July 19:05

[RobST170]

GT86 or fiesta ST. You can't say the ST isn't a drivers car(I know it's front wheel drive). Bang for buck?

[nickfrog]

If you make it 50% more powerful you need bigger brakes, bigger wheels, bigger tyres, bigger clutch, bigger diff, bigger suspension kinematics, etc etc etc - you end up with a 1,450kg Coupe.

[GravelBen]

IAJO said:

Have a gander at what was in the AE86.

A revvy, naturally aspirated engine that made reasonable power for its size but not as much mid range torque as a turbocharged equivalent?

[dashvx]

I am into my third year of BRZ ownership and still think its the best car I've owned (for context, it was one car to replace a VX220NA and Mk 2 Octavia VRS)

As others have said, the suspension setup is close to perfect for bumpy British road conditions, and the chassis is so good such that you can appreciate it at all speeds. The engine in mine is unmodified but despite that I do find myself making good progress and not holding people up. I have to work the gearbox to do that, but that is not a chore. I would not want a turbo engine, as the immediate throttle response is a big part of the appeal of the car, and anyway I don't think it needs lots more power, as that would mean more weight. Some of the Stage 1 remaps giving perhaps 10% more BHP and a bit more torque look interesting, I don't think it needs more.

Both the BRZ ts and the GT86 Aero have slightly better and wider tyres, which is said to give more progressive handling and is something I would like to try - another relatively minor modification to improve what is already a well judged package.

[AH33]

All well and good until you can't overtake mondeo man on his way to the box factory.

So many special editions, and all with mild hatch performance. Now this one gets an sti badge? Stick a turbo on it and sell it from dealers.

[Conscript]

AH33 said:

All well and good until you can't overtake mondeo man on his way to the box factory.

So many special editions, and all with mild hatch performance. Now this one gets an sti badge? Stick a turbo on it and sell it from dealers.

Only if you forget how to use a gearbox. Or just can't be bothered to. In which case, the BRZ isn't the car for you anyway. You have to work the car to extract the power yes, but I thought that was one of the main attractions of driving?

I really am quite surprised at the vitriol directed at the BRZ/GT86 on these forums. I thought here, of all places, these cars would gain the most praise and be appreciated for what they are. Some people are happy to say they would like more ooomph from the engine which is fine, but quite often the car is completely written off as rubbish because of that, which strikes me as a bit short sighted.

Also, a bit arrogant...as though any car which doesn't offer the levels of torque you deem sufficient for out performing rep mobiles on the motorway or comparing 0-60 times down the pub is not worthy. (General comment, not directed at you specifically AH33)

Edited by Conscript on Saturday 4th July 09:41

[ManOpener]

nickfrog said:

If you make it 50% more powerful you need bigger brakes, bigger wheels, bigger tyres, bigger clutch, bigger diff, bigger suspension kinematics, etc etc etc - you end up with a 1,450kg Coupe.

In all fairness, decent "bigger" wheels will be much lighter than the cast alloys they come from the factory with, tyres included; uprated suspension is usually lighter than the stuff it replaces and the total mass increase of everything else comes to, what, maybe 10kg?

Not that they actually need most of the mentioned upgrades to handle the ~80hp most of the off-the-shelf turbo or supercharger kits produce- the brakes are perfectly adequate as long as you aren't tracking it, the suspension is excellent for road use as standard, the diffs will take plenty more power and some people are still running standard clutches over 300bhp.

Edited by ManOpener on Saturday 4th July 11:22

[s m]

ManOpener said:

nickfrog said:

If you make it 50% more powerful you need bigger brakes, bigger wheels, bigger tyres, bigger clutch, bigger diff, bigger suspension kinematics, etc etc etc - you end up with a 1,450kg Coupe.

In all fairness, decent "bigger" wheels will be much lighter than the cast alloys they come from the factory with, tyres included; uprated suspension is usually lighter than the stuff it replaces and the total mass increase of everything else comes to, what, maybe 10kg?

Not that they actually need most of the mentioned upgrades to handle the ~80hp most of the off-the-shelf turbo or supercharger kits produce- the brakes are perfectly adequate as long as you aren't tracking it, the suspension is excellent for road use as standard, the diffs will take plenty more power and some people are still running standard clutches over 300bhp.

Edited by ManOpener on Saturday 4th July 11:22

I can't really see that they need physically bigger wheels than the 17s they're on already? The tyres are 215s as well. There are heavier cars with similar power that only use a 205

[ManOpener]

Are 215s suboptimal for ~300bhp? I don't know, but most people who seem to be supercharging/turbocharging do appear to be going wider at the rear.