Support NeoGAF

[reilo]

Holy shit that is fucking weak, dat non-existent torque. Somehow, I'm reminded of the RX8 all over again. And I still highly doubt they will get the car to weigh in under 2700lbs if the concept was 2800lbs. Add a full tank of gas + all fluids, you've got a car closer to 3000lbs.

The Mazda3 2.5L has 20 more torque than that and weighs the same amount. Granted it tops off at 165HP.

I don't see how this competes with the Miata. It's quite obvious that they are going after the same crowd as the Civic Si -- boring, uninspired, and willing to pay a premium because it's a Toyota or a Honda.

I wish Mazda would make proper RWD coupe with the 2.3L DISI Turbo engine in it already. I can see them squeezing that in for $25k.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Better pictures of the FR-S.

LOL.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

This is also coming with a 6AT? Heh. 17s are the largest available tire with a 215MM width? Fail. Fail. And more fail.

Uh, 215/45/17s sound like an appropriate wheel/tire size for this car. What did you expect?

The Mazda3 2.5L has 20 more torque than that and weighs the same amount. Granted it tops off at 165HP.

Acceleration = Power / (Mass * Velocity)

I don't see a spot for torque in there, do you? So it'll be a high-strung engine, that shouldn't surprise anyone seeing as it's going in a light sports-car. Again, what did people expect?

I'll agree, probably should have shot for about 250hp, maybe we'll see that in the Subaru version?

 

[reilo]

This is also coming with a 6AT? Heh. 17s are the largest available tire with a 215MM width? Fail. Fail. And more fail.

Again, I get they're trying to aim at the MX-5 Miata...but that is not Toyota's market anymore. Toyota needed a sledgehammer, some DNA from the LFA and ISF to trickle into the more affordable consumer base. They needed to make a splash with this car by announcing a turbo-4 with 250HP first, and then an entry N/A model. They now have this gigantic rift in their sport offerings: a $24K piece of slow plastic, or a $60K 420HP Lexus IS-F.

Herpderp

Toyota's marketing has gone to the shitter.

6AT only?

Uh, 215/45/17s sound like an appropriate wheel/tire size for this car. What did you expect?

If you are building a light-weight car with a RWD system meant for going around the track, and then provide it with a meek engine, you should at least put on some 18x7.5 (RX-8 wheel spec) or preferably 18x8 for better grip.

Acceleration = Power / (Mass * Velocity)

I don't see a spot for torque in there, do you? So it'll be a high-strung engine, that shouldn't surprise anyone seeing as it's going in a light sports-car. Again, what did people expect?

I'll agree, probably should have shot for about 250hp, maybe we'll see that in the Subaru version?

For $24k I expected something that would be at least as quick as a Speed3. The MSRP for a Speed3 is $23,700. Granted, it's not RWD, but that car is no slouch around the bend.

But $24k for a 200HP Scion-badged "sports" car? Haha.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

6AT only?

If you are building a light-weight car with a RWD system meant for going around the track, and then provide it with a meek engine, you should at least put on some 18x7.5 (RX-8 wheel spec) or preferably 18x8 for better grip.

I think an 18" wheel on this car would have been overkill. There's going to be plenty of grip from that tire for weekend sporting, which is really what this car is aimed at. This was never going to be a track-focused club racer.

 

[AlphaSnake]

Hey Reilo: It's 6MT and 6AT. I was just saying it'll also be available with an auto.

And Dave: No, the Subaru version will have the same powerplant. Though the inevitable STI version will bump this up to nearly 300HP. Subaru knows how to coax a boxer-4.

 

[reilo]

I think an 18" wheel on this car would have been overkill. There's going to be plenty of grip from that tire for weekend sporting, which is really what this car is aimed at. This was never going to be a track-focused club racer.

So it's a car completely confused about what it is?

Just like Toyota: while attempting to please everyone, they end up pleasing noone.

I can't think of any sports-car -- especially a RWD coupe -- that comes with 17x7" max wheelsize.

Hey Reilo: It's 6MT and 6AT. I was just saying it'll also be available with an auto.

