Sciaru BRZFRS (BreezeFrees)

[Beeblebrox237]

The car has been covered and reviewed more than anything in the past decade. Would you be able to tell us anything that hasn't already been mentioned?

I can tell you what it's like to own, and what it feels like from the perspective of a relatively young and inexperienced driver. I can tell you what it's like to drive in more mundane situations, like city traffic or a long commute.

Sure, let's see it.

Cool, I probably won't have it done until mid July, since I don't get home until late June.

 

[Omnis]

I actually went to College for 1 year, about 45 minutes north of Sebring. And not too far from 'spook hill'. And there were actually some nice hills in and amongst the orange groves in that area. Fine if you live there but I wouldn't drive from somewhere else just to get there. That would be a disappointment. Either way, the year I spent in Florida taught me that it's a great place to visit but I would NEVER want to live there. And that was 25 years ago.

You're kidding, right? If I had to live in north/central florida, I'd leave too. And 25 years ago? Dude, everything was swamp and pastures.

Miami during the 80s was the best. You didn't even have to do cocaine to enjoy it.

 

[jjaisli]

You're kidding, right? If I had to live in north/central florida, I'd leave too. And 25 years ago? Dude, everything was swamp and pastures.

Miami during the 80s was the best. You didn't even have to do cocaine to enjoy it.

I attended Webber College in Babson Park my freshman year of University. I started as a computer science major and they seemed to have a good program and taught C++, which was all the rage in those days. But there was a big disconnect from what Webber claimed they were on paper and what they were in reality. It was a joke and one of my big regrets. I left after one year.

There wasn't much swamp land in that particular area. Actually, there wasn't much of anything. Except orange groves. Lots and LOTS of orange groves. Babson Park consisted of a bank, a post office, two gas stations, a few convenience stores, and the College. I remember during orientation they made a big deal about staying out of the orange groves and never taking oranges off the trees. Coming from the North East and having spent a good deal of my youth with family in Switzerland (where most people weren't 🤬 insane), I found the whole thing a bit bizarre and took it with a grain of salt. Then a few weeks later, a few of the students had too much drink, wandered into an orange grove and begun to help themselves, and somebody shot at them. Or at least "fired shots". Over Oranges.

One of the local orange grove owners used to be driven around in a white Cadillac convertible with steer horns on the front. No joke. I saw him a few times at the bank. It was something right out of the Dukes of Hazard. I'm guessing much has changed in the ensuing years, but then again, it's Florida, so maybe not. Most people who go vacationing in FL only go to the beaches, the coasts or the Orlando Theme park hub. And they never see the dreary, back-water, orange growing, swamp & redneck infested mess the majority of the state really is. Or at least was. Between the May Flies, the June Bugs, the Love Bugs and the 🤬 brown recluse spiders, I also developed a real hatred for 6 or 8 legged life. And it didn't help that it was an ongoing joke for the guys who didn't have morning classes, to go into the community bathrooms late at night, turn on the lights on and leave all the windows open. Leaving the bathrooms a creeping, crawling nightmare for those of us who had to get up early and take showers.

And funny thing, in the winter of 1989 I actually drove to Miami to see my sister and her family who were on vacation down there. And when I was circling the area looking for the hotel and a parking spot, I noticed every 2nd person was wearing a leather jacket, smoking dope, and looking like a total head-banger. I finally pulled into a parking garage, thought I found an empty spot and was about to pull in and saw there was a group of people all hunched over, shooting up. I only found out later that evening that there was a Metallica concert that night.

 

[Omnis]

That sounds about right.

 

[YSSMAN]

The FR-S has been outselling the BRZ by a ratio of more than 3:1 since day 1. The ratio has come down now to around 2:1 (in 2014 sales), and that's more than likely due to Subaru dealers initially selling for a premium over sticker, who are now willing to deal on price. Where as Scion sticks to their pure-price model and won't deal unless it's last year's model.

As I understand it, the FR-S is one of the best-selling coupes in the US, behind the Camaro and Mustang. Nothing to scoff at. However, little more than two months ago, it was doom and gloom all over from the automotive press.

