Subaru powered Toyota FT-86 Concept

Red__Zed · 11-04-2011, 07:48 AM

Jordo-- Cobb will have the ecu picked apart before we ever see on of these in person.

I feel you on the warranty, just saying, I bet we see a lot of these going very fast.

Spikuh · 11-04-2011, 09:26 AM

I may have missed it, but is this thing suposed to run on regular unleaded? Seeing as the engine is 12.5:1 compressions ratio, I expect premium gas to be the bare minimum you can run without sacrificing power and mpg.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ-of-E

Well, the original SR20DE engines are barely 165HP w/ 120lbs of torque.

Still..you think after 20 years later, you would think these newer engines are supposed to be more power efficient, especially when the SR20DE engine had like 30MPG on the freaken god dang Sentra!

Not disagreeing with anything you said, just pointing out the SR20DE is a 9.5:1 compression which is an important factor to remember as well.

kenchan · 11-04-2011, 10:56 AM

Crap. I just noticed there is a big hump and cup holders between the rear seats preventing me from opening just one door to let 2 kids in. I would have to open both doors. Same issue on the RX8, no issue on my G35C. Will need to pass in this case.

Guess they weren't thinking kids on this car. If you have kids one would know wat I mean.

Skeeterbop · 11-04-2011, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spikuh

I may have missed it, but is this thing suposed to run on regular unleaded? Seeing as the engine is 12.5:1 compressions ratio, I expect premium gas to be the bare minimum you can run without sacrificing power and mpg.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dj-of-E

Well, the original SR20DE engines are barely 165HP w/ 120lbs of torque.

Still..you think after 20 years later, you would think these newer engines are supposed to be more power efficient, especially when the SR20DE engine had like 30MPG on the freaken god dang Sentra!

Not disagreeing with anything you said, just pointing out the SR20DE is a 9.5:1 compression which is an important factor to remember as well.

It could be possible for them to have 2 maps programmed, one for premium and one for regular. If Ford could do it on my 93 Lightning, I don't see why manufacturers can't do it now.

Another thing to consider about efficiency is the cars 20 years ago were generally lighter as well.

Lug · 11-04-2011, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeeterbop

It could be possible for them to have 2 maps programmed, one for premium and one for regular. If Ford could do it on my 93 Lightning, I don't see why manufacturers can't do it now.

Another thing to consider about efficiency is the cars 20 years ago were generally lighter as well.

+1 The current Mustang runs on 87 thru 91 octange and adjusts itself. I think it costs about 10 to 12 hp to go down to 87.

m4a1mustang · 11-04-2011, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lug

+1 The current Mustang runs on 87 thru 91 octange and adjusts itself. I think it costs about 10 to 12 hp to go down to 87.

You are correct. It's rated to "about" 400hp on 87 and 412hp on premium.

Spikuh · 11-04-2011, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeeterbop

It could be possible for them to have 2 maps programmed, one for premium and one for regular. If Ford could do it on my 93 Lightning, I don't see why manufacturers can't do it now.

Another thing to consider about efficiency is the cars 20 years ago were generally lighter as well.

That is true. The SR only had move like 2300 to 2400 lbs or weight in that old sentra. I wish I could find some information regarding the mpg of the late model 180sx with the 250hp sr20 since it weighed 2700 lbs. That would be a pretty good comparison.

I would just be concerned about engine knock with running regular fuel on a compression ratio that high, but maybe the newer technology engines allow it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

You are correct. It's rated to "about" 400hp on 87 and 412hp on premium.

This is what I was trying to alude at I guess. If that engine requires premium to make the 200 hp, then the regular is going to be less.

DJ-of-E · 11-04-2011, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spikuh

That is true. The SR only had move like 2300 to 2400 lbs or weight in that old sentra.

Nope, my dad owns an old Sentra and it's deceivingly quick, but it's definitely 2600lb last time I remembered looking at the car sticker.

Jordo! · 11-04-2011, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

Jordo-- Cobb will have the ecu picked apart before we ever see on of these in person.

I feel you on the warranty, just saying, I bet we see a lot of these going very fast.

Well, I hope you are right. That will make a world of difference.

For others who asked about the fueling: It's tuned for PREMIUM.

So, another gripe of mine (fair or not), is that I'm a bit irritated that with DI, 12.5:1 CR AND fvcking 91 AKI they couldn't do better than 200 ps/195 hp.

I feel like Toyota said, "Oooh let's make a NEARLY perfect car... then stop juuuust short. Let's also use a platform that seems highly tunable, but really, given the newness of the technology involved, it won't be. Ha!"

Again, offering a higher priced turbo variant with more power (even if not at a level to compete with Z's or Mustangs et al) should have been fairly easy... but they didn't.

And those of you hoping for a turboed Sti variant -- don't. The Sti may have a bit more power (via a slightly tweaked tune), perhaps a moderately better suspension set-up, and a nicer interior, but there has been ZERO indication it will have a substantially different set up as compared to the regular Subaru and Toyota car.

Skeeterbop · 11-04-2011, 08:34 PM

Well with all the engine specs you stated, it could be possible they just have it detuned a fair bit. This way when they make the "hot" version the have plenty of space to work with and aren't having to change any components.

Rui Z · 11-04-2011, 08:40 PM

[QUOTE=Rui Z;1392725]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordo!

