Buy a frs because its rwd and cheap

No way, pain in the ass to work on. I smoke the v6's. Plenty of room under the hood for a big turbo with the 4banger

You mad bro

The FRS/BRZ/GT86 doesn't have much power. They are right. I suppose the car wasn't exactly designed to he a straight line speed car so it shouldn't matter. Trouble is, the car looks fast. It's got the kind of looks that makes you think it's fast, but it just fucking isn't. It's almost like it's factory riced. It's not over the top or anything and I think it looks nice, it's just slower than it looks.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret.

Straight line is optimal conditions for speed.
If it's slow in a straight line, it's always slow.

A "can't turn" Mustang literally pulls more Gs, so it's not remotely fast around corners either.

It's an economy car that sacrificed economy to "feel" more like a sporty car. Problem is the feel alone does not make it sporty since it lacks the other traits of a sporty car.

What does that make it?
It sacrifices too much power and handling ability in favor of economy and cost to be sporty.
It sacrifices too much economy in favor of feeling sporty to be a good economy car.
It sacrifices too much space and comfort to be considered a luxury or even economical people mover.
RWD gives it less than average capability in inclement weather or low traction surfaces. That combined with the lack of space clearly takes it out of the practical car category.
While it's not an expensive car, it's not exactly competitively priced either. You don't get very much for the money compared to other options.

It tries to be everything, but doing anything well requires compromises in other areas. The end result is a vehicle that compromises every aspect of itself in a failed attempt to be something it's not. It's just bad at everything.

Y-YOU DELETE THIS

Stick a supercharger on it and get some sticky rubber, all that needs to be done with that car

>rwd and cheap
>like fucking $30k
>you can almost buy 2 c5 corvettes for this much
>you can buy 2 350hp v8 sportscar cars for the price of a 200hp frs

frs/brz is not cheap, what the fuck are you thinking?

>t. cum-guzzling miata poorfag benchracer

>buy Fiat 500 Abarth because it was cheap and it's fun
>family makes fun of me for driving a "girl's car"
>buy a Lincoln MKZ for dat comfy ride later on
>everyone calls me an old man

D E L E T
E
L
E
T

Because they're bench racers with no source of self worth besides lap and 1/4m times clocked in their cars by professional track drivers

It exists to look and feel good. It's a fucking luxury street car for young men.

Cars are for more than track day and emm pee gees user. You'd think they would be, with some people spending five hours a day driving them.

Personally for 26k I would rather get this
cargurus.com/Cars/inventorylisting/viewDetailsFilterViewInventoryListing.action?sourceContext=&newSearchFromOverviewPage=true&inventorySearchWidgetType=AUTO&entitySelectingHelper.selectedEntity=c402&entitySelectingHelper.selectedEntity2=c453&zip=60020&distance=50000&searchChanged=true&promotionsOnly=true&trimNames=Z06&modelChanged=false&filtersModified=true#listing=143888541
Based C5Z

The 90 hp Miata costs $2k

Why buy an MKZ when a Caddy is better in every way?

>luxury for people that haven't figured out what luxury is
>sporty for people that haven't figured out what sporty is
>economical for people that haven't figured out what economy is
>practical for people that haven't figured out what practicality is

You missed the point entirely. If I spent five hours a day in a car, the FRS/BRZ would be the last thing I would choose.

It's not spacious, it's not luxurious, it's overall design favors a sporty "feel" over a comfortable ride, the low seating position that creates a false sense of speed is terrible for visibility in traffic or in even mild hills, RWD and shitty traction make it easy to break loose and feel more powerful than it is, but are terrible for evasive maneuvers which you will eventually need to make if you drive that much and are terrible in inclement weather which you will probably be driving in if you have to drive that much.

It's for ignorant and irresponsible people, male or female.

>figured out what luxury is

Luxury is a subjective quality, not a quality defined by your cigar smoking dad and a corporation that uses a cigar smoking dad as its head of marketing. Luxury is good feels and comfort you get from wasting money.

Luxury is a 20 year old hoon in an FRS, content in himself because he's hooning around and far more comfortable physically and mentally than he would be in a "proper" luxury car. Luxury is separate from practicality, and only rarely occurs in tandem with it.

That's not to say that hoon is a fucking faggot retard, of course.

>evasive maneuvers
t. bus rider

You enjoying your car is not luxury. Luxury being subjective does not mean that you can attach whatever definition you so desire and accurately label anything you want as luxurious.

I enjoy hooning around in 25 year old V8 RWD base model beat to shit pickups. That does not make them luxurious. The old worn out cloth seats while not uncomfortable are far from luxurious.

