For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
i respect your opinion, i dont feel im an shiny happy person for complaining about a brand new sports car that is SLOW. im sure the car handles like a champion but it is SLOW. im not saying the car should have 300+ horsepower, but 240-260 would make the car alot more appealing to car enthusiast. and the room for upgrade would make it even more popular. for 26000 there is no reason that car should have 200 horsepower and weigh 2800 pounds
singleslammer wrote:
In reply to Darksider203:
Ah, well DI can make a huge difference in the relationship between forced induction and compression.
I think that we have gotten away from the point where chassis feel is more important than speed.
Example
1990 Miata: 2100 lbs - 115 HP = 18.26 LBS/HP
2012 Scion FR-S: 2800 lbs - 200 HP = 14 LBS/HP
I fail to see how the 200 hp FR-S is a bad thing. If you adjust for inflation they cost basically the same thing (1990 - 2011 according to wiki is US$14,000 - US$25,400. The main problem (IMO) with the Miata for enthusiasts has been no factory hardtop (non-vert) and here is a great alternative.
Sorry, don't mean to get all preachy but I think that we are a bunch of jaded shiny happy people for complaining about this car.
Even look at the new Miata. It's priced closely, weighs around the same amount, has more power, and is just generally faster.
Swank Force One wrote:
For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
well i learned something new today, and this is on pump gas?
Alright, bygones be bygones and all. This will go on forever.
Darksider203 wrote:
i respect your opinion, i dont feel im an shiny happy person for complaining about a brand new sports car that is SLOW. im sure the car handles like a champion but it is SLOW. im not saying the car should have 300+ horsepower, but 240-260 would make the car alot more appealing to car enthusiast. and the room for upgrade would make it even more popular. for 26000 there is no reason that car should have 200 horsepower and weigh 2800 pounds
maybe it is because I have never owned a car with more than 185hp... but I see nothing wrong with 200hp. Unless you are running the stoplight grandprix or are on the track, 200hp is perfect for most street cars.
I am not saying I have not driven cars with a lot more HP.. I have, I just prefer cars with good HP numbers and phenominal handling. If I were to think about a new car, the Toybaru twins would be high on the list as they seem about perfect for what I would want
my only complaint about the car is that it only has 200hp, i just feel it should of been turbo'd stock
singleslammer wrote:
Alright, bygones be bygones and all. This will go on forever.
lol yea were just not going to agree, but more people seem to be agreeing with you. no matter the case i respect your opinion and it was interesting to hear your thoughts on the car.
singleslammer wrote:
Alright, bygones be bygones and all. This will go on forever.
It always does. Usually perpetuated by people who really should be buying V6 Mustangs instead, but are intent on displaying the facade that they really want a corner carver. But, it'd be nice if it could run an 11 second quarter mile when they wanted to, you know?
And if it could all be done for $20k, that'd be fabulous.
Darksider203 wrote:
Swank Force One wrote:
For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
well i learned something new today, and this is on pump gas?
I don't now if they made the 461 on pump... i THINK they did, but i haven't read the thread since september when they did it.
I know they made it over 400whp on pump.
Swank Force One wrote:
singleslammer wrote:
Alright, bygones be bygones and all. This will go on forever.
It always does. Usually perpetuated by people who really should be buying V6 Mustangs instead, but are intent on displaying the facade that they really want a corner carver. But, it'd be nice if it could run an 11 second quarter mile when they wanted to, you know?
And if it could all be done for $20k, that'd be fabulous.
Right, but does it also have cup holders?
Swank Force One wrote:
For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
i think thats awesome that they did that. but thats after buying a 26,000 dollar car and then dropping i would assume another 5-6k into it. not many people have that type of money to drop on a turbo kit. my argument is at least if the car came stock turbo, a tune and exhaust , would produce around 300 hp. easy affordable upgrade, fast, more fun to drive, more competitive.
unfortunately, the car is what it is...and im not gunna be the one to change it lol...maybe the future will bring a turbo charged varient. called the fr-s sti lol
Darksider203 wrote:
Swank Force One wrote:
For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
i think thats awesome that they did that. but thats after buying a 26,000 dollar car and then dropping i would assume another 5-6k into it. not many people have that type of money to drop on a turbo kit. my argument is at least if the car came stock turbo, a tune and exhaust , would produce around 300 hp. easy affordable upgrade, fast, more fun to drive, more competitive.
If it came with a turbo from factory, it also wouldn't be $26k. 
Unfortunately, the car as it is, it's a good car, for a fair price, it's what the enthusiasts asked for, and now said enthusiasts aren't doing much besides saying what they would do better and not buying it.
Nobody will ever be pleased.
There's been a supercharged variant in testing for quite some time. Chances are good that the car will gain some power options during the model run. Chances are NOT good that you will get more power for the same price.
Swank Force One wrote:
Darksider203 wrote:
Swank Force One wrote:
For the record.... i feel like there's nothing wrong with the power the car makes.
Also for the record, anyone who tells you that the motor is too high compression to deal with a turbo is ill-informed.
Accelerated Performance has made 461whp on a STOCK motor'd car. This engine is made out of pure Japanese WTF-metal. I do not believe that 461whp is the highest number seen out of the stock motor, either.
How does a low 11s/high 10s quarter mile on a stock car with a turbo kit sound to you? (In case you care about drag racing a car that was never built for such a thing.)
i think thats awesome that they did that. but thats after buying a 26,000 dollar car and then dropping i would assume another 5-6k into it. not many people have that type of money to drop on a turbo kit. my argument is at least if the car came stock turbo, a tune and exhaust , would produce around 300 hp. easy affordable upgrade, fast, more fun to drive, more competitive.
If it came with a turbo from factory, it also wouldn't be $26k.
Unfortunately, the car as it is, it's a good car, for a fair price, it's what the enthusiasts asked for, and now said enthusiasts aren't doing much besides saying what they would do better and not buying it.
Nobody will ever be pleased.
There's been a supercharged variant in testing for quite some time. Chances are good that the car will gain some power options during the model run. Chances are NOT good that you will get more power for the same price.
i agree, they will probably cost about the same as a new sti now that i think about it.
In reply to Darksider203:
On this board, a lot of people will choose a solid chassis over power. This is probably rather uncommon though. Literally everywhere else is screaming for a 300 hp variant and saying that this version is terribly underpowered and over priced. But as Ben said earlier, these people need to go buy a V6 mustang or a Genesis Coupe. Oh well.
In reply to Darksider203:
I bet it will cost 32-33K, so a bit less. Not much less though.
singleslammer wrote:
In reply to Darksider203:
I bet it will cost 32-33K, so a bit less. Not much less though.
Then you get to decide between turbo and a warranty for the same money as you could buy a base, void the warranty, and have a REAL turbo setup.
I kindof have a hatred of OEM turbo systems. I'd go for the latter.
Posting just to follow this thread.
singleslammer wrote:
In reply to Darksider203:
On this board, a lot of people will choose a solid chassis over power. This is probably rather uncommon though.
This is very true. We have our died in the wool "Moar HP" group here.. but most of us just want a car that puts handling and predictablity over all else
I'm happy with 200hp. I loved my Civic Sis. Peppy, revved to the moon, around same weight as the FR-S/BR-Z but guess what even fully loaded with navi it's still right at $24,000 without any bargaining (Sedan).
I'd be happy with an FR-S/BR-Z just not at that price where I could get a base model American V8 Muscle car or fully loaded V6 for the same price range.
I shouldn't be complaining because it's a small little RWD car like the Miata, Solstice, etc which we need more of. Hopefully down the road they'll depreciate appropriately to where I could afford one as a second car.
I drove one earlier at lunch, I'll admit i was pretty easy on it because it was wet out but it seemed to have plenty of power to me, now i do drive a fit so 200 hp is a nice bump for me 
Online articles I'd like to see is really just more in depth details on stories and builds along with more in depth new car reviews.
As for the FR-S, I can't think of any produced vehicle currently available that has such a perfectly setup stock chassis for under $50k. FR-S is like a refined and matured miata tuned for precision... the miata is a much more sloppy/imprecise and ragged sportscar. HP is enough that it can get into triple digit speeds on freeway on ramps... so...yeah, I don't subscribe to the "It's underPowah'd! needs moar Powah before I'd buy it!" theory.
I don't need or want more power. I have test driven one and really, really liked it. I am very demanding when it comes to handling balance and response. If any of the critics can point me to a more-responsive RWD ride with the same (or less) weight without sacrificing practicality in the same price range, I am all ears. So far I have heard crickets chirping....
If Clarkson feels the power is fine, its fine.
