FR-S and BRZ sales are plummeting?

alfadriver wrote: The important parts to share are the block, pistons, and heads. Those are the really expensive parts. If they are not the same, well...

The MZR in the Miata uses unique pistons too, and they even changed the them half way through production...How unprofitable that must have been for Mazda to use such a unique engine with those significantly lower than FRS/BRZ production numbers at similar overall pricing.

Once again, the relative level of uniqueness that the engine has, and its effect on profitability/success, is far more known to the people making such decisions on a daily basis than a bunch of armchair experts...Including those that happen to work elsewhere within the industry.

In reply to Driven5:

For the Miata, it's not that big of a deal, until they go to direct injection.

DI puts a lot of development in the piston shape, which costs a lot of money.

As for the Miata, I wonder a lot how in world Mazda makes that thing and justifies it from a business standpoint. I'm very happy they make the car as an enthusiest, just can't figure how it's worth the money as a former stock holder.

Driven5 wrote:

alfadriver wrote: The important parts to share are the block, pistons, and heads. Those are the really expensive parts. If they are not the same, well...

The MZR in the Miata uses unique pistons too, and they even changed the them half way through production...How unprofitable that must have been for Mazda to use such a unique engine with those significantly lower than FRS/BRZ production numbers at similar overall pricing. Once again, the relative level of uniqueness that the engine has, and its effect on profitability/success, is far more know to the people making such decisions on a daily basis than a bunch of armchair experts...Including those that happen to work elsewhere within the industry.

lol, that last bit is funny.

making cars costs money, you know. The more unique it is, the more it costs.

Just sayn.

jv8 wrote: Why do all discussions of the BRZ/FRS turn into new vs used? We get it. Used cars are a better deal and this forum leans towards used. But I hope somebody buys new cars otherwise the supply of interesting used cars will dry up!

Your last sentence answers your first.

Everyone on this board always complains that there's no new affordable 2-door, RWD performance car for sale. Then when a company finally builds one of those cars, very few of the complainers are willing to step up and buy one new. Buying a used one 3-4 years later doesn't give the OEMs much of an incentive to spend tens of millions or more designing and building low-volume enthusiast cars.

evildky wrote: Keep in mind the MR2 sold about 130k copies in North America over the course of 12 years so it's more successful than the MR2. The 240Z sold about 150k cars in North america in just 3 years, the Z31 sold 150k cars in North America in just 2 years, the Z32 took 6 years to sell 150K cars. Japanese car sales in North America are strong for appliance cars, Japanese halo cars just don't sell that well in North America. We also tend to favor in retrospect the cars that didn't sell as well.

Going from memory, the original s30 cars (70 - 78) were never less than 50k a year (on average), 70 and 71 excepted; I think it was 10K units for 70, and 25K units for 71. And I think the 79zx hit 70k units, pretty good for a two seat sports car, impractical and all. I know they tailed off a fair amount after that, though.

For year and years, you could find a nice Z-car for $1500 - $2500 all day long.

I also think the original body Z-car is an exception to sports car production in general. They hit a vein with that one.

Fairly certain Vette's have always been, on average, a 30k a year production number.

I'll defer to those in automotive manufacturing as to profitability on niche cars, but I think as long as they're making a little money or breaking even, they'll help as marketing to bring people in to the dealership, brand excitement, "corporate identity" etc. I think the Vette does that for Chebbie, and I think the Miata does it for Mazda. How much the twins contribute to that, I don't know. Not to many sporty cars you can point to that have been manufactured for 30 years or more continuous. Vette, Miata, 911, and I can't think of many more. Z-cars took a hiatus, Supra's are gone, MR2s took a hiatus and are now gone again, Solstice/Sky are gone, Fiero, etc.

My buddy has a BRZ, drove it, very capable car imo, great chassis dynamics. Power deliver is flat, which is a little boring in a sporty car. Great for economy numbers and everything else that mfgr's have to account for in terms of CAFE, regulations ad nauseum, etc., but in terms of generating a little excitement in the seat of the pants, not so much.

Styling wise, when I saw them in pics, it was meh, but in person they liven up quite a bit (well, for me). I also think with a drop and wheels, they look really cool.

I think with a change in driving dynamic/power curve, the cars would generate a little more excitement in buyers. Several on here have said they were excited about the car, drove it, and thought "eh, not what I was expecting". If the non-enthusiast looking at it drives it and thinks the same thing, they figure "well, it drives like a Camry anyway, and with the Camry I get more space, utility etc..." and they buy the Camry. And the non-enthusiast being drawn to it is what would help drive sales numbers.

NOHOME wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

alfadriver wrote: The problem is that in terms of cost to make, it's more S2000 than Miata. The Miata has one HUGE advantage- it uses an engine that's mass produced in the multiple hundreds of thousands range. Especially the NC- where I suspect that the duratec/MZR engine sold well over a million a year for quite a while. Whereas the BRZ/FRS has a totally unique engine that's part subaru and part toyota, and is only sold in this car. I bet that most of the parts are unique to this engine, too. So while it won't have the same high end parts that the S2000 needed to hit 9000rpm, the relaive cost of the engine will be really, really close to that. And the engine is the reason the S2000 was $10k more than a Miata. 20k/year may be enough to pay the $1B to design and develop the engine as well as the extra cost to make a unique motor. But I don't see that based on it's market cost. If Subaru starts using that engine someplace else, it would help a ton (I don't see Toyota doing that at all). Still, for what it is, 20k a year is really, really good. Better than the Miata, and slightly better than the Solstace pair were at their best.

