Sciaru BRZFRS (BreezeFrees)

[jjaisli]

Finally got around to go test drive an FR-S. My verdict:

The engine. Oh the engine. I can't come up with a single positive thing to say about it. It sounds terrible. It has acceptable response, but not what I'd call good, which is a mark against it, being normally aspirated and all. The engine is also very rough. Im not sure if that is typical for a flat four, but it feels tragically unrefined. Where is the power? Honestly? I'm used to a rotary where you have to fish for the power in the upper mid range and top end. The H4 in the BRZFRS, though, doesn't seem to have a bottom, mid, or top end. There is a slight burp of torque just before redline, but then you bounce off the limiter. It honestly did not feel significantly quicker than my 100hp Mazda2 (the Mazda has a very large weight advantage) and my RX-7 (carb, exhaust, intake) would walk all over it from any point in the rev-range, and deliver much sharper response, smoother delivery, far better noise, and a broader rev range.

I've had my '86/FR-S for about 4 months and I only just noticed this thread today.

For the record, I can tell you that my engine and gearbox felt considerably smoother and more refined, post break-in period. I expected the gearbox to feel a bit less notchy once it had some use, but I was amazed how much smoother the engine felt after about 1500 miles.

To me, the engine output and power delivery from the 2.0 flat four, is broken into 3 distinct zones.

1) 2,000~3,500 RPM Keeping in mind that it's a NA 2.0 liter powerplant, I think the engine has a very flat and strong torque curve. In fact, I don't think I've driven a car with a normally aspirated engine with 2.0 liters or less of displacement, that felt so strong at this rev range. Of course the car's relatively light weight helps.

2) 3,500~4,500 RPM This is the 'dead' zone. The torque drops off very noticeably, just at the point where you expect it to be coming into stride. It's a bit annoying.

3) 5,500~7,500 RPM At this point the car really 'comes on cam' and is fully alive. It feels strong and pulls strongly, similar to many high-revving, small displacement in-line 4 cylinder engine.

I have a TRD exhaust and TRD airbox, so that probably helps it breath, and it certainly sounds better than stock, but I doubt combined together they're good for more than 10 at-the-wheel, horse power. From what I've been told by other owners, an after market header and a good Ecutek tune goes a long way to improving the midrange. But with the DI seal problems reported on this car by owners who regularly take their cars on the track, I'm reluctant to do anything that might affect the warranty. At least not at this stage.

I know the top complaint about this car is it's 'lack of power'. I traded in a Mazda Speed 3 when I bought the FR-S, which had a lot of mid range grunt--exactly what the '86 lacks. So I understand the sentiment. But I'm very happy with the car. And I think it just goes to highlight how people’s ideas and expectations of performance have changed over the last 2.5 decades. If you look at the weight, the balance, the power to weight ratio, even the wheelbase, the '86 is very similar to one of my favorite cars from my high school days, the Porsche 944S. And back in 1988, did anybody complain that the 944S was slow? So I suppose it's all a bit relative.

That said, bumping the engine up to 2.5 liters for around 230 bhp and eliminating the dip in the mid range certainly wouldn't hurt. 👍

 

[terminator363]

Well I guess all the weird configurations do mean cars are a lot more different from manufacturer to manufacturer.

 

[RocZX]

Scion FR-S Series 1.0

Only 1,500 vehicles of the FR-S Release Series 1.0 will be built, with each featuring updates including a custom-designed aero kit with a rear spoiler and side fender garnish, TRD Quad Tip Exhaust System, TRD lowering springs and Smart Key with Push Button Start. The special edition model also comes with a unique bright Yuzu exterior paint and HID headlamps with LED daytime running lights.

On the inside, the special edition model brings TRD steering wheel, TRD shift knob, black seats with T-pattern, dual auto air conditioning system and TRD logo cargo mat. The Scion FR-S Release Series 1.0 will come with either a six-speed manual transmission or a six-speed automatic transmission with paddle shifters and Dynamic Rev Management technology.

“It’s fitting that the first Scion FR-S Release Series draws on the rich motorsports history that inspired the FR-S design while standing out in new ways that will excite our drivers. FR-S enthusiasts will appreciate the side spoilers and lowered stance that deliver a look and feel meant for the track, at a price meant for them,” said Scion Vice President Doug Murtha.

Each vehicle will feature its sequential release series badge (1 of 1500) inlayed on a brushed aluminum shifter surround plate. The cars are expected to arrive in dealerships in August with a manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) under $30,000, excluding a $755 delivery charge.

Carscoops

 

[YSSMAN]

Huh. I thought I'd seen this before.

 

[SayChiSinLo]

I know the top complaint about this car is it's 'lack of power'. I traded in a Mazda Speed 3 when I bought the FR-S, which had a lot of mid range grunt--exactly what the '86 lacks.

I'm thinking about trading my MS3 in for an AP2 S2000. If and when I do, I'm going to miss having my eyeballs pinned to the back of headrest.

 

[jjaisli]

I'm thinking about trading my MS3 in for an AP2 S2000. If and when I do, I'm going to miss having my eyeballs pinned to the back of headrest.

Then again…you may not. Half a year after I wrote that post above, I have no regrets.

 

[SayChiSinLo]

Then again…you may not. Half a year after I wrote that post above, I have no regrets.

Really, not even its practicality? And the fact that you could blow the doors off of people's cars off?

It's also my anti-ricer flyby.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

My dad recently purchased an orange FR-S. He loves it, to the extent that he won't drive it in the winter and wants to buy a winter car. I never, ever thought I see the day where my dad owns a proper sports car and wants to buy a used Audi. It's a testament to the 86 that it can make a real enthusiast out of someone who enjoys driving but was never that into cars.

 

[jjaisli]

Really, not even its practicality? And the fact that you could blow the doors off of people's cars off?

It's also my anti-ricer flyby.

Well, you see, the thing is.....

My dad recently purchased an orange FR-S. He loves it, to the extent that he won't drive it in the winter and wants to buy a winter car. I never, ever thought I see the day where my dad owns a proper sports car and wants to buy a used Audi. It's a testament to the 86 that it can make a real enthusiast out of someone who enjoys driving but was never that into cars.

It wasn't something I intended when I bought my FR-S. But I went to test drive it and was over come by want and emotion. I hadn't felt like that since I last drove my old MX-5. But the reality is, I commute about 100 miles/day round trip. And the car is fine for those distances. But I quickly realized that the '86 was really somewhat limited in practicality. If I needed to stop on the way home and pick up a friend or family coming in at the airport, 2~3 people + luggage could be a problem. So about a month after I bought the car, I picked up a 2nd hand Honda Fit, just to use as a commuting car. Which is fine because it's bullet proof and gets up to 38 mpg on the highway. God it's bloody boring though. But my goal is not having to even think about it outside of normal maintenance for the next 150,000 miles. So far it's worked.

And needless to say, the '86 was kept in the garage all winter. I've had it for 9 months and I still have less than 3,000 miles on it. On the plus side, I have 3 track days lined up over the next few months. I've already upgraded to a stage I ECU tune, which does wonders to alleviate the dip in the torque curve in the midrange. In another month I'll have an unequal length header. And that combined with a stage II tune should eliminate the torque dip all together. The stock brake pads are being swapped out for something more appropriate for the track and the brake fluid (along with transmission and differential fluid) are getting an upgrade as well--something that can handle the heat and punishment a bit better. I'm guessing the stock rotors and calipers will hold up OK but we'll see. The stock suspension is actually pretty good as is, but I may just go straight to coil overs next year. We'll see.

Driving back and forth to work in the Fit, trust me, EVERYTHING can blow my doors off. You know, funny thing about the Fit, it actually has flappy paddles. But I think all they do is control the volume.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

@jjaisli Guess what? My dad is very similar to you! He too has a Fit, though it's a 2010 he bought new. It's got a manual, and with that gearbox it's a great little car. He test drove the automatic and hated it. He too was cautious about buying the FR-s until he test drove it, and after that fell in love. He commutes 50 miles round trip every day, and uses the FR-S, but he's thinking of buying a used A4 2.0T quattro as a winter car (and I'm almost certain he'll start dailying that.)

 

[jjaisli]

Actually, my Fit is a 2010 also. But I bought mine second hand. It's not a bad car. And ironically, it has more hp than my (A2) Golf GTi from about 23 years ago. Goodness, I'm really dating myself. I would have preferred a manual but they're almost impossible to find around here. It's actually the first automatic car I've ever owned. The gear ratios are tuned more for fuel economy. Which is fine. But when you're on the highway at even the slightest incline it has to downshift to maintain speed.

And for the record, I used to own an Audi A4. (But that was back around 1998~2002). I think your dad and I are kindred spirits. (Or perhaps we just have similar taste in cars). 👍

 

[Beeblebrox237]

The manual will actually do 41 on the highway, and since it's a 5 speed it's not bad for power at 70 mph. As you say, they're hard to find, even in a car that's really suited to it, when he bought the Fit it was the only new manual Fit he could find in the Pittsburgh area. I agree, you and my dad are definitely kindred spirits. He also owned a hot hatch 20-some years ago, a 1984(?) Honda Civic Si which he bought new and owned until, IIRC, 1998, when he and my mum traded it in for a Subaru Outback.

 

[niky]

Beh. Best Fit is the first-generation facelift with the five speed.

But the 2010 is a pretty neato car.

The upcoming one should be fantastic. I've driven the CVT while testing the new sedan variant (the one you won' t get) and it's miles and away better than the 5-speed auto, providing better engagement and more solid (virtual) "shifts" than Honda CVTs past.

Remains to be seen how they tune the suspension, though.

 

[jjaisli]

I will say, the amazing thing about the current generation Fit, is just how much room it has for such a small car. It's a very space efficient design and can (very) comfortably seat 4 people + a generous amount of cargo room. When you look at it from the outside and then sit inside, it's almost an optical illusion. And the driving dynamics aren't too bad. Until you compare it with, well, just about anything else. The driving position, with the low cowl and long sloping windshield, is sort of like driving the world's smallest minivan.

 

[eSZee]

I will say, the amazing thing about the current generation Fit, is just how much room it has for such a small car. It's a very space efficient design and can (very) comfortably seat 4 people + a generous amount of cargo room. When you look at it from the outside and then sit inside, it's almost an optical illusion. And the driving dynamics aren't too bad. Until you compare it with, well, just about anything else. The driving position, with the low cowl and long sloping windshield, is sort of like driving the world's smallest minivan.

 

[jjaisli]

OK, let me put it this way. The Fit is good, basic, environmentally friendly transportation. It's small, light weight (an important point where cars continue to gain weight year after year), it's a bit of a stretch but I might even describe it as nimble (if I'm being generous), it has a low carbon footprint, it's very reliable. And I guess, under certain conditions, it could be 'fun'. But then again, all of this would perfectly describe a skateboard. And the skateboard is a lot cheaper. Although not as comfortable in the winter.

 

[eSZee]

You're not helping yourself by dancing around your ridiculous statement which basically was, the fit has good driving dynamics unless you compare it to anything else.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Since this thread has been bumped, might as well add some news:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/04/24/toyota-gt86-european-updates-official/

New on next year's model are stiffer mounts for the front suspension and rear shock absorbers, and new shocks in the back for better damping and less friction. Toyota says the result is sharper steering and less body roll.

Inside, the instrument panel and center console get decorated with a "carbon-fiber motif." There are new shades of pearl white and silver to dress up the outside, and the roof gets a shark-fin antenna for sharper looks and aero.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

You're not helping yourself by dancing around your ridiculous statement which basically was, the fit has good driving dynamics unless you compare it to anything else.

I've driven it with a manual. It's very fun to drive. It's not fast, but it's really nicely sorted.

 

[jjaisli]

You're not helping yourself by dancing around your ridiculous statement which basically was, the fit has good driving dynamics unless you compare it to anything else.

I thought I explained it well enough.

Let's try it another way. This isn't a thread about the Fit. Let's move along.

Since this thread has been bumped, might as well add some news:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/04/24/toyota-gt86-european-updates-official/

It's not much of a change for those who were expecting, or at least hoping for significant upgrades. But historically, Toyota rarely makes changes to the powertrain (between redesigns or refreshes). And most manufacturers don't this early into the production run.

 

[Grandea GTR]

What I don't like about the BreezeFrees is that it uses Premium Unleaded (93 Octane).

I understand that it is a high-compression engine, but I just feel that 200 HP seems a bit... Meepish for a car that takes 93.

Come to think of it... There already is a car that unessecarily(?) uses 93 octane...
*cough*SmartForTwo*cough*

 

[ildd]

What I don't like about the BreezeFrees is that it uses Premium Unleaded (93 Octane).

I understand that it is a high-compression engine, but I just feel that 200 HP seems a bit... Meepish for a car that takes 93.

Come to think of it... There already is a car that unessecarily(?) uses 93 octane...
*cough*SmartForTwo*cough*

My car has 163 hp and runs on 93.

 

[Grandea GTR]

My car has 163 hp and runs on 93.

What car is it?

 

[ildd]

What car is it?

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/ildds-2002-mercedes-c240-suburbia-sucks.305180/

 

[Grandea GTR]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/ildds-2002-mercedes-c240-suburbia-sucks.305180/

It is a Mercedes though... They want all their cars to use premium.

Your ride looks clean btw 👍

 

[SayChiSinLo]

What I don't like about the BreezeFrees is that it uses Premium Unleaded (93 Octane).

I understand that it is a high-compression engine, but I just feel that 200 HP seems a bit... Meepish for a car that takes 93.

Come to think of it... There already is a car that unessecarily(?) uses 93 octane...
*cough*SmartForTwo*cough*

Well... Acura TSX uses premium, and that 2.4 is only good for like 210ish hp...

 

[Zenith]

Power output does not dictate octane requirement, compression ratio does.

In order for small displacement engines to have high specific output, they usually run a high compression ratio and thus high octane fuel.

 

[homeforsummer]

Since this thread has been bumped, might as well add some news:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/04/24/toyota-gt86-european-updates-official/

Detail changes. Meh.

More impressed by Subaru's announcement this morning that they're cutting £2,500 off the price of the BRZ in the UK. It's now about a grand cheaper than the 86, which is pretty good as it was over a grand more before.

Does lead me to think Toyota will do the same though. It's apparently mainly due to improvements in the £/Yen exchange rate.

Still, if they could shave another £4k off it then we'd really be talking.

Or I'll just sit tight and wait for used ones to drop to £10k. At the moment they've not come below about £18k.

 

[ildd]

Power output does not dictate octane requirement, compression ratio does.

In order for small displacement engines to have high specific output, they usually run a high compression ratio and thus high octane fuel.

I know. I was using it as an example. My car uses a 11:1 compression ratio

 

[YSSMAN]

What I don't like about the BreezeFrees is that it uses Premium Unleaded (93 Octane).

Why worry about it when it will maybe cost you an extra $1.20-$1.50 per fillup? Is it really that big of a deal?

Does lead me to think Toyota will do the same though. It's apparently mainly due to improvements in the £/Yen exchange rate.

Something I imagine we won't see in the US, despite Toyota howling about the slow sales of the FR-S versus the BRZ. Its weird how the press here chalks it all up to "not enough power," when I think anyone with sense of mind would realize the cars are overpriced by about $1500. Mark them down, scream about it on the proper automotive blogs, and the fanatics will come calling. Priced competitively with cars that would be frequently cross-shopped with it (ie, WRX, Focus ST, Fiesta ST and GTI), they'd do a hell of a lot better.