BRZ gets a thrashing
Discussion
heebeegeetee said:
I wonder how much money and how many sales the decision to give an auto (a car that just will not sell in the uk) to one of the leading magazines in one of the world's biggest sports car markets is going to cost?
Top Gear gave the car 9/10.I think there is some overlap between EVO's readers and PH. Most of PHers who want a BRZ are saying it will be a "good used buy" so on the whole the opinions of some jaded 'helmsman' who 'could have been a professional racing driver' means nothing to a manufacturer trying to sell new cars.
Edit to add circulation figures from the first half of last year:
Top Gear 190,535 - Add to that a Top Gear feature (that PH will hate, of course) where Clarkson powerslides around and tells about 4 million people that the car is brilliant.
EVO 61,417
Car 54,006
The opinion of Evo (and Car) is not as important as they think it is.
Edited by EDLT on Sunday 6th May 19:01
I'd wager an awful lot of the TTs and the like are now sold with automatic transmissions. Market expectations have changed from a few years ago, where slow, 4 speed autos were so awful.
I could accept a coherent argument that the BRZ/86 would suffer if an auto wasn't offered, in line with the competition. The younger market would certainly expect it to be offered.
That it isn't a robotised manual isn't that important- it doesn't do Mercedes too much harm, maintaining a 'slushbox' approach to the market.
So I don't really buy that Subaru and Toyota have made an error in producing and promoting an automatic version.
Where I would find fault, is in the publication in question, making a poor editorial decision to run the test as they did. If it'd been a road test against, say, a DSG TT, I'd have thought that made sense. As it stands, it was a daft decision.
I could accept a coherent argument that the BRZ/86 would suffer if an auto wasn't offered, in line with the competition. The younger market would certainly expect it to be offered.
That it isn't a robotised manual isn't that important- it doesn't do Mercedes too much harm, maintaining a 'slushbox' approach to the market.
So I don't really buy that Subaru and Toyota have made an error in producing and promoting an automatic version.
Where I would find fault, is in the publication in question, making a poor editorial decision to run the test as they did. If it'd been a road test against, say, a DSG TT, I'd have thought that made sense. As it stands, it was a daft decision.
10 Pence Short said:
Subaru have chosen to make an automatic version of the car. They have made versions of it available to the press, and are obviously keen to promote it. That is not a mistake.
If anyone made a mistake, it is Evo, in using that version of the car for a track comparison against a totally different, manual car. The person who decided to run with the auto version and create some bad journalism is the one who should be 'shot in front of his family'.
As much as I love EVO there is a bit of a commercial aspect to this. They were given the opportunity to get hold of a BRZ for a few days. This gave EVO the chance to boast to have the first one on UK roads for a full test. However, the compromise was that they did not have a choice on the spec. To be bold and say no we don't want it because it is an auto would be ludicrous since they will then be outdone by another competitor mag who would take the car instead.If anyone made a mistake, it is Evo, in using that version of the car for a track comparison against a totally different, manual car. The person who decided to run with the auto version and create some bad journalism is the one who should be 'shot in front of his family'.
As for why an auto was offered: although the focused driver market in the UK is a major one, there are other markets so hence the auto. But still, I would have thought they would offer a manual model knowing that the likes of EVO and CAR would be testing it. Where as in the U.S. this would definitely sell better as an auto.
I wonder how much the auto and softer suspension set up of this BRZ played a part in the disappointing report from EVO. Perhaps if they had a manual Toyota one with the sharper suspension set up then the story would be different.
Hitch78 said:
s m said:
Hitch78 said:
Auto BRZ? Why is this not mentioned at all in the video or write up?
When Henry picked the car up "At this point the auto box is a bit of a boon.It wouldn't have been our first choice but our hands were tied...."When Jethro wrote the main article, "I have to admit that my heart sinks when I discover our BRZ is fitted with the optional six-speed auto box..."
But you're right, there's only the noise of the slurred changes and when JB parks the lever at the end to give clues to the autobox on the BRZ
elementad said:
Or this driftable coupe for almost same price as BRZ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1XX8oDxMcw&fea...
Tripoli gymkana? I certainly approve of what the Libyans are getting up to post-Gaddafi. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1XX8oDxMcw&fea...
10 Pence Short said:
I'd wager an awful lot of the TTs and the like are now sold with automatic transmissions. Market expectations have changed from a few years ago, where slow, 4 speed autos were so awful.