In the U.S. at least, Subaru dealers posted gains in BRZ sales throughout 2013, but the figures never exceeded the 905 that were sold in March 2013. Last month, they sold 592, still ahead of a year earlier. Scion has posted declining sales figures for the FR-S since September 2012. In January, only 921 were sold, the lowest total since it went on sale in May 2012.

Still, Scion moved about 18,000 FR-Ss last year, a little short of the 20,000 goal they wanted to hit back in 2012, according to Wards Auto. Subaru, on the other hand, exceeded their 7,000-unit U.S. goal by more than 1,500 cars.

Link

Of course, that was made worse by one of their European cheifs saying:

“A faster version of that car would be at the top of most people’s wish lists, but like the cabriolet, it is hard to justify a business case to push either model into production based on the current sales.”

Link

Afterward, it appeared to be that Killman was speaking in regard to the GT-86, perhaps not the FR-S in the US, anyway. But, when the primary car that had been intended to get several variants is missing sales targets in what should be its largest market, that is a problem. However, I think it would be fairly easy to chalk a lot of that up to horrible weather and an uneasy economy. Who knows. There are a lot of variables there. Still, the BRZ is exceeding targets, and that largely offsets the smaller sales of the FR-S.

Likewise, I disagree about the car being overpriced. If anything, it's the bargain of the decade. The Focus ST and GTI, when loaded up with a few options, are all around the same price or in some cases more than a comparable FR-S/BRZ. The Fiesta ST can be had for less. But all of those cars are FWD. The WRX is considerably more (if you want one that really goes)

In the real world, driving dynamics and the perceived superiority of rear-wheel-drive don't mean much when looking at raw numbers. The "affordable" performance area is pretty hot these days, anything around $25k with sporting credentials can probably hang at least a few toes over the FR-S and BRZ. Like homeforsummer said, it is a reasonable price on the car, and it can be considered reasonably affordable when compared to other sport coupes out there. But, to truly be an absolute value, that price needs to drop. If they want to keep those sales going strong, the price needs to drop. Apparently the 2015 updates do come with a slight price drop. But, I don't think it is anywhere close to changing the game.

 

[niky]

Any well-sorted front-wheel drive hot hatch with a turbo and at least 170 hp will leave a stock BRZFRS in the dust down any mountain road (though to be fair, the BRZFRS would leave a Genesis Coupe in the dust down that same road, too). RWD isn't an advantage unless you're doing multiple laps on the race track at a competitive pace.

 

[jjaisli]

As I understand it, the FR-S is one of the best-selling coupes in the US, behind the Camaro and Mustang. Nothing to scoff at. However, little more than two months ago, it was doom and gloom all over from the automotive press.

Doom and gloom? Really, if you look at the numbers, it's just a lot of spin. With any new model car, there's always a huge spike in sales at the beginning. And for a niche car like the '86, it's even worse. Once early demand has been met, things settle down and sales drop off. Toyota/Scion's goal for first year sales was 20,000 units. But the car was late in production and they only JUST started to trickle into dealerships by late April/early May of 2012. And until the spring of 2013, demand was so strong, it was nearly impossible to walk into a dealer and just buy one. In most cases you had to put down a deposit, order one and wait for months. When I went to see the car for myself around this time last year, the first two Scion dealers I went to didn't even have a single FR-S on the lot. One told me they had 3 cars coming in the following week but all of them were already sold. So the fact that they didn't meet this goal during the first year was due more to the fact that they simply didn't produce enough cars to meet that demand within the time given.

As such, I think the fact that they sold over 18,000 cars in it's 2nd year of production, just short of their first year goal, isn't bad at all. Remember, it was always going to be a niche car. And it was NEVER going to be a huge seller. Toyota knew that. Subaru knew that. The entire automotive world knew that. The reason they basically stopped producing small, sporty, light weight, RWD 2+2 or 2 seat coups is because they have high production cost and little return value. Because not a lot of people buy them anymore. So in a sense, we're lucky they made it at all. What if Toyota had stated their goal was to sell only 10,000 units in the US every year? Which is a number still nearly double the MX-5 or Nissan 370Z. Would Jalopnik be hailing the 'return' of the sports coupe? It's all about perspective.

Sales so far in 2014 are about 20% lower than what they were in 2013, and that's about what I expected. I suspect sales for 2015 will follow that trend and then level off slightly the following year (assuming there are no major changes).

Any well-sorted front-wheel drive hot hatch with a turbo and at least 170 hp will leave a stock BRZFRS in the dust down any mountain road (though to be fair, the BRZFRS would leave a Genesis Coupe in the dust down that same road, too). RWD isn't an advantage unless you're doing multiple laps on the race track at a competitive pace.

Niky, it's not JUST about RWD. It's about the car's relatively low weight, it's low center of gravity and it's near ideal 50/50 front/rear balance. This car is VERY well sorted. It's very neutral and you can push it hard. It's very easy to drive and it just inspires confidence and allows you to comfortably reach your own limits. It was designed from the ground up to be a sports car. Unlike most hot hatches that are designed to be basic people haulers and simply given more powerful engines, reworked suspensions and more aggressive gearing.

The thing with the FT86 platform is that it's gotten a bit of a bum rap due to the stock tires. It was a design and marketing choice to go with the tires it has. But throw on some sticky rubber, especially R-compounds, and this car really comes alive.

In the REAL world, no car is ever going to leave any other car in the dust down a public road because you'll usually come upon a slower moving vehicle in a no passing zone and it's both dangerous and stupid to really push for all your worth when you never know what's around the next blind corner. But I still disagree with your claim. I've owned and driven a lot of FWD cars: two MKII VW GTis, a Mini Cooper S, a Mazda Speed 3. In a straight line, some of them were faster. But down a twisty, undulating road, none of them could hold a candle to the 86.

 

[niky]

Depends. I've driven the 86 on the track and on the street. On the track, if you know what you're doing and where you're going, it's fantastic fun. On a mountain pass, you can take liberties with it, but it just won't stick. Something like a Cooper S will.

Granted, like you said, it's all about the tires. But they really should have given it better tires, in the first place.

And, I don't know if the FRS-BRZ relationship is the same there as it is here, but I really don't like how they set up the 86 suspension compared to the BRZ. The BRZ is a car I feel I could trust, even on the sucky stock rubber. The 86 just feels too "loose" at both ends.

Weird.

 

[jjaisli]

The short answer is, the GT86, FR-S and BRZ all have the same basic suspension, struts, dampeners and roll bars. The only thing that differs is the spring rates. The FR-S by comparison is softer in the front and harder in the rear, relative to the BRZ. The general consensus is that they are both neutral but the BRZ tends to understeer and the FR-S/GT86 tend to oversteer. But a simple tire change is enough to change this dynamic.

There's no question that the FR-S's suspension (and tire choice) is set up to be more entertaining than anything. But it's limits, even with the stock tires, are more than adequate for street driving. And those limits are higher than most people are willing to give it credit for. If the car had an extra 100-hp on tap, you'd be lighting up the rear tires everywhere. But in stock form you really have to put the hammer down to get it to hang out.

I guess it's just personal preference. But I feel confident to push the FR-S in ways I wouldn't dare with my old Cooper S.

 

[niky]

I found the 86 more willing to both understeer and oversteer than the BRZ. Which is fun, but the limits feel artificially low (yeah, tires) The BRZ, as long as you were deliberate with the front end, would stick well enough until the rear broke away. I suppose it'd feel understeery to most, but it felt more like you could lean on the front end more before it did something silly. These impressions come from different days, though. I do wish I could spend more time behind the wheel of the BRZ.

I don't mind the lack of power-on oversteer. I do mind the lack of mid-range grunt. That infamous hole in the powerband in the midrange... curing that alone, and stiffening up the front suspension a bit would go a long way to making it a better car.

-

Then again, there really isn't anything else like it (except the long-in-the-tooth MX-5) on the market, so this is basically just nitpicking...

 

[jjaisli]

I do mind the lack of mid-range grunt. That infamous hole in the powerband in the midrange... curing that alone, and stiffening up the front suspension a bit would go a long way to making it a better car.

-

Then again, there really isn't anything else like it (except the long-in-the-tooth MX-5) on the market, so this is basically just nitpicking...

