RE: Megane 265 Cup and Subaru BRZ: Fast vs Fun

[Technomatt]

ELUSIVEJIM said:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2013...

Just like the Mazda RX8 these cars will drop as fast as the back end will break. Great second hand buy but I would put my money elsewhere. This goes for the Renault as well.

I understand UK new sales for the BRZ/GT86 are lacklustre and much of that is due to the UK pricing strategy. If new buyers are staying away then buyers for the used stuff are unlikely to want to pay a high price.

At least the Megane 265 has been around a while in both 265/250 guises, so their poor residuals are well established. That makes them a cracking used buy. Renault overall UK sales have tanked with a 22% reduction in sales compared to 2012 so they are also now trending less popular.

[MC Bodge]

Technomatt said:

I understand UK new sales for the BRZ/GT86 are lacklustre

I have seen a few about recently. How many would be lacklustre?

[roystinho]

V8RX7 said:

roystinho said:

^^^ have you sat in one? I've been in the back of a GT86 taking photos for an article while on the move. The driver wasn't that tall (under 6') and you'd need to be very small and/or have no legs.

Still a nice steer, and maybe the odd passenger in the back, but if they were to be regularly used I'd seriously think about it

Ha - have you sat in the back of an RX7 ?

Little kids (up to around 8) fit fine (mine are 3 and 5)

Particularly with one in the front and one in the back.

I've not been in an RX7, but not sure my 3yr old would like it in the back of the GT86, couldn't see out I don't think (was ages ago when I was in one of the first press cars)

[V8RX7]

roystinho said:

I've not been in an RX7, but not sure my 3yr old would like it in the back of the GT86, couldn't see out I don't think (was ages ago when I was in one of the first press cars)

Mine love it (in the RX7) as their feet touch the floor.

But "I spy..." is severely limited

[Richyboy]

GT86 is a bargain, balancing a properly used one on a slippy english road is road car heaven I can just see it 5 years from now, this website, the mk1 gt86 was the best road car ever made.

[Technomatt]

MC Bodge said:

I have seen a few about recently. How many would be lacklustre?

A pal of mine works for Toyota and he said a while ago they could be selling many more. Price seems to put quite a few off and pre-reg, ex demo and nearly new are not finding buyers the rate they would like. He thinks prices will have to soften, discounts grow.

[MC Bodge]

Technomatt said:

A pal of mine works for Toyota and he said a while ago they could be selling many more. Price seems to put quite a few off and pre-reg, ex demo and nearly new are not finding buyers the rate they would like. He thinks prices will have to soften, discounts grow.

Fair do's.

I suspect that headline BHP figures, mpg, a Toyota badge, company car lists not including many petrol coupés in 2013 and there being relatively few driving enthusiasts in the UK possibly also have a bearing.

[KMB]

Welshwonder said:

Dblue said:

A gutless N/A engine is a frustrating thing. The main weakness of the BRZ I think.

Gutless? Seriously? Are you one of these people who have been suckered in by mega HP shopping trollies?

Not many years ago, 200bhp made for a very fast car. You know what's changed?

Nothing.

Not quite true, like-for-like cars are typically +20% heavier than 15-20 years ago when 200bhp was 'fast'.

[SystemParanoia]

So wht you're saying is 200hp is gutless and 220hp -240hp is omgwtfvtecyo! Fast?

[KMB]

SystemParanoia said:

So wht you're saying is 200hp is gutless and 220hp -240hp is omgwtfvtecyo! Fast?

I don't think anybody is saying that, what I am saying is bhp/ton is a more important performance statistic than bhp. Simple really.

For example 200bhp in an 1100kg car 20 years ago may feel 'fast', 200bhp in a more recent 1400kg car may not.

This is because one is 182bhp/ton, the other 143bhp/ton. If you can't feel this magnitude of difference then you may as well leave PH.

Edited by KMB on Wednesday 27th March 10:18

[Technomatt]

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

[MC Bodge]

KMB said:

SystemParanoia said:

So wht you're saying is 200hp is gutless and 220hp -240hp is omgwtfvtecyo! Fast?

I don't think anybody is saying that, what I am saying is bhp/ton is a more important performance statistic than bhp. Simple really.

For example 200bhp in an 1100kg car 20 years ago may feel 'fast', 200bhp in a more recent 1400kg car may not.

This is because one is 182bhp/ton, the other 143bhp/ton. If you can't feel this magnitude of difference then you may as well leave PH.

Edited by KMB on Wednesday 27th March 10:18

But....

Joe Public don't consider power:weight ratio.

They just see peak POWER -and briefly saw peak torque a few years back, when TDs didn't have headline-grabbing POWER.