I could accept a coherent argument that the BRZ/86 would suffer if an auto wasn't offered, in line with the competition. The younger market would certainly expect it to be offered.
That it isn't a robotised manual isn't that important- it doesn't do Mercedes too much harm, maintaining a 'slushbox' approach to the market.
So I don't really buy that Subaru and Toyota have made an error in producing and promoting an automatic version.
Where I would find fault, is in the publication in question, making a poor editorial decision to run the test as they did. If it'd been a road test against, say, a DSG TT, I'd have thought that made sense. As it stands, it was a daft decision.
The magazine's hands would have been tied, with the other cars in place and publication schedules waiting, but I would have preferred it if they refused point blank to test it and explained why in the mag.I could accept a coherent argument that the BRZ/86 would suffer if an auto wasn't offered, in line with the competition. The younger market would certainly expect it to be offered.
That it isn't a robotised manual isn't that important- it doesn't do Mercedes too much harm, maintaining a 'slushbox' approach to the market.
So I don't really buy that Subaru and Toyota have made an error in producing and promoting an automatic version.
Where I would find fault, is in the publication in question, making a poor editorial decision to run the test as they did. If it'd been a road test against, say, a DSG TT, I'd have thought that made sense. As it stands, it was a daft decision.
I'm not aware of Merc selling too many cars, slush box or otherwise, to the younger, driver-orientated market in the UK.
VAG's dsg box is massively better than a slush box - I've got a VAG with one of each, fwiw - but then the TT was never particularly driver focussed imo, in that they were never rwd and also could never take on the better Renaults or Fords in the fwd market.
With regard to the mag's, those are some interesting figures that someone posted. Serious question though, of Car and EVO readers combined and TG, which is read most by the people who actually spend real money on cars? To me TG is such an adolescent mess that I can't imagine it's aimed at adults or adults with buying power, though I expect to be proved totally wrong on this
.It's such a shame, that EVO test. Here is a driver-focussed rwd car that for once is not over-endowed with massive over-tyred grip, and it's neutered by a slush box. Madness. Subaru's product deserved to come out worst.
heebeegeetee said:
With regard to the mag's, those are some interesting figures that someone posted. Serious question though, of Car and EVO readers combined and TG, which is read most by the people who actually spend real money on cars? To me TG is such an adolescent mess that I can't imagine it's aimed at adults or adults with buying power, though I expect to be proved totally wrong on this .
It's such a shame, that EVO test. Here is a driver-focussed rwd car that for once is not over-endowed with massive over-tyred grip, and it's neutered by a slush box. Madness. Subaru's product deserved to come out worst.
I'd be surprised if there was a massive difference, there might be a few Top Gear readers who are too young to drive but Evo and Car have cornered the fantasist market and they can't afford to buy new cars either - they'd probably spend all their money on a watch anyway..It's such a shame, that EVO test. Here is a driver-focussed rwd car that for once is not over-endowed with massive over-tyred grip, and it's neutered by a slush box. Madness. Subaru's product deserved to come out worst.
wackojacko said:
BRZ is meant to be aimed towards the drivers market ....
....why then are most of the press videos shot with this bloody flappy paddle box
Because I suspect that the majority of customers are buying the auto over the manual. ....why then are most of the press videos shot with this bloody flappy paddle box
Anyone got any figures from Japland or even pre-orders from over here to prove or refute this at all?
Motortrends track review of the BRZ (Manual)
Note the amount of times he says "balance".
Evo review seems to be a duffer most likely due to the pants gearbox. I'm sure Evo will redeem themselves with a review of the manual version in the near future.
Note the amount of times he says "balance".
Evo review seems to be a duffer most likely due to the pants gearbox. I'm sure Evo will redeem themselves with a review of the manual version in the near future.
drophead said:
Motortrends track review of the BRZ (Manual)
Note the amount of times he says "balance".
Evo review seems to be a duffer most likely due to the pants gearbox. I'm sure Evo will redeem themselves with a review of the manual version in the near future.
Subaru Beeyahzee, eh? Note the amount of times he says "balance".
Evo review seems to be a duffer most likely due to the pants gearbox. I'm sure Evo will redeem themselves with a review of the manual version in the near future.
I'm sure you're right about EVO, but in the mean time it can only cost sales. It's looking like Subaru have sent a manual car to the land of the auto and vice-versa.
These are decisions that the best of British Leyland management would have been proud of.
