BRZ video

[katalyst]

Which is why the Genesis 2.0T R-Spec is a much better choice for the same price ($24,500). It's a no brainer.

 

it's why hyundai makes them. so consumers can have choice.

[BAC5.2]

BAC, you don't have to be on a track to appreciate this car. I understand and enjoy the benefits that a powerful car can give you on public roads, but quite frankly, I have more fun on twisty roads than I do putting my foot down at the light. There are speed limits that unfortunately have to be followed, but luckily for me there are no speed limits denoting how quickly I can turn into my home street. You make an argument that the car might be fun at the track but that the track is only a portion of the time spent driving. I argue that the car can be just as fun off the track as a powerful car, especially since its only ON the track that you can take your 600 hp car up to 180.

 

1) Sorry, I don't get my rocks off by trying to speed into my neighborhood.

 

2) Are you saying that the BRZ with 300hp would be slower turning into the neighborhood? Or just that you'd have to use the brakes before turning to actually slow down to the same speed? Not sure of your argument.

 

I'm not talking about 600hp supercars here.

 

Why would the BRZ with 300hp be a bad thing? That's all I'm saying.

 

With 200hp, I'm not even remotely interested. With 300hp (and no DI), I'd give it a hefty consideration over all others (including my turbocharged used Elise).

[Stang70Fastback]

I was simply trying to say that, from what I understand of your argument, you are saying that a good handling car would be fun at the track, but for a daily-driver car, you would rather something with more power.

 

All I was trying to say was that you don't need to be at a track to enjoy a good handling car. I don't disagree with you that more power would be better. There is no such thing as too much power! What I was trying to say was that this car would not be fun "only at the track."

 

And no, I don't "get my rocks off speeding into my neighborhood." In fact, you took away the opposite of what I was trying to get across. I was trying to point out that while a big powerful car allows you to accelerate quickly, and reach blistering speeds, on public roads you are required to exercise restraint, and thus a car such as that is not much fun because most of the time you are driving it WAY under its limit. This car, on the other hand, is a lot more fun at low speeds because of how it drives, which means everyday driving - with entrance ramps, twisty back roads, and turns, are a lot more fun. I'm not saying you have to drive the car sideways around every turn at 60 MPH, just that sometimes it's fun to zoom around the 270-degree entrance ramp, or take a right turn at 30 MPH instead of 15 (which is completely legal and perfectly safe to do with nobody else around.)

 

I'm just saying that in my opinion, it is much more suited to everyday driving than something with a boatload of power, and that I'm willing to give it a chance based on that alone. In other words, it's more fun to drive a slow car fast, than a fast car slow.

 

I respect your opinion that the car needs more power, but I don't think it can be dismissed on that idea alone. In other words, whereas you seem to be saying "this car is BAD because it lacks power," I am trying to say, "the lack of power does not make this car BAD." I am NOT saying, "this car is perfect and more power would RUIN it."

 

I hope that makes more sense.

[Guest]

I don't think there is something like too much power, but there are things like:

 

- too much turbo lag

- too much weight (power usually means more weight)

- too little throttle control

 

I see how I like it, but I am considering buying it when it comes out, abuse it to the limit (track, autox) until I get to the point where I can say there is nothing more I can get out of it, and then move into something more powerful.

 

If I get Elise, I'll be too worried about trashing the clam shells. But FR-S looks like a perfect candidate for an expendable track car.

 

Anyway, I agree that they should release a ~275 hp turbo or perhaps even better supercharged version.

[ehsnils]

not anymore they dont, at least not in the USA:(

 

I have a turbo in my wagon.

[BAC5.2]

I was simply trying to say that, from what I understand of your argument, you are saying that a good handling car would be fun at the track, but for a daily-driver car, you would rather something with more power.

 

All I was trying to say was that you don't need to be at a track to enjoy a good handling car. I don't disagree with you that more power would be better. There is no such thing as too much power! What I was trying to say was that this car would not be fun "only at the track."

 

And no, I don't "get my rocks off speeding into my neighborhood." In fact, you took away the opposite of what I was trying to get across. I was trying to point out that while a big powerful car allows you to accelerate quickly, and reach blistering speeds, on public roads you are required to exercise restraint, and thus a car such as that is not much fun because most of the time you are driving it WAY under its limit. This car, on the other hand, is a lot more fun at low speeds because of how it drives, which means everyday driving - with entrance ramps, twisty back roads, and turns, are a lot more fun. I'm not saying you have to drive the car sideways around every turn at 60 MPH, just that sometimes it's fun to zoom around the 270-degree entrance ramp, or take a right turn at 30 MPH instead of 15 (which is completely legal and perfectly safe to do with nobody else around.)

