The BRZ was invited to a drag race & lost!
But did come in 4th overall in the competition.
Stay and listen to all the cool exhaust symphony at the very end.
The BRZ was invited to a drag race & lost!
But did come in 4th overall in the competition.
Stay and listen to all the cool exhaust symphony at the very end.
i think 14.9 is extremely respectable for 200hp.
MT is so berkeleying stupid.
I don't recall them having the Miata in previous iterations of this "super sportscar shootout." So the BRZ is surprise! slower than a bunch of high-powered cars that cost 2-3-4-5 times as much. Shocker.
Why not put a WRX in there that runs in the high 12's stock, or an Evo? Oops, don't want to embarrass any of the high dollar "supercars" when they get beat by a $25k sedan.
I think they just added it due to all the hoopla that's been going on and probably cause they just happened to have one on hand.
You've got to admit that it does get your attention and probably increases the story's penetration.
It also wasn't the most boring-sounding car - I'd have to give that to the Porsche or GTR.
What I want to see is the shootout between the BRZ and other cars that people who would buy a BRZ would also be looking at - Miata, specifically, perhaps 370z, perhaps some of the FWD/AWD hot hatches in the sub-$30k price range.
I'm sure M/T could have had a 370z, which would have been a more worthy car of a higher-power drag race, IDK.....
GameboyRMH wrote: It also wasn't the most boring-sounding car - I'd have to give that to the Porsche or GTR.
No kidding. I remember the 3.0 in our 80's Aerostar sounding more soulful than the Porsche. Something ain't right there...
irish44j wrote: MT is so berkeleying stupid.
In reply to irish44j:
If you actually read the article, (here you go: http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/1208_2012_motor_trend_best_drivers_car/) it explains the criteria for selecting the cars.
Basically, they had to be on sale now in North America, and they either had to be new or significantly revised cars for this model year.
I'd view it as more of a compliment that the BRZ is mentioned in the same breath in a "driver's car" competition when placed up against cars like the 911 and GT-R.
ok, well still seems odd. If the goal is to find 2012's best driver's car, it should include performance cars sold in 2012, not just ones that got changes. What constitutes a "change" seems pretty subjective too.
At very least, RT should retitle it "2012's best NEW driver's car" or something more indicative of what the test is. You know, for people like me who just watch one video segment (so....like 90% of the population) lol...
Also, any "driver's car" test should include snow performance. Because snow driving is the most fun. 
Most people looking at this car are really, really concerned about drag races.
Actually, they should have had a drift competition perhaps.
And where was the rallycross section? WHY ISN"T THERE EVERY A RALLYCROSS SECTION? hahahahaha.....
irish44j wrote: ok, well still seems odd. If the goal is to find 2012's best driver's car, it should include performance cars sold in 2012, not just ones that got changes. What constitutes a "change" seems pretty subjective too. At very least, RT should retitle it "2012's best NEW driver's car" or something more indicative of what the test is. You know, for people like me who just watch one video segment (so....like 90% of the population) lol... Also, any "driver's car" test should include snow performance. Because snow driving is the most fun.
The problem with including all "performance cars" sold in 2012 is two fold:
1: How many cars is that again? What magazine really has the sheer man-power to drive probably over 30 cars, in just say...a week for time constraints? Let alone the logistics of getting all of those cars in one place, at the same time. Can't really spread it out over time, as then varying weather factors will raise inconsistencies in the results.
2: A lot of it would be redundant information if this "feature" is done annually, and they usually are. What you said about the 370Z last year, is probably going to be the exact same you say about the 370Z this year...etc. Unless there is a change that is subjectively considered substantial enough by the editors/writers of the magazine to warrant inclusion into the test.
Add on point; Magazines have been doing this exact headline/article scheme for years. I have back copies of EVO magazine from the early 2000's with their version of this idea, and the scheme has definitely been going on for far longer than that as well. Never really heard of too much complaints about the technical wording of the article titles before.
A BRZ ran in the Mt. Ascutney Hillclimb over the weekend. The "low" power did not seem to matter as it was always near the top of the charts and bettered many higher powered cars. And the driver formaly drove a very quick Honda SI.
Would your rather have a craft beer, decent glass of wine or Everclear/PGA?
Per-proof, the Everclear is the clear winner, and will definitely yield the tunnel vision you crave.
The BR-FZ-S's are my Sierra Nevada: reasonable enjoyment/$. Not the best at anything, and definitely not the most bang for the buck if you're just trying to get E36 M3faced.
phaze1todd wrote:irish44j wrote: MT is so berkeleying stupid.
Supplies!
MT is so berkeleying stupid. I don't recall them having the Miata in previous iterations of this "super sportscar shootout." So the BRZ is surprise! slower than a bunch of high-powered cars that cost 2-3-4-5 times as much. Shocker. Why not put a WRX in there that runs in the high 12's stock, or an Evo? Oops, don't want to embarrass any of the high dollar "supercars" when they get beat by a $25k sedan.
Oh really?
If you looked youd see the Miata certainly HAS been in previous 'best driver's car' and 'best handling car' kinds of competitions. The article that produced the lineup there was not about purely high power cars and had other explicit and perfectly reasonable qualifications.
Further, the WRX and EVO wouldnt have done anything differently than the BRZ except lose by less. The slowest car they tested other than the BRZ still trapped 117+ in the 1/4. Stock EVOs and WRXs dont come close. So what exactly would have been embarassed? The only thing they would have beaten would have been the BRZ, which (shocker!) costs much less.
I think they just added it due to all the hoopla that's been going on and probably cause they just happened to have one on hand. You've got to admit that it does get your attention and probably increases the story's penetration.
Exactly..
What I want to see is the shootout between the BRZ and other cars that people who would buy a BRZ would also be looking at - Miata, specifically, perhaps 370z, perhaps some of the FWD/AWD hot hatches in the sub-$30k price range. I'm sure M/T could have had a 370z, which would have been a more worthy car of a higher-power drag race, IDK.....
A 370z costs closer to twice what a brz costs, than it does to what a brz costs, or the base miata. And it wouldnt have done any better than the EVO or WRX! All those options are just swapping out last place finisher for a different last place finisher, but i bet the 370z wouldnt finish 4th in their overall rankings.
WHAT I THOUGHT WAS REALLY FUNNY.... was that if that race had been much shorter, the 'base' 911 would have held off both the gt500 and ZL1 at ~600hp each. That is just really funny to me.
ScottRA21 wrote:irish44j wrote: ok, well still seems odd. If the goal is to find 2012's best driver's car, it should include performance cars sold in 2012, not just ones that got changes. What constitutes a "change" seems pretty subjective too. At very least, RT should retitle it "2012's best NEW driver's car" or something more indicative of what the test is. You know, for people like me who just watch one video segment (so....like 90% of the population) lol... Also, any "driver's car" test should include snow performance. Because snow driving is the most fun.: 2: A lot of it would be redundant information if this "feature" is done annually, and they usually are. What you said about the 370Z last year, is probably going to be the exact same you say about the 370Z this year...etc. Unless there is a change that is subjectively considered substantial enough by the editors/writers of the magazine to warrant inclusion into the test.
So why not just use the information from "last year" if the cars didn't change significantly. I know weather conditions, temperature, etc......but those constraints don't seem to be constraints when mags list "official" skidpad or 1/4 mile or top speed or braking numbers (C&D always had the big list near the back).
If you looked youd see the Miata certainly HAS been in previous 'best driver's car' and 'best handling car' kinds of competitions. The article that produced the lineup there was not about purely high power cars and had other explicit and perfectly reasonable qualifications.
The "qualifications" are determined by the testers. They could have easily changed the qualifications to omit the BRZ (say, make a price cutoff) or changed the qualifications to any other factor that would include/omit a car that they thought would get magazine sales.
So the Miata has been matched up in this same competition in R&T against a bunch of near-supercars? How did it do against Lambos, Porsches, etc? Serious question, I'm curious.
Further, the WRX and EVO wouldnt have done anything differently than the BRZ except lose by less. The slowest car they tested other than the BRZ still trapped 117+ in the 1/4. Stock EVOs and WRXs dont come close. So what exactly would have been embarassed? The only thing they would have beaten would have been the BRZ, which (shocker!) costs much less.
point taken. That said, the BRZ doesn't cost "much less" than a WRX. My loaded 09 premium bought first day off the lot ran me a shade over $27k....which is less than first-day-off-the-lot BRZ's and FRS's are reportedly going for.
Is it just me, or do Frisbee fans get really really defensive when their car doesn't win something when compared to other cars? Just an observation.
I'm not a Frisbee fanboi, if you're talking about me. Sure, in a few years there is no doubt that i'll be checking them out on the used-car market (along with a number of other cars). Who here won't?
I am, however, a fan of comparisons that compare apples to apples. Because a comparo of a BRZ (or any other "cheap" sporty car) to a bunch of supercars that I can't come close to being able to afford is about as useful to me as a comparison of a Rav4 to a Hummer H1 in "off-roading capability" or comparison of a Z06 to a WRX in "winter conditions capability."
If the BR-Z lost a comparo test where it was matched with a Miata, Genesis, Z, etc.....I'd have no problem with that. Apples to Apples - albeit maybe different colors of apples.
But I'm also the guy who gets annoyed in comparos between performance cars when one comes with r-comps and the other is on all-seaon tires. I like a fair fight. Guess it's just the analyst in me.
Bobzilla wrote: Is it just me, or do Frisbee fans get really really defensive when their car doesn't win something when compared to other cars? Just an observation.
I'm definitely not toyobaru fanboi, but that was just a dumb comparo. It's a decent car, but if you compare any item to others that cost 2 or 3 times as much it won't fare well. I doubt those cars are being cross shopped.
Just reads like a lot of what we would normally call "ricer excuses" is all. Just find it amusing. No offense meant to anyone, just an observation that I find funny.
The difference there being that true ricers actually BELIEVE that their Civic with a cold-air intake and loud muffler can smoke that Porsche GT2. 
Which is why the make excuses when they lose.
irish44j wrote: But I'm also the guy who gets annoyed in comparos between performance cars when one comes with r-comps and the other is on all-seaon tires. I like a fair fight.
Amen, brutha. A comparo without standardized tires is just guesswork.
David
You'll need to log in to post.
