Automotive News, Media & Press - Edmunds Full-Test - Scion FR-S lightweight RWD coupe

The Return of the Sports Car

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_actf34_ft_424121_717.jpg
The front fascia is the main item that visually differentiates the FR-S from the Subaru BRZ.

By Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor | Published Apr 25, 2012

Just as it takes a village to raise a child, making a sports car like the 2013 Scion FR-S apparently requires an arduous collaboration between two automakers, a stubborn chief engineer and a whole lot of waiting.

This might be the sixteen-thousandth time you've seen the 2013 Scion FR-S show up on Inside Line. Endless spy photos and auto show teases have finally led to this, our first proper test of the Toyota's highly anticipated rear-wheel-drive coupe.

The birth of the 2013 Scion FR-S and 2013 Subaru BRZ twins may be overdue, but the end result is worth the wait.

A New Sports Car

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_actr34_ft_411122_717.jpg
Its limits are not sky-high but are ridiculously accessible by virtue of the overachieving chassis dynamics.

Skip ahead to our test numbers if you must, but know this: the FR-S is more than the sum of its performance results. The tactility and control afforded by this chassis belies its modest sub-$25,000 price tag.

For the 12 readers unfamiliar, the FR-S is the product of a collaboration between Subaru and Toyota to produce an affordable, back-to-basics 2+2 sports car for each of them. The true division of responsibility is a bit fuzzy, but it went something like this — Toyota provided much of the direction, handled the styling and assisted with powertrain hardware, while Subaru performed the engineering and development work and manufactures the car in its own plant.

Its body shell is entirely new, the idea being to create a stiff, lightweight sports car that has a center of gravity somewhere below the earth's crust. A new six-speed manual gearbox was developed for the car, as was a heavily reworked version of Subaru's FB-series flat-4. About the only carryover parts are suspension components from Subaru's parts bin.

Approach the 2013 Scion FR-S in person and the first thing you notice is its size. Rather, the lack of it — at 166.7 inches long, it's a half-inch shorter than a two-seat Nissan 370Z and nearly 16 inches shorter than a Hyundai Genesis Coupe. Sitting 50.6 inches high, it's lower than either of them. The FR-S's compact form is the first clue that this car is unusual.

Get Busy With It

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_whl_ft_411121_717.jpg
Vented brake discs reside at all four corners.

To access the car's personality, press and hold the "VSC Off" button for about 3 seconds. This removes all nannies. Forget the VSC Sport setting. It's simply unnecessary in a car as communicative and predictable as this one. Indeed, the car's limits are ultimately capped not by its chassis but by its relatively skinny, plucked-from-Toyota's-shelf 215/45 Michelin Primacy HP low rolling resistance summer tires. In our testing the FR-S generated 0.88g on the skid pad and turned out a 67.3-mph slalom performance; results that trail those produced by the BRZ we tested. The reason is balance — the FR-S's slightly more tail-happy character makes the numbers less big.

It's exactly this character combined with the control this chassis lavishes upon the driver that makes the FR-S so much fun to drive. In steady state cornering the FR-S is neutral tending to mild understeer, but by working the weight transfer — and getting rowdy with the steering and throttle — it can be provoked into easily catchable powerslides. Though its ultimate cornering ability won't yank the wax from your ear canals, the breakaway is so progressive that you can use every iota of grip. It's a rare car that won't bite neophyte drivers, yet encourages and rewards those drivers who are willing to manipulate its cornering attitude.

But you don't have to fling the FR-S to enjoy it. The chassis is pinprick-precise, every steering input from the quick rack is rewarded by immediate, slack-free response. You think it; it does it. You won't find this kind of immediacy in a Hyundai Genesis Coupe or Ford Mustang. Meanwhile, there's enough compliance in the suspension to suit daily use. It's appropriately sporting-firm without jiggling every appendage.

In our testing the 2013 Scion FR-S halted from 60 mph in 117 feet, again a tire-limited exercise. The pedal has minimal idle stroke and a solid feel that softens just a bit when you give the brakes a good thrashing.

Between The Turns

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_eng_ft_411121_717.jpg
The FA20 flat-4 engine was developed specifically for the FR-S and BRZ.

The modest grunt from the 2.0-liter boxer four power plant relegates the countersteering hooliganism to low-speed corners. It's an engine that needs to be revved to deliver the goods — its urge flags a bit in the midrange and then pulls with relative enthusiasm to the 7,400-rpm fuel cut. The factory rating is 200 horsepower at 7,000 rpm and 151 lb-ft at 6,600 rpm.

This engine's 4-2-1 exhaust manifold eliminates the characteristic chuffling warble we've come to expect from Subaru boxer engines, so the engine note is something of an amalgam of a flat- and an inline-4. It's not particularly thrilling-sounding, despite the inclusion of a honkus that pipes induction noise to the cabin. But the FA20 is smoother than previous Subaru boxer engines and thrives on high revs, which is where it needs to be to get the most of the engine.

Sixty miles per hour is reached in 6.6 seconds (6.3 seconds with one foot of rollout like on a drag strip), and the quarter-mile in 14.8 seconds at 93.8 mph. Yes, this result is notably quicker and faster than the BRZ, which did those deeds in 7.3, 7.0, and 15.3 seconds at 92.1, respectively. What's going on?