I would have to agree. I'm convinced the torque dip in the mid range is mainly due to emissions requirements. I have a Stage One ECU upgrade and that alone does a lot to mitigate the flat spot. And I have a catless UEL header on order, that combined with a Stage II tune, all but eliminates it completely. It's how this car really SHOULD be.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Any well-sorted front-wheel drive hot hatch with a turbo and at least 170 hp will leave a stock BRZFRS in the dust down any mountain road (though to be fair, the BRZFRS would leave a Genesis Coupe in the dust down that same road, too). RWD isn't an advantage unless you're doing multiple laps on the race track at a competitive pace.

I agree. A well sorted FWD can do just as good or better than a RWD car, seen and experienced it. My Sentra SE could keep up with my friends turbo Impreza across the local mountain. (Granted that's AWD)

 

[homeforsummer]

A well sorted FWD

And some of today's ones are seriously well-sorted. They certainly shouldn't be dismissed on the basis that they're essentially tuned shopping cars. Not least because things like the Fiesta are fantastic to drive even in base trim, let alone with a completely revised suspension setup, hotter engine etc.​

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

And some of today's ones are seriously well-sorted. They certainly shouldn't be dismissed on the basis that they're essentially tuned shopping cars. Not least because things like the Fiesta are fantastic to drive even in base trim, let alone with a completely revised suspension setup, hotter engine etc.​

FWD only begins to show their detriment over 300hp when they become totally unruly. But, under that, they can be just as good in my opinion. Funnest car I've ever had was my b16a powered EG Civic screamer. 9,000rpm all day long and enormous grip. No brakes though...

 

[Azure Flare]

Any well-sorted front-wheel drive hot hatch with a turbo and at least 170 hp will leave a stock BRZFRS in the dust down any mountain road (though to be fair, the BRZFRS would leave a Genesis Coupe in the dust down that same road, too). RWD isn't an advantage unless you're doing multiple laps on the race track at a competitive pace.

One of those right?

 

[Joel]

That's the biggest issue with the BRZFRS. It looks great, it's RWD, and by all accounts in the driver's car we all hoped it would be, but a Fiesta ST is all of those things (save RWD) and I can put my hockey bag in the back and there's tons more torque.

I'm years away from buying a new or relatively new car, but if I were given a choice of ~25k "driver's cars" the Fiesta would probably be at the top of the list and the FRS a few places down.

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm years away from buying a new or relatively new car, but if I were given a choice of ~25k "driver's cars" the Fiesta would probably be at the top of the list and the FRS a few places down.

Absolutely. I think the market needs to shake itself out a bit when it comes to pricing and performance. As much as I love the idea of the FR-S, on a day-to-day basis, I don't know if it'd be worth it. Especially living in Michigan. If I lived in Texas or California, my opinion would be entirely different. Then again, GM and Ford would probably pay me to take one of their hot hatches, or even a Mustang, off their hands during some times of the year. On a value for values sake standpoint, it makes much more sense.

 

[jjaisli]

I agree. A well sorted FWD can do just as good or better than a RWD car...

And some of today's ones are seriously well-sorted. They certainly shouldn't be dismissed on the basis that they're essentially tuned shopping cars...​

FWD only begins to show their detriment over 300hp when they become totally unruly. But, under that, they can be just as good in my opinion...

...but if I were given a choice of ~25k "driver's cars" the Fiesta would probably be at the top of the list and the FRS a few places down.

Absolutely PATHETIC! If I ever wondered how the death of the classic sports car could have possibly happened, along come you four to 'explain it'. You should all hang your heads in SHAME!

 

[CodeRedR51]

Absolutely PATHETIC! If I ever wondered how the death of the classic sports car could have possibly happened, along come you four to 'explain it'. You should all hang your heads in SHAME!

We speak from experience. What about you? I'm guessing no.

 

[homeforsummer]

I'm not sure the smileys at the end of his post weren't at least a little tongue-in-cheek, though...

