Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Nickey Chicago
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion

General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion Come chat about other cars.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-14-2011, 10:36 AM   #1
matthewmiller01
 
Drives: 2002 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nebraska City, NE
Posts: 37
Cool New RWD Subaru Sports Coupe (FT-86 equivalent) Coming in March!

Anyone been following the Toyota/Subaru joint project FT-86/216a sports car? News from FT86club today is that Subaru's RWD version is going to be unveiled at the 2011 Geneva autoshow in March.

Supposed to be on an all new RWD platform and powered by Subaru's boxer engine. I just hope the Subaru version makes it to the states, but I got some fear that it won't because since both models are now RWD, wouldn't they just eat into each other's sales?

via
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=916
__________________
Just wanting and waiting...
matthewmiller01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 10:48 AM   #2
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
i like it, seems like it would compete with the Genesis Coupe and perhaps whatever rwd coupe Honda will be putting out..
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 11:52 AM   #3
Zabo
Bowtie to the brim
 
Zabo's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 R6P 2SS/RS M6, '96 S10 ZR2 M5
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Woodhaven, Michigan
Posts: 9,582
Is honda even considering one anymore? It's been what.. almost 40 years since they've had an affordable RWD car that wasn't trying to be a supercar.
__________________
2010 2SS/RS M6
Black on Black, Silver Rally Stripes, NPP Exhaust, 1LE Rear Diffuser,
SLP Z/28 style Blackwing CAI
Zabo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 12:38 PM   #4
lil_chef
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Mustang GT
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 1,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zabo View Post
Is honda even considering one anymore? It's been what.. almost 40 years since they've had an affordable RWD car that wasn't trying to be a supercar.
s2000?
lil_chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 12:49 PM   #5
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zabo View Post
Is honda even considering one anymore? It's been what.. almost 40 years since they've had an affordable RWD car that wasn't trying to be a supercar.
s2k... had the highest NA piston hp/liter engine in the world for a few years...
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 02:49 PM   #6
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,112
Sweet. I've been eager to see these things come to fruition. It should be a potent little sports car.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 12:41 AM   #7
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 21,981
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
s2k... had the highest NA piston hp/liter engine in the world for a few years...
I will never understand the fascination with a high hp/L number. A bigger engine, with the same hp, will produce more torque and therefore more average power, and as a result make the car faster overall.
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:05 AM   #8
KKreme15

 
KKreme15's Avatar
 
Drives: C6 Z06
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Dayton, MD
Posts: 1,638
I have one of these in Gran Tourismo 5
KKreme15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 08:30 AM   #9
LOWDOWN
Downright Upright
 
LOWDOWN's Avatar
 
Drives: Daily
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cruisin'...
Posts: 4,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3 View Post
I will never understand the fascination with a high hp/L number. A bigger engine, with the same hp, will produce more torque and therefore more average power, and as a result make the car faster overall.
In many foreign countries, vehicles are taxed on displacement. 2.0L can be "magic" territory. So, if you're "restricted" to 2.0L AND no forced induction, "factory-built tuner engines" ensue...

With VVT, the conventional wisdom to this point has been to concentrate on more hp beyond a certain rpm. No one said manufacturers couldn't use VVT to concentrate on torque AND mpg, instead...
__________________
LOWDOWN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 10:10 AM   #10
v6sonoma


 
v6sonoma's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS RS
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 7,799
I've seen the articles on it, but I think it was a small mistake for Subaru to make a car that isn't AWD. It's basically there main selling point and strongest feature. They KNOW AWD and to go RWD is going to alienate their main customer base. It might bring in new customers and I'm sure some existing customers will go for it, but I think it will be flop. Part of the problem was/is cost. They both wanted a cheaper car and AWD was gonna make it to much so they axed it. I guess it doesn't really matter to me though since I got my rocket ship already.
__________________

Mods: BBK Intake, BBK LT's and High Flow Cats, Corsa Cat-back exhaust, Hurst short throw shifter, SLP skip-shift eliminator.

7/1/09 Placed order for IOM/IO int/ SS/RS 6M
9/26/09 Took delivery!
v6sonoma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 10:19 AM   #11
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by v6sonoma View Post
I've seen the articles on it, but I think it was a small mistake for Subaru to make a car that isn't AWD. It's basically there main selling point and strongest feature. They KNOW AWD and to go RWD is going to alienate their main customer base. It might bring in new customers and I'm sure some existing customers will go for it, but I think it will be flop. Part of the problem was/is cost. They both wanted a cheaper car and AWD was gonna make it to much so they axed it. I guess it doesn't really matter to me though since I got my rocket ship already.
We are just seeing the base model, STI could mean AWD and forced induction.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 06:08 PM   #12
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
but Toyota is selling it, so what does it matter if it's awd or rwd to Subaru?
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 10:52 PM   #13
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 21,981
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOWDOWN View Post
In many foreign countries, vehicles are taxed on displacement. 2.0L can be "magic" territory. So, if you're "restricted" to 2.0L AND no forced induction, "factory-built tuner engines" ensue...