The data reveals that the BRZ actually accelerated quicker initially, but at 19 mph the Subaru laid over a bit and the Scion powered ahead and never looked back. The explanation is equal parts launch technique and gearchange speed. The Scion's tire-spinning launch allowed it power through the 4000-rpm torque hole we observed in our dyno testing where the Subaru bogged down briefly. Plus, our BRZ tester was plagued with a finicky 1-2 gearchange which ate up precious time en route to 60 mph.

So is the 2013 Scion FR-S fast enough? Yes and no. It isn't slow, but it's so capable and communicative that it could easily exploit more power.

Function Over Form

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_seat_ft_411121_717.jpg
The seats are terrific.

When you drop into the driver seat it immediately feels well positioned deep into the chassis. There's enough room in the pedal box for easy heel-toe movements with size 11 shoes, the wheel is tidily sized and the gearchange lever moves through its gates fluidly. Crucially, there's enough headroom for your 6-foot, 1-inch all-torso author to don a helmet without it touching the headliner.

Few concessions to style adorn the simple and businesslike cabin. Manually adjusted grippy cloth seats provide ample support in full-attack maneuvers without compromising comfort for daily use. The steering wheel is devoid of buttons, the tachometer is granted a prominent central placement, and there's a basic three-knob climate control interface. While nothing about it screams "cheap," the interior is where the FR-S's price point is most apparent.

The backseat is perfect for people you don't like. It's cramped back there. Toyota says the car's 2+2 layout was the result not of a desire to increase its marketability but to provide just enough space to package a set of track tires and tools when you fold the backseat down.

According to the EPA, the FR-S delivers 22 mpg in the city and 30 mpg on the highway. We netted 22.6 mpg in a few days of mixed driving that included track testing and a photo shoot. Such jackassery isn't representative of normal driving, so don't put too much stock in our result.

Notes From the Chief Engineer

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_actr34_ft_411121_717.jpg
Our test car was VIN 00003 and had 586 miles on the odo when we tested it.

We also chatted with Chief Engineer Tetsuya Tada at an FR-S preview at Spring Mountain Raceway outside of Las Vegas, Nevada. In his personal stable is an AE86 rally car that he exercises in anger on a semi-regular basis. Yeah, he's the right guy to head this project.

Ease of modification played into the decision to adopt the rather expensive port- and direct-injection D-4S fuel system. Tada-san was insistent that the car produce 100 hp/liter from its 2.0-liter engine, and direct injection was required to achieve this goal. However, the chief engineer also wants the FR-S/BRZ to be a blank slate for the tuning community. Making a direct-injection system bend to tuners' will is difficult, but port injection is easy.

The suspension calibration of each car reflects the sensibilities of the two manufacturers: Subaru's customers are accustomed to AWD cars with a lot of stability, and so the BRZ is tuned accordingly. The FR-S's rear suspension is slightly stiffer for less understeer, while the front has a bit less spring rate and revised damper valving to improve steering feel. The remaining suspension components — stabilizer bars, bushing durometers, tires — are identical between the two cars.

Tetsuya defends the FR-S's front weight bias (55.4 percent of the FR-S's 2,745 pounds sits at the front axle according to our scales) as suiting the power level of the car better than a 50/50 weight distribution. If the car had 300 horsepower instead of 200, he says, then he'd prefer a less nose-heavy weight bias to facilitate traction.

Looking under the hood, the engine sits low but there's a curiously large gap between the rear plane of the engine and the firewall. This car doesn't need to package axles to the front wheels (there will never be an all-wheel-drive variant), so why not shove the engine to within a millimeter of the bulkhead, thereby reducing the car's polar moment of inertia to an absolute minimum?

Tada-san's explanation boils down to this: They had to make room for the steering rack. A front-mount rack location à la Mazda MX-5 was not an option since the boxer engine layout is inherently wide and blocks the way for a steering shaft. To accommodate a front-mounted rack the engine would have to be located where the pedal box currently resides. As such they instead employed a rear-mount rack location that places the rack between the engine and firewall, in the process pushing the engine forward somewhat.

Oh, and according to Tada-san, the twins will undergo continual updates on an annual basis, similar to the approach Nissan takes with the GT-R.

The Wait Is Almost Over

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_rint_ft_411121_717.jpg
The bench is less a seat and more a place to put your track stuff.

Pricing is very straightforward, as the 2013 Scion FR-S starts at $24,930 with destination when equipped with a six-speed manual. Heretics who insist on the six-speed autobox will have to cough up an additional $1,100.

Other accessories will be available à la carte in usual Scion fashion, the most substantial of which is the 340-watt Pioneer BeSpoke premium audio that features a novel app-based multimedia interface. This system will debut with iPhone capability only, with other device compatibility to follow in the coming months. Pricing for this isn't finalized yet, but it's expected to cost less than $900.

Scion says the FR-S will reach dealership floors on June 1st. That's not too long to wait for the most gratifying sports car to come along in years.

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_f34_ft_424121_717.jpg

What Works (pros): Brilliantly balanced chassis; enormous fun-to-drive quotient.

What Needs Work (cons): Uninspiring engine note; a few low-rent pieces in the cabin; more midrange grunt would be nice.

Bottom Line: Enthusiasts, rejoice! The affordable, lightweight rear-wheel-drive sports car for which you've been waiting has arrived.