Oh as long as the 6MT is standard, that's fine. The RX-8 offered an auto, too, but those are pretty rare for that car.

I can't believe this thing will be $24k.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

So it's a car completely confused about what it is?

Just like Toyota: while attempting to please everyone, they end up pleasing noone.

I can't think of any sports-car -- especially a RWD coupe -- that comes with 17x7" max wheelsize.

The Miata maxes at 17" according to the mazda website and the S2000 came with 17" wheels too.

There was also a car and driver tech piece about up-sizing wheels and how it actually hurt vehicle performance after a while. I think you're over-reacting here. Besides, on a light car like that, 18" wheels will give a fantastically shitty ride.

I can't believe this thing will be $24k.

It costs about the same as a base model miata. Why are you all bent out of shape about this car?

Edit: Here's the C&D article on the effects of wheel size. Note that the higher skid-pad numbers for the 18" and 19" wheels are more likely due to the effect of the higher grip tire they had to use for that wheel (they note that in the article). Could they eek out a bit more grip with a larger wheel and tire? Probably, but acceleration and fuel economy would suffer; and I don't think Toyota is about to let their fuel economy suffer.

 

[cajunator]

I'd rather have a Hyundai Genesis. Or even better, a Ford Mustang GT.

 

[ascii42]

I'd rather have a Hyundai Genesis. Or even better, a Ford Mustang GT.

Both of which cost significantly more than this car is going to cost...hopefully.

 

[cajunator]

Both of which cost significantly more than this car is going to cost...hopefully.

Both don't make me vomit looking at them either.

 

[reilo]

The Miata maxes at 17" according to the mazda website and the S2000 came with 17" wheels too.

There was also a car and driver tech piece about up-sizing wheels and how it actually hurt vehicle performance after a while. I think you're over-reacting here. Besides, on a light car like that, 18" wheels will give a fantastically shitty ride.


It costs about the same as a base model miata. Why are you all bent out of shape about this car?

Edit: Here's the C&D article on the effects of wheel size. Note that the higher skid-pad numbers for the 18" and 19" wheels are more likely due to the effect of the higher grip tire they had to use for that wheel (they note that in the article). Could they eek out a bit more grip with a larger wheel and tire? Probably, but acceleration and fuel economy would suffer; and I don't think Toyota is about to let their fuel economy suffer.

A Miata is also a convertible that will weigh minimum 400lbs less. This is the Pontiac Solstice all over again, except it's not even a convertible. The FR-S is also going to be 10" longer and 4" wider. It's closer to a RX-8 in dimension than a Miata.

As far as your article:

Subjectively, both the 17-inch and 18-inch wheels and tires were in the sweet spot of grip, braking performance, ride comfort, and steering feel. Moving from 17-inchers to 18s barely degrades ride quality, and the additional grip is welcome.

Besides, these guys are talking about "plus-sizing" which is meant to go above and beyond limits (ie 19-20").

Both of which cost significantly more than this car is going to cost...hopefully.

Mustang starts at $22k MSRP and comes with 300HP V6 stock. Hyundai Genesis Coupe starts at $22k MSRP and offers a 210HP/220TQ Turbo i4 and you have the option of a 300HP V6. We already know that the FR-S MSRP is $24,000.

 

[AlphaSnake]

Large wheels have their advantages over smaller diameters. Of course when you use a freakin' stock Golf a 16 or 17 inch wheel will perform better. It's a 175HP mini-hatch.

When you have a RWD performance car, you need something that'll grip the surface to take advantage of the chassis. A 215MM with a chunky 45-series sidewall is not going to please the enthusiasts who are anticipating this car as if it were some sort of golf cart. That's too much sidewall with far too little of a contact patch.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

When you have a RWD performance car, you need something that'll grip the surface to take advantage of the chassis. A 215MM with a chunky 45-series sidewall is not going to please the enthusiasts who are anticipating this car as if it were some sort of golf cart. That's too much sidewall with far too little of a contact patch.

1) I disagree. And I'm sorry but a 45 sidewall is not chunky until you start looking at serious sports cars.