Isn't Evo the only mag to get a car for an extended drive on the roads though, and that's where they say it falls down. Their preview drive before on track rated it very highly, all other mags have had it on track and scored it top marks, but it's the road drive test it fails. Not that hard to believe really, since there's all kind of other cars that are simply astonishing on track but a chore on the roads.
10 Pence Short said:
I'd wager an awful lot of the TTs and the like are now sold with automatic transmissions. Market expectations have changed from a few years ago, where slow, 4 speed autos were so awful.
I agree with this - it does show that the BRZ and the Megane are in different markets. I would be amazed to see an auto hot Megane but an auto BRZ doesn't surprise me in the least. Ekona said:
Isn't Evo the only mag to get a car for an extended drive on the roads though, and that's where they say it falls down.
CAR also had one and tested it in France against the Megane, 370Z and Cayman. They found;"it takes Ben Barry and I a good few runs before we get under its skin and start to love it; Subaru really needs to offer extended test drives because a quick 15 minutes round the block will put off potential customers"
"If you've been weaned on front wheel drive then the low grip levels and feeling of the BRZ's rear end moving around will at first feel weird, disconcerting and (whisper it) even a bit scary. But we're not talking about sideways antics, just accessible limits that are more easily and safely exploited."
and concluded;
"For some, perhaps many, the BRZ will be a compromise too far, and there is no doubt that at times it will frustrate. But you will have fun, you will love it, and hopefully enough people will 'get it', otherwise it might flop and it could be another generation before this idea is tested again. If you don't always want more, if you don't supersize, and if you are up for it, the BRZ is utterly awesome."
"
The whole 'low grip' thing is an interesting one, its funny how perspectives change - even just in terms of tyre size the 215/45R17 which seem to be considered narrow now are the same size as my 280bhp Legacy had from the factory, and were probably thought to be fairly wide at the time. (and its not like its lacking in grip either despite being 300kg heavier than a BRZ)
Not to mention the media babble quoted above which seems to be suggesting Fwd cars naturally have more grip?
Not to mention the media babble quoted above which seems to be suggesting Fwd cars naturally have more grip?
Edited by GravelBen on Monday 7th May 12:05
otolith said:
CAR also had one and tested it in France against the Megane, 370Z and Cayman. They found;
"it takes Ben Barry and I a good few runs before we get under its skin and start to love it; Subaru really needs to offer extended test drives because a quick 15 minutes round the block will put off potential customers"
"If you've been weaned on front wheel drive then the low grip levels and feeling of the BRZ's rear end moving around will at first feel weird, disconcerting and (whisper it) even a bit scary. But we're not talking about sideways antics, just accessible limits that are more easily and safely exploited."
and concluded;
"For some, perhaps many, the BRZ will be a compromise too far, and there is no doubt that at times it will frustrate. But you will have fun, you will love it, and hopefully enough people will 'get it', otherwise it might flop and it could be another generation before this idea is tested again. If you don't always want more, if you don't supersize, and if you are up for it, the BRZ is utterly awesome."
"
Was that a pukka road test, and was the BRZ a manual?"it takes Ben Barry and I a good few runs before we get under its skin and start to love it; Subaru really needs to offer extended test drives because a quick 15 minutes round the block will put off potential customers"
"If you've been weaned on front wheel drive then the low grip levels and feeling of the BRZ's rear end moving around will at first feel weird, disconcerting and (whisper it) even a bit scary. But we're not talking about sideways antics, just accessible limits that are more easily and safely exploited."
and concluded;
"For some, perhaps many, the BRZ will be a compromise too far, and there is no doubt that at times it will frustrate. But you will have fun, you will love it, and hopefully enough people will 'get it', otherwise it might flop and it could be another generation before this idea is tested again. If you don't always want more, if you don't supersize, and if you are up for it, the BRZ is utterly awesome."
"
GravelBen said:
The whole 'low grip' thing is an interesting one, its funny how perspectives change - even just in terms of tyre size the 215/45R17 which seem to be considered narrow now are the same size as my 280bhp Legacy had from the factory, and were probably thought to be fairly wide at the time
With you on that one Ben205s were standard fitment on the E30 M3, Sierra Cosworth, Merc 190 2.3/2.5-16s - all fat tyred Cafe racers.
Trouble is with todays suspension/tyre technology, 215s are just too wide for lots of adjustability and they've had to bow to DRG/showroom appeal and fashion
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff