Sciaru BRZFRS (BreezeFrees)

  • Thread starter Azuremen
  • 5,604 comments
  • 378,543 views
homeforsummer
Swooning journalist checking in :D

I know it's a fairly subjective thing, but I still quite like the 86's engine. Or rather, I like its drivetrain as a whole. If the engine was powering an Impreza it might be a different story, but I do think it's well-matched to the car, the gearbox, the rear-drive etc. Throttle response is great, and something you forget about unless you've not driven one in a while. Will happily, easily spin to the red line, makes a pretty cool noise (to me) as it does so, and feels pretty brisk when you're up there too. Smooth, too - makes some odd noises at low revs, but in terms of mechanical smoothness it's pretty good - very little vibration.

I have a sneaking suspicion too that Toyota has massaged out the "torque dip" in the very latest models. The one I'm currently driving (which reminds me, need to update my thread) seems to go through the rev range pretty easily compared to previous ones I've driven. And the close gearing does aid you in keeping it spinning.

Now conceptually there probably is a better engine for the car... but I don't think that should harm it unduly. No Miata in history has been sold new with a great engine (fight me), and I know some people moan about that with each generation too but ultimately it's never really harmed the appeal or experience of the car.

The 86's two problems, I reckon, are price and tyres. I don't think it's unfairly priced for what it is (for a dedicated sports car on its own platform) but ultimately it's in a pretty similar market to an MX-5, and an MX-5 is cheaper. And the tyres are pretty obvious: I understand what Toyota/Subaru was going for, and it kinda works, but it's pretty much universally accepted that better tyres improve the car, and don't even detract from the adjustability it has on the standard ones.
Click to expand...

Its near perfect per my metrics. It just needs:
100lbs less weight (did some man maths and figured this is possible with carbon hood/trunk, lightweight wheels - 16x8 enkei compe, motorcycle battery, lightweight single outlet catback exhaust, carbon prop shaft, aftermarket airbox & piping)
10-15 more hp (exhaust and mail order tune is probably enough)
10-15% more aggressive gearing. (4.3 FD ratio from the 2017+ cars is just right)

With the above, the powertrain is I think perfectly adequate. It doesn't give the melodious charm of a 6 (Boxster), the visceral drama of a VTEC 4 (S2000), or the never-ending revs & smoothness of a Wankel (RX-8), but it works. Obviously I'm penciling myself into one again. :lol:
 
homeforsummer
Swooning journalist checking in :D

I know it's a fairly subjective thing, but I still quite like the 86's engine. Or rather, I like its drivetrain as a whole. If the engine was powering an Impreza it might be a different story, but I do think it's well-matched to the car, the gearbox, the rear-drive etc. Throttle response is great, and something you forget about unless you've not driven one in a while. Will happily, easily spin to the red line, makes a pretty cool noise (to me) as it does so, and feels pretty brisk when you're up there too. Smooth, too - makes some odd noises at low revs, but in terms of mechanical smoothness it's pretty good - very little vibration.
Click to expand...

I'm biased, full disclosure, but I agree with all of this. It's a cliche but the '86 is truly a better car than the sum of its parts.

That said...
(1) I don't think the torque dip has really changed, although I have yet to drive a 2018 model (or newer). But I think it was more a result of emissions requirements than anything else. A tune and header change the torque characteristic dramatically but the car will not pass a tailpipe test.
(2) At least here in the US, the price of the base Miata and 86 are only about $700 apart. I don't think it's really fair to compare a convertible with a hard top but otherwise, the cars have very similar appeal. And few people rant on endlessly about the Miata's lack of power.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
It doesn't give the melodious charm of a 6 (Boxster), the visceral drama of a VTEC 4 (S2000), or the never-ending revs & smoothness of a Wankel (RX-8), but it works.
Click to expand...
Hard to disagree with all of that, though as I've mentioned elsewhere, I was pretty underwhelmed by the S2K. That's a car that really does feel pretty weak unless you're absolutely hammering it - by comparison an 86 and even an RX-8 feels like a muscle car down low :lol: But I drove a 2-litre rather than a 2.2, and I suspect it'd benefit even more from a shorter final drive as gearing rather than the engine felt like the issue there.
jjaisli
I'm biased, full disclosure, but I agree with all of this. It's a cliche but the '86 is truly a better car than the sum of its parts.