With VVT, the conventional wisdom to this point has been to concentrate on more hp beyond a certain rpm. No one said manufacturers couldn't use VVT to concentrate on torque AND mpg, instead...
I see two problems with that explanation. Anyone that I've talked to what likes a high hp/L has been living in either the US or Canada. Last time I checked, neither country has a displacement tax. Second, regardless of why a manufacturer does it, its not a positive attribute and if anything, its a negative. More power is good. More torque is good. But high hp/L ... so what? I'd much rather have an LS7 than the 4.3L from the F430 Scuderia. The proponents of hp/L would have you believe that the Ferrari engine is superior, since it makes more than 50% more hp/L. But in just about any measurable way its inferior to the big pushrod mill of the Z06: it makes less torque, burns more fuel, and costs more (and presumably, weighs more and is bigger overall though I can't find much info on that stuff)
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 11:03 PM   #14
8cd03gro


 
Drives: 2005 STi corn fed
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
We are just seeing the base model, STI could mean AWD and forced induction.
This is what I have heard. There are rumors that this will have an sti trim level with awd and a turbo 2.5. . .
8cd03gro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:20 PM   #15
ArkySS
Camaroless for now...
 
ArkySS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Blue Topaz Silverado
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 1,408
Can't imagine Subaru having much success with this thing without AWD so I bet you guys are right when they go STI on it.
__________________
It was fun while it lasted.....
ArkySS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:30 PM   #16
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8cd03gro View Post
This is what I have heard. There are rumors that this will have an sti trim level with awd and a turbo 2.5. . .
300+hp in a light weight low center of gravity chassis with AWD will make for a lot of fun.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 01:44 AM   #17
PeeBee

 
PeeBee's Avatar
 
Drives: "Bee" ZL585, Dark Blue Suburban.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Luxemburg
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3 View Post
I see two problems with that explanation. Anyone that I've talked to what likes a high hp/L has been living in either the US or Canada. Last time I checked, neither country has a displacement tax. Second, regardless of why a manufacturer does it, its not a positive attribute and if anything, its a negative. More power is good. More torque is good. But high hp/L ... so what? I'd much rather have an LS7 than the 4.3L from the F430 Scuderia. The proponents of hp/L would have you believe that the Ferrari engine is superior, since it makes more than 50% more hp/L. But in just about any measurable way its inferior to the big pushrod mill of the Z06: it makes less torque, burns more fuel, and costs more (and presumably, weighs more and is bigger overall though I can't find much info on that stuff)
Oh my... I think you should keep in mind that most countries ooutside of America DO have displacement taxes. I live in Belgium, and the magic "border" is indeed around 2 liter, everything above there, they tax you for the extra displacement you have, or if the hp is too high, on the hp.

To give you an idea: somewhere in some dark ministery some people decided we would all be better of if we would drive small displacement, high output engines.

I drive a 2.7 TVD6 Range Sport as daily driver. Compared to someone driving a < 2 liter diesel, I pay about 800 EUR a year "volumetric tax". Which in itself is a joke as they base the tax on the hp the car has (190 "official" hp is way too high for those same people, so they decide I should pay taxes for a 3 liter diesel instead of a 2.7, based on the hp).

You can see this also reflected in the company cars that are offered over here. Few years ago, when I wasn't running my own company yet, I had as a "standard car" the choice between the "big" 3 Germans (Merc, Audi, BMW), all of them were around 2 liters, with a few exceptions where I was allowed a 3 liter diesel (330d and X5).

If I look now at the customer I'm working for, the people there get offered a 1.3 or 1.4 diesel as company car, and they have to pay a contribution about the same as I did about 7 years ago.

Coming back to your example, LS7 vs 4.3: both would cost you 5k EUR "inscription tax" in Belgium, yearly tax would be about 1900 for the LS7, 1400 for the 4.3. So yes, I can see the reason why people want low displacement, high hp engines: to avoid some taxes, and still have some fun while driving.
PeeBee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 02:47 AM   #18
shevyman

 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS IOM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: california
Posts: 1,741
i have been waiting for the ft-86 from totyota. it will be cheaper and just about the same as the subaru. but i liked the camaro and jumped on board.

but will say if things stay the way they are now with me not having my car, well once i get it the ft-86 will be out and i will just trade a brand new camaro with like 2000miles in for the toyota.
shevyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 03:12 AM   #19
a_Username


 
a_Username's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeeBee View Post
Oh my... I think you should keep in mind that most countries ooutside of America DO have displacement taxes. I live in Belgium, and the magic "border" is indeed around 2 liter, everything above there, they tax you for the extra displacement you have, or if the hp is too high, on the hp.

To give you an idea: somewhere in some dark ministery some people decided we would all be better of if we would drive small displacement, high output engines.

I drive a 2.7 TVD6 Range Sport as daily driver. Compared to someone driving a < 2 liter diesel, I pay about 800 EUR a year "volumetric tax". Which in itself is a joke as they base the tax on the hp the car has (190 "official" hp is way too high for those same people, so they decide I should pay taxes for a 3 liter diesel instead of a 2.7, based on the hp).

