I do feel for roninsoldier83. I used to live in Denver, and at altitude, nearly everything naturally aspirated is slow. When you live out there, you don't notice it too much, as nearly everything is affected. Take that same car to sea level though......whoa! This car has cajones!
Even my 87 Cressida felt powerful at sea level, and it wasn't exactly a rocket-ship.
I could see a legitimate gripe for the Frisbee twins at high-altitude. I'd probably go with a boosted car if I ever returned.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: In reply to roninsoldier83: Remember that Mazda couldn't give away the Mazdaspeed Miata's and Pontiac went bust before we know how that would sell. If they are meeting their sales goals with the car as is why bother? I do feel your pain at altitude though. I wonder why it seems to suffer so so much more than some of the other (NA) cars you've compared it too still at altitude, especially the S2K?
Those are valid points about the Mazdaspeed and GXP/Redline. Although I did enjoy my MSM before I sold it and bought the S2000. I was under the impression that the Frisbee twins weren't selling well, according to magazine headlines... I figured the boosted power might bump sales up a bit.... maybe I'm wrong?
http://www.caranddriver.com/flipbook/the-10-best-cars-that-nobody-buys#11 http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/g6607/13-great-cars-2015-nobody-bought/?slide=7
I honestly can't explain why the Frisbee seems so much slower than the ND/S2000 up here. I thought it might have been in my head until I found that TFL Car video. I thought maybe the ND/S2000 just felt faster due to the open-top/more visceral experience. The TFL video showed the ND beat the Frisbee to 60mph by a whopping ~1.4 seconds up here, vs them generally being within ~0.5 seconds of each other according to most of the reviews at sea level. I have no idea why.
Maybe the timing is programmed to be more aggressive in the ND, to help make up for elevation? Or the power to weight ratio isn't as affected due to the ~400 lbs weight advantage? No idea.
I think the S2000 just feels much faster due to actually being faster (even at sea level) thanks to the ~40hp advantage. The VTEC cam switchover also makes it feel much more alive; so I'm sure that's somehow a factor.
IIRC, most of the reviews had the Frisbee trapping in the 1/4 mile around ~93-95mph whereas the AP2 S2000 seemed to trap between 97-100mph, so the Honda should be the faster car anyway. Although some sites have multiple listings for drag strip correction factors that gave me some thought:
http://www.dragtimes.com/da-density-altitude-calculator.php
^^^I've always noticed they use 3 different corrections factors for altitude:
-Stock and Mildly Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
-Extensively Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
-Extensively Modified Supercharged and Turbocharged Engines
^^^I wouldn't say the S2000 would be considered "extensively modified", but the head flows a ton of air, the valves are relatively big and the VTEC cam lobes are pretty aggressive.... I wouldn't be terribly shocked if this was helpful up here. But I have no evidence, just theory and speculation.
All I know is that the Frisbee could use more power up here.
In reply to Joe Gearin:
Ain't that the truth! I remember when I got out of the military in 2006; I drove my 2003 350Z up from Ft Hood, TX to Denver. It was a fun, lively car down in Texas, but when I got up here it really felt like a lifeless dog. You're right, you do get used to it if you drive nothing but NA cars up here.
My current daily is turbocharged (2016 VW Golf R). Although for a weekend car that will see some track time I had a few preferences:
-Relatively lightweight
-Soft top preferred, but not a deal breaker for the right car.
-RWD.
-Manual transmission.
^^^Not a whole lot of affordable boosted cars fit that bill. I owned one of them- my MSM. I drove the Solstice GXP, the motor was just fine, but I didn't like quite a few things about the car itself; that's a story for another thread!
Boosted cars are faster up here, but after my lightly modded MSM, I wanted to return to an NA machine. The MSM was fine on the street, but I was having some trouble keeping it cool at High Plains Raceway. I chalk that up to Mazda not fully developing the MSM for track work and me not wanting to spend the money and get creative. I've ran factory boosted cars on the track before without an issue, but the MSM just didn't seem to be up to the task reliably; so I went back to an NA weekend machine.
So, I ended up with the S2000.
I would like to see how the Frisbee would fare with the WRX's engine/cooling system, but I'm probably beating a dead horse here, and I'm not going to hold my breath!
^^ it sounds like you ended up with a great car anyway. Hard to fault an S2000!
Appleseed wrote:irish44j wrote:Still buying into that "Its got Prius tires" nonsense?Appleseed wrote: I give this thread less than 10 posts before someone who's never driven an 86 complains about horsepower.I'll complain that it still doesn't come with respectable tires....unless it does now. Toyota's site doesn't specify the tire brand, what does this car have on it?
