2017 Subaru BRZ

The internet has doled out a lot of mixed opinions on the BRZ and its twin, now called the Toyota 86, since their launch a few years ago. We've seen them succeed at a national level in autocross and now it's time to test out the 2017 version.

Quoting Tom: "The internet has doled out a lot of, well, internet onto the BRZ"

I know this is beating a dead horse, but it does need a turbo variant. Preferably when the second-generation car comes out with better F/R weight distribution. The engine is only 2 cylinders long, and it's 55/45?! But seriously, it is not unreasonable to think that Subaru could sell a turbo version with 275HP and better springs and brake calipers for under $33k. Heck, if the WRX is only $1k more than this, and the STI sells for mid-30s while having two extra differentials to upgrade as well as the AWD electronics to go with it, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a similar but less-complex jump in specs for a similar-or-slightly-less jump in price. A WRX engine, WRX brakes, STI/SPT springs/shocks from the factory, and bingo. A 275HP sub-3000-lb car for low $30k's... It would trump the Miata performance-wise and be close to 370Z territory, if not level with it (and the Cayman). The only worry I think is that they are dealing with a small market, and too close to $35k, you're creeping into base Mustang GT/Camaro SS territory.

You can turbo a base BRZ for the theoretical $4-5k difference, but then you're looking at lots more power and no money left for brakes or spring/shock combo. There is no 275-300HP turbo kits because the cost to do that isn't much less than the 350-400HP kits. The factory can do it cheaper, especially since it is basically swapping Legos to them.

The engines in the twins do not have any margin for increased loads. Fine if you want to self warranty, but without a completely different engine, it would not work.

By the time all the incremental upgrades were made, the result would be a car that weighed as much as theHyundai and yet still lacked the hp to compete in the porker class.

The value proposition for the twins is light weight and the ensuing chassis dynamics . If that is not something that you value over surplus power, it is not the car for you.

There have been rumblings of a second generation car, so perhaps your wish will be granted. :) I wonder if raiding the parts bin for a varient of the n/a 2.5L would be the cheapest way for the manufacturer to go. Staying n/a would probably mean they could continue using the same transmission, and probably diff. Cooling system upgrades would be minor. A turbo setup means lots of changes and additional costs that they probably couldn't justify with such a low volume car.

I have only sat in a scion, but I liked it. If I was to join the chorus of more power, I would prefer the H6 over boost.

Are the incremental changes enough to make it competitive in CS? It sure looks like the NC has an edge over the earlier cars though it's not necessarily a big edge.

In reply to Brian:

I'm with you, a relatively low displacement, rev happy (well for a pancake motor) H6 if possible. something like a 2.8L churning out 240-260hp.

Power is not always the answer. A 280zx turbo was a whole lot faster than a 240z, but it was less fun. The BRZ / FRS appeal has to do with it's light weight, frisky chassis, and simple / affordable nature. There are plenty of 300hp+ ground pounders out there. I'm glad the Frisbee twins exist exactly the way they are.

It's not a perfect car, but it ticks the boxes that are most important to me. If I was shopping for a new sports car, it would be between the Frisbee and an ND MX-5. I'd probably go with the Frisbee, as the ND's trunk has shrunk so badly--- it's no longer even remotely practical.

I've sometimes been pretty hard on my old BRZ, but the truth is that it is a few simple tweaks away from being a very nice car. I disagree a bit with you Joe. I will say what the car needs is a bit more torque and drive-ability. I remember my old 2.2 Subaru having a good midrange, where the BRZ falls kinda flat. I would think a bump in displacement with maybe 20 or 30hp and a corresponding torque number would do wonders in real world usability.

And like I've said here before, an option for much nicer seats would have made it more difficult for me to turn it loose. I would have paid a lot more to have had a better option. I think Subaru is missing out on a population of older guys that would like the car and buy it.

I'm not that old, but as a daily driver for me, it was not working. If it were only a toy that was an autocross or track car, I would have liked it much better. Ironically, as the prices have dropped on the early cars, I'm looking at one for just that purpose. Plus I think it has been reclassed into possibly an overdog.

^^ I hear you Dave, and I'd also like a more willing power plant in the Frisbees. I still love them as they are---- but a more eager rush to redline would make me happier.

I found the seats comfy, but sometimes I wonder why automakers don't jus copy VW seats from the mid- late 80's and call it a day. Those sport seats (made by RECARO) were fairly light, simple to adjust and just about perfect.

So regardless of whether or not the BRZ has enough power, why is it that so many people complain about lack of power? Seems like other enthusiast cars do not get nearly the hate.

In my mind there are VERY few cars that wouldn't be better with 100 more HP.

I think that it's precisely because the chassis is so capable. It's fun with stock power, throw on coilovers and wide sticky tires and a supercharger and change nothing else - and it still works.

