Suppose BRZ/GT86 now has a $36k MSRP

suppose BRZ/GT86 now has a $36k MSRP
What does Veeky Forums wants in this new package?

Attached: frs time attack.jpg (1920x1280, 282K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=pkyficAs18Q
consumerreports.org/car-reliability/10-most-reliable-cars/
google.com/amp/s/www.torquenews.com/1084/2014-subaru-brz-holds-value-better-any-other-sports-car?amp
motortrend.com/news/epa-fuel-economy-variance-best-performers-real-world-fuel-economy-winners/
youtu.be/a-PijjOGa-Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

350 bhp, stickier and fatter tires and a better interior.

it already costs 54k eurobucks where I live
fml

>250hp/ton for $36k
>350hp from a 2L
Be realistic. Even if they used the EJ257 we'd only see about 290-300.
Although the BRZ should be nearing the end of its life cycle, I wonder if we'll see a successor.

desu, where you live it's also only 20-25k eurobucks after 1-2 years, and you can get it secondhand easily.
it really isn't that bad living in the NL the roads are god-tier and the cucks that buy new pay for them.

Really, ever drove to Belgium?
You go on the off-ramp, and in the middle of the wacky unpredictable turn of it you enter the Belgian road territory.
The road goes to absolute dangerous shit and it's ridiculous.

Who said anything about FA20?

Fuck that m8. Crank the price up like that and now you're trying to compete with an entirely nicer market segment, so you'd have to make the 86 just plain nicer all around, not just toss in a bigger engine and make the stereo system not suck balls.

Attached: Screenshot_20180324-064913.png (1440x2560, 366K)

>Who said anything about FA20?
>Even if they used the EJ257

Imagine, for the price of a Mustang GT, you could get the performance of an EcoBoost Mustang with even less practicality.

A flat 6

Attached: 8100B3E9-F089-4B06-8E2A-224C79AB037A.jpg (600x450, 51K)

Okay, lemme try again.
Who said about flat 4?

Wouldn't fit without massively compromising the front end. A V6 or even V8 is a better fit.

Who said anything about keeping a shit-tier boxer?
Put in a V8.

Doesn't matter what the MSRP is, it's still a weebmobile.

srsly. I could nitpick the toyobaru all day long, but it's still the fact that I found an almost new one for like half price that sold me on it. I'm completely comfortable with accepting I'd have to shop upmarket or take on a project to get closer to the exact mix of features I'd like.

Or probably just go for the two-car solution.

i fucking hate that they named it tS, just too similar to the TC, that Scion shit.

>Wouldn't fit
wrong
youtube.com/watch?v=pkyficAs18Q

Attached: 86-Style-2013-44.jpg (800x533, 193K)

I would want a Dacia Duster

Right, I'm sure Subaru is going to develop an entirely new engine to use in a trim of a car that barely sells any units. Even if they used that shitty CUV engine, the r&d on boosting it would put them way under. It's just retarded to think they'd ever do that.

>EcoBoost Mustang with even less practicality.
In what ways is a ecoboost mustang more practical than the BRZ? BRZ gets better mileage, is cheaper to maintain, and is more reliable.

>What is a hypothetical situation?

>In what ways is a ecoboost mustang more practical than the BRZ? BRZ gets better mileage, is cheaper to maintain, and is more reliable.
A turbo model wouldn't be any of those things and it still has a smaller backseat and trunk.

WRX engine or some decently powerful i4
Weighs like 2500 lbs because of lighter parts

Well then while we're at it, they should just make it a midengine twin turbo V12 with a DCT and AWD and sell it for $36k. Since we've decided to throw any sense of realism out the window, hell, they could make it a quad turbo X16.

>turbo model wouldn't be any of those things and it still has a smaller backseat and trunk.
A turbo Subaru would still definitely get better mileage, be more reliable and less expensive to maintain. True it has less cargo space, but it's also a much smaller car which makes it more practical for city driving

Attached: FT_IIvsGenCvsStangvsMX5.jpg (550x365, 65K)

250-300hp, idk how supercharge turbocharge or h6 is fine

>A performance tuned turbo would get better fuel economy than the naturally aspirated version.
Absolutely delusional. The BRZ already is only rated for a measly 2mpg combined over the Mustang on it's current state. Even the WRX gets worse milage than the EBM, although it's AWD so the BRZ would have a slight increase, it still would at best tie.
And also the 5 year cost to own insurance, fuel, maintenance, repairs) for the BRZ and EBM are almost there same, so I'd like to see your source that shows the BRZ being more reliable and cheaper to maintain.

Honestly? I could make something good for less than $30k (base model of course)

>Turbo system from the Forester XT, bump up the boost a bit
>Upgraded rods/pistons
>Hawkeye WRX 4-piston brakes (not Brembo)
>Upgraded radiator for cooling

Throw in some nifty badging and aero with the new model generation. Vuala: You got yourself a new BRZ "RS" or some other moniker, but definitely not STI. That name plate is gonna be saved for the $40k base.

Real world economy for the ecoboost is terrible. The BRZ on the otherhand gets consistently better mileage than posted.

The BRZ and 86 are rated as one of the most reliable cars available today, I'm not sure why you think the emb is on the same level?

>$36k
I wouldnt want anything because if I was going to drop that kind of money Id get a GT or an SS.

Wow look at all that proof you didn't post. It's almost like you're making shit up even though the EPA, Edmunds, and KBB all say otherwise.

Some reading material for you

consumerreports.org/car-reliability/10-most-reliable-cars/

google.com/amp/s/www.torquenews.com/1084/2014-subaru-brz-holds-value-better-any-other-sports-car?amp

motortrend.com/news/epa-fuel-economy-variance-best-performers-real-world-fuel-economy-winners/

Attached: Screenshot_20180324-082838.png (1440x2560, 1.56M)

>Consumer reports
Lmao I should've known. If you have an actual credible source, try using that next time. Also, by the way, only shows that the BRZ is better than what it's rated for. It does not prove that it is significantly better than the Mustang and it is also irrelevant because the turbo version would perform much worse.
I'm patient, however, if you'd like to dig some more maybe you can find some other website to cherrypick "studies" from.

Attached: Screenshot_20180324-084102.png (1440x2560, 426K)

hp from a 2L
Honda gets 300hp to the wheels from a 2L. You can do tons of stuff to get that much HP

>I'm patient, however, if you'd like to dig some more maybe you can find some other website to cherrypick "studies" from.
How about this time you provide concrete data showing the ebm is more reliable or more economical than the BRZ?

How about that new 2.4 flat 4 that's coming in the ascent? It makes mad torque.

Attached: Screenshot_20180324-095124~2.png (1080x573, 133K)

I don't know if I'd pay $36k for it, but I'm a used car kind of guy anyway.

However, if you told me I had to cough up some extra on the used market for that, maybe I would have originally declined. But having lived with the FA20 for a while now, even though it is in some sense well-matched to the car, I would pay more to get more engine. I'd probably also have shopped around more critically though.

>Toyota decidea to put a V8 in the GT86
>Too incompetent to develop an engine by themselves
>Contact GM for collaboration
>GT86 now comes with an LS from the factory

I could live with that.

There's a big difference between 300 and 350

>Prove something that you never claimed
Ok.

Just jam the tundra engine in it.

Im sure it would fit.

i would like a rolling chassis, preferably under 20K

it would be better without that stupid boxer engine, give it some random shitty i4, hell some 5sfe from the 90's would be better.

in a perfect world, for how much they are overcharging for this thing i would expect nothing less than a 1uzfe.

>and such, this is life in yuropooria

Vanything, Too tall to pass crash tests.

Coming from pre-crash-nonsense-regulations era cars, I didn't really notice how bad it really is until getting a toyobaru.
>oh user it's like you're sitting an inch off the ground!
uh, no it isn't
>wow how do you get all the way down in there
i don't know, sit in it?
>what a seating position!
little bit high imo but I guess it's pretty good

And then you get out and look at whatever newish car you parked next to and the difference is staggering even though the shapes they use do a decent job of hiding it in many cases.

Yes but only 8% of our road and car related taxes are used for roads, the rest is for rapefugee projects. That shit could've been waaaaaay cheaper

I keep thinking how perfectly a Honda engine would fit the car. Small format with high output, turbo optional.

Attached: Honda-S2000-JDM-F20C.jpg (2048x1536, 1.13M)

checked I think maybe Honda or somebody else should build a competitor around an inline engine and different set of compromises. Would they be able to figure out how to carve market share out from Miata vs. 86 vs. Mustang or whatever else it would try to compete with?

Could be interesting.

fooking hell m8 my 15 year old miats with a smaller engine make more torque than that, what are toyobaru doing?

>smaller
>lighter
>more powerful
>more durable

it would be sweet, thus why i wish the car was offered as a rolling chassis

Yeah but then you'd start to think about making the whole chassis a little bit narrower, or giving it a tighter turning radius, or wanting to move the whole thing further over the rear axle or whatever else. The choice of using a boxer/Impreza underpinnings really shapes a lot of the package deal.

nah, i would be happy with almost any engine over a boxer.

who tf would buy that when you could get a mustang GT for the same price?

OK, but then what's so special about this particular chassis, considering that it's designed around accommodating a boxer?

Name 1 (ONE) other car with a hard top and an LSD that weighs this much.

Brand new? You have a point. I'm just saying if you don't want to put a boxer in it, then you might as well design an entirely different car that would be even better than buying one of these and doing an engine swap, or buying something else and doing and LSD swap, or whatever else.

