What engine would make you consider buying a new GT86.

[kambites]

Someone asked if we could have a poll to determine people's attitudes to the power level of the GT86, so here it is. I've put together a list of what I consider the feasible future engine configurations for the GT86/BRZ.

Since it's a very recent car, select only the options that you could ever see yourself buying new. For simplicity's sake, assume that the engine changes have negligible effect on the weight balance of the car and that the price is the current 25k for the lowest powered one, varying up to 30k for the 300bhp versions.

[Krikkit]

I reckon 28k for a 250hp version (supercharged would be fine) would tempt me in... That said the 200hp version looks good.

[thinfourth2]

A MILLION horsepower as anything less would be dangerously slow

[DanDC5]

N/A or S/C. Power not overly important to be honest.

[Marf]

thinfourth2 said:

A MILLION horsepower as anything less would be dangerously slow

I agree. Also it should make petrol as I drive it and cost tuppence to buy.

[ali4390]

I voted for 250BHP N/A, although I haven't driven the GT86 and so am only basing opinions on power (or lack thereof) on what I've read/heard.

[CJP80]

I voted 2 and 6, which seem to be running away with it.

[Vitorio]

I wouldnt consider one, certainly not new.

Even if i were to be able to look past the fact that i dont have the money, nor the real want for a car with that profile (i'd probably prefer an MX5 with an aftermarket SC kit), i'd take the subaru over the toyota every single time.

In which case, an STi please.

[kambites]

Interesting. It seems we have some people who'd consider a 250bhp turbo but not a 300bhp turbo.

[Dave Hedgehog]

i like force induction engines, charged or blown, not a problem for me

[Marf]

Having driven it I like the car as it is, but if a 250/300hp S/C version was available and I was a) in the market for a new car and b) could afford it, that's where my money would go

[kambites]

Hmm, not even remotely the results I'd have expected so far.

[bicycleshorts]

NA or SC for me, I imagine a Turbo would ruin any kind of mid corner throttle balance.

That said, where would they get a 250bhp NA engine? The EJ25 and FB25 (thanks wikipedia!) both have less than 200bhp.

[cvega]

hmm, i chose 250 with SC, for linear power delivery..

[StottyZr]

I'd like two options, a 200hp N/A or a 300hp S/C

[kambites]

bicycleshorts said:

NA or SC for me, I imagine a Turbo would ruin any kind of mid corner balance.

That said, where would they get a 250bhp NA engine? The EJ25 and FB25 (thanks wikipedia!) both have less than 200bhp.

Dunno where they'd get any of the engines; I guess they'd have to be designed for the application. Subaru do have a 2.5 boxer four; I'd imagine that could be tuned up to 100bhp/litre in N/A form with a bit of effort.

[bicycleshorts]

kambites said:

Dunno where they'd get any of the engines; I guess they'd have to be designed for the application. Subaru do have a 2.5 boxer four; I'd imagine that could be tuned up to 100bhp/litre in N/A form with a bit of effort.

Yep, that's the 2 engines I posted. Don't know if they're heavier than the 2.0 boxer either.

[kambites]

bicycleshorts said:

kambites said:

Dunno where they'd get any of the engines; I guess they'd have to be designed for the application. Subaru do have a 2.5 boxer four; I'd imagine that could be tuned up to 100bhp/litre in N/A form with a bit of effort.

Yep, that's the 2 engines I posted. Don't know if they're heavier than the 2.0 boxer either.

Ah OK.

To be fair, they didn't have a 200bhp 2.0 until this was released, so I see no reason to believe it's impossible. The weight question is a good one, I don't know the relative block dimensions.

[gofasterrosssco]

I don't really see the point in a 250bhp NA. Probably no more torque (which is really what people are bemoaning when they say its not quick enough) and less chance to fully wring it out (would need a 8-9k rpm redline, ala S2000!).

A 250bhp (200lb/ft) SC would be the next choice however.

[kambites]

gofasterrosssco said:

I don't really see the point in a 250bhp NA. Probably no more torque (which is really what people are bemoaning when they say its not quick enough) and less chance to fully wring it out (would need a 8-9k rpm redline, ala S2000!).

A 250bhp (200lb/ft) SC would be the next choice however.

And yet it's winning the poll at the moment.

I had expected the supercharged engines to be running away with this but it seems I was very wrong. The fact that the current engine is actually ahead of all the forced induction engines is quite a surprise to me. Maybe Toyota did their market research better than we give them credit for.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 16th August 10:36