Motor Trend Head-to-Head: BRZ vs... Mustang?

B430 wrote: I thought the brz/frs came with terrible tires stock, does the track pack v6 come with decent tires? Equal tires might narrow the gap a bit. I don't see how it doesn't have enough power to be fun, it's as fast or faster than many of the hot 80/90s cars that everyone loves here. I think we're all just getting spoiled by 250+hp family sedans.

Evo's complaint was that it was almost impossible to get the car to oversteer, even on the crappy stock tires, and that there was no power coming out of corners.

Max_Archer wrote: I just red EVO's review of the BRZ and they were totally unimpressed with it. The conclusion, over and over again, was that the car just didn't have enough power to be any fun. They compared it head-to-head with a Miata, which they liked much better, so it's not just an obsession with power, or a lack of understanding the "slow car fast" philosophy, either.

I guess I should look up the review (first I would have to figure out what EVO is...), but I'm having a hard time understanding how you do a Miata vs. FR-S comparo and say the Miata wins because the FR-S doesn't have enough power?

I do think that, compared to my 350Z, the torque deficit will make this thing less fun to hoon around town, but I was going to get arrested doing that eventually anyway.

ShadowSix wrote:

Max_Archer wrote: I just red EVO's review of the BRZ and they were totally unimpressed with it. The conclusion, over and over again, was that the car just didn't have enough power to be any fun. They compared it head-to-head with a Miata, which they liked much better, so it's not just an obsession with power, or a lack of understanding the "slow car fast" philosophy, either.

I guess I should look up the review (first I would have to figure out what EVO is...), but I'm having a hard time understanding how you do a Miata vs. FR-S comparo and say the Miata wins because the FR-S doesn't have enough power? I do think that, compared to my 350Z, the torque deficit will make this thing less fun to hoon around town, but I was going to get arrested doing that eventually anyway.

EVO is a car magazine from the UK.

Basically the FR-S (they actually drove a BR-Z) is a car that's completely set up like a 300HP car, but without the power to make the way it's tuned make sense. The Miata is built to work with exactly the power it comes with.

In reply to Max_Archer:

I looked at the EVO website, it looks like the article you're talking about is only available in the print magazine?

I noticed in another article where they compared a BRZ to a Megane that it took them 7.6 seconds to do 0-60, since this is over a second slower than Motor Trend (6.4 secs) I wonder if the BRZ EVO got is not healthy.

AutoXR wrote: I have an 05 GT as well and can say that swapping out all the suspension makes it into a different car. Friend of mine has a 2011GT bone stock and it's like driving a really fast waterbed. Soft springs, horrible dampers and 235 18's... My watts link will be here next week from Strano

One thing to remember is that swapping out the suspension bits you need to to make it work good is a cheap and easy affair. The stock stuff is tuned for ride comfort, which is fine for me and my '06 GT convertible. it rides good even on the 20" wheels and tires I have on there and is more than agile enough for the occasional backroad blast.

That being said, I'd love a BRZ in the driveway next to the Mustang, just to have the right tool for the job regardless of what the job is.

B430 wrote: I thought the brz/frs came with terrible tires stock, does the track pack v6 come with decent tires? Equal tires might narrow the gap a bit. I don't see how it doesn't have enough power to be fun, it's as fast or faster than many of the hot 80/90s cars that everyone loves here. I think we're all just getting spoiled by 250+hp family sedans.

The V-6PP has Pirelli P-Zero 255/40/ZR19 tires. They are very sticky. The BRZ probably would have lapped faster if it had a similar type of tire.

I thought it was a nice review although the synopsis left a little to be desired.

I would have reworded it as:

"If you want to go fast buy the Mustang, if you want to feel like you are going fast buy the BR-Z. Either way you have a great car with great potential."

The Mustang killed the BR-Z in every single test. The BR-Z won the opinion vote, which, honestly, I expected.

Could have written the copy before it was ever tested is about right.

Now given current SCCA rules, which one do you think will be doing the slaughtering in Stock?

The Mustang V-6 is classed in D Stock. A 2011 3.7L placed 9th at last years Nationals (the first time a 3.7L V-6 participated IIRC), so it might have some potential. I do plan on autocrossing mine in the local D Stock Street tire class at least once or twice before deciding what else to do besides dampers. I won't be able to swap springs but the V-6PP-specific front springs and GT rear springs might be sufficient.

Dunno where the Scionbaru will end up.

In reply to I Am Keyser Söze:

Do we know which class the BRZ is going into? C Stock? I gotta think it would do well there vs. Solstices and NC Miatae.

How about the V6 Mustang? If they put it in F Stock it doesn't have a chance against the GT and I don't see it out-running the S2000's in B Stock.

EDIT: I think the V6 'Stang has a LOT of potential in D Stock, it actually looks like a fairly wide-open class (rare in SOLO stock classes!) now that the Hegemony of the Integra Type R is at a Close.

Former HS national champion Jack Burns has a brand new DS car.

I need to start a letter writing campaign to get the E36 reclassed to GS. They moved the E30s down last year.

One of our very experienced club members brought his new GT with the track package to autocross school this weekend and I was pretty impressed with it - so was he. He typically mops the floor in a Subaru STI and says the GT is more fun and easier to drive.

In reply to DaveEstey:

That's pretty strong praise. I've always considered the WRX/STi to be one of the easier to drive "heavy" cars for autocross

I have plenty of experience in the new STIs but none driving a GT. I can tell you the GT felt more willing to change direction during my ride alongs though, which I attribute to only driving one set of wheels instead of all four.

mazdeuce wrote:

AutoXR wrote: I have an 05 GT as well and can say that swapping out all the suspension makes it into a different car.

This statement alone makes me not want a mustang.

I'm not sure about that. Swapping out the suspension on a new car is generally cheaper and easier than doing things to the engine to make more power. Usually better for warranty and resale as well.

New car time for me so I have done the comparison shopping.

Rented and drove the mustand. I really wanted to like the Mustang because I want a convertible. The Mustang feels like a big heavy car with a warhead under the hood. No desire or reward for curve flinging. The Hyundai Genesis does not even appeal enough to get on the dealer lot. Big Heavy and Rice. Sorry, but zero on pushing my buttons for a sale.

Test drove FRS yesterday. Instant love for the way the car works; they nailed it in the same way that the Miata did in 1989. I will be getting rid of the noise generator that pipes intake noise into the cabin; very lame. The FRS is not a rocket ship, maybe even a bit pokey if you will. But the driving experience is so far from the leaden experience of the Mustang that all is forgiven.

I have to give credit to the EVO writter; when the entire world is singing the praises of a car, it is proper journalism to be the contrarian. Also, the EVO crowd is al about the Ubber tuner running insane HP on the street. Wrong car for the crowd

NOHOME wrote: New car time for me so I have done the comparison shopping. Rented and drove the mustand. I really wanted to like the Mustang because I want a convertible. The Mustang feels like a big heavy car with a warhead under the hood. No desire or reward for curve flinging. The Hyundai Genesis does not even appeal enough to get on the dealer lot. Big Heavy and Rice. Sorry, but zero on pushing my buttons for a sale. Test drove FRS yesterday. Instant love for the way the car works; they nailed it in the same way that the Miata did in 1989. I will be getting rid of the noise generator that pipes intake noise into the cabin; very lame. The FRS is not a rocket ship, maybe even a bit pokey if you will. But the driving experience is so far from the leaden experience of the Mustang that all is forgiven. I have to give credit to the EVO writter; when the entire world is singing the praises of a car, it is proper journalism to be the contrarian. Also, the EVO crowd is al about the Ubber tuner running insane HP on the street. Wrong car for the crowd

Awesome!

Let us know how you get rid of that noise tube, seems contrived to me to.

I'm always annoyed when reviewers criticize the BRZ/FRS for a lack of power. Toyota clearly stated that the car is being aimed toward tuners. The tuning crowd has no problem modding their cars to gain power, not to mention the carbon-fiber hoods, lightweight wheels, racing seats, ect for weight reduction. Toyota/Subaru and reviewers praise the car for being light, but to me, 2,700lbs isn't that light. My car is 400lbs lighter than that.

I dunno, i guess what i'm getting at is there are a lot of people out there who enjoy modifying a car and gaining power anyway-- so the 200hp isn't a huge problem to them. But after watching their negative reviews of it, I can't help but feel like if they drove a lightly-tuned version (Intake, Exhaust, Wheels/Tires) they'd feel differently-- it leads potential buyers to think it shouldn't be considered.

I get a lot of joy out of modifying and i know the guys on this forum are very money/value oriented and wouldn't be caught dead dishing out $600-700 on a carbon fiber hood or something. But for someone like me who would love to modify the BRZ/FRS i think it's a great base, more so perhaps than the Mustang. The mustang just seems so crass.

I dunno, i'm no expert, that's just my two cents.

EdenPrime wrote: I get a lot of joy out of modifying and i know the guys on this forum are very money/value oriented and wouldn't be caught dead dishing out $600-700 on a carbon fiber hood or something. But for someone like me who would love to modify the BRZ/FRS i think it's a great base, more so perhaps than the Mustang. The mustang just seems so crass.

I think an issue with that mindset is that there's very little room in the engine bay. Little enough that most people are dismissing the idea of a future turbo'd version under either brand. I'm also not sure how much tire you can fit under it. That, and there's currently very little aftermarket for these cars. It's an unknown at this point.

Contrast that with the Mustang, where I don't even have to look to know that I'll be able to buy an off-the-shelf 50-state legal supercharger, and for any weak link there will be 14 different ways to improve it. If I'm feeling thrifty, there's a good chance I can stroll into any junkyard in the country and find parts for it. Should I have the budget, I can replace the rear suspension with one of 4 completely different designs and run either McPheresons or an SLA up front. To push the BRZ/FR-S as the "tuner car" when the comparison is the Mustang is, no offense intended, laughable. There's just no completely new car that will have the aftermarket of one of the most popular cars to modify in the history of ever.

Mind you, I've been a huge champion of the FT86 twins since first hearing about them, and they're on my very, very short list should I come into a place where I can afford $400/month payments.

people complaining about 2.0L NA cars that trap 95mph in the 1/4 mile is lame. The only other 2.0L NA i can think of that's in the ballpark is a 9000 rpm honda that cost more and was a lot less useful.

Wasn't the EVO video a review of the automatic BRZ ? If that's the case, the driving dynamics would be completely different.

Stripper V6 Mustang with the Performance Package and X-Plan is under $23K BTW

Odd to compare the Mustang and BRZ, BTW. A better pairing might be Mustang vs 370z and BRZ vs Hyundai Genesis.

Vigo wrote: people complaining about 2.0L NA cars that trap 95mph in the 1/4 mile is lame. The only other 2.0L NA i can think of that's in the ballpark is a 9000 rpm honda that cost more and was a lot less useful.

THIS!!!!

mad_machine wrote:

Vigo wrote: people complaining about 2.0L NA cars that trap 95mph in the 1/4 mile is lame. The only other 2.0L NA i can think of that's in the ballpark is a 9000 rpm honda that cost more and was a lot less useful.

THIS!!!!

Yeah no kidding, that's fast

oh gods.. just had a thought.. how many will get blown up on NAAAWWZZZZZZ?