Toyota/Subaru/Scion Lightweight Sports Car: Toyota GT86, Subaru BRZ, Scion FRS!
#1502
Pole Position
It's supposed to be a compact, lightweight, economical, rwd and most importantly FUN sports coupe. I understand that you may think that it's heavy (I myself was hoping for 2500lbs), but seriously, a 2600-2700lb 2+2 with all modern safety features and standards just doesn't get much better than that. Not it this price bracket anyway. This car wasn't built by numbers, so give it a drive and then come back and complain, k? Pretty sure it will be unrivaled in the way they **intended** by anything costing up to 2x the price.
p.s. It'd have the same power-to-weigh ratio as your weight reduced and modified MR-2
p.s. It'd have the same power-to-weigh ratio as your weight reduced and modified MR-2
#1503
Again, stick to 2-seaters if practicality is of no value to you. But to people who need to deliver tofu while drifting their way down the mountain twisties, the FT-86 is just perfect.
Last edited by ydooby; 11-17-11 at 01:21 PM.
#1504
I would have not minded "only" 197hp, but the weight kills it even at 2600lbs. If we are averaging 2700lbs (waaayy too much for a supposed "lightweight" car) for regular FR-S, then 220hp would have been minimum IMHO. Sorry, but i come from a 2K lbs MR-S w/ 150hp (thats with power and weight reduction mods)....so i was looking for an "upgrade" to an FR-S. As I said before, maybe i was hoping for too much from the "new" Toyota...My only hope now is the added weight is the result of additional reinforcement for a supposedly more powerful model! /crosses fingers
I just wrote an article about why there is no way this car will or would have been under 2600lbs:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2286
#1505
This might pertain to you.
I just wrote an article about why there is no way this car will or would have been under 2600lbs:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2286
I just wrote an article about why there is no way this car will or would have been under 2600lbs:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2286
You state that "The EJ engines form this period were SOHC 1.8 or 2.2 motors with MUCH smaller heads (Phase I) and the engine was lighter than later 2.5 SOHC and DOHC motors."
What about the newer Subaru flat 4 that will go into FT-86? The FB engines, according to Wikipedia, have "lighter pistons and connecting rods", and the FA20 going into the FR-S/BRZ is essentially the FB20 with the addition of Toyota's D4S direct + port injection system.
Might the new engine help keep things lighter overall, or does the DOHC and direct + port injection drive the weight back up?
#1506
So your argument for the additional weight now was that practicality was part of the triumvirate of design goals?! My intended purchase was about performance first and some practicality in a coupe, so i know what it means to me and don't need you insinuating as such. The FR-S is going to be Toyco's ONLY affordable F/R coupe. One would of thought that with that in mind and the lessons learned from the lightweight MR-S, they could of morph the the 2 together for an unrivaled sports coupe. Sorry, but I'm an old school guy who has owned (2) Supra TT's and now an MR-S, so wanted more from Toyco.
we already know the weights of FT86 though, leaked brochure is real so info is real. So 1190Kg - 2618lb for the stripped out model, 1210Kg- 2662lbs for the low-spec, and 1230Kg - 2706lbs for the top model.
#1508
Pole Position
If you're talking straightline sure. On an auto-x or smaller road course, it would probably be a wash. Power isn't everything, yes i understand that. But it is much easier to make more power than to subtract weight. And weight contributes much more to overall performance then power in terms of handling, braking, acceleration, etc.
#1509
Pole Position
The FR-S will be an upgrade in terms of interior room and cargo space. At ~2600lbs it's going to be one of the lightest if not the lightest of all production 2+2 coupes that meet the safety standards today.
Again, stick to 2-seaters if practicality is of no value to you. But to people who need to deliver tofu while drifting their way down the mountain twisties, the FT-86 is just perfect.
Again, stick to 2-seaters if practicality is of no value to you. But to people who need to deliver tofu while drifting their way down the mountain twisties, the FT-86 is just perfect.
#1510
Nice brown-nosing there ydooby. You know, I used to own a 600hp Evo IX that has much more practicality in 4 doors and AWD and weighed in at a track tested 3k lbs. So please, spare me this "practicality" BS. Maybe this is why they made it a Scion in the US, because all these kids like ydooby will think they're Jay Chou in an initial D movie getting passed up byothers, but hey...they're kool and "practical".
BTW I'm well past the age of a "kid". No need to get so up and personal when we're only discussing about the different purposes of these cars.
#1511
Nice brown-nosing there ydooby. You know, I used to own a 600hp Evo IX that has much more practicality in 4 doors and AWD and weighed in at a track tested 3k lbs. So please, spare me this "practicality" BS. Maybe this is why they made it a Scion in the US, because all these kids like ydooby will think they're Jay Chou in an initial D movie getting passed up byothers, but hey...they're kool and "practical".