2) It's a Toyota. People who were anticipating a golf cart were far too optimistic. I always pictured this would be a fun, tossable little car; never did I dream it was going to be a serious car for serious enthusiasts.

A Miata is also a convertible that will weigh minimum 400lbs less. This is the Pontiac Solstice all over again, except it's not even a convertible. The FR-S is also going to be 10" longer and 4" wider. It's closer to a RX-8 in dimension than a Miata.

As far as your article:

Besides, these guys are talking about "plus-sizing" which is meant to go above and beyond limits (ie 19-20").

Fair point on the article, though I don't think there's enough to be gained from the 18" wheel that it warrants the losses from what Toyota is aiming for (they're still concerned about ride comfort and economy). I'll concede that an 18" wheel should have been offered as an option, and maybe one still will be--we haven't see the US specs yet.

But the FRS actually splits the difference in size between a Miata and a RX-8 pretty well and is smaller than just about every other car that could be classed as a competitor.

 

[reilo]

1) I disagree. And I'm sorry but a 45 sidewall is not chunky until you start looking at serious sports cars.

2) It's a Toyota. People who were anticipating a golf cart were far too optimistic. I always pictured this would be a fun, tossable little car; never did I dream it was going to be a serious car for serious enthusiasts.


Fair point on the article, though I don't think there's enough to be gained from the 18" wheel that it warrants the losses from what Toyota is aiming for (they're still concerned about ride comfort and economy). I'll concede that an 18" wheel should have been offered as an option, and maybe one still will be--we haven't see the US specs yet.

But the FRS actually splits the difference in size between a Miata and a RX-8 pretty well and is smaller than just about every other car that could be classed as a competitor.

Which, goes back to my point that Toyota doesn't know what it wants the car to be.

And good lord I can't get over that hideous $24k price tag.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Which, goes back to my point that Toyota doesn't know what it wants the car to be.

And good lord I can't get over that hideous $24k price tag.

I think they know what they want it to be--a fun, sport car for young people concerned with both image and fuel economy.

When you look at it like a fun, RWD Scion tC it makes perfect sense.

I'm going to be in the market for a new car probably next year and while odds are I'll end up getting an older 911 I may take a look at this. If it has solid build quality and a tuneable engine it may just be a new car I could get behind (The Genesis Coupe and the Mustang have never been on a list of maybes).

Naaaaah who'm I kidding. I'm going to be an (awesome) idiot and get a mid 80s Porsche 930.

 

[reilo]

I think they know what they want it to be--a fun, sport car for young people concerned with both image and fuel economy.

When you look at it like a fun, RWD Scion tC it makes perfect sense.

But the price does not. It firmly puts it out of the Scion's target demographic. If you are marketing this to the young Scion crowd (16-21, bought by parents most likely as a first car), making it $24k and putting in a meek 200HP N/A engine just does not cut it. This car is a whopping $7k more expensive at MSRP than a tC, and when compared to the competition it falsely laughably short.

If you are a recent college grad and can afford a $25k car and want something sporty, why in the hell would you buy this monstrosity?

I'm going to be in the market for a new car probably next year and while odds are I'll end up getting an older 911 I may take a look at this. If it has solid build quality and a tuneable engine it may just be a new car I could get behind (The Genesis Coupe and the Mustang have never been on a list of maybes).

Naaaaah who'm I kidding. I'm going to be an (awesome) idiot and get a mid 80s Porsche 930.

Nice.

 

[YuriLowell]

I think they know what they want it to be--a fun, sport car for young people concerned with both image and fuel economy.

When you look at it like a fun, RWD Scion tC it makes perfect sense.

I'm going to be in the market for a new car probably next year and while odds are I'll end up getting an older 911 I may take a look at this. If it has solid build quality and a tuneable engine it may just be a new car I could get behind (The Genesis Coupe and the Mustang have never been on a list of maybes).

Naaaaah who'm I kidding. I'm going to be an (awesome) idiot and get a mid 80s Porsche 930.

DO NOT BUY A 996 911.

Go for an air cooled one.

 

[Limedust]

Large wheels have their advantages over smaller diameters. Of course when you use a freakin' stock Golf a 16 or 17 inch wheel will perform better. It's a 175HP mini-hatch.

When you have a RWD performance car, you need something that'll grip the surface to take advantage of the chassis. A 215MM with a chunky 45-series sidewall is not going to please the enthusiasts who are anticipating this car as if it were some sort of golf cart. That's too much sidewall with far too little of a contact patch.

You're not thinging about this from the manufacturer's point of view. Put a smaller side-wall on that rim from the factory, and watch the idiots bend/break them driving through potholes.

As someone with a preference for being off-road, and 45 sidewall terrifies me.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

But the price does not. It firmly puts it out of the Scion's target demographic. If you are marketing this to the young Scion crowd (16-21, bought by parents most likely as a first car), making it $24k and putting in a meek 200HP N/A engine just does not cut it. This car is a whopping $7k more expensive at MSRP than a tC, and when compared to the competition it falsely laughably short.

If you are a recent college grad and can afford a $25k car and want something sporty, why in the hell would you buy this monstrosity?

Hmmm..... I think you're selling the scion crowd short, there are a few people (late 20s) in the office I work at who've bought them and I know for a fact that they had the money to go bigger.

Honestly I think it's a decent price point if the car pulls together as a solid package--I mean it's only two grand more than a Civic Si. I think it's only going to seem like a weak contender if you're only considering horsepower per dollar and comparing it against the genesis and mustang, and even then it overpowers a good amount of other cars at its price point.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

DO NOT BUY A 996 911.

Go for an air cooled one.

I had an '00 996 for a few years and now I'm fuming mad! Raarrghh!!!

Aside from the headlights (yes, I know), what's not to love?

 

[reilo]

Hmmm..... I think you're selling the scion crowd short, there are a few people (late 20s) in the office I work at who've bought them and I know for a fact that they had the money to go bigger.

Honestly I think it's a decent price point if the car pulls together as a solid package--I mean it's only two grand more than a Civic Si. I think it's only going to seem like a weak contender if you're only considering horsepower per dollar and comparing it against the genesis and mustang, and even then it overpowers a good amount of other cars at its price point.

The Civic Si is also another overpriced monstrosity. It's the same price as a Speed3 hahah.

 

[kkaabboomm]

2013 Audi S4.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2013-audi-s4/

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fmsW4VRGvW0

not a fan of the grill - the S line always has had a vertical-emphasis grill; besides that, i like the tail-light modification, hate the not-circular wheel. not sure i like the squared fogs/weird mesh behind them either...

Wait, the 2010+ Audi S4 weighs 3850lbs? /grumble

I thought they lowered the curb weight with the new engine. That's 100lbs more than the M3 sedan. I guess the AWD system takes up a huge chunk of that, huh?

It really isn't an issue, it kicks all sorts of ass, especially with the rear sports diff.

I'm glad i got my 2012 S4 last month

 

[reilo]

not a fan of the grill - the S line always has had a vertical-emphasis grill; besides that, i like the tail-light modification, hate the not-circular wheel. not sure i like the squared fogs/weird mesh behind them either...

Grills are so easy to change out on S4s anyhow.

It really isn't an issue, it kicks all sorts of ass, especially with the rear sports diff.

I'm glad i got my 2012 S4 last month

Yeah, I'll see once I test drive. Hopefully incentives for 2011-12s get ratcheted up a little by summer time to clear inventory for the 2013s.

 

[TurtleSnatcher]

The FR-S has less torque then my MINI.. wtf?

 

[AlphaSnake]

Audi and incentives don't go together. One of the reasons I fucking hate Audi's buying experience. Their lease programs suck, and the biggest rebates they offer are either $1000 (or $1500) for current Audi owners or a rebate on clearance models that are almost impossible to locate anyway.

 

[reilo]

Audi and incentives don't go together. One of the reasons I fucking hate Audi's buying experience. Their lease programs suck, and the biggest rebates they offer are either $1000 (or $1500) for current Audi owners or a rebate on clearance models that are almost impossible to locate anyway.

Really? Blah. $1000 for current owners? Grrr.

 

[twinturbo2]

Come on, guys, less talk about the FR-S more talk about the Abarth. A little Italian pocket rocket.