 

I'm just saying that in my opinion, it is much more suited to everyday driving than something with a boatload of power, and that I'm willing to give it a chance based on that alone. In other words, it's more fun to drive a slow car fast, than a fast car slow.

 

I respect your opinion that the car needs more power, but I don't think it can be dismissed on that idea alone. In other words, whereas you seem to be saying "this car is BAD because it lacks power," I am trying to say, "the lack of power does not make this car BAD." I am NOT saying, "this car is perfect and more power would RUIN it."

 

I hope that makes more sense.

 

I never said you can only enjoy a good handling car on the track, I'm just saying that you can enjoy a faster good handling car daily and on the track. It's not about driving a slow car fast, and a fast car slow. It's about being able to drive a fast car, fast.

 

My point has never been that this car is BAD because it lacks power. I never said it's bad at all. It's just going to be slow. My definition of slow, and others definition of slow might be different, but that doesn't change my opinion of the car. It'll be slow by my standards, and that's enough reason for me to not be interested.

 

I've got no problem dismissing the BRZ on the sole fact that it's underpowered. It doesn't meet my wants in a car, so I'm not going to consider it. Everything else could be PERFECT, but if it's slow then I'm not going to buy it. End of story.

 

Uncle - If it's a track-only car, just learn to patch fiberglass. There's nothing quite like driving a turbocharged Elise.

[boymk123]

128i

230HP, RWD

200 lb-ft of torque at 2750 rpms

3208 lbs

 

 

S2000

237 bhp (177 kW; 240 PS) @ 7,800 rpm

162 lb·ft (220 N·m) @ 6,800 rpm

2864 lbs

 

they feels slow on the paper, right? Now think about the BRZ... I love to see underpower s2k eats evos and stis all day long at the autox. This argument will keep going on and on. Honestly, by looking at the number, we can't justify anything. One of us need to purchase the BRZ and let everybody test drive

[BAC5.2]

The 128i feels slow IRL. Not fast.

 

S2000's aren't fast either.

 

It might be enough for auto-x, but I'm not buying a car just to auto-x.

 

Why do people have a problem with this?

[boymk123]

I don't have problem with you

I understand your definition, but some of us keep bashing this car is SLOW! NO, it's not SLOW by all definition!!!!

lol you'r up early

[BAC5.2]

Sorry boss, but it's slow. Just accept it. It's not bashing, it's just fact.

 

The only way it isn't slow, is if you define slow as a horse-and-buggy.

[fishbone]

We ain't seen no tests yet boss, so hold yer proverbial horses. Give it a chance before you write it off.

 

LE: yep, looks like I haven't been keeping up

https://www.google.com/search?q=brz+drive&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=&safe=active

Do mags hate it? I need to form my opinion based on that.

[BAC5.2]

0-62 in 6.8s. Pass.

[fishbone]

I take it you live your life one quarter mile at a time.

If I told you a car that pulls similar figures in straight line acceleration was in the top 10 of the best handling cars available to the US market and given the proper tires, in stock form, would run and own exotic cars in the turns, would that raise your eyebrow?

I'm not saying that's the case with the BRZ, talking about something else here, but the guys at Top Gear seem to like it and that's all that matters to me

[BAC5.2]

No. I just don't live my life on a track. If I were in the market for a sports car, I'd buy one that does, or could easily, beat a Toyota Tundra to an on-ramp. I wouldn't buy one that has very little ability to produce more power (a strung out, 2L N/A DI engine is pretty much at it's limits).

 

I can't imagine a scenario in which I'd buy one of these. For track-only, I'd probably get an E30. For a great handling daily sports car, I'd buy a used Elise. For a daily "going to need something a bit more practical", I'd get a Genesis 2.0T.

 

If the BRZ had 300hp and no direct injection, then it would be my top contender. That's all I'm saying.

[chutrain]

How many Elise owners actually drive their cars around and not just to the track and

back? I barely see any on the road for that matter. Elise is only good for track duty.

A forced induction Elise will drive you crazy and not to mention it'll beat you up on

anything other than a flat surface. In my opinion you should switch the E30 as the

daily "sporty" car and Elise as the track only.

 

Reading one of the reviews on the car, it looks like Subaru is leaving a lot on the table.

Most of which they will allow for aftermarket. A NA four that will chirp third, a fully

defeatable traction/stability control, a better shifting and feeling 6 speed than what's in

the WRX or Sti, and better turn in and more level handling than the WRX. I think they

are catering to the enthusiast here. There were some small faults, more about noise,

but pretty negligible for a first gen.

