Nice little article.

Reading the DYNO report comment section is depressing....

People are actually dismissing the car (FR-S / BRZ) solely based on a DYNO test which only confirms the cars 200hp rating. They compare to the GTI which is highly under rated@200hp and use its DYNO #'s as a reason to somehow justify to theirselves for why they think the FR-S / BRZ is "over priced" / not worth ~25K.

Their reasoning is that one can get a 300hp+ Mustang for the same price as if the #'s are the ONLY and or very most important/relevant reasons to purchase a particular sports car. I swear some folks have absolutely NO CLUE whatsoever.

And people wonder why cars such as the Honda S2000 are disappearing...This ridiculous obsession with test track #'s above all else is NOT good for the market. The way people just skip the actual reviews and go straight to the spec sheet/ test track #'s is very telling and depressing.

Folks are actually comparing the GTI to the FR-S / BRZ as if they're somehow even remotely a like. The argument goes something like "But the GTI cost about the same and is quicker to 60! so this means the GTI is the better buy.." This is the logic (sadly) most people apparently use when evaluating a sports car.

And then the same people wonder why Europe often gets dynamically superior automobiles of the same make while the U.S. gets the fast in a straight line but sucks everywhere else models. It's because this is what "you" are asking for!

It's a damn shame car companies can build a car (FR-S / BRZ) which deliver ~95% of the driving entertainment of a Porsche Cayman for 1/2 the price and yet people dismiss the car simply due to its 6.4 second 0-60 time. WTF is wrong with people? I mean it's dumb enough to dismiss a car before even test driving it.

In case anyone was wondering the FR-S DYNO results:

173Hp@ wheels
143Ft-lb.Tq@wheels

http://img.tapatalk.com/c6e4e870-bdb0-3961.jpg
So taking into account the typical ~ 15% drive train loss via RWD 173WHP is right in line with 200hp@crank.

The torque rating is actually a bit under rated seeing as the FR-S put down ~ 143WTQ. Also the torque curve is VERY broad which is very good for daily driving. You wont have to shift the hell out of it unless you want to. Plus you got to remember the car only weighs ~ 2770lbs so it really doesn't need a whole lot of torque.

There's some talk about a turbo version possibly coming out in the next year or so. However I don't think it needs anymore than 200hp unless perhaps you live at like 10000+ ft above sea level / way up in the mountains, etc. Plus I wouldn't want the weight distribution to lean any farther to the front with extra weight added via an FI kit.

All in all it really just depends on where you live as to rather or not the power would be an issue but for most 200hp in a sub 2800lb. shouldn't be an issue. It's still going to be quicker than 90% of the cars out there.

If you're into drag racing just race cars like the GTI, SI, Mini S, MX-5, etc. It should be just as fun as say having a BMW M3 and racing against a C63 AMG, CTS-V, Cayman S, etc. It's all relative.

Personally I'm not much into street racing but I've been in my fair share of drag races and understand the appeal. It's especially fun when you're driving a "sleeper" and blow the doors off a "sports car" that should be a lot faster than you.

If I get a BRZ I would just enjoy it for what it has been described to be, as in one of the most fun / rewarding sports cars to drive regardless of price. 28K fully loaded doesn't seem over priced in the least if the car turns out to be close to as good as its said to be.

So the 2010 VW GTI they DYNO'd put down ~ 200@the wheels which translates to roughly 235hp@crank when the typical 15% drive train loss via FWD is factored in.

So the real rating of VW's 2.0l turbo I-4 is closer to 235hp/240ft-lb.tq. This makes sense when you consider the GTI's curb weight ~3200lbs and acceleration #'s. Still the BRZ / FR-S weigh over 400lbs less and hence have roughly equal power to weight ratios of ~ 13.8:1.

I always thought that it was bizarre that the GTI could run the times it did with supposedly just 200hp but this DYNO result pretty much explains it. The HP/TQ figure VW uses actually turns out to be HP@the wheels. I wonder why they choose to advertise it under-rated so severely like that... Insurance maybe?

This kinda has me wondering about the new Golf R's power rating now... VW claims it makes 256hp/243ft.lb.Tq but seeing how under-rated the GTI's power rating it sort of makes me wonder. But then again they've tested it's acceleration and it posted times similar to an MS3's 5.5 0-60 / 14.0@100 quarter.

So when you consider the Golf R has AWD but a power to weight ratio a bit inferior (12:1 vs. 13.2:1) to the MS3 it's ratings may be about right or perhaps a little under-rated as well.

