Im happy with being the content aggregator homie for TFL
Any fucking way
Subaru WRX Review: better than the BRZ (FRS, GT86)? -- Everyday Driver (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkWyyY718AM#ws)
"Everyday Driver"
I didn't even watch the video, but if that phrase has even an ounce of merit to the outcome than it's a god damn no brainer.
A car that has more HP, more Torque, twice the passenger space and twice the cargo space while offering better performance AND awd would HAVE TO BE the better everyday driver.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on June 13, 2014, 11:33:04 AM
"Everyday Driver"
I didn't even watch the video, but if that phrase has even an ounce of merit to the outcome than it's a god damn no brainer.
A car that has more HP, more Torque, twice the passenger space and twice the cargo space while offering better performance AND awd would HAVE TO BE the better everyday driver.
It's the name of the show, not the determining factor of the comparison.
Those dummies are more concerned with amusing themselves with cleverness than they are with actually saying something not incredibly obvious or interesting.
Quote from: Rupert on June 13, 2014, 11:59:23 AM
Those dummies are more concerned with amusing themselves with cleverness than they are with actually saying something not incredibly obvious or interesting.
Everyone has to do reviews now and it's annoying.
Quote from: Catman on June 13, 2014, 05:56:12 PM
Everyone has to do reviews now and it's annoying.
Your opinions do not matter just because you have them.
The worst is the cell phone reviews ugh
I thought it was a good review. Everyone can't be (and thankfully isn't) Jeremy Clarkson, Chris Harris, or the big homie Steve Sutcliffe.
Febreeze twins just need 500ccs more displacement, 30 more HP and like 50 more lb ft of torque. Then they will be literally perfect.
Not sure why they don't just put the WRX engine in the BRZ next year.
Quote from: Catman on June 14, 2014, 07:58:45 AM
Not sure why they don't just put the WRX engine in the BRZ next year.
Supposedly there's not enough space to package the turbo, intercooler, and plumbing under the hood and still meet all of the various crash standards (I would guess that the pedestrian standards are the driving factor).
500ccs. All it needs.
The BRZ's Boxer is annoyingly torqueless. It was fun the first few times, but after that it just feels slow as shit.
Makes sense in the twisties and on track days. When I'm in the mountains on my bike, I don't want more power. I use the engine more for braking than accelerating. But when I'm on the highway or need to make a pass, I do. Problem is, nobody lives on a mountain pass. And if they do, they need turbos to handle the altitude
Bollocks. 944 makes plenty of power for all of my wants and desires and needs (needs being the same as anyone's), and it makes much less than a briz (power:weight better on the briz IIRC). Y'all can like power and want more power all you want, but silly justifications like oh but how will I ever pass someone are really quite pointless.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 14, 2014, 07:36:51 AM
I thought it was a good review. Everyone can't be (and thankfully isn't) Jeremy Clarkson, Chris Harris, or the big homie Steve Sutcliffe.
Febreeze twins just need 500ccs more displacement, 30 more HP and like 50 more lb ft of torque. Then they will be literally perfect.
There was no new information in there, there wasn't any interesting cinematography or any cool sounds, etc. I mean, I agree that not everyone needs to be bombastic/clever/your homie, but if you can't contribute something new or interesting, why bother (ego and a misplaced sense of self-interestingness, that's why).
Quote from: Rupert on June 14, 2014, 12:12:58 PM
Bollocks. 944 makes plenty of power for all of my wants and desires and needs (needs being the same as anyone's), and it makes much less than a briz (power:weight better on the briz IIRC). Y'all can like power and want more power all you want, but silly justifications like oh but how will I ever pass someone are really quite pointless.
:rolleyes:
Rubbish, nobody needs the power of a 944, it far more than anyone needs. Nobody needs more than a 50 hp VW beetle. I have made this decision for everyone and therefore, it must be true.
Quote from: Rupert on June 14, 2014, 12:12:58 PM
Bollocks. 944 makes plenty of power for all of my wants and desires and needs (needs being the same as anyone's), and it makes much less than a briz (power:weight better on the briz IIRC). Y'all can like power and want more power all you want, but silly justifications like oh but how will I ever pass someone are really quite pointless.
Good thing no one charged you $26,000 for the 944.
It's heading that way, though!
Quote from: SVT32V on June 14, 2014, 12:22:44 PM
:rolleyes:
Rubbish, nobody needs the power of a 944, it far more than anyone needs. Nobody needs more than a 50 hp VW beetle. I have made this decision for everyone and therefore, it must be true.
No, I did not say that no one should ever have a powerful car, thanks for asking.
I said that if you want to justify more power, say that you like more power. If you need some excuse for it (but the passing lane!), you're Doing It Wrong (as certain large feline fans might say).
In modern freeway traffic, BTW, even a 50 hp VW is almost adequate for safety.
Quote from: Catman on June 14, 2014, 07:58:45 AM
Not sure why they don't just put the WRX engine in the BRZ next year.
Can't. Packaging.
Take the hood off. Or the front fenders. Saw a S2k without either front fender yesterday.
Junk
Quote from: Rupert on June 14, 2014, 12:50:26 PM
No, I did not say that no one should ever have a powerful car, thanks for asking.