Track Test Results

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/scion/fr-s/2013/ft/2013_scion_fr-s_actprf_ft_411121_717.jpg

0-30 mph (sec.) 2.5
0-45 mph (sec.) 4.2
0-60 mph (sec.) 6.6
0-75 mph (sec.) 9.6
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 14.8 @ 93.8
30-0 mph (ft.) 29
60-0 mph (ft.) 117
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.3
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.88

As-tested MSRP $24,930
Edmunds observed (mpg) 22.6

Acceleration Comments - Rewards big-wheelspin launch with quicker accel than BRZ. Best launch from 5,500-5,700 rpm, spin tires through first, then grab 2nd. Feels slow but is much quicker than BRZ. Also, no problems getting 2nd gear in this car like I had in the BRZ.

Braking Comments - Consistent, confident pedal throughout.

Handling Comments - Skid pad: Eager to rotate. Wants to hold a consistent slip angle around skid pad. Easy to hold small slip angle but this doesn't result in big lateral g. More fun than BRZ, despite lower lateral acceleration. Slalom: Far more "lively" than BRZ during rapid transitions. Less stable, and not as quick as a result.

http://support.edmunds.com/images/logo-insideline-big.png (http://www.insideline.com/scion/fr-s/2013/2013-scion-fr-s-full-test.html)

I no like these one.

Patiently waiting for BRZ STI...

With some boost I could like this more.

I think it's alright, looks like a fun package for the money, not going to be a very competitive car with those numbers though.

Its ok.... Id buy it if it was this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV55Ka84Jac

If theyd just add at least another 75 hp then we could have a really great car.

I think my girlfriend would enjoy this one, but I see little use for it even though I think it looks good enough. At first, I thought it looked too much like a Genesis, and it still pretty much does, but whatever. I like that it's a rear drive, but if I'm getting something that small to my eye, it's gonna say MX-5 or Miata somewhere on it... This has more power and cost less, but a 'vert is always in style.

I think my girlfriend would enjoy this one, but I see little use for it even though I think it looks good enough. At first, I thought it looked too much like a Genesis, and it still pretty much does, but whatever. I like that it's a rear drive, but if I'm getting something that small to my eye, it's gonna say MX-5 or Miata somewhere on it... This has more power and cost less, but a 'vert is always in style.I agree.
I think I'd sooner spend a little more and get a 370Z that has some balls or spend a little less and go with a base Miata for that open top summertime feel.

Anxiously awaiting summertime for a test drive :drive:

Anxiously awaiting summertime for a test drive :drive:

x2! When is it hitting car lots, June?

After lookin at the specs on the Scion site, I've essentially lost all interest in this model. There are 2 great things impo. #1, it can turn around in less than 18' (that is special). #2, it weighs less than 2800 lb(manual transmission).

Aside from that, 200hp sounds usable for such a small car, but I think my lawnmower offers more torque than the anemic 151 lb-ft emanating from this little BOXER engine. Even so, the 200hp doesn't hit ya till 7,000rpm(kinda high, even though it's a boxer). Not to mention, torque peaks at 6,600rpm. It's gonna be like an over-sized sled on wheels... downhill, anyway. :D

Even the decent fuel economy is made to look blasé when compared to say, the base Mustang V6 and it's 100 more hp and over 100 more lb-ft torque, all made available at a lower and more usable rpm. As light at it is, I think this little thing is going to be REAL FUN in the parking lot, but a real joke in acceleration.

After lookin at the specs on the Scion site, I've essentially lost all interest in this model. There are 2 great things impo. #1, it can turn around in less than 18' (that is special). #2, it weighs less than 2800 lb(manual transmission).

Aside from that, 200hp sounds usable for such a small car, but I think my lawnmower offers more torque than the anemic 151 lb-ft emanating from this little BOXER engine. Even so, the 200hp doesn't hit ya till 7,000rpm(kinda high, even though it's a boxer). Not to mention, torque peaks at 6,600rpm. It's gonna be like an over-sized sled on wheels... downhill, anyway. :D

Even the decent fuel economy is made to look blasé when compared to say, the base Mustang V6 and it's 100 more hp and over 100 more lb-ft torque, all made available at a lower and more usable rpm. As light at it is, I think this little thing is going to be REAL FUN in the parking lot, but a real joke in acceleration.


I agree mostly, but I wouldn't take a V6 mustang over this due to the fact that this car is one of the few cars out there that is small and light. Now if they put 75-100 more hp at a lower rpm, due to FI, while keeping the weight the same, this car would be a smash hit.

I no like these one.

my thoughts exactly

After lookin at the specs on the Scion site, I've essentially lost all interest in this model. There are 2 great things impo. #1, it can turn around in less than 18' (that is special). #2, it weighs less than 2800 lb(manual transmission).

