Subaru powered Toyota FT-86 Concept

vo2max99

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.

Zaggeron

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%

__________________
2010 Platinum Graphite 370z Roadster:Touring/Sport
2013 Subaru BRZ Limited

kenchan

that graph needs another +100

Isamu

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

__________________

黒子 ('Kuroko')
Project: SuperNova Owner/Operator and Lead designer @BlackGuard Aeroworks

Spikuh

vo2max99

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

vo2max99

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%

Zaggeron

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

__________________
2010 Platinum Graphite 370z Roadster:Touring/Sport
2013 Subaru BRZ Limited

vo2max99

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.

vo2max99

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

vo2max99

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

Zaggeron

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.

__________________
2010 Platinum Graphite 370z Roadster:Touring/Sport
2013 Subaru BRZ Limited

Isamu

__________________

黒子 ('Kuroko')
Project: SuperNova Owner/Operator and Lead designer @BlackGuard Aeroworks

vo2max99

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

Shamu

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.

__________________
Grant