Is it wasted money if you spent less to get more? Maybe you should come up with a new subjective definition of "wasted" as well.

When I look at an frs I pretty much see a crz. Both complete POS in the same ways. Owners of both cars pull the same mental gymnastics to convince themselves they don't own a terrible car

Enjoying your car is not luxury. A car that was designed to be enjoyed above all else is luxury, even if it's luxury for literal children.

Bus riders do not have to directly deal with the complete fucking idiots that populate public roads. Those of us that drive on a regular basis do. I assume it varies based on location but I've lost count of the number of accidents I've avoided.

You care too much what other people think about you
You don't care about how your car drives
You don't care about how you feel driving your car
You only care what people think about you driving that car.

You are a failure.

>weight and weight transfer dont matter when cornering!

how to tell that someone has never driven a car remotely quickly or taken a car to its grip limits

A go kart is designed to be enjoyed, that does not make it luxurious.

The plastic 1:64 scale toy cars at the dollar store are designed to be enjoyed, that does not make them luxurious.

Here we can see the difference in using logic to reach a conclusion vs attempting to use logic to find support for a conclusion you've made in the absence of logic.

Jesus Christ, you make some terrible decisions

Humor me, what point are you trying to make?

Are you implying that a car that cannot change direction as quickly and has to maintain a slower speed through a corner corners better just because you like the feel of the weight distribution and suspension setup?

Oh, right. You're just grasping at straw men to use for an ad hominem.

>I do not know how vehicle weight affects inertia or weight transfer when determining how to enter a turn at speed or hit apex

try a rally course one day

>another straw man
>to support another ad hominem

Is that really all you know how to do? At least make it interesting and try directly debating anything I've said.

I don't debate people who don't know how to drive :^)

benchracers who think skid pad Gs have any relevance to how a car behaves at the apex have nothing of value to say :^)

It seems to have decent suspension geometry and curb weight. You're not letting stock tires and brakes dictate solely how a car performs are you? In testing it also seems to run right with a miata despite the shitty stock tires. Sounds to me like something a lot of people wanted, a coupe miata.

>another straw man
>to support another ad hominem
>to avoid a direct debate

I think that pretty much sums it up. I have no further questions.

There's no strawmanning here, I'm simply saying you don't know how to drive, based off of some of your hilariously moronic statements in the thread

there's no debate to be had with non driving simpletons

>I don't debate people that think real world objective measurement of performance has any relevance to how a car performs

>Sounds to me like something a lot of people wanted, a coupe miata.
The Miata is not particularly sporty in stock configuration. One of it's biggest redeeming qualities is it's price. It's a cheap taste with an aftermarket to support expansion as time and money allow. Now you're paying $25-30k instead of $1500-2500. Once you take price into consideration, you really can't even compare the two any longer.

Wow new miatas go for 1500-2000 dollars? Guess I should head to a dealership.

>real world measure of performance

You've posted none though
Start posting real skid pad numbers, weights lap, times etc and I jump in on this argument

As of now you look like another faggot user with a decent vocabulary

It corners well, if you feel bored just go 10/10 and get a little slideways on the touge. Drag cars are NOT fun to drive on the street. You do one pull and you are worried your engine is going to blow and it only lasts a few seconds before you are going maniac fast.

>to support another ad hominem
>to avoid a direct debate

I'm assuming with all the time you spend accusing people of Veeky Forums of not driving and avoiding any sort of debate with objective facts, you probably don't have any time to drive.

Your preference to logical fallacies over debate hint at you not being old enough to drive anyway.

stop replying to a benchracing shitposter

skid pad Gs mean nothing when you're attempting to take a tight turn or hairpin at speed, because on a skid pad you transfer all weight through steering action and not through forward acceleration

the fact that he doesnt realize this makes him just another subhuman bus rider

I'm aware of that but you're just as bad for encouraging roundabout argument that goes nowhere.

>he hasnt seen the norcal meet threads over the past year and a half
>still thinks that challenging someone's credibility on a subject through evidence of lacking knowledge constitutes a personal insult

kek
e
k

youtube.com/watch?v=7rhpWOQhtTQ

Because Cadillac are absolutely abysmal in terms of cost of ownership, and the MKZ was getting a facelift the next year so I got it for nearly $10k off.

How so?

>buy Fiesta ST
>get called a fag quite often
>mom said I was compensating for getting a "sports car"
I am a faggot, but it's getting annoying. How is buying a fun, cheap, and lightweight hot hatch faggy or compensating for anything?

>Straight line conditions are optimal so if its fast in a straight line its fast in the corners and if its slow in the straight line its slow in corners.