I remember the article commenting on the BRZ's consistency on the Dyno. And, frankly a loss of only 15% at the wheels is good -- it shows an efficient drivetrain. Didn't the Z lose closer to 17%

that graph needs another +100

I think someone is a fanboi and on the wrong forum looking for sympathy

:stirthepot:

:roflpuke2:

Who's the "fanboi" looking for "sympathy" you refer to? Explain

Yeah 173@the wheels is right in line with 200@ the crank so the FR-S / BRZ are making the claimed 200hp / 151ft lb. torque. The torque though is probably closer to 165-170 considering it put down 143ft-lb. @wheels.

It's just when you look at the GTI's DYNO graph it's deceiving as its severely under-rated. It's 2.0l Turbo 4 makes closer to 235hp not 200hp.

But in terms of power to weight ratios the FR-S / BRZ have roughly the same power to weight ratios as the GTI. I was just pointing this out in response to many of the ridiculous comments posted in the DYNO article.

The fact that it doesn't make much sense to compare the GTI with the FR-S / BRZ. The only things they really have in common is a similar MSRP and power to weight ratio.

So folks seemly don't understand the advantages of RWD vs. FWD; 53/47 F/R balance vs. 38/62; 2770lbs vs. 3200lbs; etc, etc.

But yeah it's good that they got very consistent #'s on the DYNO with the FR-S. I'm looking forward to testing out a BRZ limited with 6MT. I may very well have one in my drive way around September /October. If it turns out to be underwhelming (unlikely) I'll probably just get a new MX-5.

Typical drive train loss via FWD: ~ 12% / RWD: ~ 15% / AWD: ~ 20%

Ahh, so when I see more than 15% loss it's likely because the at-the-crank HP was overstated.

Yeah typically but of course some drive trains will be slightly more / less efficient than others.

As long as the WHP accounts for no more than ~ 15% loss of peak output for RWD the chances are the motor is making its advertised horse power.

So for a 200hp RWD car such as the FR-S / BRZ it should put down ~ 170WHP. It put down 173@7000rpm so it's good to go.

A 200hp FWD car should DYNO ~ 176WHP. Civic SI's typical DYNO ~185WHP so they either have extremely efficient drive trains or the real power rating is closer to 210hp. The 2010' GTI DYNO is ~200WHP (this would translate to a 0% drive train loss which is impossible) The GTI's 2.0l Turbo in reality makes up 235hp or somewhere between 220-235hp.

A 200hp AWD car should DYNO ~ 160WHP. AWD is obviously the least efficient at transferring engine power to the wheels. This is why AWD cars are slower "at speed / no launch in the equation" compared to FWD/RWD cars of the same relative power to weight ratios.

Of course AWD cars have the advantage from a standing start but otherwise they are typically going to be slower than most FWD/RWD with the same advertised power to weight ratios from a rolling start / passing.

There's advantages / disadvantages to each drive train configuration but over all RWD is typically the most fun IMO unless you live in a really snowy / harsh climate in which case AWD is better.

Oh and automatic transmissions typically suck up more power (~ 2-5%) than manual transmissions.

And of course "peak power" is not the only thing that matters when analyzing a DYNO. You got to consider the "torque curve" how progressively the engine builds power, consistency and so on.

I'm sure most of you knew this stuff already just pointing out to those who may be confused.

So I watched some YouTube vids of the BRZ and I'm really liking what I see more and more. It's really a gorgeous car in my opinion especially in that blue color. It's only a tad bit bigger than the MX-5 yet still has semi-usable folding rear seats so that's a big plus for me. I wonder if my road bike will fit in the trunk with the seats folded.. I think it will a long as I release the front wheel.

There's a video of a BRZ racing a modified Z around this really technical / autocross type course. The BRZ finished just ~ 1 second behind at ~ 1:11.xx vs. 1:10.xx so you know it's handling is amazing (Using the Porsche Cayman as their bench mark was smart).

I just hope people dismiss it due to its relatively low 200hp so that I wont see every swinging **** and their mother driving them. It wouldn't be a huge deal but it would be nice for it to be somewhat unique.

I'm glad it comes with HID's and quite a few other features that typically are only an "option" for many cars such as Navigation. I just hope the Navigation unit works as good as it looks. All in all the BRZ seems like a great deal considering the reviews / features.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?5do3kp

Easily exploitable limits. This is in a nutshell is what makes a car such as the BRZ so great to drive. It's a car you can drive at 99% for 99% of the time as the saying goes.

This is why this idea that the BRZ needs more power, wider / stickier tires, etc doesn't make much sense unless all you care about is numbers.

What's the point in having all kinds of power and extremely high limits if the only time you can exploit the cars limits is at a race track? Bragging rights? I just don't get the appeal...

Subaru could have easily put wider / stickier tires on the BRZ so that it would look more impressive on paper, pull higher G's, etc but "numbers" weren't their main concern.

Subaru's goal with the BRZ was to produce an affordable fun to drive sports car and by all accounts they've delivered. If you want #'s Subaru has the STi.

Yet in all the comment sections after the reviews of the BRZ / FR-S people continue to bitch and complain about the power. Is as if they have NO CLUE about what makes a sports car worth it.

Their logic goes something like this "OMG 200hp?? Why would I buy this slow POS BRZ when I can buy a 274hp Genesis Coupe for the same price"?

It's really amazing....



---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?an3btv

I don't care about uniqueness. I want both Toyota and Subaru to sell a ton of them. I want 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation BRZs. I'd love to see this start a trend towards inexpensive fun to drive not-very-practical sports coupes. There is a real dearth in the market and if these end up not selling well, it will be a long while before a manufacturer tries it again.

:iagree::excited:

Exactly! This is why this obsession with numbers many folks have isn't conducive in convincing manufactures to build truly great and affordable sports cars such as the BRZ.

I hope manufactures go back to producing more cars like the Honda S2000 / MX-5 / RX-8. Cars that may not be all that fast but are affordable and a blast to drive.

Of course many will dismiss such cars ONLY because their ego's are too fragile unfortunately. They're oh so afraid about that drag racing soccer mom in that 300hp V6 family car. This of course is ridiculous but you may be surprised by how many are truly terrified about such none sense.

For one, there's always going to be someone out there with a faster car. Two, if your concerned about your ego just race cars of similar capability. What's the point in racing against cars that are clearly slower anyways? It doesn't prove anything other than your car happens to be quicker.

http://m.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1112_2013_subaru_brz/index.html

"Wait, wait, wait! The BRZ isn’t about the numbers! A sports car doesn’t need to look good in the stats box, it just needs to be a great drive. And the BRZ is a great drive. If you’re looking for smoking 0-60 numbers and crazy top speeds that you’ll never get to, there are certainly other cars that better fit your tastes. The BRZ needs a convertible top more than it needs a turbo -- because that, not horsepower, is the only thing holding this car back from being the modern-day equivalent of those wonderful 1960s sports cars."



---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?purq3e

EVO staffers drove BRZ, 370Z, Renault hot hatch, base Cayman and MX5. General comment is the BRZ is underpowered for road car. Lack of torque and odd pancake 4 just don't suit the excellent chassis. So plan on spending additional $10k on turbo. They also said mx5 was more fun to drive a d Toyota and Subaru should have driven mx5 before building BRZ/FT86.

They also said 370z is in completely different league. BRZ was toy like in comparison. Cheap trim etc.

thanks! :tup: i will test drive one myself, but at the moment i scratched it off my list of dd's to buy. for me it would be the FRS.

for some reason the car reminds me of a tamiya grasshopper theme.. lol

Looks like Vivid Racing has got one and has started playing with it:
FR-S Inbound - Vivid just reserved an FR-S! - MY350Z.COM Forums

http://www.vividracing.com/blog/wp-c...2-frs-dyno.jpg
http://www.vividracing.com/blog/wp-c...cion_frs-1.jpg

The VAST majority who've tested the BRZ / FR-S say it's a phenomenal sports car not in need of more power (Car and Driver; Road&Track; Motor Trend; Edmunds, Automobile Mag; etc,etc..)

Judging the car based on test track #'s (apparently this is what EVO does) doesn't even begin to scratch the surface.

The Z is in a different league? Sure and if judging solely by #'s most other cars 35K and under are in a "different league" compared to the BRZ / FR-S.

The BRZ / FR-S weren't built to produce fast test track #'s. They were built to be excellent driver's cars and by ALL accounts (other than EVO I suppose because they judge more on #'s) they've delivered.

A turbo kit would do nothing other than make the BRZ / FR-S produce quicker test track #'s. The vast majority who've actually test driven the car say it has just the right balance of power to make it a blast to drive on a daily bases. A turbo kit would be a waste of money / ruin the cars great balance.

The bottom line is that at least 9/10 say the BRZ / FR-S are among the best cars to drive right up there with the Mazda MX-5 Miata. So if this is indeed the case the car is going to be phenomenal.

As they said theirselves if you want #'s they have the STi. If you want a driver's car the BRZ / FR-S deliver.

You can mod the hell out of an STi and have a blast for short 3-4 second burst at a time. Personally I'd rather have a car I can drive closer to 99% for 99% of the time.

---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?x20bpo

vo2max99, its hard to compare anything without referring to some kind of statistic. Subjective comparisons are great, but they are... subjective. Saying that the car is badass and you can drive it at 99% for 99% of the time is great... but many slower cars can be driven at 99% for 99% of the time (because their acceleration sucks and top speed is low). Does that make it a good sports car? You get used to it and it becomes a dull car...
I'd rather have a car that can be great on the road, but when I get a nice opening or a lonely curvy road - I can have exciting fun with which will end up with my heart rate going up and fun memories/stories.

I think you mean "subjective". Anyway, the proof of the eating is in the lack of pudding ...

In any event, top speed is rather meaningless for an everyday car. I've never come close to the top speed in my Mazda 3 much less my Z. Acceleration -- from 25 to 50 is a good interval to judge for twisty road fun -- and handling are my main concerns.

Zaggeron, I did indeed mean "subjective", thank you.

As far as 20-50 acceleration - I agree that its a very good stat for twisty road fun. This is probably my most important stat.
I also tend to have a lot of 0-80mph accelerations from the red light, so that stat is probably most important to me.
Agreed that top speed is mostly good for bragging rights ;)

The BRZ / FR-S produce more than enough power while also having exploitable limits. What's the point in having a car with all kinds of power and extremely high limits when it can only be exploited while going balls to the wall on a race track?

With cars like the BRZ / FR-S you don't have to exceed all the posted limits to have a blast driving it on a daily bases. Because of the relatively modest power and relatively skinny semi-performance tires the BRZ / FR-S can be ran through the gears, induce oversteer, drift, etc without the risk of losing your license, etc.

Again, these cars are all about the experience behind the wheel not 0-60, nurburgring time, etc. Stats are great for selling cars but they don't even begin to scratch the surface when it comes to evaluating how great a sports car is.

This is why cars are thoroughly reviewed / tested first hand and judging by the vast majority of credible entities that have reviewed the BRZ / FR-S they don't need more power are are phenomenal driver's cars.

The Mazda MX-5 Miata is no quicker than the BRZ / FR-S and it is World renown for being one of the best driver's cars on the planet. So there's no reason to think that the BRZ / FR-S wont be as well.

I'll have to test drive before making up my mind in the end. There's always the MX-5 if I'm not entirely convinced. I know for sure that's a phenomenal car because I've driven it so no worries there.

I've driven many far quicker cars and none where nearly as fun to drive other than perhaps an EVO 9. But an EVO is far more expensive to maintain. Oh and the S2000 is awesome but as a daily driver a bit too harsh and I don't want to buy used.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?0gbvqs

Too many judge cars like this:

Car A: $ 35k / 300hp

Car B: $35k / 200hp

Conclusion: Car is "A" is superior because you get more horse power per dollar.

Of course this is a ridiculous way to go about evaluating the worth of a car but this is unfortunately how most do it.

Marketers need to do a better job at convincing the public that #'s don't even begin to tell the full story. Until this happens the horse power wars will continue.

They'll continue to produce over powered cars with extremely high limits that aren't much fun to drive unless your on a race track.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?yomh0e

vo2- you really like the BRZ/FRS, huh? :)

I don't know but I'm not going to diss it just because it doesn't run a certain 0-60 time, etc.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?4ht235

EVO drivers are much more like minded to enthusiast drivers. They took it on 1000 km road trip. Quite opposite from your assumption. They see BRZ as being awesome track toy where you thrash it to death but the took brz on extended trip on country roads with competing cars. Spent a lot of non track time. They wanted to love the car but couldn't. It's way too buttoned down with not enough power.

They indicated they often were lacking torque and engine is not rewarding but very thrashy. Indicated its very well executed but very boring to drive on the street.

Makes sense to me 2700 lbs of car plus driver are a lot for a little 2.o to haul around. They indicated car is lifeless on street until you get it over 5000 rpm.

Also indicated its toy like. They gave it 3.5 stars. 370z got better rating.

I'll stay with my grown up Z thank you.

They also tested old Wrx against it and said wrx was more exciting to drive. That's pretty damning!

Also ran it on the track were a front wheel drive Renault was putting 5 seconds a lap on it! Ouch!

Here you go

http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/trackday...est_video.html

http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/planetev...road_trip.html

The numbers a particular car produces often way over rates it's overall value is terms of being a great sports car. There are multiple examples which prove precisely this.

If you want a good idea of how good / bad a particular car is you obviously need to drive it. The numbers will give you an idea of how fast / slow the car is but that's about it.

If the 0-60, 1/4m, skid pad, slalom #'s, etc. was all there was to the value of a sports car there would be no need for reviews, test drives or anything. You'd just buy the car that produced the best #'s for the money and be done with it.

Far more important reviews are the "Best handling / Best Driver's car" reviews. These type of test / reviews reveal how the car actually drives, feels from behind the wheel, connects with the driver, etc. The subjective qualities that actually matter are revealed.

With that said I'll guarantee the BRZ / FR-S will finish far ahead ALL of the merely more powerful / faster cars in its segment (EVO X possibly being one exception as far as handling) and most above. In other words the cars will excel in the areas that actually matter not so much the #'s.



---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?4ggftl

Oh and that's what 1 out of how many reviews that say the opposite? I got a feeling they are full of ****. EVO is known for being shitty at car reviews so what they say doesn't mean anything as far as I'm concerned.

I'll take the word of the VAST Majority until I get a chance to drive one myself.

Your "grown up" Z? Well your "grown up" Z gets destroyed by a little MX-5 where it matters. The BRZ / FR-S according to 99.9% who've tested say it doesn't need more power and should be among the best driver's cars available.

Just wait until Car and Driver / Road & Track compare / test the BRZ / FR- S against your "grown up" Z in test that actually matter. I can almost guarantee the BRZ / FR-S will rate far ahead of your "grown up" Z.

I just noticed that EVO could only muster a 7.6 0-60time so they either can't drive worth a time or they were handed a busted BRZ to test. Others have posted times ranging in the 6.2-6.4 range.

Regardless the car isn't about #'s and should be a phenomenal driver's car. EVO is CLEARLY full of **** and this wouldn't be the first time they published a BS review. They're consisting coming to conclusions completely contrary to reality. Their mentally is like the typical 20 year old kid judging cars almost solely on "how fast" it goes. UK Top Gear has more credibility than them and that isn't saying much at all.

---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?uywwxw

Mazda seemed to do fine convincing people that you don't need power to have fun? I have owned Mazda MX5 and found that car more fun to drive than heavier more powerfully Porsche boxsters I owned. Toyota and subi built something very close to 2.5 liter Porsche Boxster. Great car but boring as heck to drive on street

My 450 HP sub 3000 lb Z is a true hoot to drive compared to well buttoned down boxsters.

I also owned 3 porsche 914s and 914/6. Way less power than anything above including BRZ but fun to drive.

I don't think BRZ developers got the fun to drive piece completely. I'm waiting for next generation. They will still send a ton based on hype but serious sports car drivers are likely be on the fence.

To be honest I had a Toyota Echo with full coil overs and big swaybars that was one of most fun cars I have ever driven it would set into turn with oversteer and had to use its 95 Ho to haul it out of a spin.

What are you basing "boring as heck on the street" on in regards to the BRZ / FR-S? I've yet to read one review (other than EVO for some odd reason/ they could only muster a 7.6 0-60 so who knows) that says the BRZ somehow needs more power to be fun on the street.

Serious sports car driver's will be on the fence? No, people who understand cars know that cars don't need all kinds of horse power to be a great driver's car.

The MX-5 consistently rates far above EVERY sports car in its segment (exception being EVO X in which case it's close) when it comes to handling and being a superior driver's car.

So seeing as the BRZ / FR-S are no slower than the MX-5 there's no reason to believe "serious sports car driver's" will or should be on the fence. More power, wider stickier tires would help it produce a quicker lab time but that's about it.

As is at its current power to ratio it should strike just about the right balance to be the most fun on the street. More power could be added and you could enjoy the sudden rush of acceleration for short 3-4 second burst at a time before losing your license and so on.

I've found that cars you can push closer to 99% more of the time is a lot more fun / rewarding vs. driving a car which is much faster for short burst. I prefer the actual experience over the bragging rights / #'s.

As far as Mazda convincing people well that use to be the case. Sell of the MX-5 Miata are way down from where they use to be because ppl have been brainwashed into "more in better".

It's the same reason for why Honda stopped production of the Honda S2000 and the same reason Subaru / Toyota unfortunately won't be making too many more cars like the BRZ / FR-S unless people are educated.

They'll just go back to producing high horse power cars vastly inferior to drive than cars like the Mazda MX-5 / Honda S2000, etc because folks keep crying for more horse power. So people who understand cars have to suffer from mass ignorance.

---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?xydptf

Here's a good review:

U.S. Roads / Pro driver


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPoZ1...e_gdata_player


Okay so I just read that review from EVO.

1.) They tested an AUTO version against the others equipped with MANUALS.

2.) What they say about the car is completely contrary to what 99% have said about it. Majority says the BRZ is a phenomenal driver's car with adequate power. EVO basically says its a POS.

3.) No F'N way is the car nearly as terrible as they've made it out to be automatic transmission or not.

4.) They say there's no power below 5000 RPMS and you have to rev the **** out of it to move yet the vast majority say the BRZ has plenty of grunt from as low as ~ 2500rpm and DYNO confirms why as 90% torque available @2500RPM on up to 7000RPM.

4.) It sounds as if they were hired to diss the car not review it. The bottom line is that they're either: Way off the mark in their review. The automatic transmission makes the BRZ a turd. The BRZ they tested had issues. Otherwise it doesn't make sense because no way can so many credible automobile entities be so wrong. It's as if 99 say YES and EVO says NO. Something isn't adding up..


On another note I noticed the MX-5 they tested had just 158hp vs. 167hp (really 170 for 09's with a 7200rpm redline but not a big deal) for the U.S. model. I wonder why that is?

You wouldn't think 10hp would big a deal but according to EVO their MX-5 takes 7.5 seconds to hit 60mph vs. the 167hp U.S. MX-5's 6.3 0-60. That's over a full second for 10hp... It may have been 62mph making it roughly 7.3-7.4 seconds but that's still a full second back from the U.S. MX-5. But then again it may be their driving as they could only manage a 7.6 second 0-60 with the BRZ when it's posted 6.2 in the U.S.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?xep0df

EVO guys hired to diss a car? Lol! You clearly don't know those guys. Nope they just know cars well and Take time to really drive cars too. Lots of long term tests. Take cars to same circuit. They have track days on regular basis too. They are great at assessing cars strengths and weaknesses. They were spot on.

Have you seen Dynos? Yeah it make 125 ft lbs of torque and 75 HP at 3000 RPM hauling 3000 lbs of car and people. Sorry that's a fail in my book. No f'n way does this car have grunt with hefty near 3000 lb weight with customers seated in drivers seat. Vast majority of testers in US have based input based on track tests where they can easily grab power and focus on extracting power with redline shifts. That's not practical on the street. Yeah it's an underpowered But fun track car. However a 2700 lb car that will be closer to 3000 lbs with passengers will suffer with a sub 150 whp motor. It's physics. I don't even need to drive it to know its underpowered.

I can tell you my biggest complaint with 2800 lb 217 Hp Porsche Boxster was that it always needed to be down shifted if I was under 4000 rpm to grab acceptable power. Magazines all raved about Boxster too and it was and still is a great car but lack of power in early boxsters was real bummer. There is a reason why you can buy used 2.5 and 2.7 boxsters for under $10k. The Boxster S and Cayman S actually are fun to drive as they make enough power to exploit great chassis.

Subaru made excellent chassis for BRZ just as Porsche did for old boxsters. However just watch what happens to resale values of base BRZ if Subi introduces an STI version with forced induction. I suspect they won't do that soon as they know they would tank resale values and cars sold on leases would take higher depreciation hit. They likely will make slow incrental changes. Too bad really as the car has great potential.

I disagree with you. If BRZ had come in around say 2450 lbs with 2.0 it would have been tons of fun but when you put two people in the car your going to be over 3000 lbs. the power and torque to weight ratio is terrible. It's just too heavy for that small NA 2.0 motor.

Yes it's relatively fun car compared to a Civic or a Mazda 3. It's spicy sport looks will attract lots of women buyers too. It's practical too. But it misses mark as serious sports car in my book. Please buy one I'd lobe to hear what you think once you have one for a year or two. You seemed to convince yourself this car is awesome with no flaws. Suspect brz forums are going to be fixated on how to get more power and how to shed weight.

