woah, welcome to 1997 honda prelude. :rofl2:


but $24.2K for MT sounds great. :tup:

if i got one it would be for around town driving and autocross...

but yeah the acceleration times are bad even though i expected them to be slow..but thats real damn slow.... would have to get a bumper sticker to say "dont race me...my other car is a GTR "

the limited trim car has like leather and alcantara seats push button start and a spoiler for supposedly 28K.... for almost 30K even though i know thats not the point that just doesnt make sense its that slow to be so light..... the turbo version should be like 5.5 0-60 and maybe like a 14.1 1/4 mile

Ok, sorry but that is pathetic, especially for 2012.
Just looked up old 240sx times and the 240sx was faster by a a little bit..I mean come on, this is suppose to be something amazing I though.

The car appears to be awesome but those acceleration #'s have me wondering if its making something like 185-190hp not quite 200hp.

The Civic SI weighs over 100lbs (~2900lbs vs. ~27XXlbs.) more with the same ~200hp yet blows the BR-Z's doors off... 0-60: 6.3sec vs. 7.3 and 1/4mile: 14.8@96 vs. 15.3@92.

Hell even the MX-5 Maita runs 0-60: 6.5-6.7 sec and 14.9@93 for the 1/4mile.. But then again its power to weight ratio is similar to the Civic si / BR-Z.

I'm not saying the BR-Z isn't worth it or anything I'm just wondering about the 200hp figure which seems over-rated considering the #'s....

Otherwise the BR-Z appears to be one of the best driver's cars out there along side the likes of the S2K, MX-5, RX-8, Boxster/ Cayman.

So it seems if driving is what you desire it wouldn't make much sense to spend more than ~26K on one of these BR-Z's. I'm torn....

The BR-Z is obviously not for those lacking in the genitalia debt.

MT tested it to be slightly faster than the Miata.

But the doors!!! Will someone think of the DOORS!!!! :stirthepot:

No one can ever forget about the doors. :bowrofl:

MT tends to be wrong much of the time. Car and Driver / Road & Track have it slower so I'm more inclined to take their word.

What's up with the doors? The only thing I noticed about the 11' MX-5 I test drove was that it's a very well built car. I didn't notice anything odd about the doors

The Miata's are known for their superb door quality...........

Known fact, Captain America uses part of a Miata door as his shield.

:iagree:

I cautiously await a turbo version to see how well it does.

So it looks like this car will be a total slug after all.

I'm not really bothered by the acceleration #'s because it appears to be a blast to drive regardless. I guess some folks feel they need to prove something I don't get it. There's always going to be someone out there with a faster car. How fast your car is doesn't prove anything.

A lot of sports cars these days have so much power they aren't as rewarding to drive on a day to day bases. Sure if you have a racetrack in your back yard that's another thing but for daily driving a car doesn't need a 12:1 power to weight ratio or better to be fun to drive. There are plenty of good examples that demonstrate this but some don't seem to grasp this.

I bet this little BR-Z although much slower than most sports cars turns out to be one of the very best sports cars to drive. So if this is the case why would one dismiss a BR-Z just because it runs a ~ 15sec 1/4mile? What if it ran a 14,13 or 12 sec 1/4mile?

Why does it matter as long as its rewarding to drive? Just adding more power isn't likely to increase the fun to drive factor but likely make it's limits less approachable and hence less fun to drive on a day to day bases. People always suggest the MX-5 somehow needs more power but it really doesn't for the same reason.

A lot of sports cars have so much power and such high limits that their not even remotely attainable to approach 99% of the time unless you're at a race track going balls to the wall. Cars like the S2K, MX-5, RX-8, BR-Z,etc have limits not so high that you can actually explore them on a day to day bases. These cars can easily be drifted, ran through the gears, etc without breaking all kinds of laws / causing un wanted attention and so on.

Most sports cars these days have such high limits you can't come close to approaching them during normal everyday use. So as a result they're only really fun on a racetrack. It's nice to see companies build driver's cars vs. cars which are really quick but not much fun to drive on the street.

Just because it handles well doesn't make it a fun car. This car will not be leaving faster sports cars behind on the twisties or the track. I'm sure buyers will eventually regret the lack of power. I would spend a little more and buy a z or spend a little less and get a mustang.

+1

Agree completely. Case in point. Yesterday I drove my Z home via 2222 in Austin -- a twisty road, but quite busy during rush hour. It was fun, but mundane because of the heavy traffic.

Today I drove my normal daily driver -- Mazda 3 -- down the same road with the same traffic conditions. Did I go slower? Yes. Did it feel like I was going faster? Yes. I hate to admit it, but it was just funner in the Mazda under those sorts of conditions.

I love my Z but I'm replacing my Mazda with the BRZ. For my day to day commute in heavy traffic with bursts of acceleration down the twisties, It seems like a good choice.

has anyone thought that maybe it's slower in a straight line because of gearing...

this is true... I seent it

The 0.92g skidpad and 114 ft 60-0 braking aren't all that impressive either, especially for a car supposed to be a "handler". But hey, it exhibits awesome "control".

Really? Those numbers are far from bad, especially at this price point.

One of the huge benefits this car is going to have, which the Z still does not, is the aftermarket. Before this car even goes on sale every part will have a better upgrade made for it already. From NA to boosted, suspension to chassis, etc. While I am still on the side that the numbers are not making this car look like a winner, the aftermarket support will just because if I want or need more I know it will be there for me to buy.

Good point, after market is already developing for this car where as for the 370z we had to wait a few years to even have a more than just a couple, if any, options.

:tup:

What tires does it come with stock?

Middle of the road Michelins 215/45R-17 tires -- better tires will up the skid pad ratings and lower the stop time

The ones they use on the prius

So all seasons?

If so, that explains the lousy skid pad and braking numbers. Get a set of Star Specs on that car and you're talking .98+ G and much shorter 60-0.

bingo!

I knew it. Tires mean everything.

In terms of raw acceleration, this car is going to be a dud. Even with an aftermarket turbo kit, you'd have to build the block before any "real" power can be had.

However, I have this funny feeling that the chassis will run quite well. .92 skid pad is not great, but nowhere near horrible, and also 69mph in the slalom is what our Z car runs.

It should be a sweet handler with a proper tire on it.

I bet it's light enough to even do well with crappy Hankook V12s.

still too expensive. Just this past week they announced it will be right around 25K (24,900 or somthing like that).

Should have had a base model start at 19,900.

It looks like a RWD Scion TC booo

I certainly would not pay 25k for one. I'm sure many will, though. Optioned out I think they push 30k.

There is the problem...30K = 5.0 and regarless of how the FRS/BRZ handles i would not take one over a 5.0 simply because

5.0 > 2.0
V8 > 4 cylinder
V8 rumble>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>4 cylinder chirp
420 hp > 200 HP

EDIT not to even mention all the other cars that are only a few grand more (regular Evo, 370Z)

it doesn't look like a TC at all... :ugh2:

It's definitely a niche car to say the least.

i think when they come out with a turbo version people will jizz

Only if the turbo version was $25k.

:iagree: