|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Indeed - that's why they don't sell 93 here. Husky and Petro-Canada have ethanol blended 94 however. There's ethanol in every Canadian fuel except Shell's V-Power 91 AFAIK. What's the deal with Petro-Canada's Ultra 94? Is it really 94 octane because people are telling me it's "fake". The ethanol percentage is the most worrying factor for me honestly. I hear it's the main reason the fuel pump chirps.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:There's ethanol in every Canadian fuel except Shell's V-Power 91 AFAIK. quote:What's the deal with Petro-Canada's Ultra 94? Is it really 94 octane because people are telling me it's "fake". The ethanol percentage is the most worrying factor for me honestly. I hear it's the main reason the fuel pump chirps. If Californians and Albertans can tool around in it with their poo poo 91 I can guarantee you it's fine. Seat Safety Switch fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
TrueChaos posted:Calgary is up at 3500ft. You don't need 93, you'd be fine on 91. I've always worked on 1% power loss per 100 metres above sea level, for NA cars. I live 1650 metres above sea level and drive an S2000 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Hello Spaceman posted:I've always worked on 1% power loss per 100 metres above sea level, for NA cars. You're good, 84% of zero is still zero, you aren't losing anything!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 04:31
|
|
|
True to form I am working on replacing all the speakers in the car with some mildly inexpensive Polk DBs. I've only managed to get the front ones installed and even then I think I am going to have to redo it to cut out the stock tweeter. Hopefully I'll have a write up on my experience with links to the places I got my information in the next few days. It's actually pretty simple once you know what to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
Arizona is all 91 period, I doubt they'd sell the car in places with detrimental gas issues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
So, remember back when the "Mystery engine ping" was troubling a few toyobaru owners? Anyone willing to bet it was from using 87 instead of 93?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:You're good, 84% of zero is still zero, you aren't losing anything! Don't even joke. It's bad enough that GTIs are outright faster, and even a newer Cooper S will give me a fright up to about 120km/h. They weight 100kg less and dyno 170whp, so the numbers make sense. Strangely, a Toyota 86 was tested up here and did the 0-100km/h benchmark in 7.46, while achieving just about the same time down at the coast. This lends credence to the fuel quality issue, since we only have 95RON available across the country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Costco has Super Sports 215 45R17 for 100/tire installed. I feel like this is a good price.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
I spent some time today at Laguna Seca being chased by Robert Fuller (of Robispec) in a modded FR-S. It's surprising how quick the car is - would have been faster than mine (stockish Cayman S) if Robert hadn't had to lift on the exit of turn 5 due to his Borla exhaust blowing sound (98db). He's designing a rear-mount turbo good for ~300 whp and will be bringing it around to various events in February for testing, so just putting it out there in case anyone's interested in this sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Sound limits at racetracks are still the stupidest goddamn thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Sound limits at racetracks are still the stupidest goddamn thing. Well how was I supposed to know it was going to be loud before I moved right next to it? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
Oh gently caress you're right, I never though of it that way! Like, I moved next to this airport, right? And now what do I see? Fuckin' PLANES flying overhead at all hours of the day and night! They should really do something about that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Oh gently caress you're right, I never though of it that way! Like, I moved next to this airport, right? And now what do I see? Fuckin' PLANES flying overhead at all hours of the day and night! They should really do something about that. Don't worry, there are noise abatement procedures at most airports even remotely near any kind of housing/commercial developments because jets making a lot of noise was a completely unforeseen issue with building next to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 05:56
|
|
|
It must just be California housing prices that force people to buy house in the most ridiculous spots. Remember the Myth Busters episode where they fired a cannon at a bomb range and it ended up crashing through a residential neighborhood? Putting up with race cars seem kind of tame by comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Don't worry, there are noise abatement procedures at most airports even remotely near any kind of housing/commercial developments because jets making a lot of noise was a completely unforeseen issue with building next to it. Don't get me started on this poo poo. I work for a large aerospace manufacturing company that happens to have it's main manufacturing facility at an area municipal airport. Recently a group of locals flipped the gently caress out at the idea of a cargo company flying in and out up to four times a week. They even tired to claim it would interfere with our flight tests and delivery schedules! Typical "my property values" assholes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Rabble posted:Right, I figured they all got it from the same place, my worry is that the dealer is a cheapass (where I bought it and where ill service are two different dealers) who bought a drum from billy bob's discount lube instead of doing the minimum of using actual Toyota branded bottles. I'm confused. Did you already have an oil change? Oil fill is from the factory. oRenj9 posted:It must just be California housing prices that force people to buy house in the most ridiculous spots. Remember the Myth Busters episode where they fired a cannon at a bomb range and it ended up crashing through a residential neighborhood? Putting up with race cars seem kind of tame by comparison. I worked right there for several years. It's not a "bomb range". It's Alameda county government property, with the jail, sheriff's, CHP facility, etc. there. That cannon ball traveled a very long distance in an unlikely fashion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
My wife had to drive across Phoenix for three days straight for a job, so I let her borrow the FR-S while I drove her minivan in order to save on gas. When she was done the gauge read 34MPG average. Best car, time to get that back down. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Don't get me started on this poo poo. I work for a large aerospace manufacturing company that happens to have it's main manufacturing facility at an area municipal airport. Recently a group of locals flipped the gently caress out at the idea of a cargo company flying in and out up to four times a week. They even tired to claim it would interfere with our flight tests and delivery schedules! Paine field? Boeing field?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:Paine field? Boeing field? Paine Field. Seriously, we can handle a few more flights here. Additionally, I've seen a white BRZ and a black FR-S in the parking lot. I'm hoping to add an orange FR-S to the collection in the next few months.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
OldPueblo posted:My wife had to drive across Phoenix for three days straight for a job, so I let her borrow the FR-S while I drove her minivan in order to save on gas. When she was done the gauge read 34MPG average. Best car, time to get that back down. The best part is that 6th is functional as a passing gear unlike some cars that cheat their MPG by making 6th basically useless unless you're at speed. In other news, I'm 50 miles away from revving up to 7500 at every stoplight
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
How does that work with the low torque numbers, assuming you're passing at a highway speed in 6th.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
Edit: I don't know poo poo about cars...Torque is a motorcycle movie and F&F taught me that I have to keep shifting well beyond the number of gears my car has in order to accelerate.
Rabble fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Jan 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:How does that work with the low torque numbers, assuming you're passing at a highway speed in 6th. The car passes fine under regular driving conditions on the highway in 6th (100 - 140 kph). You do start to hit the torque dip at 130 kph or so in 6th if I remember correctly but it still pulls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:How does that work with the low torque numbers, assuming you're passing at a highway speed in 6th. Floor it and wait a second for the engine to rev up into the powerband (and watch your gas mileage drop to mid single digits momentarily)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
Deathreaper posted:The car passes fine under regular driving conditions on the highway in 6th (100 - 140 kph). You do start to hit the torque dip at 130 kph or so in 6th if I remember correctly but it still pulls. Why would you want your final gear to be able to execute a highway pass? That's either amazing torque, strange gearing, or you're really just being lazy and taking your life into your hands because there's never a good reason to overtake any slower than you absolutely have to. Or do you mean that it can accelerate in the final gear and overtake a car on a multi-lane highway (in other words, not into the oncoming lane)? Because that's not really an accomplishment either. I just don't understand what point is being made here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
Jesus Christ, just downshift into 5th or 4th which quickly and easily puts you above the torque dip.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Why would you want your final gear to be able to execute a highway pass? That's either amazing torque, strange gearing, or you're really just being lazy and taking your life into your hands because there's never a good reason to overtake any slower than you absolutely have to. Or do you mean that it can accelerate in the final gear and overtake a car on a multi-lane highway (in other words, not into the oncoming lane)? Because that's not really an accomplishment either. Sorry about the misunderstanding, just to clarify; the scenario I was explaining would only occur on a multi-lane highway. Indeed it's not an accomplishment but I assumed we were discussing passing on a regular highway (multi-lane for the most part where I live). Now on a country road or a smaller 1 lane highway; yea 4th or 5th is a must unless you have a deathwish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 07:19
|
|
|
I've always been irked by videos of Clarkson describing "turbo lag" on a turbocharged car by putting the car into 6th and flooring it at 1500 rpm to show how slowly it accelerates..... I mean, the turbo's got very little to do with it, a 2.0 L N/A and turbo variant of an engine with the same gearing (something like comparing a WRX to a std Impreza) are going to accelerate pretty similarly in the same situation. The only thing that's really going to give you great torque at just above idle speed is a big V8.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
That's just not true. Sure, if you put a huge fuckoff turbo on a little four-banger it's going to need to rev to accomplish much. But the little turbos on modern I4s are pretty much all set up for low-end response and torque. Look at a GTI's or MS3's torque curve; there's scads more torque off idle and at normal cruising RPM than a comparable NA motor. That's also why automakers are getting away with replacing V-6s in their big sedans with smaller turbo fours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 09:13
|
|
|
Ecstatic posted:I've always been irked by videos of Clarkson describing "turbo lag" on a turbocharged car by putting the car into 6th and flooring it at 1500 rpm to show how slowly it accelerates..... That's exactly what he means though? A "performance car" is usually going to have a turbo i4 or a v6 or v8, and the first one of those is going to have the least amount of torque at low RPMs when the cars are engineered to the same price level. Since you compared a turbo engine to its N/A version, look at it this way: you are spending 3-10k possibly for the turbo, and there's <0 extra torque across a given (low) RPM range, so you paid extra money for worse performance (until you rev it). This doesn't apply so much anymore, but it's dumb that you don't understand his point of view.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 09:39
|
|
|
It's not that I don't understand his point of view, it's that he's labeling a lack of low down torque as "turbo lag" and attributing it to the small engine with a big turbo. A Honda S2000 engine or a Renesis is still going to have the same issue and they are both performance cars. Turbo lag is not a lack of torque at low rpm, its the time lag between the throttle opening and the torque produced by the engine, it happens at all engine speeds. Anti-lag doesn't magically put more torque in the curve at low rpm, it just reduces the time between the driver asking for torque and the engine delivering. It all relates back to the discussion of overtaking....if its not accelerating, just drop a gear or two. Ecstatic fucked around with this message at 12:44 on Jan 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 12:32
|
|
|
While we're on the topic, are there any goons that have driven a turbo FR-S / BRZ? How is it versus a stock model?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Ecstatic posted:It's not that I don't understand his point of view, it's that he's labeling a lack of low down torque as "turbo lag" and attributing it to the small engine with a big turbo. A Honda S2000 engine or a Renesis is still going to have the same issue and they are both performance cars. Your explanation is spot on. People don't realise that's what lag is, and just mistake turbo spooling and reaching boost threshold as "lag". Hello Spaceman fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jan 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
So the 2014 Subaru Forester gets a redesign and an XT model with a 250hp turbocharged FA20. Car and Driver is already hoping/speculating that engine gets into the BRZ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:So the 2014 Subaru Forester gets a redesign and an XT model with a 250hp turbocharged FA20. Car and Driver is already hoping/speculating that engine gets into the BRZ. They've already said no due to turbo plumbing. New BRZ STi is coming soon, with hp boost but no turbo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:They've already said no due to turbo plumbing. New BRZ STi is coming soon, with hp boost but no turbo. I'm calling bullshit on that line, it doesn't take this long to slap an exhaust, new suspensions bits, and an aero package onto a car. Especially when it's the OEM tuning house that's had the car for longer than anyone else. Turbo is coming because turbos already exist for the motor. If the STI version doesn't have at least a small turbo people will scoff and say "it's not a real STI, where's the boost?" Speaking of the 2014 model, it will be interesting to see what directions Toyota and Subaru go with their development of the platform. Supposedly they don't have any sort of agreement past the 2013 model year, but it would naive to think that either side could stray too far. If anything, Subaru has more latitude because its their motor in their chassis being built in their factory. It would be hilarious if the car only lasts a few years only to fall apart due to corporate politics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
Here's Road & Track's coverage of the '14 engineering prototype: http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/first-drives/2014-scion-fr-s-coupe-engineering-prototype Car and Driver's article on the info available for the convertible model: http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2014-scion-fr-s-toyota-gt-86-convertible-rendered-news
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Rabble posted:I'm calling bullshit on that line, it doesn't take this long to slap an exhaust, new suspensions bits, and an aero package onto a car. Especially when it's the OEM tuning house that's had the car for longer than anyone else. Turbo is coming because turbos already exist for the motor. If the STI version doesn't have at least a small turbo people will scoff and say "it's not a real STI, where's the boost?" I'm inclined to agree with this. At this point, it would be utterly ridiculous for Subaru to not offer a turbocharged version. They already have all the parts necessary to build one and they can justify charging north of $30k for one because they know people will pay it. I think they are just holding out long enough to fill current demand before announcing a turbocharged variant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
oRenj9 posted:I'm inclined to agree with this. At this point, it would be utterly ridiculous for Subaru to not offer a turbocharged version. They already have all the parts necessary to build one and they can justify charging north of $30k for one because they know people will pay it. I think they are just holding out long enough to fill current demand before announcing a turbocharged variant. Maintaining the product range is a real thing. The same reason you don't see Porsche making a faster version of the Cayman beyond a certain point in case it steps on the Carrera's toes. The WRX and STi replacements are in active development right now, and they are a big deal. Moving engineering resources to a car that will directly compete with the WRX and STi in both price and performance would be a dumb move. Between those two models, there is very little room for a turbo BRZ to fit in without moving something into silly price territory where Subaru cannot compete. And this is ignoring whatever the exact terms of the deal they have with Toyota are. Also, it's been said that there absolutely isn't room for a turbo without significant re-engineering. A supercharger was explored but was rejected because, again, it will conflict with the WRX/STi in their model range and on top of that would require a bunch of new engineering for stuff that can't be used on anything else, which Subaru is probably loathe to do considering that they are still a small automaker with limited resources.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 19:27
|
|