 

[TheCracker]

Trouble with the BRZ/GT86 is that there just doesn't appear to be a big enough market for it. In Europe at least, probably elsewhere too. People who must have a small RWD coupe will probably pay a little more and go down the tried and tested small BMW route. People who want a small fun sporty handling car will probably opt for one of many very good hot hatches that offer similar on paper performance at the same price with an added element of practicality. People who just want a flashy small coupe and don't care which wheels are driven, will go for something that looks better, like the Scirocco, or something with a premium badge. People who are into quick Subarus, want turbos and AWD. People who get teary-eyed over small FR Toyota coupes, are either too young to afford them or too old for them to be a practical option.

It's just not distinctive enough looking to appeal to joe public. After all the hype surrounding it and the luke warm reception it eventually received in the press at launch, it doesn't appear to appeal to many enthusiasts either.

 

[jjaisli]

We speak from experience. What about you? I'm guessing no.

I'll requote myself, because I'm wondering if you didn't just glance over my post and didn't really grasp was I was trying to convey.

Niky, it's not JUST about RWD. It's about the car's relatively low weight, it's low center of gravity and it's near ideal 50/50 front/rear balance. This car is VERY well sorted. It's very neutral and you can push it hard. It's very easy to drive and it just inspires confidence and allows you to comfortably reach your own limits. It was designed from the ground up to be a sports car...But I still disagree with your claim. I've owned and driven a lot of FWD cars: two MKII VW GTis, a Mini Cooper S, a Mazda Speed 3. In a straight line, some of them were faster. But down a twisty, undulating road, none of them could hold a candle to the 86.

Trouble with the BRZ/GT86 is that there just doesn't appear to be a big enough market for it. In Europe at least, probably elsewhere too. People who must have a small RWD coupe will probably pay a little more and go down the tried and tested small BMW route. People who want a small fun sporty handling car will probably opt for one of many very good hot hatches that offer similar on paper performance at the same price with an added element of practicality. People who just want a flashy small coupe and don't care which wheels are driven, will go for something that looks better, like the Scirocco, or something with a premium badge. People who are into quick Subarus, want turbos and AWD. People who get teary-eyed over small FR Toyota coupes, are either too young to afford them or too old for them to be a practical option.

It's just not distinctive enough looking to appeal to joe public. After all the hype surrounding it and the luke warm reception it eventually received in the press at launch, it doesn't appear to appeal to many enthusiasts either.

All true. Unfortunately.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'll requote myself, because I'm wondering if you didn't just glance over my post and didn't really grasp was I was trying to convey.

And you can very easily take this part of your quote:

This car is VERY well sorted. It's very neutral and you can push it hard. It's very easy to drive and it just inspires confidence and allows you to comfortably reach your own limits.

And apply it to just about anything, including a FWD car.

 

[jjaisli]

OK, so let me ask you. Name one front wheel drive (road) car that has (a) as low or lower a center of gravity and (b) less than or equal to the 86's 52/48% front rear weight balance. Because if there is, I don't know it. And to me, that's important.

I used to drive a Mini Cooper S. When I bought it back in 2002, I thought it was the best handling FWD car I had ever been in. And about 9 months ago I test drove a Focus ST. Which I thought bettered it. Although there's only so much you can tell about a car's demeanor on a relatively sedate test drive.

As good as the Cooper was, when pushed, it exhibited traits that nearly all FWD cars I've ever driven share. They are nose heavy and they start to plow when approaching their limits of adhesion. To be fair, some RWD cars will do that too. And like most tidy FWD cars, you could really throw the Cooper into a corner. Good on corner entry. But they suffer on corner exit. You'd want to get on the power but you couldn't. And if it's a slower corner you better make sure you're gripping the wheel with both hands. It really requires a different technique.

Granted, nobody should be pushing their car to these limits on the street. And some of today's cars, even FWD, have VERY high limits. But for me, my FR-S is not my daily driver. It's my 'fun' car. My weekend car. And my track car. The handling, the feedback it generates, I just find it all together wonderful. And it's simply in a different league. There's nothing magical about it. It's simple physics.

I had a 2000 MX-5 for a few years and I got rid of it shortly before my daughter was born. I actually wanted another Miata. (Well, what I REALLY wanted was a Boxster S but it was just way out of my range. And the maintenance on a used one just scared me away). I drove the FR-S on a whim and wasn't really expecting to like it as much as I did. But there just isn't much else in that class and for that price.