 

[YuriLowell]

I had an '00 996 for a few years and now I'm fuming mad! Raarrghh!!!

Aside from the headlights (yes, I know), what's not to love?

IMS going out.

 

[AlphaSnake]

Really? Blah. $1000 for current owners? Grrr.

Yeah, if you spend $60K on an S5...you get all of $1K back*










*Some exclusions may apply. Not all Audi models are subject to dealer or manufacturer's incentive.

lawlz. The dealer here in my area (Biener Audi - don't buy shit from them) not only charge a premium on all of their cars (they won't sell shit below MSRP), but they rob people on pre-owned S5s and S4s. They have used S4s and S5 that they sell at damn near new costs. Depreciation doesn't phase them, because they tell their customers: you either buy this used 2010 S4 with 9k miles and an extended warranty for 52K. Or wait 4 months for a brand new one that'll cost you about the same.

And people do it! Fawk. People in NY are idiots. They don't even care that an Audi dealer paid at most 43-45K for a car like that. And if one idiot doesn't buy the car, another one will. Ugh.

 

[reilo]

Yeah, if you spend $60K on an S5...you get all of $1K back*

*Some exclusions may apply. Not all Audi models are subject to dealer or manufacturer's incentive.

lawlz. The dealer here in my area (Biener Audi - don't buy shit from them) not only charge a premium on all of their cars (they won't sell shit below MSRP), but they rob people on pre-owned S5s and S4s. They have used S4s and S5 that they sell at damn near new costs. Depreciation doesn't phase them, because they tell their customers: you either buy this used 2010 S4 with 9k miles and an extended warranty for 52K. Or wait 4 months for a brand new one that'll cost you about the same.

And people do it! Fawk. People in NY are idiots. They don't even care that an Audi dealer paid at most 43-45K for a car like that. And if one idiot doesn't buy the car, another one will. Ugh.

Maybe I'll have better luck in Portland then. I'm also thankful that I don't have to worry about sales tax.

*searches local dealer listings*

One S4 found (2012, new, Prestige) with a manual (3 in auto? Fuck off) for $57,055. Errrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

 

[kkaabboomm]

Yeah, if you spend $60K on an S5...you get all of $1K back*

*Some exclusions may apply. Not all Audi models are subject to dealer or manufacturer's incentive.

lawlz. The dealer here in my area (Biener Audi - don't buy shit from them) not only charge a premium on all of their cars (they won't sell shit below MSRP), but they rob people on pre-owned S5s and S4s. They have used S4s and S5 that they sell at damn near new costs. Depreciation doesn't phase them, because they tell their customers: you either buy this used 2010 S4 with 9k miles and an extended warranty for 52K. Or wait 4 months for a brand new one that'll cost you about the same.

And people do it! Fawk. People in NY are idiots. They don't even care that an Audi dealer paid at most 43-45K for a car like that. And if one idiot doesn't buy the car, another one will. Ugh.

damn that sucks. I got my premium+ with all sorts of bells and whistles (oddly it was like $1500 less than a prestige, and the only things missing were the headlights the turn 15 degrees into the corner, and the availability to buy the ADS and the rear sun shades) for like $300 over invoice (hooray for battling dealers against each other), which was well below MSRP. ordered in mid july, had them change a pre-ordered car in the system to my specs, got to the top of their queue, and had the car built in august. on a boat sep1, and then delivered end of september after clearing customs at the port.


then again the dealer is one of the highest-volume sellers in the country. let me test drive the r8 they had, which he sold the saturday before i picked my s4 up on monday. man THAT was a fun car.

(first time audi buyer, bought straight up, so i didn't deal with leasing/financing. also had them toss in audicare ($850 on an s4) as a 'i want it so give it to me' extra)

Maybe I'll have better luck in Portland then. I'm also thankful that I don't have to worry about sales tax.

*searches local dealer listings*

One S4 found (2012, new, Prestige) with a manual (3 in auto? Fuck off) for $57,055. Errrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

the auto's are nice. 7 speed, the dual-clutch s-tronic is like butter, and you switch it into manual mode and up the rpms to get a bunch of power...it's fun. granted, i live in atlanta so a manual would drive me crazy on my day to day driving.