I said that if you want to justify more power, say that you like more power. If you need some excuse for it (but the passing lane!), you're Doing It Wrong (as certain large feline fans might say).
In modern freeway traffic, BTW, even a 50 hp VW is almost adequate for safety.
Lol. A 50 hp VW is not adequate. I drove one in Ghana. The avg car today is faster than it was when the 944 was new.
200 HP is not slow. Plenty of cars that have 200 HP are quick enough and "safe". It's the fact that you have to ring the thing out just to keep up with traffic. It's the way the power is delivered. I don't think the car would have lost anything by having 500cc's more displacement.
It's just a hair slower than an AP1 S2000 and has a more usable torque curve, but people will always bitch about the BRZ regardless. Everyone on here whined about how heavy and expensive cars are. A cheap, great handling rwd sports car, and suddenly everyone puts a ton of emphasis on power.
Quote from: MrH on June 15, 2014, 07:44:16 AM
It's just a hair slower than an AP1 S2000 and has a more usable torque curve, but people will always bitch about the BRZ regardless.
AP1 S2K has better roll-on performance (better top gear 30-50 and 50-80 times, better 5-60 times). I'm going to say that either the S2K has the better torque curve, or the Frizbee has horrible gearing.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 14, 2014, 08:01:55 PM
Lol. A 50 hp VW is not adequate. I drove one in Ghana. The avg car today is faster than it was when the 944 was new.
200 HP is not slow. Plenty of cars that have 200 HP are quick enough and "safe". It's the fact that you have to ring the thing out just to keep up with traffic. It's the way the power is delivered. I don't think the car would have lost anything by having 500cc's more displacement.
Lol. I drove a 70 hp MGB in the States, and it was adequate. The average car having a higher top speed and better acceleration doesn't mean a thing on the freeway with speed limits and relatively constant speed traffic (merging and passing). A lot of power can be convenient and fun, but it's not necessary.
I imagine things are a little different on the east coast, with a bit faster traffic, more traffic, and shorter on-ramps, but the point stands-- just be honest with yourself that you like having power for its own sake, and stop trying to justify it with fakey pragmatic logic.
Quote from: MrH on June 15, 2014, 07:44:16 AM
It's just a hair slower than an AP1 S2000 and has a more usable torque curve, but people will always bitch about the BRZ regardless. Everyone on here whined about how heavy and expensive cars are. A cheap, great handling rwd sports car, and suddenly everyone puts a ton of emphasis on power.
A hair slower? Lol. It's a second slower to 60 and through the quarter. Once you get the S2K rolling, it's as fast as my car, but you literally have to rev it to 9K to get that speed. The low cam on the S2K is pretty bad (my H22A Accord had more seat of the pants low/midrange punch than an AP1), but <4K in the freeze breeze is way worse. It doesn't need more peak power. just more area under the curve, which would come at zero cost/weight with more displacement. Just like they did with the significantly faster/more powerful S2K.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 15, 2014, 07:04:06 PM
A hair slower? Lol. It's a second slower to 60 and through the quarter. Once you get the S2K rolling, it's as fast as my car, but you literally have to rev it to 9K to get that speed. The low cam on the S2K is pretty bad (my H22A Accord had more seat of the pants low/midrange punch than an AP1), but <4K in the freeze breeze is way worse. It doesn't need more peak power. just more area under the curve, which would come at zero cost/weight with more displacement. Just like they did with the significantly faster/more powerful S2K.
Um, where are you getting your 0-60 and 1/4 mile times?
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2003-audi-tt-vsbmw-z4-honda-s2000-nissan-350z-porsche-boxsterblow-dryers-test-results.pdf (http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2003-audi-tt-vsbmw-z4-honda-s2000-nissan-350z-porsche-boxsterblow-dryers-test-results.pdf)
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s-specs.pdf (http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s-specs.pdf)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 16, 2014, 06:37:01 AM
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2003-audi-tt-vsbmw-z4-honda-s2000-nissan-350z-porsche-boxsterblow-dryers-test-results.pdf (http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2003-audi-tt-vsbmw-z4-honda-s2000-nissan-350z-porsche-boxsterblow-dryers-test-results.pdf)
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s-specs.pdf (http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s2013-porsche-cayman-s-vs-2013-scion-fr-s-specs.pdf)
Is that an AP1 or AP2?
I thought AP1s were around 5.6 to 60, 14.6-14.7 in the 1/4 mile. BRZs are high 5's, 15.0 1/4 mile.
AP1s were a low 14... A lot quicker then a frbrz
Quote from: MrH on June 16, 2014, 11:59:35 AM
Is that an AP1 or AP2?
I thought AP1s were around 5.6 to 60, 14.6-14.7 in the 1/4 mile. BRZs are high 5's, 15.0 1/4 mile.
AP1. 04 was the first year of the AP2. I should have linked the article.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2003-honda-s2000-page-6 (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2003-honda-s2000-page-6)
I used to think I liked DOHC VTEC but in retrospect it was a lot of work for not a lot of reward. I spent more time working to keep it on the big cam than enjoying the rest of the car, which was a real shame. The V6 out of the Accord/TL/CL with more bark might have been a better choice.