That said...
(1) I don't think the torque dip has really changed, although I have yet to drive a 2018 model (or newer). But I think it was more a result of emissions requirements than anything else. A tune and header change the torque characteristic dramatically but the car will not pass a tailpipe test.
(2) At least here in the US, the price of the base Miata and 86 are only about $700 apart. I don't think it's really fair to compare a convertible with a hard top but otherwise, the cars have very similar appeal. And few people rant on endlessly about the Miata's lack of power.
Click to expand...
The car I'm currently running is post-2018 and it really feels fine - but I don't think it's model year specific either as the last facelift car I drove did have a torque dip. It feels more like a sneaky factory update to try and quell criticism. Lots of manufacturers do similar - when the Porsche 991 was first launched it got plenty of stick for its steering, but it was gradually improved throughout the model cycle rather than just from facelift to facelift.

The latest Miata seems to have avoided too much power discussion perhaps because it's so light, but every time a new one is launched I see at least some people complaining that it hasn't grown even more powerful. And in reality, the latest 2-litre ones feel a lot punchier than an 86, though for me personally it's not the most interesting engine to use (with the caveat I've not driven the more powerful model launched recently).

Otherwise, they're about as close conceptually as the market currently allows, even though one's fixed-roof and the other isn't. For me, the 86 is still the better car - but I can understand people choosing the Mazda.
mustafur
Wouldn't a 4 Cyl Supra cost way more?

The 86/BRZ sells quite well it seems odd to can it.
Click to expand...
A 4cyl Supra probably would cost more, but being turbocharged it's one of those situations where in a dealership test drive the Supra might instantly feel like it's worth the extra as the power should hit harder.

The trouble might be where that price difference falls. I suspect a 2-litre Supra will be closer to the $50k six-cylinder than it will a $26k 86.
 
R1600Turbo
Not even the newest one?
Click to expand...
Like I said further up, I've not driven the very latest one, so can't be definitive.

But my suspicion would be probably not. We're not talking a K20A or a Lotus twin-cam or a 4A-GE here. It's just an above-average four-cylinder with a half-decent rev limit and whose greatest USP is probably fuel efficiency. I suspect that much of the good press the revised engine has been getting is more because naturally-aspirated engines are so rare now that some characteristics that used to be commonplace now feel quite special in context of the wider market.
 
homeforsummer
Like I said further up, I've not driven the very latest one, so can't be definitive.

But my suspicion would be probably not. We're not talking a K20A or a Lotus twin-cam or a 4A-GE here. It's just an above-average four-cylinder with a half-decent rev limit and whose greatest USP is probably fuel efficiency. I suspect that much of the good press the revised engine has been getting is more because naturally-aspirated engines are so rare now that some characteristics that used to be commonplace now feel quite special in context of the wider market.
Click to expand...

I think the Miata has always excelled because it's engine isn't peaky. I've never driven an early 1.6, but the 1.8 in the NA/NB, the 2.0 in the NC, and the 2.0 in the ND all have a particular characteristic....you don't need to work them really hard to enjoy them. They aren't particularly high revving, but they do have a fairly useable spread of torque. This means that to average drivers/buyers (again, an immense part of the MX-5's success) the cars never feel recalcitrant. A car-ignorant MX-5 driver may jump into an S2000 and really dislike it because they never get close to the engine's powerband. The MX-5 is perfectly happy to plod along at 3,000 revs and give useful response down there when needed. Personally, I love this attribute about MX-5s and kind of wish the BRZ/86 felt a little more like this, hence my thirst for a slightly lazier 2.5L version of the car. I'll put it this way: I have a lot of watches, and some of them are pretty unique. I have a few automatics, a few wind-ups, a weirdo 1960s tuning-fork digital. But the watch I wear by far the most is an $18 Timex weekender quartz. It's cheap & easy to replace, it does the job perfectly well, its battery has lasted a frankly-astonishing 5 years already, and I'm fond of its everyman personality. Its like a Miata engine.

