Quote:
Originally Posted by nuTinmuch
The car gets a lot of hype because it is good. Basically every journalist disagrees with you.
The car is "good" on stock tires because it is fun on stock tires. They picked them so you could easily (and safely) get the rear tires loose, not because they're good for lap times.
Everyone already knows that one test R&T did with the FR-S, though, which showed this perfectly. When they stuck equal summer rubber on the FR-S it was faster than the WRX and the MS3.
Now, by all means, ride the WRX into the moon for all I care. I'll likely be switching into a WRX or a ST later this year for practicality's sake.
But based on what I've seen, if performance was the only thing I was interested in I'd pick up a BRZ and go to town in aftermarket land.
The system Subaru uses is very basic from a technological standpoint. I'm not saying it isn't good -- quite the opposite, if you read my last post -- I'm just saying that it isn't advanced, which was what the post I was replying to was saying.
The simplicity of the system is why it is good.
|
You can do 100 write ups worshipping the BRZ. But... I'm not falling into the corporate sponsored hype. Sure the BRZ/FRS is a fun car to drive "when pushed to the limit". A lightweight properly geared low hp is always fun to drive. I can get the same experience from a used $2500 econobox from the 80's. prelude, CRX, Rx-7, RWD corolla, celica etc... At $30k for a nicely featured 16 second car? I'd rather take the R-spec 2.0T and replace the whole suspension piece by piece
For a cool romp to work? Yeah i'll take one. To spend $10k in mods and the car still be slower than my stock $34k Z? When $2,000 in suspension mods makes the Z pretty damn capable? I'll stick with the Z.. Shed 200lbs off the Z and i'm good to go.