Toyota Nation Forum banner

41 - 60 of 2041 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
The BZR is December's cover story in Motor Trend! Specs:

Base Price: $25,000
Engine: 2.0L/200hp (est)/170lb-ft (est) DOHC 16 Valve Flat-4
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual, 6-Speed Auto
Curbweight: 2,500lb (Mfr. Est)
Wheelbase: 93.5" (est)
Length x Width x Height: 148.8 x 70.0 x 46.8 (est)
0-60MPH: 6.0 Seconds (MT Est)
EPA City/Highway: 25-27/30-32MPG (est)

They also said that "Subaru engineers concede there's more power to come from the boxer four", but will not confirm if a turbo version. Engineers also said it was designed to allow for a convertible, and that the platform can be stretched. Those are the highlights of the article anyway, with most of it focusing on analyzing the design and genesis of the car.
 

·
Newbie One Kanobi
Joined
·
8,643 Posts
Does anyone know if the Subie version is going to be sold in NA? I guess I'm kinda concerned cause as we got a glimpse of it, it didn't look too much different from the FR-S and it seems exact power output. Maybe handling dynamics are altered to what Subie wanted??? It will be interesting. A more powerful version:naughty::naughty:
 

·
1MZ powered MR2
Joined
·
1,064 Posts
Lol, I think you guys are spoiled by todays higher displacement, high output engines. This is a 2.0L engine, so expecting more power in normally aspirated form gets very expensive without variable valve lift.

My V6 MR2 has a 3.0L engine with 215hp/220lb-ft, so the power output is pretty good considering. If my engine put out 300hp from 3.0L in N/A form, I'd be pretty damn happy, alas it doesn't. My chassis weighs about 2680lbs, so this new FR car is pretty similar. Also, Toyota has been underrating their engines a bit as of late. The 179hp 2AR is actually closer to 190hp, based on dyno numbers, but it's also a 2.5L.

If you had a ride in my car, you'd agree that weight is the biggest fun killer in todays cars. Don't get caught up in the numbers game. Remember, the Elise with ONLY 190hp? Sure would blow past a lot of cars, and on a track, it's a weapon.
 

·
Need For Speed
Joined
·
10,765 Posts
^Yeah, but you have 220 ft. lbs. of torque. That's a LOT compared to this concept, and it makes a huge difference. If this car had more torque then I would be happy, I'm not as concerned about hp numbers.
 

·
Save The Manuals
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
The BZR is December's cover story in Motor Trend! Specs:

Base Price: $25,000
Engine: 2.0L/200hp (est)/170lb-ft (est) DOHC 16 Valve Flat-4
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual, 6-Speed Auto
Curbweight: 2,500lb (Mfr. Est)
Wheelbase: 93.5" (est)
Length x Width x Height: 148.8 x 70.0 x 46.8 (est)
0-60MPH: 6.0 Seconds (MT Est)
EPA City/Highway: 25-27/30-32MPG (est)

They also said that "Subaru engineers concede there's more power to come from the boxer four", but will not confirm if a turbo version. Engineers also said it was designed to allow for a convertible, and that the platform can be stretched. Those are the highlights of the article anyway, with most of it focusing on analyzing the design and genesis of the car.
Hmm, it's estimated to be lighter than the Scion version? :confused:

Lol, I think you guys are spoiled by todays higher displacement, high output engines. This is a 2.0L engine, so expecting more power in normally aspirated form gets very expensive without variable valve lift.

My V6 MR2 has a 3.0L engine with 215hp/220lb-ft, so the power output is pretty good considering. If my engine put out 300hp from 3.0L in N/A form, I'd be pretty damn happy, alas it doesn't. My chassis weighs about 2680lbs, so this new FR car is pretty similar. Also, Toyota has been underrating their engines a bit as of late. The 179hp 2AR is actually closer to 190hp, based on dyno numbers, but it's also a 2.5L.

If you had a ride in my car, you'd agree that weight is the biggest fun killer in todays cars. Don't get caught up in the numbers game. Remember, the Elise with ONLY 190hp? Sure would blow past a lot of cars, and on a track, it's a weapon.
I agree. Weight makes the biggest difference. I think the low weight, high revving engine, and close ratio 6 speed transmission along with the low center of gravity will make this car a blast to drive. It'll definitely be quick. Not a hp monster, but it doesn't need to be. Plus the aftermarket for this car will be huge once it goes on sale.