 

Subaru is very good with taking customer feedback. If enough people demand a turbo

model when the NA BRZ finally hits our shores, then I think there is a good possibility.

[BAC5.2]

What's left on the table in a 100hp/L Direct Injected N/A 2.0L 4-cylinder?

 

I know LOTS of people who daily Elises. Snow tires and everything for the winter, and many of those are FI. An FI Elise is a beautiful thing, nothing crazy-inducing at all. I don't know what would make you say that. They ride fine on "normal" roads, but they are definitely harsh on the really bumpy stuff.

 

I'd feel bad stuffing an Elise on the track. An E30, just tow it to a yard and buy another one if the crash is bad enough, or fix it otherwise. The E30 is the perfect disposable track car.

 

And for the love of everything, why won't you stop hitting enter at the end of the text-entry box? Auto word-wrapping. Use it.

[08 WGT]

I have been reading all of these statements, about this car, it may be alright, no one knows, until actual tests here are done. The manufactures can claim many things but until real world tests are done, who knows ?? Some have been comparing different cars, with like, less, or more power, but one car hasn't been mentioned. The Volkswagen GTI, which is known for being a very good track car, and everyday driver. What makes it a good car is the light weight, and the turbo engine with HP and Torque being evenly dispersed, along with the DSG Transmission. Personally have owned one, I think a power train set up similar what is found in the GTI, would be a perfect match for the BRZ, a 207 HP turbo engine with 200 ft. lb. of torque would fit this car nicely, and help keep weight down. JUST MY OPINION !!!!!!

[boymk123]

if HP and 0-60 are your only concern then I'll done with this thread. I'd go get a mustang V6 shitbox for 19k out the door and call it a day. lol

[BAC5.2]

I never said they were my only concern, I said that the lack of power is my only problem with the BRZ.

 

I care about handling as much as the next guy, but I also care about not getting the doors blown off of my "sports car" by a Tundra.

 

You make it sound like all I care about is power, and that I don't care anything about handling. That's not the case at all.

[08 WGT]

For me it's not about massive horsepower, and torque, it's about a well rounded package. They say the BRZ is a very good handling car, but several people that have driven it, have said it needs a little bit more power, not me saying that, but people who have test driven it, so that is why I stated a drive train with similar power and torque numbers found in the GTI, might be the the perfect set up for this car, retaining light weight, and adding enough power and torque to satisfy most ( NOT EVERYONE !!!). The GTI weighs around 2900-3000 lbs., which is heavier than the BRZ by about 250-350 pounds, and the drive train in the GTI has plenty of power to make it a very enjoyable ride. With the lower weight of the BRZ, it would but this car in VERY enjoyable segment, plus still delivering good gas mileage, GTI 25-26 in town, 34-35 on the highway, is what I got from my GTI, along with the good handling.

[fishbone]

No. I just don't live my life on a track.

You're being realistic and that's a fair point, on the street it's pretty much about straight lines. That guy in an old rusted-out pick-up truck that just beat you off the line in your shiny new toy ain't gonna care you own him in turns and that's little comfort when you just lost.

I have absolutely no emotional involvement in this thread (in case I lead to believe the contrary), I think it's a good looking coupe that I am looking forward to see in person. There's pros and cons just like with every other car. If you ask me, I would have MUCH rather had Subaru bring us the Boxer diesel than this thing.

[Stang70Fastback]

I care about handling as much as the next guy, but I also care about not getting the doors blown off of my "sports car" by a Tundra

 

Considering how many SUVs there are these days that can blow the doors off a "real" sports car, I don't think that's a good benchmark. These days if you spend enough money on the optional bigger engine, there are a lot of not sporty cars that can race with a Mustang in astraight line.

[scoobyscoodle]

I'm with BAC on this one. Unless you're on the autoX course, you're gonna crave more power at every straightaway longer than 50 yards. The precise handling will be fun but the lack of power, even on a semi open road course will get to you after the handling fun factor wears off after 2 months.

 

I really do like this car and the direction they're taking it, but until it's got some sort of FI that can make it to around 250+whp I'll have to pass...

[BAC5.2]

Considering how many SUVs there are these days that can blow the doors off a "real" sports car, I don't think that's a good benchmark. These days if you spend enough money on the optional bigger engine, there are a lot of not sporty cars that can race with a Mustang in astraight line.

 

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

I do find it humorous that Toyota builds a truck that's faster 0-60 (and likely 1/4 mile) than their coolest sports car. The Tundra isn't just a "little" faster either. It sprints to 60 in 6 flat. That's almost a second faster!

[Guest]

Dang, everybody is a street racer here.