You can see this also reflected in the company cars that are offered over here. Few years ago, when I wasn't running my own company yet, I had as a "standard car" the choice between the "big" 3 Germans (Merc, Audi, BMW), all of them were around 2 liters, with a few exceptions where I was allowed a 3 liter diesel (330d and X5).

If I look now at the customer I'm working for, the people there get offered a 1.3 or 1.4 diesel as company car, and they have to pay a contribution about the same as I did about 7 years ago.

Coming back to your example, LS7 vs 4.3: both would cost you 5k EUR "inscription tax" in Belgium, yearly tax would be about 1900 for the LS7, 1400 for the 4.3. So yes, I can see the reason why people want low displacement, high hp engines: to avoid some taxes, and still have some fun while driving.
That's great and all, but I too see no relevance of HP/L in performance (which is really what DG is referring to).
a_Username is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 09:39 AM   #20
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_Username View Post
That's great and all, but I too see no relevance of HP/L in performance (which is really what DG is referring to).
for example, in rally there are 2.0 liter displacement requirements to compete... i dont think Mitsu is gonna make two different engines for the same rally car..

having a high hp/liter shows efficiency, its why you see Ford finally going to mass produce dohc 4v engines because its more efficient than a sohc 2-3v engine and has potentially greater top end power... there is a larger market when it comes to small engine performance numbers because those engines tend to be more affordable than larger displacement engines....

you dont think the v6 Camaro would be as popular if they had the old 3800 series engine in it do you?
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 10:39 AM   #21
LOWDOWN
Downright Upright
 
LOWDOWN's Avatar
 
Drives: Daily
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cruisin'...
Posts: 4,058
Chev was very proud of their "1st to do it in a production car" 1 hp/cu" 283/283 in '57...and their 1.15 hp/cu" 327/375 followed in the '60s. Neither was a torque monster compared to then-era Cad/Olds/Buick engines, but in lighter cars they ruled the streets...

Think "home markets" for imports and, as explained, smaller efficient engines in smaller lighter packages are simply historic responses to what Chev has already done and will be doing...which is what Ferrari's entire existance is predicated on.

"Efficency"...with CAFE 2016 looming, expect more from less...
__________________
LOWDOWN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 04:45 PM   #22
a_Username


 
a_Username's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
for example, in rally there are 2.0 liter displacement requirements to compete... i dont think Mitsu is gonna make two different engines for the same rally car..

having a high hp/liter shows efficiency, its why you see Ford finally going to mass produce dohc 4v engines because its more efficient than a sohc 2-3v engine and has potentially greater top end power... there is a larger market when it comes to small engine performance numbers because those engines tend to be more affordable than larger displacement engines....

you dont think the v6 Camaro would be as popular if they had the old 3800 series engine in it do you?
Again, that's great and all, but I would simply call it a different route to achieve a certain level of performance that reflects its own limitations. However, I have not seen anyone argue how this has any relevance to performance. All other things being the same, there would be no difference in performance between two cars with one having a 2.0L engine producing 426 and another having a 6.2L producing 426.
a_Username is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 07:08 PM   #23
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_Username View Post
Again, that's great and all, but I would simply call it a different route to achieve a certain level of performance that reflects its own limitations. However, I have not seen anyone argue how this has any relevance to performance. All other things being the same, there would be no difference in performance between two cars with one having a 2.0L engine producing 426 and another having a 6.2L producing 426.
sure there would be! engine weight, torque, and stress level (longitivity)... some people prefer sushi to hamburgers... both are great foods, neither could you sustain life on 3 times a day, 7 days a week, etc..
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 07:39 PM   #24
a_Username


 
a_Username's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 3,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
sure there would be! engine weight, torque, and stress level (longitivity)... some people prefer sushi to hamburgers... both are great foods, neither could you sustain life on 3 times a day, 7 days a week, etc..
Unequal torque is pretty much unavoidable in this case yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of total car weight. Stress is an aspect that isn't that important anymore; there are S2000s running 700rwhp on supposedly stock blocks. Regardless, HP/L is still a worthless statistic for performance.
a_Username is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2011, 07:41 PM   #25
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_Username View Post
Unequal torque is pretty much unavoidable in this case yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of total car weight. Stress is an aspect that isn't that important anymore; there are S2000s running 700rwhp on supposedly stock blocks.
for how many seconds? 8-9 through the 1/4 mile?
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GM Reveals 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe! FenwickHockey65 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 47 05-20-2010 11:18 PM
Answeres to questions I have stumbled on dieseldave24v 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 13 02-23-2009 06:56 PM
Holden Monaro coupe could be produced Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 4 03-11-2008 09:27 PM
ZAP Says its $30K Electric Sports Car Is Coming in 2009 KILLER74Z28 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 9 02-08-2008 01:41 AM
GM's global rwd approach promises savings KILLER74Z28 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 1 02-21-2007 12:11 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.