The MR2 is at best a second car, the FR-S could be an only car. I'm pretty sure they could have stripped out the rear seats, bumped the power, thrown in a couple CF components and made for a lighter, meaner car, but then you limit the audience, and lets be real, this car has to sell and sell well. I think it hits the right demographic, and if we want more coupes and sports cars from Toyota, I think it's a given that this has to do well, and I think they are giving it the best chance possible (providing that they don't mess up the pricing) in this particular configuration.
#1512
Excellent analysis there, but I'd like to add a thought:
You state that "The EJ engines form this period were SOHC 1.8 or 2.2 motors with MUCH smaller heads (Phase I) and the engine was lighter than later 2.5 SOHC and DOHC motors."
What about the newer Subaru flat 4 that will go into FT-86? The FB engines, according to Wikipedia, have "lighter pistons and connecting rods", and the FA20 going into the FR-S/BRZ is essentially the FB20 with the addition of Toyota's D4S direct + port injection system.
Might the new engine help keep things lighter overall, or does the DOHC and direct + port injection drive the weight back up?
You state that "The EJ engines form this period were SOHC 1.8 or 2.2 motors with MUCH smaller heads (Phase I) and the engine was lighter than later 2.5 SOHC and DOHC motors."
What about the newer Subaru flat 4 that will go into FT-86? The FB engines, according to Wikipedia, have "lighter pistons and connecting rods", and the FA20 going into the FR-S/BRZ is essentially the FB20 with the addition of Toyota's D4S direct + port injection system.
Might the new engine help keep things lighter overall, or does the DOHC and direct + port injection drive the weight back up?
The overall weight of the engine actually went up slightly (less than 10lbs if I recall correctly). The biggest reasons are the switch to a chain drive with an aluminum cover and to DOHC with the variable timing. All of which added weight compared to the old timing belt, plastic cover, SOHC engines.
I don't have access to the materials that listed the specifics, but there was a introductory brief in the service manual for the FB25 when that came out for the forester that listed the weight difference.
#1514
If you're talking straightline sure. On an auto-x or smaller road course, it would probably be a wash. Power isn't everything, yes i understand that. But it is much easier to make more power than to subtract weight. And weight contributes much more to overall performance then power in terms of handling, braking, acceleration, etc.
but you cant compare MR2 2 seater, from 1999, that even then got only 4 stars in crash rating tests, to the 4 seater car made in 2012 which has 9 airbags standard.
I was never impressed with MR-S speed until I turboed mine in any case so I know where are you coming from. Of course, that made it difficult to handle. But at the same time, ZZ engine in MR-S was never really made to be fast either.
#1515
Pole Position
I think you are missing that they key development goal was to maximize accessible fun and not maximize performance; while both goals are not mutually exclusive, there are not exactly the same either. You are thinking strictly in terms of paper. I'm not defending anyone, I just think you have your expectations in the wrong place.
The MR2 is at best a second car, the FR-S could be an only car. I'm pretty sure they could have stripped out the rear seats, bumped the power, thrown in a couple CF components and made for a lighter, meaner car, but then you limit the audience, and lets be real, this car has to sell and sell well. I think it hits the right demographic, and if we want more coupes and sports cars from Toyota, I think it's a given that this has to do well, and I think they are giving it the best chance possible (providing that they don't mess up the pricing) in this particular configuration.
The MR2 is at best a second car, the FR-S could be an only car. I'm pretty sure they could have stripped out the rear seats, bumped the power, thrown in a couple CF components and made for a lighter, meaner car, but then you limit the audience, and lets be real, this car has to sell and sell well. I think it hits the right demographic, and if we want more coupes and sports cars from Toyota, I think it's a given that this has to do well, and I think they are giving it the best chance possible (providing that they don't mess up the pricing) in this particular configuration.
As I have said previously before, I was rather disappointed from Toyco because i expected more inline with what was developed in the Supra going all out and hoping they would take the same mojo into the FR-S. Maybe this car isn't target at my particular demographic (have spare money, extra cars for "practicticality", so just need a fun cheap car to toss and thrash around). It seems more oriented to kids as the sole vehicle (with a seemingly tight back seat, but whatever). Anyhow, i'm not sure why folks keep brining up the MR-S in the discussion, as i only pointed it out as illustration that Toyco can do a lightweight sports car and i wanted it as an upgrade my present car (i like to change every couple of years). I'll test drive it myself and check out the production version, but really hope there is a further souped up version otherwise the new 276hp i4t huyndai genesis coupe (even as ugly as that new front fascia is), seems really intriguing....thanks for caring!