I don't have the slightest clue what tire the Prius uses, but I assume it's some kind of econo-all-season. I know the earlier BR-Z had Primacy HP87's, which are a summer grand touring tire (read: not a performance tire) better suited to a regular economy sedan like a civic. Of the half-dozen or so people I know who own BR-Zs, every one of them replaced the tires almost immediately with a more performance-oriented tire. I do NOT know what the new BR-Z/86 are shod with, which is why I asked.
So I am buying into the "I'd rather my new car not come with tires that are not the kind of tires I want on that type of car." Nothing to do with Priuses. I actually will be buying a new car next year, and am willing to buy a NEW BR-Z if it suits my needs (since it's unlikely Mazda is going to make a fastback Miata). So I apologize if my interest in "getting what I am paying for" offends your sensibilities. In 2008 when I was thinking about a new car, I said "If the (then 2008) WRX would come with a better suspension and more power, I'd buy it." In November 2008 I bought one of the first 2009s that came out (with better suspension and more power). I'll put my money where my mouth is, as long as the product is what I want.
We could tell you all about the 280hp STi/TRD version coming out soon that we just got the press release on, but that would be fake news.
I took an FRS for a test drive last week. I got to drive an FRS for session at high plains raceway last summer. I like the car. I'll probably trade my Focus ST in on an 86.
The 86 doesn't have tons of power or grip. Neither does the ND. But that's the concept.
If you don't like that concept you have two options:
1) Whine about it on the Internet
2) Buy a Mustang.
I feel like this would make a great daily for me, expect for it coming in a 2 door with limited back seat space.
Is there anything out there that shares the characteristics of the 86 but has 4/5 doors? Fun to drive, RWD, manual, lightweight, decent MPG, reasonably priced, newer/warrantied?
Maybe I could get by with the limited rear seat space, but I am a much bigger fan of sport sedans and wagons. Really wish there was a BR-Z sedan.
CobraSpdRH wrote: Is there anything out there that shares the characteristics of the 86 but has 4/5 doors? Fun to drive, RWD, manual, lightweight, decent MPG, reasonably priced, newer/warrantied?
You've exactly described the BMW E30... well up until the "newer/warrantied" part. 
LuxInterior wrote: I took an FRS for a test drive last week. I got to drive an FRS for session at high plains raceway last summer. I like the car. I'll probably trade my Focus ST in on an 86. The 86 doesn't have tons of power or grip. Neither does the ND. But that's the concept. If you don't like that concept you have two options: 1) Whine about it on the Internet 2) Buy a Mustang.
Or option 3 - replace stock wheels and tires with light weight 17x7.5 wheels wrapped in 205/45-17 Continental ExtremeContact DW (or the new Sport)...NECK SNAPPING ACCELERATON AND GRIPPPPP! 
Yup its too expensive. Make it comparable to a FiST and you have a car. The fact that its 10% more expensive kills it.
irish44j wrote:Appleseed wrote: I give this thread less than 10 posts before someone who's never driven an 86 complains about horsepower.I'll complain that it still doesn't come with respectable tires....unless it does now. Toyota's site doesn't specify the tire brand, what does this car have on it?
I can have a look at what tyres are standard on them tomorrow if you're actually interested and not just taking the piss
Vracer111 wrote:LuxInterior wrote: I took an FRS for a test drive last week. I got to drive an FRS for session at high plains raceway last summer. I like the car. I'll probably trade my Focus ST in on an 86. The 86 doesn't have tons of power or grip. Neither does the ND. But that's the concept. If you don't like that concept you have two options: 1) Whine about it on the Internet 2) Buy a Mustang.Or option 3 - replace stock wheels and tires with light weight 17x7.5 wheels wrapped in 205/45-17 Continental ExtremeContact DW (or the new Sport)...NECK SNAPPING ACCELERATON AND GRIPPPPP!
Not sure if serious. Neck snapper it ain't.
In reply to roninsoldier83:
You present a number of valid points which I very much agree with and I can certainly understand your point at higher altitudes. I think the problem is that the Frisbee twin's don't share enough in common with the WRX in the engine department where you could simply pop on a hood with a scoop for the TMIC and transplant the turbocharged WRX engine.
It would necessitate a fair bit of engineering work to get the car to the point where an OEM could limit liability for reliability issues and then they'd have to figure out how to package the motor. All that on an already low volume car. I'm not sure it's a winning proposition especially with how developed the aftermarket already is for it.
While you're certainly correct with the MSM and Redline/GXP twins the flip side is Mazda not doing their due diligence with the turbocharged CX-7. Yea it has the same 2.3L mill as the MS3 without the turbo in stock form, but when you add in the turbo... Well it scored a zero in Consumer Reports reliability scale. A zero. I didn't even think that was possible and it did a number on Mazda's reputation.
So it cuts both ways I suppose.
The0retical wrote: In reply to roninsoldier83: You present a number of valid points which I very much agree with and I can certainly understand your point at higher altitudes. I think the problem is that the Frisbee twin's don't share enough in common with the WRX in the engine department where you could simply pop on a hood with a scoop for the TMIC and transplant the turbocharged WRX engine. It would necessitate a fair bit of engineering work to get the car to the point where an OEM could limit liability for reliability issues and then they'd have to figure out how to package the motor. All that on an already low volume car. I'm not sure it's a winning proposition especially with how developed the aftermarket already is for it. While you're certainly correct with the MSM and Redline/GXP twins the flip side is Mazda not doing their due diligence with the turbocharged CX-7. Yea it has the same 2.3L mill as the MS3 without the turbo in stock form, but when you add in the turbo... Well it scored a zero in Consumer Reports reliability scale. A zero. I didn't even think that was possible and it did a number on Mazda's reputation. So it cuts both ways I suppose.
Yep, the turbo hangs so low, the stock FA20DIT in the BRZ I think puts the turbo below the subframe. It would necessitate a lot of extra work to shoehorn it in.
Ok, there was a new arrival 86 this morning and the tyres were Michelin premacy HP. Didn't really check size as it was dumping down with rain. For that same reason I didn't bother going looking for a prius to compare.
Tyres appeared to be very uninspiring looking all season econo tread looking things.
DaveEstey wrote:Vracer111 wrote:Not sure if serious. Neck snapper it ain't.LuxInterior wrote: I took an FRS for a test drive last week. I got to drive an FRS for session at high plains raceway last summer. I like the car. I'll probably trade my Focus ST in on an 86. The 86 doesn't have tons of power or grip. Neither does the ND. But that's the concept. If you don't like that concept you have two options: 1) Whine about it on the Internet 2) Buy a Mustang.Or option 3 - replace stock wheels and tires with light weight 17x7.5 wheels wrapped in 205/45-17 Continental ExtremeContact DW (or the new Sport)...NECK SNAPPING ACCELERATON AND GRIPPPPP!
The emoji's were there for a reason...
There is one aspect of an 86 with good high performance rubber mounted on light weight wheels that make it really stand out though... it's almost instantaneous in lane changing - basically teleports to the next lane in an emergency if you have to AND it does so in an extremely stable manner.
If I had to describe the FR-S in a single word it would be 'agility', that is the essence of what the car is about. It's extremely reponsive and precise yet also simultaneously very planted - even more so with the right wheel/tire combo and supporting mods on it.
daeman wrote: Ok, there was a new arrival 86 this morning and the tyres were Michelin premacy HP. Didn't really check size as it was dumping down with rain. For that same reason I didn't bother going looking for a prius to compare. Tyres appeared to be very uninspiring looking all season econo tread looking things.
The Primacy HP's are the 'Prius tires' because they were a Summer Sport tire option on a performance package spec Prius in Japan. Factory tire size will be 215/45-17. The tires are actually pretty decent, they work well with the chassis for road use - it was a genius move that perfectly suits the car most of the time. For the second set of tires or for any track use though, it would be best to get any other tire because: 1) the Primacy HP are nearly $200 each, 2) their wet weather capability is merely 'adequate', 3) at speed (triple digits) the car feels 'floaty' on the stock tires [not in terms of sidewall but in terms of the entire car just moving all over the place, especially feel it in the rear], and 4) grippier tires (but not rediculous grip tires) are more fun with the excellent chassis of the 86 and the car is definitely more planted feeling at all times.
Personally, the size I feel that suits the stock chassis best would be a 205/45-17 specced in a Max Performance category tire. The chassis is just magic with that sized tire.
daeman wrote: Ok, there was a new arrival 86 this morning and the tyres were Michelin premacy HP. Didn't really check size as it was dumping down with rain. For that same reason I didn't bother going looking for a prius to compare. Tyres appeared to be very uninspiring looking all season econo tread looking things.
They definitely NOT all seasons. 3 season tires, at best. You will rather eat the business end of a shotgun than drive it in snow.
Ask me how I know.
You'll need to log in to post.