Completely untrue in fact if you wanted maximum straight line speed you would have to add features that completely kill your cornering speed which is why you don't see dragsters winning F1

Also on the subject of F1 a proper racing bike will easily outaccelerate an F1 car on a flat out straightaway but the F1 car will destroy the bike through the corners and lap much better times.

Your entire post was built upon a huge and massively incorrect assumption.

>turbo install
>make 400hp

because

>responding to obvious shitpost seriously

lets raise the bar on Veeky Forums a bit and only bite hard on the shitposters that know something about cars

the threads become way more fun that way

Same thing as my Celica really.

People just can't enjoy a lightweight sporty cars without being butthurt about power apparently.

This is why cars like the integra/celica/240sx do not exist anymore, this is why we cant have nice things.

>ignoring the lolgoodbyepower torque dip

Also the Miata is faster

>Shitty car a is just as fast as shitty car b!!

I would hate to be the type of person who gives a shit about something like that

>miata
>faster

proof?

>triggered

Is this alphonse actually not shitposting? Holy shit.

How's your personality? You just a quiet pushover? Cause if so that's probably why. Tell he kid in the river civic to put up or shut up. If his car is faster than yours then put some money into it and make it fucking fast. I know some guys with frs that are just office workers losers and they get made fun of but other guys who did more than just lower the car and put wheels on it.
The car doesn't make the man

You completely missed the point. You're not going to go faster around a corner than you are in a straight line.
We're not comparing Formula 1 to Top Fuel drag cars.

>You've posted none though

2013 Mustang V6 - 2013 Scion FRS

>0-60
5.3s - 6.2s

>skidpad
.95g - .93g

>braking 60-0
110ft - 118ft

>MT Figure Eight
25.4s - 25.9s

>Willow Springs Streets of Willow
1:29.09 - 1:31.15

Real world measurable objective results: Mustang is better across the board, even with the V6. This a live rear axle car that is known for it's inability to turn. The fact that there is even a comparison to be made with the "god machine" should tell you the FRS/BRZ is not even close to what it was hyped up to be.

Driver complaints: Mustang has body roll and feels large. FRS gets sideways more often than you'd like.

If you drive on public roads for five hours a day, a car that gets sideways when you don't want it to, isn't all that great on gas, and isn't comfortable is not something you want to be driving for those five hours. The only thing stopping you from running into a crowd of people is the fact that there's no crowd of people there for the FRS.

offleasefinancial.com/2014_Ford_Fiesta_Sanford_FL_262235579.veh

Am I making a mistake? I'm so fucking confused.

>this level of low effort shitposting
>lol you're going around corners slow anyway so who cares how quickly the corner is actually taken

>gets literally 100 extra horsepower and is only 2s faster than the 200 hp box on prius tires

...

>If his car is faster than yours then put some money into it and make it fucking fast.
For what reason though? There's always gonna be someone with a faster car.

your "point" was that a car thats fast in straight lines will be faster around corners than cars that are slower in straight lines

that is patently untrue

you are benchracing filth thats never apexed a turn except when turning the corner at the kitchen counter for your mother's freshly made tendies

>you're going slow so who cares how quickly
Are you convinced that you're taking a corner "more quickly" at 52mph than at 54 mph?

>750lbs lighter
>2s slower

There's an 86 model in Japan that retails for 17k brand new. It's a "featureless" model (no stereo, bumper isn't even painted). If I was an idiot that buys from stealerships I would consider the 17k 86 a good deal

>your "point" was that a car thats fast in straight lines will be faster around corners than cars that are slower in straight lines
No. I just told you what my point was, now you are telling me that my point was not my point, and are making up a new point for me.

That is a straw man.

here is the quote

>Straight line is optimal conditions for speed.
>If it's slow in a straight line, it's always slow.

based off this quote you know nothing about cars

OP sounds pretty self conscious. Saying to get more power probably wasn't the right choice of words but he's got to ask himself why he bought it.
>If he bought it to have a fun DD then he should just enjoy it and maybe do some autocross or some sort of motorsport to bring out the charm of the car
>If he bought it to impress some teenagers in civics then he should work on himself cause he's being a giant pushover from the sounds of things.
I see the same thing a lot with different people I ride with. The personality dictates how people will stand up for you or make fun of you.

>focus st or brz

>torque (muh power) or handling (muh driving feels)

that wasnt me

Yes, that is the quote. If what you are claiming my point was is what you actually got out of that, then you know nothing about the English language.

Once again I will explain it to you in a way that's even easier to understand. The car isn't going to corner any faster than it will go in a straight line. While slower than top fuel drag cars, F1 cars are still by no means slow in a straight line. Hence why I said we are not comparing F1 to top fuel.

