OhForKavy (WhiteKnightro) wrote:Wing doesn't look bad on there, but I think there are other things that would look great. I think it is sexy as hell. People will buy them and boost the hell out of them, thought as it sits, would be a fun weekend car for autocross and just spirited driving. It's obviously not supposed to be a drag queen or rally car (like the other subaru brands). The boxer engine is a win, but just not a subie, I think it should've been a toyota (Not sure how the FT-86 is coming, or is that the scion I've seen?)
Evol...??? wrote:OhForKavy (WhiteKnightro) wrote:Wing doesn't look bad on there, but I think there are other things that would look great. I think it is sexy as hell. People will buy them and boost the hell out of them, thought as it sits, would be a fun weekend car for autocross and just spirited driving. It's obviously not supposed to be a drag queen or rally car (like the other subaru brands). The boxer engine is a win, but just not a subie, I think it should've been a toyota (Not sure how the FT-86 is coming, or is that the scion I've seen?)
It's all Subie bro. Subaru developed the mechanical side of the car, Toyota the styling. This car is more Subaru than Toyota.
(tabs) wrote:z yaaaa wrote:its not much fun trying to argue with a wall.oh, trust us, we know
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
SUBARU BRZ Concept – STI - Specifications
Body size (Overall: Length x Width x Height): 166.7 X 70.9 X 50.4 inches
Wheelbase: 101.2 inch
Engine: Subaru BOXER “FA” engine - 2.0-liter naturally-aspirated four-cylinder Horizontally-Opposed Boxer engine
Tire size: 215/45R18 (Front), 225/45R18 (Rear)
(tabs) wrote:z yaaaa wrote:its not much fun trying to argue with a wall.oh, trust us, we know
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
wheelbase (inches): 94.5 [s2000]
VS.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Wheelbase: 101.2 inch [BRZ]
Whalesac wrote:Not to add fuel to the fire, but regardless of weight...
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
wheelbase (inches): 94.5 [s2000]
VS.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Wheelbase: 101.2 inch [BRZ]
...those are VERY different numbers.
But I would still argue that it's a sports car.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:, not so much where the wheels are placed.
(tabs) wrote:z yaaaa wrote:its not much fun trying to argue with a wall.oh, trust us, we know
JLAudioCavalier wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:, not so much where the wheels are placed.
Which actually effects how it handles and drives, where "bumper to bumper, overall" dimensions do not.....
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:JLAudioCavalier wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:, not so much where the wheels are placed.
Which actually effects how it handles and drives, where "bumper to bumper, overall" dimensions do not.....
True. But, i was responding to your S2K dimension comparison, not anything on the handling aspect.
(tabs) wrote:z yaaaa wrote:its not much fun trying to argue with a wall.oh, trust us, we know
Jookycola wrote:Leafy (Club Jeffie FEA man) wrote:The BRZ has the two things that have prevented me from wanting a miata or an s2000, and thats rear seats and a permanent hard top.
The Miata has an optional power hardtop.
JLAudioCavalier wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:JLAudioCavalier wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:, not so much where the wheels are placed.
Which actually effects how it handles and drives, where "bumper to bumper, overall" dimensions do not.....
True. But, i was responding to your S2K dimension comparison, not anything on the handling aspect.
It just brings me to my sports car argument. If its heavier than, lower in power, and handles worse than other sports cars, why the hell would I buy one and pay "sports car" insurance rates? Lol