I can't lie, I used to be obsessed with RPM. I think my 9,200RPM B16A powered Civic did this to me. At full boil, I still maintain its the most enjoyable flavor of engine. But 80% of the time, I think I prefer not to treat an engine like it enjoys BDSM. :lol:
 
Eunos_Cosmo
I think the Miata has always excelled because it's engine isn't peaky.
Click to expand...
This is where I need to make the distinction between it not being a special engine, and not being a bad engine. MX-5s have never had bad engines, but they've also never had special ones.
mustafur
What about the Most powerful MX-5 ever made by Mazda the Australian only SE?

https://www.goauto.com.au/new-model...x-5-se-is-turbo-terrific/2004-03-23/1711.html
Click to expand...
a) Isn't that just the Mazdaspeed sold in the US (or Roadster Turbo sold in Japan), and therefore not Australian-only?
b) A lightly turbocharged not-that-interesting engine doesn't make it interesting, it just makes it faster. I've driven BBR's 250bhp take on the earlier ND 2.0s. It's quicker than the standard car, but the actual characteristics of the engine don't get any more exciting.
R1600Turbo
I doubt we'll ever see another engine like those. Emissions are a b*tch.
Click to expand...
The thing is, I don't see why that should matter. If Audi can get something as remarkable as its 5.2-litre V10 through emissions testing then there's no obvious reason why a truly special four-cylinder (which is volumetrically more efficient, in theory) can't also get through.

It's just a case of priorities. Skyactiv tech is very impressive at what it does, but Mazda has chosen to focus on that rather than go down the K20 path. The two factors shouldn't be mutually exclusive either (since no emissions test would require an engine to be operating in a fancy and less efficient high-lift cam phase!) and things that are good for performance (lightweight components, low friction) are typically good for economy too. I think it's more a case of where there's a will, there's a way. And budget, of course - Mazda is still independent and pretty small as global car companies go.
 
I can't remember a Mazda engine, other a rotary, being sought after to swap into another make.
Don't think I've seen the NA MX-5 1.6 in an AE86.
Maybe there's been the MX-3 V6 swapped into another make, but I don't think it's a trendy swap.

I still like the 86. It'll make an awesome semi-classic coupe in another 5 years. Plenty of them to choose from, between the GT86 and BRZ. ND MX-5 should still be in my list in that time as well. Anyway, I'll be 50 in 2 years. So, who knows what I'll be wanting by then.

May just revisit the Camry culdesac thread. :lol:
 
05XR8
I can't remember a Mazda engine, other a rotary, being sought after to swap into another make.
Don't think I've seen the NA MX-5 1.6 in an AE86.
Click to expand...

Plenty of kitcars use MX-5 engines and running gear. It's unusual as it's a four-pot but it's mounted longitudinal and drives the rear wheels rather than the norm of modern four-pots that are generally transverse-mounted front-drivers. Makes it not a straight swap into most things that don't follow the MX-5's retro drivetrain layout.

Like you say, AE86's, Escort Mk1's and 2's etc that could fit an MX-5 drivetrain probably won't as they're much better suited to 4A-GEs and BDAs or Pintos which all have a strong tuning scene and are still readily available.
 
Last edited:
TheCracker
Plenty of kitcars use MX-5 engines and running gear. It's unusual as it's a four-pot but it's mounted longitudinal and drives the rear wheels rather than the norm of modern four-pots that are generally transverse-mounted front-drivers. Makes it not a straight swap into most things that don't follow the MX-5's retro drivetrain layout.