FYI in Europe mx5 comes with smaller 1.8 liter motor

Edit: heres an idea how about Subaru offering a Motorsports edition where they delete rear seats and maybe do a few more things to take weight off this porky 4 cylinder "sports car"

Pretty sure most of 370z owners have researched the sports car market before choosing the Z. I'm sure we all understand that the cute Miata has good cornering capabilities but that's about it. So we chose the Z for a reason.
Most cars have something special. If you care about the price, you should go with Versa and you can say that "where it matters" Versa destroys all competition. If all that matters is interior quality you will say Aston Martin Raptide destroys all competition "where it matters". If you care about a straight line acceleration at a good price you will say that the mustang destroys all "where it matters"... and everyone is right from their own perspective.
So it seems like cornering is the only one thing that matters to you. You don't care how silly your car looks. You don't care about acceleration and power? You don't care about interior quality. You don't care how all the stats translate to track times or quarter mile times. In that case, yes, the Miata is best for you.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that from the perspective of Z owners (and that's your audience right now), Miata doesn't "destroy competition where it matters" for most Z owners... especially not me. Try this trick on Miata forums and I'm sure you can get some extra respect :tiphat:

I look at this from a different perspective. I have my Z. It's not going anyway.

I have my daily driver Mazda 3, but the love is wearing off. The Z is a no-go as a daily driver -- for various reasons including gridlock every morning.

What cars are out there that will be fun as a DD, sporty, more or less cheap to run and maintain, and, oh ... by the way ... I'm sick of FWD and 4 doors.

My choices are basically the FRS, MX-5, or the BRZ. For my purposes, the BRZ looks like a solid deal -- better interior than the MX-5 and FRS. More practical than the MX-5 (plus I already have a convertible so a used s2000 is out as well). I looked at the BMW 1 series, but those are starting to get up there in price and the 128 doesn't have much better performance than the BRZ for about 8K more ...

Did I leave anything out? What other RWD coupes around 28K or under are there that get better mileage than an SUV (to rule out the RX-8 which I would pick up in a heartbeat if they got better gas mileage and their rear seals didn't blow in the Texas heat).

Mazdaspeed 3 is worth a look for a DD. I'm gonna peek in on a 2012 when the 2013's are anounced and see if I can pull one for around 22K.

I've test driven the FR-S on an auto-X course before. It's a fun and peppy car, but my previous experiences with Boxer engine made me scared of riving over 7000RPM.

I have my Nissan 240sx and Nissan 370z. Engine-wise it feels like my stock 240sx quite a bit with a lot more power at the top end. Handling-wise, I would definitely want this chassis over Silvia S15 on the track. It has a lot of composure on the handling. It's a fun little car that I may consider purchasing, but since I already have a 240sx and money spent on mods on it, I most likely not.

However, this car isn't a bad purchase. If a person haven't bought a Mustang or 370z, I whole would suggest the FRS has a very good sporty option of a car to recommend. It's a great step-up from a daily driver and hopefully promote more car companies to build sportier looking and feeling cars.

As an overall package, I personally would not trade my Z for the FR-S (I did not sit on BRZ, so I cannot compare). Here are my pros and cons vs the 370z.

Pros:
-2 rear seats
-a lot of trunk space
-Actually very easy to drive quickly (Z is harder to drive, but can outgrip FR-S once you learn it).
-Not as corner carver as Miata, but friendly enough to let you power through a corner.
-Easier to see down the engine bay from the driver's windshield perspective
-Better engine sound to 7000RPM than the stock VQ.
-Cabin not as noisy as 370z.
-Feels a lot lighter, yet feels heavier (but planted) compared to my 240SX.

Cons:
-Lacking lacking in power if you're use to turbo or larger engine (both applies to me).
-IMHO, Z33 interior is better than this car's interior...and I do not like the Z33 interior.
-$30k OTD price this year (these cars are priced jacked like hell @ dealers last time I checked yesterday), expected to be around $28k OTD by the end of the year.

While it seems the pros outweight the cons, it's because I felt the FRS is a solid car overall and a lot of the benefits are just personal preferences and comfort rather than performance.

I use my Z as a daily driver and I love it.

Different strokes .... My 16 mile drive takes 40 minutes. I'm keeping the Z in any event. I just like having a daily driver too.