You're comparing near opposite ends of a spectrum and attempting to draw parallels to a comparison of two cars that are close on the spectrum instead of just directly comparing the two cars you're trying to compare. Logically the only reason to do this is if comparing them directly does not support the conclusion you've already come to.

And now you're literally debating with me over what my point is as if you'd know better than I.

GOD
MACHINE

...

Top fuel and racing bikes absoloutely destroy F1 cars in a straight line, like completely and utterly annhilate them.

An F1 car is purely, significantly faster around most tracks than a superbike because it can use aero to corner far faster than a bike ever could, we're talking on the order that an F1 car would do 4 laps in the time the bike would do 3, it's that much of a difference.

You're an idiot.

not him but don't F1 cars do the 1/4 mile ~ 7.5s at 180mph?
is a Moto GP bike even faster than that?

>continuing to compare things we are obviously not comparing, I've said multiple times we are not comparing, and given reasons as to why the comparison is meaningless

Another straw man. I never said F1 cars are faster in a straight line than top fuel cars, or that top fuel cars are faster around most tracks than F1 cars.

That comparison does not work here.
The Mustang is faster in a straight line, and around the tracks.

And 0-60 in under 3s.

No, you were saying if something is faster in a straight line its the faster car which is patently untrue.

There are plenty of cars slower than the mustang in a straight line that would destroy it on the track because there's far more than just those numbers. Weight, its effect on cornering and braking, engine position and type have a huge effect hence why as someone posted a slow ass EK9 with less power/weight and a smaller engine and slower 0-60 still beats a Camaro SS around tsukuba

>No, you were saying if something is faster in a straight line its the faster
This is true.
If it's the faster car in a straight line, it's the faster car. Lowest lap time around any and every track? Of course not.

Since you're bent on the F1 vs top fuel comparison, let's make it a little more accurate.

Top fuel car obliterates F1 in a straight line. Agree? Great.
Now imagine that "can't turn" top fuel car pulling more lateral Gs on a skidpad than the "handling godmachine" F1 car AND beat it around most tracks while costing roughly the same brand new.

Sounds absurd, right? However absurd it sounds is how absurd it is to compare the Mustang to a top fuel car and the FRS to an F1 car.

>my reasoning being revealed as obviously flawed is just a strawman :^((((

>my car is faster even if its slower around a track :^(((((((((((

Look on the bright side, you're not in a Miata.

....you do realize the FRS is actually faster around many tracks with non prius tires, right

put potenza re070s on both and the FRS is a second faster around laguna seca

Was that the last straw, ... man?

Which track? Your cherry picked twisty course that favors your car?

>my reasoning being revealed
You didn't reveal any reasoning of mine. I have clearly stated my own reasoning.

>my car is faster even though it's slower :^(((((((((((
It works both ways. But it doesn't matter, because the Mustang is faster in a straight line and around the track

You're arguing points that do not apply in any way to the conversation and trying to tell me that my point is something other than what it is so that you have one single thing you can argue against, even if you made it up and it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Laguna Seca isnt a real racetrack. No FIA sanctioned events happen there.

Only scrubs who want to pretend heir slow car is fast think its a real racetrack.

>Laguna Seca isnt a real racetrack.
Any track that doesn't favor your favourite car isn't a real racetrack, right user?

>Hating the corkscrew

Get a load of this tard bucket.

>you do realize the FRS is actually faster around many tracks with non prius tires, right
And the Mustang is even faster with slicks and a V8.
If you want to get into the potential of the vehicle, throw a boosted 5.3 LS in a Miata and take out there.

The simple fact of the matter is that you can not conceivably call the FRS a better car without cherrypicking specific configurations at specific tracks. If I cherrypick stock Mustang configuration (which by the way is still stock unlike your cherrypicked FRS configuration, the GT500 gets around Willow Springs in 1:23.48.

>non prius tires
They're not "Prius tires" They were not designed specifically for the Prius. They're available as an option on the Prius in Europe if and only if you also have the optional upgraded wheels.

This is just an exaggeration used as a pathetic excuse for the car's poor performance. If you want to call them Prius tires then that just furthers the evidence of sacrificing performance for economy because the designers could not decide what kind of car they wanted to design.

>spending 500 extra on new tires vs spending $20k to upgrade to GT plus trackpack

:^)

>moving the goalposts in every single post

>thread devolves into literally the worst benchracing I've seen on Veeky Forums in weeks

There are only two racetracks worth mentioning - Willow Springs and Indianapolis Motor Speedway

Other racetracks are for posers with cars that are compromised from the purpose of going fast