So, another gripe of mine (fair or not), is that I'm a bit irritated that with DI, 12.5:1 CR AND fvcking 91 AKI they couldn't do better than 200 ps/195 hp.

With those 3 things you would have wished for a little more than 200 horses. But, it is still 100 hp/liter. That's better than most cars (370Z = 90 hp/liter, 95 for Nismo).

Jordo! · 11-05-2011, 04:45 PM

[QUOTE=Rui Z;1392728]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rui Z

With those 3 things you would have wished for a little more than 200 horses. But, it is still 100 hp/liter. That's better than most cars (370Z = 90 hp/liter, 95 for Nismo).

It's not that impressive for a small, high reving engine -- they've been doing that with 4 bangers for years!

Moreover, some older honda engines already far exceed that, so, again nothing to wake the neighbors over.

But as disappointed as I am in the power figures, the torque nnumber is even more depressing: 151 lbft.

All the insiders were claiming around 170 before the ofical specs were released -- that's a big let down. Another 20 lbft would have made a world of difference on this car.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm sure it will be a fantastic car to drive, but it really needs some sort of big power boost option, and given that it's a DI motor, what can be done by the aftermarket remains a big unknown...

Rui Z · 11-05-2011, 05:09 PM

The 370Z makes 73 lb-ft/liter of torque. The forums beloved Mustang makes 78 lbft/liter. The FR-S makes 76 lbft/liter which is about the same as an S2000. I know these numbers look like a disappoinment to alot of people, but it's inline with top performance vehicles (<$50,000 normally aspirated cars) when considering the size of the engine. They just need a turbo version for the power hungry, but the engine looks like a good engine spec-wise.

Jordo! · 11-05-2011, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rui Z

The 370Z makes 73 lb-ft/liter of torque. The forums beloved Mustang makes 78 lbft/liter. The FR-S makes 76 lbft/liter which is about the same as an S2000. I know these numbers look like a disappoinment to alot of people, but it's inline with top performance vehicles (<$50,000 normally aspirated cars) when considering the size of the engine. They just need a turbo version for the power hungry, but the engine looks like a good engine spec-wise.

Ehhhh... but the bottom line is that it's going to moderately outhandle and out brake a 10 year old FF Celica GT-S, and match it almost exactly in straightline acceleration, and that is hugely fvcking depressing

Red__Zed · 11-05-2011, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rui Z

The 370Z makes 73 lb-ft/liter of torque. The forums beloved Mustang makes 78 lbft/liter. The FR-S makes 76 lbft/liter which is about the same as an S2000. I know these numbers look like a disappoinment to alot of people, but it's inline with top performance vehicles (<$50,000 normally aspirated cars) when considering the size of the engine. They just need a turbo version for the power hungry, but the engine looks like a good engine spec-wise.

HP/L is an engineers spec, but as a driver, I'm not too impressed. I care more about the lbs/hp, and that spec is not terribly impressive.

11-04-2011, 08:34 PM	#130 (permalink)
Skeeterbop A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Fort Bliss, TX Age: 40 Posts: 1,440 Drives: 2011 GM 370 base SP Rep Power: 16	Well with all the engine specs you stated, it could be possible they just have it detuned a fair bit. This way when they make the "hot" version the have plenty of space to work with and aren't having to change any components. __________________ Srenity: "Yeah no rest needed to spread the love when your 20 that's for sure...."

11-05-2011, 05:09 PM	#133 (permalink)
Rui Z Track Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: (.)(.) Posts: 931 Drives: 8====D Rep Power: 16	The 370Z makes 73 lb-ft/liter of torque. The forums beloved Mustang makes 78 lbft/liter. The FR-S makes 76 lbft/liter which is about the same as an S2000. I know these numbers look like a disappoinment to alot of people, but it's inline with top performance vehicles (<$50,000 normally aspirated cars) when considering the size of the engine. They just need a turbo version for the power hungry, but the engine looks like a good engine spec-wise. __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bazooka Powered Subs...anyone???	john370z	Audio & Video	8	08-17-2009 12:25 AM
2009 Subaru Impreza WRX STI Design Concept by Lars Martensson	BanningZ	Other Vehicles	7	05-29-2009 12:02 AM
I'm a subaru guy who fell in love with a Z	omnomz	New 370Z Owner	7	05-02-2009 03:59 PM
High-Powered Vehicle	Indy	Australia/New Zealand	1	04-15-2009 10:51 PM
2009 Subaru Impreza WRX STI - Pearl White - Immaculate!	kailua	Other Vehicle For sale	9	03-04-2009 01:29 AM

11-04-2011, 07:48 AM	#121 (permalink)
Red__Zed A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: window seat Posts: 28,940 Drives: Mostly on two wheels Rep Power: 120	Jordo-- Cobb will have the ecu picked apart before we ever see on of these in person. I feel you on the warranty, just saying, I bet we see a lot of these going very fast.

11-04-2011, 10:56 AM	#123 (permalink)
kenchan A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: N/A Posts: 76,801 Drives: N/A Rep Power: 141521	Crap. I just noticed there is a big hump and cup holders between the rear seats preventing me from opening just one door to let 2 kids in. I would have to open both doors. Same issue on the RX8, no issue on my G35C. Will need to pass in this case. Guess they weren't thinking kids on this car. If you have kids one would know wat I mean.