^Yeah, but you have 220 ft. lbs. of torque. That's a LOT compared to this concept, and it makes a huge difference. If this car had more torque then I would be happy, I'm not as concerned about hp numbers.
I think if you test drove it and enjoyed it, you wouldn't be complaining about any sort of numbers anymore :lol:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,059 Posts
^Yeah, but you have 220 ft. lbs. of torque. That's a LOT compared to this concept, and it makes a huge difference. If this car had more torque then I would be happy, I'm not as concerned about hp numbers.
What you are talking about has mostly to do with easy drivability and accessibility. Little or nothing to do with the car being quick. It is a driver's oriented car with a high performance engine (although, I am very disappointed Yamaha/Toyota has no role in the development, but it must be due to low development costs).

Definitely, someone looking for easy drivability is going to be disappointed since it is about putting in the effort and skills and it would reward the driver with the responses, control and experience. That is what a driver's car is all about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Somehow I doubt we'll get the unpainted bumpers, door handles, mirrors, in the US. Even the Yaris has standard color-keyed goodies and it's just easier to make them standard. That, and it looks effing terrible.
This package doesn't even have air....it's designed for someone to race. The Bumpers etc are of no use to someone who is going to put their own aftermarket bodykit on it anyway....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
What you are talking about has mostly to do with easy drivability and accessibility. Little or nothing to do with the car being quick. It is a driver's oriented car with a high performance engine (although, I am very disappointed Yamaha/Toyota has no role in the development, but it must be due to low development costs).

Definitely, someone looking for easy drivability is going to be disappointed since it is about putting in the effort and skills and it would reward the driver with the responses, control and experience. That is what a driver's car is all about.
No matter how good the car is at it's limits, if you can't drive it day to day with reasonable ease, people won't buy it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,059 Posts
No matter how good the car is at it's limits, if you can't drive it day to day with reasonable ease, people won't buy it.
The enthusiasts can drive it just fine since it will have more than enough ease in daily drivability (152 ft-lbs is a lot of midrange for a 2600 lbs car). I am quite sure of that. History can vouch for that as well since they have always sold very well because people wanting driver's cars would love it.

A turbo diesel is the best option for people looking for low end torque. Though a 1/4 mile in 16 seconds with 120 HP, but hey its got 200 ft-lbs of torque at only 1000 rpm, which allows passing at 20 mph in 4th gear.
 

·
1MZ powered MR2
Joined
·
1,064 Posts
What you are talking about has mostly to Don't with easy drivability and accessibility. Little or nothing to do with the car being quick. It is a driver's oriented car with a high performance engine (although, I am very disappointed Yamaha/Toyota has no role in the development, but it must be due to low development costs).

Definitely, someone looking for easy drivability is going to be disappointed since it is about putting in the effort and skills and it would reward the driver with the responses, control and experience. That is what a driver's car is all about.
I think we're at the point, technologically, where you can have the best of both worlds. Higher torque output does make a car quicker with the same gearing. For example, the BEAMS 3SGE (200ps @7000rpm/155lb-ft @6000rpm, very close to the new FA, eh?) MR2 and the V6 MR2 are nearly equally matched in horsepower, yet the V6 MR2 will always trounce the 4 cylinder BEAMS. 0-60mph is 1s faster (6.6s vs 5.6s) and the quarter mile is slightly quicker (14.6 vs 13.9). Older Toyota V6s have double torque peaks, so there's an advantage there (3500rpm + 4400rpm). For low-torque motors with good top-end, you have options: 1) low gearing/close-ratio, 2) reduce weight. Honda usually goes with option 1, as do most manufacturers. Toyota has opted to do 1 AND 2. A miracle, IMO.

Anyway, this new FA boxer has its merits. It has a race engine compression ratio of 12.5:1 and is coupled with a new, performance oriented D-4S system. D-4S was co-developed by Toyota, Denso, and Yamaha, so you could say that Yamaha was involved indirectly. It's most likely underrated. Remember that 200hp today is different from when my 1MZ was tested. Look at it as a MINIMUM output rating rather than maximum. We'll see how it fares on the dyno. If it puts down 180-190whp, it'll be about 210-220hp at the crank.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,059 Posts
Yeah, I have to look at the gearing of the new engine and see how the gear stack is spaced.