Joe Public aren't really bothered about handling dynamics either. Most driving is on Dual carriageways and urban roads.

[KMB]

MC Bodge said:

KMB said:

SystemParanoia said:

So wht you're saying is 200hp is gutless and 220hp -240hp is omgwtfvtecyo! Fast?

I don't think anybody is saying that, what I am saying is bhp/ton is a more important performance statistic than bhp. Simple really.

For example 200bhp in an 1100kg car 20 years ago may feel 'fast', 200bhp in a more recent 1400kg car may not.

This is because one is 182bhp/ton, the other 143bhp/ton. If you can't feel this magnitude of difference then you may as well leave PH.

Edited by KMB on Wednesday 27th March 10:18

But....

Joe Public don't consider power:weight ratio.

They just see peak POWER -and briefly saw peak torque a few years back, when TDs didn't have headline-grabbing POWER.

Joe Public aren't really bothered about handling dynamics either. Most driving is on Dual carriageways and urban roads.

A sorry state of affairs and maybe intrinsic to the general dumbing down across society, we need to keep these enjoyable parts of driving alive, vive la PH!

[Dr Z]

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

TOP GEAR? There goes your credibility. It is an unwritten rule among PH that anybody who brings in TopGear in a serious discussion about cars/bikes has a can of Red Bull thrown at them. For shame!

[MC Bodge]

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

Why does that bother you?

[Captain Muppet]

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

This st again?

A selection of TG test track times:

01:31.3 Toyota GT86 (partly wet)
01:31.4 Audi TT Mk.II 2.0T
01:31.6 Honda NSX-R (wet)
01:31.8 BMW M3 E46
01:31.8 BMW 535d
01:31.8 Nissan 350Z
01:31.8 Mazda RX-8
01:31.9 BMW 130i (E87)
01:32.1 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG (wet)
01:32.2 Ford Focus RS Mk I
01:32.2 Mazda 6 MPS
01:32.5 Renaultsport Mégane 225 Cup
01:32.5 Lotus Esprit V8 (cold tyres)
01:32.7 Audi TT 3.2 quattro

What a dreadful slow car.

[s m]

Captain Muppet said:

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

This st again?

A selection of TG test track times:

01:31.3 Toyota GT86 (partly wet)
01:31.4 Audi TT Mk.II 2.0T
01:31.6 Honda NSX-R (wet)
01:31.8 BMW M3 E46
01:31.8 BMW 535d
01:31.8 Nissan 350Z
01:31.8 Mazda RX-8
01:31.9 BMW 130i (E87)
01:32.1 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG (wet)
01:32.2 Ford Focus RS Mk I
01:32.2 Mazda 6 MPS
01:32.5 Renaultsport Mégane 225 Cup
01:32.5 Lotus Esprit V8 (cold tyres)
01:32.7 Audi TT 3.2 quattro

What a dreadful slow car.

It's interesting that it beat the E46 M3 dry time by half a second with the track partly wet

[MC Bodge]

Captain Muppet said:

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

This st again?

A selection of TG test track times:

01:31.3 Toyota GT86 (partly wet)
01:31.4 Audi TT Mk.II 2.0T
01:31.6 Honda NSX-R (wet)
01:31.8 BMW M3 E46
01:31.8 BMW 535d
01:31.8 Nissan 350Z
01:31.8 Mazda RX-8
01:31.9 BMW 130i (E87)
01:32.1 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG (wet)
01:32.2 Ford Focus RS Mk I
01:32.2 Mazda 6 MPS
01:32.5 Renaultsport Mégane 225 Cup
01:32.5 Lotus Esprit V8 (cold tyres)
01:32.7 Audi TT 3.2 quattro

What a dreadful slow car.

Indeed.

...and despite the importance of Top Gear lap times(-add a generous pinch of salt here) to a lot of people, judging by the other thread about "Driving Hard" hardly anybody drives their car hard anyway.

Amusingly, the level of "hard driving" appears inversely proportional to the potency of the car.

It could be argued that car performance is a theoretical quantity used as currency in the masculinity-by-proxy (rather than based on personal performance) urinating contest.

[otolith]

MC Bodge said:

It could be argued that car performance is a theoretical thing used as currency in the masculinity war.

Or in others words, poor Top Gear lap time = shrinky winky.

[Technomatt]

MC Bodge said:

Technomatt said:

What did it for me was after the GT86 went around the Top Gear track and Clarkson pinned the time on the board, he nearly did his back in having to bend down so far.

Why does that bother you?

It bothers me in the same way as the GT86's 0-60 time of 7.6 sec does.