Like you say, AE86's, Escort Mk1's and 2's etc that could fit an MX-5 drivetrain probably won't as they're much better suited to 4A-GEs and BDAs or Pintos which all have a strong tuning scene and are still readily available.
Click to expand...
When you mention kitcars, (other than a Caterham type thing)I'm thinking of cars with either a Beetle engine or a V8. Times have changed.
 
I would rather forced induction if it has the power curve of the last engine, but at 2.4L it's likely to be N/A
 
It seems like Subaru and Toyota are going separate ways on the next gen BRZ/86, what is the likelyhood that Subaru will make the next BRZ an AWD?
 
There's already a 2.4L engine for making an educated guess -- the FA24 now found in the Ascent. Perhaps a derivative of that engine, which is turbocharged...but maybe naturally-aspirated instead for all we know.

RocZX
It seems like Subaru and Toyota are going separate ways on the next gen BRZ/86, what is the likelyhood that Subaru will make the next BRZ an AWD?
Click to expand...
I think optional AWD could be justified -- effectively a two-door WRX on a diet, since the current WRX has porked up to 3300-3500lbs. If the WRX was still a ~3100lbs. car it would make less sense. A next-gen BRZ with AWD could turn out to be around that weight.

Standard AWD would be easier to justify in terms of manufacturing expense, simplicity for buyers, and pulling the BRZ in line with the rest of the model range, but I don't know...RWD was half of the point of the car. You'd just have some enthusiasts pulling the front axles and welding the center diff.
 
Pretty confident that:

Anything called BRZ will be rear wheel drive only. The R stands for rear wheel drive!
A successor to the BRZ might have increased displacement's worth of extra power or forced induction's worth of extra power. Not likely both. My bet: it will remain naturally aspirated with a bump in displacement to rectify the car's biggest problem. A 2.4T sports car is a little 2007.

If they can keep it the same weight (preferably a little less actually) and bump up the torque by about 30ft*lbs or so (I don't even care if the power stays the same) through the mid range, it will be a right winner.
 
BXZ?

The styling is what I'm curios about. I remember the 1st gen Integra was a nice upright hatch. Then drastically changed to the low wide coupe shape. Wonder if they'll do an evolutionary change or flip it to something like the S-FR. They did same with MR-2 to MR-S.
 
If Subaru is going to make the BRZ all-wheel drive and turbocharged, they may as well just make a 2-door variant of the next-gen WRX and translate the costs saved in development into a lower price tag for the consumer. Naturally aspirated engines (without electrification) are on their last legs, at least with emissions laws in the EU.
 
FT-1
Naturally aspirated engines (without electrification) are on their last legs, at least with emissions laws in the EU.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure they are, given the WLTP changes should give a much more realistic picture of economy and emissions and the gap on the road between naturally aspirated and turbocharged is nowhere near as the gap on paper. Put it this way: the GT86 I'm currently running is comfortably capable of 40-ish mpg on a cruise, against an official (NEDC) 36-ish combined. The i30 N I was driving previously is rated at about 40mpg and over six or seven months I was lucky to scrape 30...

Given post-WLTP everything will take a nice hit to its official figures it wouldn't surprise me if at least some manufacturers don't slowly revert back to natural aspiration (albeit some with electrification, I'm sure). Maybe not necessarily the ones we'd hope for - I imagine Porsche, BMW etc will stick with it for performance reasons - but I reckon NA engines will stick around for a little while yet.

However, I could see Subaru going down the turbocharged route. It's kinda known for it after all, and if Toyota and Subaru do go their separate ways with the next-gen cars and are therefore more in competition, it's not hard to imagine Subaru leveraging its turbo knowledge and taking the BRZ in a higher-performance direction.

Both Toyota and Subaru are familiar with electrification too, of course. Toyota made a hybrid 86 concept for the last Tokyo show remember:

toyota_grhv_01.jpg

...and Subaru has dabbled with both mild hybrids and full hybrids with cars like the Crosstrek. I do wonder how long it will take either one to incorporate it into something more fun - and provided it's done in the right way (driver involvement is key), I'd not object to a hybrid 86 or BRZ.
 

Latest Posts

Back