 

[CodeRedR51]

It's obvious you are biased because you own on 86, and I come from a ton of FWD experience and could be considered biased towards them (apart from my turbo Miata and an RX-7 or two) so we're really just butting heads on difference of opinion based on experience. The thing about FWD cars is you have to learn and adapt to drive them. If you can't drive them what I would consider "properly" then you may form a negative opinion about them.

As most of my cars have been FWD I have spent countless hours in the canyons and on track with them, I learned to adapt to the negatives and change my driving style so that those negatives were no longer an issue. That includes the corner exit understeer you speak of, late apexing helps here a ton. In fact, one of my FWD cars (2000 Sentra SE) was prone to oversteer if pushed too hard. But this car had 90% of the suspension replaced and the large rear sway bar may have had an effect on that, but now we get into modified cars and that's a whole different ballgame.

 

[jjaisli]

Well, yes and no. I actually learned to drive on a FWD car (an Opel Ascona back in 1987). And most of my driving experience and the majority of the cars I've owned have been FWD. And it has it's advantages. Especially for general road use. What's more, it's cheaper to produce. It's more space efficient. There's a reason why FWD cars are so prevalent. And as performance cars, they're getting better and better.

...I learned to adapt to the negatives and change my driving style so that those negatives were no longer an issue.

But that's the whole thing. And a big part of my argument. If you're driving a sports car, you shouldn't HAVE to adapt. It's like fighting gravity. Well, sort of. It's just, sometimes putting the square peg into the square hole just makes a heck of a lot more sense. And from a clean sheet, RWD cars make better sports cars. And not JUST because they're RWD.

The thing about FWD cars is you have to learn and adapt to drive them. If you can't drive them what I would consider "properly" then you may form a negative opinion about them.

I get it. In other words, learn to drive you bum. Is that it?

 

[CodeRedR51]

But that's the whole thing. And a big part of my argument. If you're driving a sports car, you shouldn't HAVE to adapt.

Why not? All cars are different, you have to adapt to one or the other. No two cars are like 99% of the time.

I get it. In other words, learn to drive you bum. Is that it?

I'm just saying it takes a different approach to driving a FWD car, and if you can adapt your driving style and turn the negatives into positives by doing so like I have, then that's the way to go. I have nothing against RWD cars, I'm just simply saying that FWD cars are not as horrible as people make them out to be. And they can be equally as fast in certain situations.

 

[Clark]

After I drove a Corsa VXR nurburgring which has an LSD, I was amazed at how grippy and how much traction FWD cars can have. (I wasn't a FWD sceptic, I was just genially surprised at how capable it was).

 

[jjaisli]

Why not? All cars are different, you have to adapt to one or the other. No two cars are like 99% of the time.


I'm just saying it takes a different approach to driving a FWD car, and if you can adapt your driving style and turn the negatives into positives by doing so like I have, then that's the way to go. I have nothing against RWD cars, I'm just simply saying that FWD cars are not as horrible as people make them out to be. And they can be equally as fast in certain situations.

Again, I never said FWD cars were horrible. Some are pretty good. And they continue to get better as technology and engineering allows designers to overcome some of their inherent deficiencies. But in general terms, RWD cars make better sports cars. Because they (usually) have better front/rear balance. And not necessarily but usually, a transversely mounted engine in a FWD car will have a higher COG than a longitudinally mounted engine in a RWD car. All this in addition to the fact that it's generally better when you don't have to both steer and power the car from the same axle. It certainly rewards you with more natural steering feel. (Although the way Porsche, BMW and other manufacturers are going with electrically assisted power steering systems, it makes you wonder why they bother).

There are good reasons why most manufacturers produce FWD platforms. And share those platforms amongst various models. But the reason why manufactures produce 'sporty' FWD vehicles has more to do about cost than any inherent performance advantages.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I think everyone is saying that FWD cars can be pretty good and your post seems to indicate that you think they cannot. Who cares if it's a true sports car or not? My FB is front-mid-engined, 50/50 weight distribution, weighs 400lbs less than an FR-S and makes about the same power. So I get the whole chassis dynamics and balance thing. But an Integra GSR is a hell of a thing in it's own right.