Aside from that, 200hp sounds usable for such a small car, but I think my lawnmower offers more torque than the anemic 151 lb-ft emanating from this little BOXER engine. Even so, the 200hp doesn't hit ya till 7,000rpm(kinda high, even though it's a boxer). Not to mention, torque peaks at 6,600rpm. It's gonna be like an over-sized sled on wheels... downhill, anyway. :D

Even the decent fuel economy is made to look blasé when compared to say, the base Mustang V6 and it's 100 more hp and over 100 more lb-ft torque, all made available at a lower and more usable rpm. As light at it is, I think this little thing is going to be REAL FUN in the parking lot, but a real joke in acceleration.

peak numbers don't show the whole truth.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/assets_c/2012/04/frsdyno-thumb-717x477-118670.jpg

bone stock. 173whp @ 7k rpm and 143wtq @ 2800rpm. it has a weird dip at about 4k rpm where it goes lean, which somehow is supposed to help low end drive ability, but otherwise has a nice flat torque curve.

i personally think they are both ugly. but fun to drive they may be....

i personally think they are both ugly.While I might not find them to be totally hideous, I also don't consider them to be exactly beautiful looking cars either.

While I might not find them to be totally hideous, I also don't consider them to be exactly beautiful looking cars either.

I appreciate the form-follows-function simplicity of the proportions. Not a gorgeous car, but elegant in its simplicity.

I appreciate the form-follows-function simplicity of the proportions. Not a gorgeous car, but elegant in its simplicity.Agreed, I kind of like the interior as well (again, that functional simplicity also applies).

The latter part of this video really illustrates the difference in total engineering between the new Japanese coupe and American muscle cars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pD3hgleEOXA&feature=player_embedded

And the Subaru is doing all of this on standard tires versus the Mustang's expensive Pirellis.

The latter part of this video really illustrates the difference in total engineering between the new Japanese coupe and American muscle cars.That's been the case since the 240Z. Nothing seems new about it to me.

And the Subaru is doing all of this on standard tires versus the Mustang's expensive Pirellis.Why then, are the 215/45/17 Michelin Primacy HP tires touted at "summer tires" by InsideLine? Michelin also calls them summer tires and they're listed as a "PILOT" brand as well.

Tire type Asymmetrical summer, low-rolling resistance That's what they call them... http://www.insideline.com/scion/fr-s/2013/2013-scion-fr-s-full-test.html

I'm not saying Pirelli's aren't better, but it is what it is in EACH, not just one, case. The Subaru is also doing all this on 700+ lb less weight... Why not mention that little factoid?

The FR-S also has DI, which is a big deal, considering most cars gain so much power from it(and this one did too), leaving tuners a bit further from upgrades on their own, although it won't be impossible.

Also, I noticed a 35.4' turning circle, making me wonder if the 17+ was indeed a misprint.

The FR-S is apparently even better than the Subaru BRZ, but it does "all this" about as well as the Mustang V6, which isn't great(but it's good). Still, the Mustang beats it in a drag race, zero to 60mph, and on a road course...

"low rolling-resistance" because they're the same model tire used on the Prius...which means not very good. And you know as well as anybody that this car isn't about the numbers. This car, as much as any car made, is about feel.

"low rolling-resistance" because they're the same model tire used on the Prius...which means not very good. And you know as well as anybody that this car isn't about the numbers. This car, as much as any car made, is about feel.I don't care which cars they're used on, the point is the same... They're considered SUMMER tires, just exactly as are the tires on the Mustang (which beat it in all racing) that tips the scales at about 750 lb more... The fact our lopsided wannabe "journalist" mentioned over and over in the video, that the Mustang has summer tires while the Scion does not, is what I was really addressing. The fact is, both cars are on summer tires, that's all.

The "feel" aspect is lost on me with this one. After all, if "feel" is all I'm after, I'll take a 2002 ZO6 or a 1996 Viper GTS and leave this thing from Toyaru where it is... rather than driving it.

Yes, it's got its cool points, but for a sports car, this is a joke of an offering. Gimme a Miata instead, really.

Miata, no. S2000, sure.

Miata, no. S2000, sure.

Yeah, I think the Miata would look pretty pitiful compared to this car, especially after watching that video. Also, I don't think this car is bad, but I personally like the S2000 a heck of a lot better. I would choose a nice AP2 over this any day.

The "feel" aspect is lost on me with this one. After all, if "feel" is all I'm after, I'll take a 2002 ZO6 or a 1996 Viper GTS and leave this thing from Toyaru where it is... rather than driving it.


No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about.

There's a massive difference between manhandling a car that is put together with screws and a car that is completely telepathic, a part of you and feels fluidly and purposely engineered for performance.

A really old Corvette and Viper are the polar opposite of the latter.

No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about.

There's a massive difference between manhandling a car that is put together with screws and a car that is completely telepathic, a part of you and feels fluidly and purposely engineered for performance.

A really old Corvette and Viper are the polar opposite of the latter.Okay then... You take the BR-S... then go race one of those old "put together with screws" cars and see how well that works for you. For the record, I think the BR-S will lose 100% of the time. For the price, I am simply one of millions who will more than gladly take a pass. It's not what it's cracked up to be, according to it's actual capabilities, regardless how it takes a hold on emotions.

If you think this is any real indication of what a "purposely engineered for performance" car is, I suggest you actually go drive some decent cars for a change of pace, and raise your standards at the same time. ;)

Any car that loses to a V6 Mustang in a drag race AND a road course... Not my idea of a "purposely engineered for performance." That's just my humble opinion and you are entitled to yours.

Okay then... You take the BR-S... then go race one of those old "put together with screws" cars and see how well that works for you. For the record, I think the BR-S will lose 100% of the time. For the price, I am simply one of millions who will more than gladly take a pass. It's not what it's cracked up to be, according to it's actual capabilities, regardless how it takes a hold on emotions.