The BEAMS 3S-GE's major drawback was the iron block (and hence heavier weight) of the entire drivetrain. Also, the gearing on the BEAMS 3S-GE was not very good. The BEAMS MR-2 had a redline at 7200 rpm rather than 8000 rpm that the Altezza had. I don't know if it had anything to do with dual VVT-i (which the Altezza had) versus non version.

BTW, why are the specs on the Toyota sheet so different from the one's that Subaru is giving out as "estimates"??


I think we're at the point, technologically, where you can have the best of both worlds. Higher torque output does make a car quicker with the same gearing. For example, the BEAMS 3SGE (200ps @7000rpm/155lb-ft @6000rpm, very close to the new FA, eh?) MR2 and the V6 MR2 are nearly equally matched in horsepower, yet the V6 MR2 will always trounce the 4 cylinder BEAMS. 0-60mph is 1s faster (6.6s vs 5.6s) and the quarter mile is slightly quicker (14.6 vs 13.9). Older Toyota V6s have double torque peaks, so there's an advantage there (3500rpm + 4400rpm). For low-torque motors with good top-end, you have options: 1) low gearing/close-ratio, 2) reduce weight. Honda usually goes with option 1, as do most manufacturers. Toyota has opted to do 1 AND 2. A miracle, IMO.

Anyway, this new FA boxer has its merits. It has a race engine compression ratio of 12.5:1 and is coupled with a new, performance oriented D-4S system. D-4S was co-developed by Toyota, Denso, and Yamaha, so you could say that Yamaha was involved indirectly. It's most likely underrated. Remember that 200hp today is different from when my 1MZ was tested. Look at it as a MINIMUM output rating rather than maximum. We'll see how it fares on the dyno. If it puts down 180-190whp, it'll be about 210-220hp at the crank.
 

·
Need For Speed
Joined
·
10,765 Posts
What you are talking about has mostly to do with easy drivability and accessibility. Little or nothing to do with the car being quick. It is a driver's oriented car with a high performance engine (although, I am very disappointed Yamaha/Toyota has no role in the development, but it must be due to low development costs).

Definitely, someone looking for easy drivability is going to be disappointed since it is about putting in the effort and skills and it would reward the driver with the responses, control and experience. That is what a driver's car is all about.
I don't want to have to treat every single road as a racetrack. Granted, I do that often, but some days I want to get a respectable mpg. Or if I'm feeling laid back, I don't want to have to push the crap out of the thing just to get it moving.

I push the Camry much farther than most people would dream of on a daily basis, but if it didn't have a fairly decent "easy drivability", then it wouldn't be a fun daily driver. And that's another reason why I love our 2000 Maxima...it has gobs and gobs of torque so it has the best of both worlds-being very quick (especially for its weight), and the ability to easily accelerate in 4th gear at 25-30 mph. Now THAT'S my kind of driver's car.
 

·
1MZ powered MR2
Joined
·
1,064 Posts
Yeah, the gearing will most likely be closely spaced to 5th gear with a longer 6th for cruising comfort and economy. I don't think anyone wants to be cruising at 80mph with the engine screaming at 4000rpm like my MR2 used to before I switched gearsets (and an engine :)).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
The enthusiasts can drive it just fine since it will have more than enough ease in daily drivability (152 ft-lbs is a lot of midrange for a 2600 lbs car). I am quite sure of that. History can vouch for that as well since they have always sold very well because people wanting driver's cars would love it.
Mmm, fair enough, and that is what I am in agreement with.

BTW, why are the specs on the Toyota sheet so different from the one's that Subaru is giving out as "estimates"??
Motor Trend is not clear if it's their estimate or Subaru's aside from the weight.
 

·
Tacoma Rocks
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
Mmm, fair enough, and that is what I am in agreement with.


Motor Trend is not clear if it's their estimate or Subaru's aside from the weight.
As a subscriber to MT, I can tell you, nevermind.
When it comes to estimates, they usually have their share of bad estimates.
I`ve seen it.
 
41 - 60 of 2041 Posts
About this Discussion
2K Replies
119 Participants
molson.david
Toyota Nation Forum
ToyotaNation Forum is a community dedicated to all Toyota models. Come discuss the Camry, Tacoma, Highlander, 4Runner, Rav4 and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top