EDIT

And an oil cooler. You're gonna want an oil cooler.

Robbie wrote: So regardless of whether or not the BRZ has enough power, why is it that so many people complain about lack of power? Seems like other enthusiast cars do not get nearly the hate. In my mind there are VERY few cars that wouldn't be better with 100 more HP.

For me it was the power delivery and the roughness of the engine. For some cars the engine just doesn't match the chassis well, and this is one of them. I wanted to like the FR-S, but after I drove it I walked away liking the car, but really disliking the engine.

Robbie wrote: So regardless of whether or not the BRZ has enough power, why is it that so many people complain about lack of power? Seems like other enthusiast cars do not get nearly the hate. In my mind there are VERY few cars that wouldn't be better with 100 more HP.

It's because the engine doesn't really do anything until north of 4500rpm. So the lack of midrange really hurts it as a DD.

I've owned a BRZ for 2.5 years now.

I dunno. You guys have probably driven more cars than I have, but I've not found the mid-range lacking. Yes there is a noticeable increase in thrust above 4,500 but by then you're driving like an shiny happy person.

In reply to racerdave600:

I'm with you, Dave. 205 Hp would be fine if there were 200 ft-lbs as well, but 156 is pretty pitiful in a 2800 lb. car.

Here's what I'm talking about:

Can you spot the sad part?

In reply to jstein77:

D-o-w-n-s-h-i-f-t

The reason I bought my FR-S was specifically because it wasn't like anything else on the market. I've never understood the mindset of "Car A would be a whole lot better if it had XYZ to be more like/more competitive with Car B." Why the heck haven't you just gone and bought Car B already? If I wanted a 370Z, Genesis coupe, or V-6 Mustang, I would already have one. If the twins were turboed or had a bigger six, I wouldn't have bought one. I wanted a Miata with a bit more interior room and a real roof, and I'm pretty happy so far.

Because the Miata makes sense, even though the RX-7 has existed in the past, there's not been much comparison of the two by the enthusiasts.

The Frisby twins, for some reason, are compared to the Supra and WRX/STi.

It really should be considered the tin top Miata many wanted.

ae86andkp61 wrote: In reply to jstein77: D-o-w-n-s-h-i-f-t The reason I bought my FR-S was specifically because it wasn't like anything else on the market. I've never understood the mindset of "Car A would be a whole lot better if it had XYZ to be more like/more competitive with Car B." Why the heck haven't you just gone and bought Car B already? If I wanted a 370Z, Genesis coupe, or V-6 Mustang, I would already have one. If the twins were turboed or had a bigger six, I wouldn't have bought one. I wanted a Miata with a bit more interior room and a real roof, and I'm pretty happy so far.

I went directly from a 370Z to the BRZ. There were things I liked in each car, but the BRZ, to me at least, needs a few things to make it usable in my life. The problem is that there are only a few coupes out there, so they get compared a lot. No doubt the 370 was better at everyday life, but it was also close to $20k more expensive and I'm not forgetting that.

The BRZ excelled at being a great drivers car, but with a few tweaks, it could be soooo much better. I think that's what a lot of us are lamenting about. I didn't expect it to have the hp of the 370, but I did think it needed a bit more torque for modern real world driving. My commute or going to the store is not the same as running an autocross or track event, and this is where the twins fall a bit short. Sure I'm nit picking, but I so wanted to like one well enough for long term ownership. There are things about it that work so well, it makes me want to kick Toyota and Subaru in the rear for not finishing it.

Regarding the torque dip, haven't some of the aftermarket tunes resolved that issue? If so, then I don't entirely understand why Subaru can't fix it. I don't claim to really understand the benefit of having the mixed direct and port injection system either. Maybe it improves fuel economy by 5%, but does is it a worthwhile trade off for power delivery in that kind of car?

I think all Subarus need to be "bumped" up. The BRZ needs the Forester XT 250 hp motor, the Forester XT motor should be at around 280 hp, the WRX should be around 320 hp and the upcoming redesigned STi should be at least 350 hp to compete with the Focus RS. Now if Subaru would just call me and ask for my advice the world would be a better place. Oh and I also think that Mazda should offer a hardcore Miata like a Type R for instance with a turbo and 230-250 hp. Ya....I know..... it would likely be at $40K but I can dream.

In reply to Snrub:

Mixed injection fixes carbon buildup issues, but still has the power and economy benefits of direct injection

My main annoyances are the easily damaged paint and minimal front ground clearance. Better paint than a white NA Miata though. Low power keeps my inner delinquent in check, on straight roads, and sadly, on twisties when passing. I've grown fond of the crickets.

I'm wondering how many people complaining about the BRZ have driven a non-turbo rotary. It sounds like half the fun is keeping it at a boil to get to the power.

What's that old quote? People buy horsepower but drive torque?