If you think this is any real indication of what a "purposely engineered for performance" car is, I suggest you actually go drive some decent cars for a change of pace, and raise your standards at the same time. ;)

Any car that loses to a V6 Mustang in a drag race AND a road course... Not my idea of a "purposely engineered for performance." That's just my humble opinion and you are entitled to yours.

You can't judge a car by its stats only. You clearly have no idea what is meant when we refer to the feel of a car. It's intangible. I have yet to drive a FR-S/BR-Z, but I have driven a V6 Mustang (Dad has one). Let's just say I prefer my mom's Subaru Forester because of the way the car feels, at least for every day driving and the occasional on/offramp. If I really want to push it, I'll take the stang, but the scooby feels lighter and more tossable, and thus more fun.

Also, a V6 Mustang isn't the slow POS it used to be.

Also, a V6 Mustang isn't the slow POS it used to be.True, I think the quickest bone stock one has already gone 13.5s and 102+mph. :eek:

Miata, no. S2000, sure.

I would take a first or second gen modded Miata over this car modded any day.

No offense, but you have no idea what you're talking about.

There's a massive difference between manhandling a car that is put together with screws and a car that is completely telepathic, a part of you and feels fluidly and purposely engineered for performance.

A really old Corvette and Viper are the polar opposite of the latter.

You're really going to try and argue that a Z06 and a GTS are cars with poor feedback and weren't purposely engineered for performance? All while talking about a car that WASN'T purposely engineered for performance, but for having a fun driving car? :jest:

You can't judge a car by its stats only.Who are you to tell anyone such a thing? Not everyone considers the exact same things, like how a car feels, as real factors of performance. A car that feels like it performs well is great... unless it doesn't. Feel is an emotional thought whereas road holding ability is a real factor.

When the car in question is specifically labelled as a performance sports car, it certainly should perform like one. The FR-S, though it's cute like my youngest niece, also offers about the same things in life... A way to waste my time and money taking it out to play... Neither is going to be much fun for me at the end of the day, but she has a great time... if the car could "feel" our emotions, it may or may not...

You clearly have no idea what is meant when we refer to the feel of a car. It's intangible.Oh... So you're on that band wagon that this car has that "intangible" that we, somehow, some ridiculously clueless way, cannot get from a 1997-present Corvette or a 1996 Viper GTS.... Got it. The "intangible" is above my head...

Personally, I will never buy a teeny tiny 4-seater based on how well I think it melds to my pale ass... or how well I feel it handles. I will pick based on overall performance or luxuriousness, but not "feels intangible."

I have yet to drive a FR-S/BR-Z, but I have driven a V6 Mustang (Dad has one). Let's just say I prefer my mom's Subaru Forester because of the way the car feels, at least for every day driving and the occasional on/offramp. If I really want to push it, I'll take the stang, but the scooby feels lighter and more tossable, and thus more fun.If you've not driven it, how do you know how great it feels? I mean, I don't have to drive one to tell you it's rather slow... I do, however, to tell you it "feels" some way or another.

Also, a V6 Mustang isn't the slow POS it used to be.I'm aware, and the reality is still the same... It's the least performing new Mustang available. Come to think of it... The FR-S is probably considered the least performing of it's configuration too... including the 86 and the BRZ(which apparently isn't as good in reality). We're talking about a car that beat the standard MX-5 by a bit over 2 seconds on a lap of Twin Ring Motegi by a short margin, in a best of 3 test.

Not a Scion but there the same thing lol... I think this one looks pretty sick! If only they had a engine that made 3xx hp

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/560751_3271306225941_1365942530_32509843_166886553 5_n.jpg

The Sti and TRD versions should make close to that.

I bought one of these cars and it handles amazing. just like in your ls cars you had to start somewhere and build it up. Power to weight ratio these cars are perfect for an ls swap or even turbo. This car wasn't built for straight line it was built for some back road fun. But here is proof they have great potential http://youtu.be/xVbfUtxQ_sw

It is a "sporty" econocar, when you are slower then many SUV's, sedans and even station wagons that are available, hard to consider this a "sports car". Sports car tend to have power as part of their overall equation, with 200 hp this is severely underpowered.

What a turd. Sounds like the ideal "sports car" for a woman.

It is a "sporty" econocar, when you are slower then many SUV's, sedans and even station wagons that are available, hard to consider this a "sports car". Sports car tend to have power as part of their overall equation, with 200 hp this is severely underpowered.

The classical definition of sports car puts no emphasis on straight-line speed. Some of the best sports cars in history are "slow."

The classical definition of sports car puts no emphasis on straight-line speed. Some of the best sports cars in history are "slow."

Word..

What in the hell is a Miata? A TR6? A Spitfire? Hell, there were underpowered Corvettes in the 70s too. Were they stripped of their sports car status temporarily?

"Slow" sports cars are gay.

Not bad looking cars. At 15K-17K they may be interesting. Not at 25K. The TRD /Sti nes will be around 30K. No thanks.

After further review, I really wouldn't be interested. I can see why a younger person would be, but once I got a close up, I honestly decided I'd much rather the slower and far more appealing Miata. I think the S2000 would be a better choice, used and all. This one seems over-priced for its performance level.

"Slow" sports cars are gay.