An updated 2ZZ-FE or 3sg(t)e would be pretty damn fun in this thing.

They could but there's no motivation. There's no demand. Say they make a new s2k or something else, RWD 2 seats under 30k, they're selling 6, maybe 10k units max.

mx5 coupe
eg/ek civic si
integra type r

which stock honda 2l gets 300whp bro

nothing

there is nothing special about this car / chassis
If all this car had going for it was they designed it to work with a boxer engine instead of trying to be the successor of the original 86, then, good job i guess?

I thought the whole point of this car was to be a spiritual sucessor of the 86, but then they chose an engine that really lacks the ability to be worked on / modified or even properly serviced to last for 30+ years like the original. Throwing the boxer engine into the mix over complicates the car and jacks up the price when a cheap simple i4 could have had a much higher ceiling for improvement, just like the engine in the miata.

a honda v8 n some brembos

The new Civic type r?

No it doesn't

Porsche Cayman ;)

>I thought the whole point of this car was to be a spiritual sucessor of the 86, but then they chose an engine that really lacks the ability to be worked on / modified or even properly serviced to last for 30+ years like the original.

What are you talking about? There are 86 owners with 150,000 miles already on the stock engine with no signs of failing anytime soon.

Aside from the spark plugs (which aren't even that bad), the fa20a is stupid easy to wrench on.

Not to mention several solid FI kits that retain reliability while almost doubling engine output

The claim is 306 HP

Are there any people with the FI kits that have got some decent mileage on them?

I'm very curious as to how 12.5:1 holds up to boost.

There are plenty of people with the Jackson Racing supercharger who have been tracking their cars for years.

An oil cooler, a good tune, and regular maintenance is all that's needed to stay reliable

That's crank hp m8. You'd be lucky if it made 260 hp to the wheels.

There are people putting down 295whp stock. It sounds like Honda underrated the car.

Some wheel dynos are set to compensate for the difference and read high. The only way to tell would be to pull the engine and put it on an engine dyno in a shop.

Literally every dyno shows that it's underrated.

(citation needed)

They could easily get 350bhp with an FA20 with D4S

Sure they are.

Sorry you're too dumb to look anything up.

might as well get a used lotus elise for this kind of money

or TWO used miatas

What is burden of proof

More power, nicer interior/tech (infotainment, etc) better tires.

Looking at a 2017 special edition. Honestly was faster than i expected when i test drove

Attached: 20180324_144642.jpg (2117x2823, 823K)

This is just "I'm too retarded to search please spoonfeed me." You didn't post any proof with your claim hypocritical faggot.

The burden of proof lies on the person claiming something that is outside of the known logical route.
The known logical route is most of the time, car manufacturers do not overrate their engines. Therefore, you, being the person claiming something other than the norm, carries the burden of proof for his claim.
It's a known logical fallacy. Committing a logical fallacy is reason for your argument to be completely discarded.

I like how he commits fallacies then writes a paragraph. What a hypocritical loser.

Mwah

>The known logical route is most of the time, car manufacturers do not overrate their engines.
There are plenty of examples of sporty cars coming underrated from the factory. What makes you think the Civic type R is different?

youtu.be/a-PijjOGa-Q

the engine from a WRX and better tires

alternatively

a bump in displacement to 2.5L and lighter materials to drop curb weight to 2400lbs

and radically

a 250hp boxer six engine with better tires

>a bump in displacement to 2.5L and lighter materials to drop curb weight to 2400lbs
sex; would pay for

idc about tires, since they're a wear item. I'm even running 16s on mine BOI takes the pain out of potholes and puts the fun into going sideways around town

The 86 had the option of 16s from the factory. A lot of people prefer 16s. That's the route I'm going too

Veeky Forums would make the shittiest possible cars I swear.

I'm using like 15 yr old wheels from some kid's #rekt wrx. Not much for looks, but I can't see them from inside the car anyway. My patritcian taste in tires also keeps noise levels down on the highway while still providing much better ability in the snow than I was expecting. dat LSD is key.

Plenty of examples means nothing. There are hundreds of albino crows, does that mean the majority or even a significant ount of crows are white? No.
Also the majority of underated cars from factory were Japanese during the gentleman's agreement.

>the engine from a WRX and better tires
this, and:
>lighter materials

Actually the majority were German cars because of tax reasons.

an S54

>asks for sources
>provided with sources
>disregard sources because they don't conform to the reality you made up
>asks for more sources that say what he wants
>provides none of his own

Know how I know you're stupid?

>existing engine is 2.5 pistons long
>let's put in one that is 6 pistons long
m8

>>Turbo system from the Forester XT, bump up the boost a bit
This is why you don't understand.

They already haven't "bumped up the boost a bit" in the xt for about a million reasons explained over and over by every automotive journalist under the sun, this will never and has never been a logical thing to say.

Hueg motor doesn't belong in sports car pls no.