It's not a unique motor. It's used in other subarus. Just because it was the first to use that motor doesn't mean it's the only one.

I had not heard that- which ones? (and more importantly, at what volume?) That's good news for these cars.

Pretty much... all 4 cylinder Subarus.

I don't believe that to be true. The Frisbee engine was designed for and is unique to the twins. The flat 4 configuration is used across the board, but I don't think much transfers from other Subaru models. This uniqueness to the model is one of the things I don't like about the car and one of the reasons why enthusiast will not embrace the Twins in the used car market as a hot-rod platform; lack of used drivetrain parts that can be sourced for cheap and offered up to the Hooning Gods. Currently, any used engines are snapped up by the people who need to replace a blowed up factory engine after the factory has turned down the warranty. No bargains to be had. FA20D Subaru FA20D Wiki Quote: "The FA20D features both direct and port injection (Toyota's D-4S injection system) and Subaru AVCS variable valve timing system. It is used in the Subaru BRZ, and is identified by a Toyota engine family code known as the 4U-GSE, which is installed in the Toyota 86 and the Scion FR-S.[6] According to Subaru, 0W-20 oil is recommended."

I've been after a couple of heads for 2 years now... cheapest I've found is $350 @ head OCCASIONALLY... a damaged one shows up... but I've not been in the loop @ the time they show....

alfadriver wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

ProDarwin wrote:

Swank Force One wrote: FA20F. I think i exaggerated when i said "all 4 bangers." But they're in the WRX and Forester state-side, and they'll be expanding into everything within a year or two i'd bet.

Still, not the same motor like Alfa is talking about. Different pistons/rods/injection system. Heads? I think if the BRZ had the FA20F, it might be more appealing to many people :) I don't quite understand why they used that goofy engine anyway and didn't use the *exact* same engine as an Impreza, or even better, a Toyota I4 of some sort.

Same bore, stroke, is direct injection, etc. FA motors share many many many parts.

The important parts to share are the block, pistons, and heads. Those are the really expensive parts. If they are not the same, well...

Same block. Same heads.

Pistons are different compression, but if that was truly a big deal, you'd think that every car company wouldn't have changed compression throughout the "career" of their engines.

Mazda and Toyota in particular seem to have done this time and time again with no perceivable issues stemming purely from changing pistons.

I'm no engineer, but i'm calling this a "barely unique" situation.

The only thing I can't understand from this thread is how there are so many out there calling the twins unattractive? I think it looks great and should age very well. It merely needs the performance to back up the looks. Factory turbo system as an option is what they need. A BRZ STi if you will. I'm still going to take advantage of the depreciation of new cars instead of getting raped by it. Plenty of people buy new cars though.

In reply to Swank Force One:

I've not followed this car or powertrain since it came out, but I do recall seeing that when the engine came out for the FRS/BRZ, it was brand new, not shared at all with any other car.

If that's changed, great, and means one thing; if not, it means something else.

All I'm tyring to do is put 20k sales/year in some kind of financial perspective.

I know 100% sure that the engine is not in any other Toyota product. Never pretended to be an expert on this engine or powertrain.

This engine shares few to no parts with anything from Toyota OR Subaru, even if many of the parts are similar to others. It probably would've been smarter to have this engine share more parts or even an entire engine with a more popular vehicle, but it's too late for that now.

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: I've not followed this car or powertrain since it came out, but I do recall seeing that when the engine came out for the FRS/BRZ, it was brand new, not shared at all with any other car. If that's changed, great, and means one thing; if not, it means something else. All I'm tyring to do is put 20k sales/year in some kind of financial perspective. I know 100% sure that the engine is not in any other Toyota product. Never pretended to be an expert on this engine or powertrain.

The bottom line is that if you bought this car used, ant it blew an engine, you will most likely be stuck buying a new one for over $7000.

http://parts.subaru.com/p/Subaru_2013_BRZ/ENGINE-ASSEMBLY/60014490/10100CB270.html

It wont be like you can pull one out of a wrecked Subaru Unless its a BRZ) and bolt it into the broken Frisbee.

The early jury poll is that the engines are a bit blow-upy and hence not a comfy-cozy feeling for a guy who keeps his cars for 10 years. Ditto on the gearbox since they are unique to this car.

In reply to NOHOME:

Well now... that brings up an excellent point. Does the LS fit?

Why yes. Yes it does.

I have to add that I know I am in the right place when a "why isn't blah blah new car selling" thread can have a legitimate "will a chevy V8 fit in it if the engine goes bad?" discussion.

In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:And??

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to NOHOME: Well now... that brings up an excellent point. Does the LS fit?

Funny you should ask...