Well said, sir.

Put a turbo on it and I'll take a look. Otherwise no thanks.
I drove my brothers Focus ST a couple weekends ago. That thing is a damn riot to drive. Really enjoyed it.

Not bad looking cars. At 15K-17K they may be interesting. Not at 25K. The TRD /Sti nes will be around 30K. No thanks.

Agreed 100%. I got really excited when this car first started appearing; but back then it was either rumored that this car was going to have a 2.0 turbo inline 4 with a sticker below $20k. Had they built it like that I would own one. Fuck $25k for a non-turbo boxer motor with weak internals. The WRX is turbo'd with AWD for the exact same price as this car, no way I would ever take this over that.

Honestly I have to say that after this car being such a let down I'm really NOT looking forward to the new Supra. The MKIV Supra was the last Toyota car I really liked. The LFA is about twice as much as it should have been ( $150k max), and the FR-S should have been around $15k with a more basic interior, or had ~275-300hp for the $25k they are asking.

Agreed 100%. I got really excited when this car first started appearing; but back then it was either rumored that this car was going to have a 2.0 turbo inline 4 with a sticker below $20k. Had they built it like that I would own one. Fuck $25k for a non-turbo boxer motor with weak internals. The WRX is turbo'd with AWD for the exact same price as this car, no way I would ever take this over that.

Honestly I have to say that after this car being such a let down I'm really NOT looking forward to the new Supra. The MKIV Supra was the last Toyota car I really liked. The LFA is about twice as much as it should have been ( $150k max), and the FR-S should have been around $15k with a more basic interior, or had ~275-300hp for the $25k they are asking.

$15k? Seriously? And it's a completely different car than the WRX; if you would get a WRX over one, then you definitely weren't their target market. That'd be like me getting an Accord V6 6spd over an S2000 cuz the Accord has more torque...

I can't wait to find one on auction so I can rip the motor and trans out and drop an LS3 in her....

What would you use to hold the rest of the car together??? It would need a quality rear right away and by the time you finish upgrading to prevent it from ripping itself apart, it would probably have gained 300-500 lb! :lol:

The return of the sports car! Thank God... It's finally returned! :lol: What a POS.

Not bad looking cars. At 15K-17K they may be interesting. Not at 25K. The TRD /Sti nes will be around 30K. No thanks.I agree....although I think a TRD/STi version might even exceed $30k for base MSRP.

You'd be surprised what you can do with a mig welder, a ford 8.8, and some 10 bolt axle tubes.

I'm just saying if I found one dirt ass cheap. JUST SAYING

these cars are perfect for an ls swapI can't wait to find one on auction so I can rip the motor and trans out and drop an LS3 in her....Someone has already beaten ya to it (LS2):

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/subaru/2013-subaru-br-z-v-8-by-weapons-grade-performance-ar140170.html

:cool:

I'm not saying an LS-powered FR-S or BRZ wouldn't be loads of fun, but to say it's not a good car because it doesn't have 400hp+ is a bit silly. The car was designed for a specific purpose, and it's not for everybody.

I'm not saying an LS-powered FR-S or BRZ wouldn't be loads of fun, but to say it's not a good car because it doesn't have 400hp+ is a bit silly. The car was designed for a specific purpose, and it's not for everybody.I think nearly everyone here agrees(including me), but it seems the car is decent at everything for 1 and only 1 reason.... a so-so engine. I'm sure the engine itself is good, but since it so terribly lacks power and torque, the car suffers greatly vs what it could be and frankly, what the "powers that be" exclaimed to the world that it would be and indeed, was. Had they used a "serious" engine, this car would be a massive hit and probably wouldn't be deemed totally over-priced by most.

They could've used a 250-300hp engine and it would have made a real difference toward improving all aspects of performance. Well, that's my opinion, anyway.

Bottom line seems to be, it's a wonderful little car with a wretched drive line for the type of car it is. America may not have the autobahn, but it's not Japan either.

I think nearly everyone here agrees(including me), but it seems the car is decent at everything for 1 and only 1 reason.... a so-so engine. I'm sure the engine itself is good, but since it so terribly lacks power and torque, the car suffers greatly vs what it could be and frankly, what the "powers that be" exclaimed to the world that it would be and indeed, was. Had they used a "serious" engine, this car would be a massive hit and probably wouldn't be deemed totally over-priced by most.

They could've used a 250-300hp engine and it would have made a real difference toward improving all aspects of performance. Well, that's my opinion, anyway.

Bottom line seems to be, it's a wonderful little car with a wretched drive line for the type of car it is. America may not have the autobahn, but it's not Japan either.

Looking at how well the BRZ is selling for what it is, I guess people don't feel it's overpriced.

I just don't like boxer motors, other than that it's alright I guess.

I think these cars look amazing on the outside but the interior looks very cheap and out-dated. I can recall reading about this car before it actually was released and I think the auto makers are making this in hopes of a strong after-market community. Out of the box it comes with enough to keep most people relatively happy, but once the after-market products start coming in with nice turbo-chargers and all of those goodies...this car will be plenty fast enough. I just wish they would upgrade the interior.

I'm not saying an LS-powered FR-S or BRZ wouldn't be loads of fun, but to say it's not a good car because it doesn't have 400hp+ is a bit silly. The car was designed for a specific purpose, and it's not for everybody.

Yeah, for some reason people people just expcet a "sports car" to our run a Camry.

The Sti version will probably make poeple much happpier, but it will still be slower than a 5.0. People shouldn't expect miracles.

Yeah, for some reason people people just expcet a "sports car" to our run a Camry.

The Sti version will probably make poeple much happpier, but it will still be slower than a 5.0. People shouldn't expect miracles.

I imagine most of the people that judge what makes a "sports car" by straight line speed also think Mustangs and F-bodies are sports cars.

I imagine most of the people that judge what makes a "sports car" by straight line speed also think Mustangs and F-bodies are sports cars.

:stupid: I own an F-body and I wouldn't call it a sports car, a muscle car yes.

I checked this car out last week, and it was a nice little car. Drivers seat was nice, but the backseats are pretty much useless. I think they were made to sit on them indian style cus they make a fbody and mustangs backseat look like SUVs.

Id probably like it if it was under 20 grand. For 25k, id rather buy something else.

Looking at how well the BRZ is selling for what it is, I guess people don't feel it's overpriced. You base this comment on what information, the fact that BRZ sold maybe 6,000 units ALL YEAR??? Pfffft! Whatever... The Camaro, by comparison, sold more nearly EVERY month than the BRZ did all year for 2012!

People must actually think it's over-priced, by the way, because the Scion FR-S outsold the BRZ nearly 3:1 for the year. The FR-S costs less for the same car, with different badges. 3k less for the BRZ might mean 3 times the sales. :judge:

BRZ starts ~$200 more than the FR-S... Toyota was only expecting to sell ~10k units for the remainder of 2012, and ~20k in 2013. So if it did almost 18k in 2012, that means it's selling as fast as they can make them.

BRZ starts ~$200 more than the FR-S... Toyota was only expecting to sell ~10k units for the remainder of 2012, and ~20k in 2013. So if it did almost 18k in 2012, that means it's selling as fast as they can make them.The base sticker prices I read were more than $200 difference, but that doesn't even matter because the two companies have already reported what the cars are actually selling for and the BRZ is going for more than 29k while the FR-S is only over 25k.

The actual base price of the two is less than $300 difference, btw. stepping up to the automatics, the starting price seems to be more than $1,000 different.


I've seen no record indicating the 2 combined for even close to 18k, let alone the Toyota(Scion) alone... The last I read(from the web, so...)was only a bit over 13k combined.

I was going off what you said... 6,000 for the BRZ, FR-S outsold it nearly 3:1.

I was going off what you said... 6,000 for the BRZ, FR-S outsold it nearly 3:1.I don't think they sold 6k... After all, they apparently sold 402 for the month of October.

The turn rate for how long they sit on the lot is 15 days better then almost any other car out. There r people waiting six months for they're car on order subaru just can't make them fast enough

Subaru CAN build them fast enough... The turn ran ONLY means they are on a lot for "this" long. It has NO bearing on whether or not the cars could be built more quickly.

Advertising a turn rate and saying that's why more aren't out there(can't build 'em that fast) is just a ploy and that's all it ever was or will be when it comes to automotive ads. The idea is to get people thinking "this car is so hot you can't even find one!" In reality, you can find one right away, but it may not be THE one you really want, based on color, options, price, whatever, though it IS available. ;)

I'm sitting in Tampa at the moment and there are 2 Subaru dealerships here... Reeves Subaru has 1 BRZ. MASTRO Subaru has FIVE! Nobody is going to make me believe this car is hard to find. I found 6 in less than 1 minute.

I would expect it to sit in Florida the car is useless in a flat state where there is no twisty roads

I think these cars look great. But for the price, for me, it definitely does not offer enough. A little more power, and I think these cars can be pretty awesome, but of course, the price will also go up real quick.

Around here where I live, those that have the FRS/BRZ think they have a super fast, god-like car. I've taken two out and they provoked the race. Once beat the driver really hangs back or takes the next turn. I mean, what do they expect? It looks great, but the car's performance does not match its looks. Then there is this other guy who works with my friend who just got one and swears he can take my friend's Vette, if not in a straight line, on mountain roads. This is after he told him his suspension and engine mods. Really? Wtf?

I really like the car, but I hope the douches around here don't make me hate it. It seems those around here that buy it have a different view of what the car can do compared to what it was designed to do and its limitations.

I think these cars look great. But for the price, for me, it definitely does not offer enough. A little more power, and I think these cars can be pretty awesome, but of course, the price will also go up real quick.

Around here where I live, those that have the FRS/BRZ think they have a super fast, god-like car. I've taken two out and they provoked the race. Once beat the driver really hangs back or takes the next turn. I mean, what do they expect? It looks great, but the car's performance does not match its looks. Then there is this other guy who works with my friend who just got one and swears he can take my friend's Vette, if not in a straight line, on mountain roads. This is after he told him his suspension and engine mods. Really? Wtf?

I really like the car, but I hope the douches around here don't make me hate it. It seems those around here that buy it have a different view of what the car can do compared to what it was designed to do and its limitations.

For what it was designed to do, there isn't anything near it's price that touches it. But it was built for a certain purpose that isn't necessarily quantitative, so most people here would argue that.