"With room to spare" seems to be the answer from our friends at Vorshlag Motorsports.

OK. Now I want one with a blown motor. Thanks a berkeleying lot.

Flat fours are wide motors. Future Challenge competitors should keep that in mind as damn near anything will fit in there.My son had a Subaru Outback and we noticed that it looked pretty big under the hood. I went back and forth between it and my Astro for a half hour , or more and came to the conclusion the 4.3 would fit widthwise and was pretty convinced that there was enough length for a V8.

In reply to alfadriver:

I don't disagree with your generalized statements. In fact, I previously made the same point about low production volumes increasing per unit costs, resulting in getting less for your money on anticipated low volume cars like these. I just don't think any such rationalizations can necessarily be applied to a bunch of completely unsubstantiated claims that seem to operate under the assumption that the people who made the FRS/BRZ decisions were both completely uninformed on the market they were entering and totally ignorant to the cost of doing business, and that the people who want to have interesting options available to fill more market niches are jerks individually to blame for any (perceived or actual) sales shortcomings if they don't automatically buy it for themselves.

Mazda has also already added DI to the L-engine architecture, and I would still be shocked if the ND Miata simply got the same mass production Mazda 3 variant instead of a 'unique' variant with upgraded components (including pistons) to achieve a hither output. But tweaking a piston, head, or even block design to a similar but slightly modified lower volume configuration is also still fractionally as expensive as the initial development...And I would like to believe that the manufacturers are all aware enough of this fact to spread the expected amortization of the initial development costs across all planned applications, such that the first to get it does not carry the full burden of financial justification.

I never had any interest in the Frisbee twins. They're ugly. They're too small to fit my sons car seat in. They're painfully under powered, dramatically more so since they take a 18-20% hit in power due to the altitude where I live.

I would be mildly interested if they had an STI version making at least 300hp. However, Suby seems to be having engine durability issues, many of the people on the Suby boards with the new STI's are blowing them up.

No thanks.

Petrolburner wrote: The only thing I can't understand from this thread is how there are so many out there calling the twins unattractive? I think it looks great and should age very well. It merely needs the performance to back up the looks. Factory turbo system as an option is what they need. A BRZ STi if you will. I'm still going to take advantage of the depreciation of new cars instead of getting raped by it. Plenty of people buy new cars though.

I wasn't saying it's unattractive . It's more of a current convention with all the creases and edges and front end vents, etc. I don't think we'll look at one of them in 30 years and say "That was a great design". The styling elements used are found on many current models, I was hoping on something new and different. I'd say much the same about the ND Miata,too.

DeadSkunk wrote: Flat fours are wide motors. Future Challenge competitors should keep that in mind as damn near anything will fit in there.My son had a Subaru Outback and we noticed that it looked pretty big under the hood. I went back and forth between it and my Astro for a half hour , or more and came to the conclusion the 4.3 would fit widthwise and was pretty convinced that there was enough length for a V8.

I once measured a Subaru 2.5L flat four vs. a 2ZZ-GE. The Subie boxer was roughly the same length and height as the 2zz, and MUCH wider. Boxers are tall, long, wide motors. They just have a low CoG.

z31maniac wrote: So which one of you complained about the lack of this car, then it was made, and you didn't buy it? Sorry, just annoyed the "enthusiasts" get what they want and then don't buy it.

It's not a 11,000rpm turbodiesel with AWD that tows 6,000lb and can get 70mpg highway while toting sixteen cases of beer in the back.

(But srsly - I DO want a BRZ - but it has to be a first model year edition with the lumpy torque curve)

Will wrote:

jv8 wrote: Why do all discussions of the BRZ/FRS turn into new vs used? We get it. Used cars are a better deal and this forum leans towards used. But I hope somebody buys new cars otherwise the supply of interesting used cars will dry up!

Your last sentence answers your first. Everyone on this board always complains that there's no new affordable 2-door, RWD performance car for sale. Then when a company finally builds one of those cars, very few of the complainers are willing to step up and buy one new. Buying a used one 3-4 years later doesn't give the OEMs much of an incentive to spend tens of millions or more designing and building low-volume enthusiast cars.

Someone gets it!

Just bolted up my MXP cat-back exhaust, not too much louder than stock, a little deeper. Perfect. We will see how it sounds when the rest of the exhaust is done.

Lots of interesting points in this thread!

NOHOME wrote: The early jury poll is that the engines are a bit blow-upy and hence not a comfy-cozy feeling for a guy who keeps his cars for 10 years. Ditto on the gearbox since they are unique to this car.

The transmission isn't as unique as you might think... it is the newest variant of the Aisin Industries AZ6 - other examples out there the 99-05 Miata, and the RX8, as well as the Altezza/IS200, and finally the Nissan S15. The Frisbee twins actually use 5 of the 6 gears that the S15 uses....

as to engines blow upy... I've heard a few...

As to the uniqueness of this engine... in 2012 Cosworth barely managed to get 200hp from a Subaru 2.0 flat four N/A... that was a $20 grand engine. Now Toyota/Subaru are getting 200hp on a 2.0 flat four stock... the difference is the direct injection.