I would expect it to sit in Florida the car is useless in a flat state where there is no twisty roadsIf you knew anything to speak of about Florida, you'd know where to find miles worth of twisty roads. In order to be really good for hilly areas, the BRZ would need the one thing it lacks most, POWER! That's why I still say Corvette is essentially incomparable for the money. You get the cute crap like the BRZ has along with real power the BRZ hasn't.

Plus, while Florida isn't a mountainous state by any means, it isn't until one goes further south than roughly, Tampa on the west side or anywhere on the far eastern side, one can't really find hills too, believe it or not.

Btw, I just found 4 more at Subaru of Glendale... CALIFORNIA... Southern, at that! $27,641(MSRP) for the least expensive, but there it sits, 2.9% financing and all. If it's a hot car and CA has all those hills people who love this car want and it's in CA, where millions of wannabe's live... Why's it still there? Why are there 4 at 1 dealership in the best place on earth??? 2 more await your arrival at Subaru of Santa Monica! One more at Subaru Sherman Oaks... That's in Van Nuys, btw. 4 more at Subaru of Ontario. Are you getting the picture yet??? This car is EASY to find, even in Californication! Personal note: I didn't leave anything in CA myself, and if I did, you guys can have it, as I have NO intention of going back to that crap-hole of a state.

For what it was designed to do, there isn't anything near it's price that touches it. But it was built for a certain purpose that isn't necessarily quantitative, so most people here would argue that.What does "touches it" mean, here?

If performance is the mark, I disagree with you because even a V6 Camaro can hang with that car in essentially any contest, aside from fitting in a tiny spot... The Mustang offers the same story, as does the Genesis and of course, its(BRZ) sister car, the less expensive but largely identical FR-S.

^^^
Totally agree. In the price range this car is in, especially in CA as mentioned by another poster above, there are way better options, and it's performance is not only "touched" but seriously molested by the other options. If the car was in the low $20k's, even with it's performance, I would definitely consider it more of a bargain. But for the price and what it does...no. The main problem is the pricing where more should be expected from what you pay, at least IMO. If I'm paying $27k+ for a car, it needs to do more than just look good and feel fast and fun.

I'm thinking, the way the car is currently, the FRS/BRZ were designed to be a fun, lightweight, good handling, small car, that "feels" fast and spirited. Like a Miata, the car does not have a ton of power, but it can be fun because it small, spirited, and can handle well. The current thinking of some owners of the FRS/BRZ, and those that I have come in contact with seems to be if it feels fast, then it will demolish all. Currently, the car is not set up to actually be really fast, and when you try to explain, they don't give a shit. Maybe it has to do with the "86" emblem and that Initial D anime. Idk, but once again, these owners/people think there car is can perform in a way it is currently not designed and capable of doing.

What does "touches it" mean, here?

If performance is the mark, I disagree with you because even a V6 Camaro can hang with that car in essentially any contest, aside from fitting in a tiny spot... The Mustang offers the same story, as does the Genesis and of course, its(BRZ) sister car, the less expensive but largely identical FR-S.

For what it was designed to do, there isn't anything near it's price that touches it. But it was built for a certain purpose that isn't necessarily quantitative, so most people here would argue that.

Like I said lol

Like I said lolPerformance, however, is necessarily quantitative with every vehicle ever made... ;)

The BRZ and FR-S simply stated, fall very far short in the real world, regardless what some say on the internet. This is why price really does matter. It's no new Corvette... at any price. There's nothing really wrong with the car, except it really does lack performance. Bragging about outrunning a Miata isn't my idea of proving how capable my car is... :D

Besides, if I'm getting a MIATA KILLER at about the same price as a MIATA... At least make it a convertible, like the ... MIATA!

I understand your viewpoint, but there are lots of people out there that don't want/need a lot of power, and put the most importance on how the car feels. This car was made for them.

I understand your viewpoint, but there are lots of people out there that don't want/need a lot of power, and put the most importance on how the car feels. This car was made for them.Yeah... So was the Miata, which sells a boatload(from Japan) more from the looks. Moreover, the FR-S is still dominating the sister car in sales and again, it's really about price. If nothing else proves price matters, a 3:1 sales advantage probably covers it...

I just watched a video comparing the FR-S to the Hyundai Genesis 2.0T and Mazda Miata hardtop on a race track. The Miata won, Genesis took second. Only three cars in the contest. That was TTAC.

Read an article about the BRZ and FR-S, plus the Miata, Mustang V6, VW GTI, Genesis 2.0T.

Genesis, the 2nd best performer, took 6th and the Mustang, the absolute best performer(it won essentially performance category), took 4th... So the opinions there weren't AT ALL about performance, even though they called it a track test... The overall winner, according to the story, was the BRZ... It had the 2nd highest starting price AND was the overall worst performer... But let's face it, Subaru offered the most money for the pick, period!

2nd place... The FR-S, which actually out-performed the more expensive BRZ! The Mustang SMASHED this competition, literally winning, save lateral g's, every single performance contest. That's how they "roll" at Motor Trend... Best means nothing to those idiots. I say idiots because they constantly allow their "feelings" to get in the way of being subjective and real, I might add, journalists. I could write a better story based in truth and I'm no writer(by real standards, not the typical garbage from American colleges over the past 20yrs or so).

A big part of buying a car is SUBJECTIVE. And depending on what they were looking for in that test, their SUBJECTIVE view of the car would cause it to win.