 

[reilo]

You paid $47,600 for your S4?

the auto's are nice. 7 speed, the dual-clutch s-tronic is like butter, and you switch it into manual mode and up the rpms to get a bunch of power...it's fun. granted, i live in atlanta so a manual would drive me crazy on my day to day driving.

Fuck an auto.

-----

Oh, on another note, my neighbor scratched/dinged my car in her Cherokee in the parking lot. She owned up to it (after not leaving a note, claimed to not have noticed she did it, okay) and the car is in the shop for the next three days.

My rental during that time?

A Mazda5. smh.

 

[kkaabboomm]

You paid $47,600 for your S4?

? no; msrp was 56,4, dealer invoice from his build system was a lot lower than that. another dealer offered $700 over invoice, this guy offered $300. probably the easiest/fastest sale he made all month/year - about 30 minutes of getting the thing spec'd out and ordered.

 

[reilo]

? no; msrp was 56,4, dealer invoice from his build system was a lot lower than that. another dealer offered $700 over invoice, this guy offered $300. probably the easiest/fastest sale he made all month/year - about 30 minutes of getting the thing spec'd out and ordered.

Ah. I saw invoice listed for a new Audi S4 at $47,300, but didn't take options into account.

 

[otake]

okay, car gaf.

Regular Gas or Premium? Does premium give you higher mpg?

 

[reilo]

okay, car gaf.

Regular Gas or Premium? Does premium give you higher mpg?

What year/model is your car?

Premium only gives you a benefit if your car is tuned for it. Otherwise, you will not see an added benefit to using Premium in a Regular tuned engine.

 

[otake]

What year/model is your car?

Premium only gives you a benefit if your car is tuned for it. Otherwise, you will not see an added benefit to using Premium in a Regular tuned engine.

2012 Golf.

 

[kkaabboomm]

Ah. I saw invoice listed for a new Audi S4 at $47,300, but didn't take options into account.

Yeah lots of options which are "built into" the prestige package; didn't need rear sunshades and wasn't gonna get ADS so I just got them ala cart-- oddly cheaper that way.

 

[reilo]

2012 Golf.

Use what the car is tuned for.

 

[BoobPhysics101]

okay, car gaf.

Regular Gas or Premium? Does premium give you higher mpg?

If your ECU isn't tuned for Premium, it will give you LESS mpg and less power.

 

[AlphaSnake]

2012 Golf.

Premium. My mom has a 2009 (same engine) and the dealer filled it with regular we took delivery of it. It felt sluggish, I ran the tank dry and filled it up with 93. The ECU adjusted timing (timing relates to the combustion process) and the car felt much, much better after about 25 miles of driving with the 93.

ECUs in modern day cars aren't tuned to just accept one type of gas, if they are it'll only be for premium, which performance oriented cars usually specify. First of all, regular gas is dirtier gas - it'll eventually clog up your valves and hurt your motor's performance. Premium is cleaner gas and detonates better as well, preventing engine knock issues. Also, premium has been found to provide better mileage results, simply because it allows the engine to run more efficiently and combust properly.

Any higher-compression motor, anything above the 9:1 mark should be using premium only, even if the manufacturer says regular is okay. A low compression motor, say, 8:1 can do on regular for its entire duration. Your VW has a compression ratio of 9.5:1 - that's decently high and definitely requires premium. It's also a 2.5L 5-cylinder motor.

Use cheap gas on a higher compression motor, and you'll experience some knocking - you may not hear it, but it'll be there and you'll prematurely wear certain components of the motor. Trust me. You can use regular on occasion, and your ECU will compensate by decreasing ignition timing to prevent as much engine knock as possible, even on a performance car - but it is not advised to do it for prolonged periods of time.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

IMS going out.

Yeah, the fear of losing my $15k engine without warning gave me some sleepless nights, but it's less of an issue than internet hysteria would lead you to believe and there's a kit you can buy to replace the IMS bearing with a much sturdier unit. The kit is from Flat 6 Innovation and LN Engineering and is around $500-$1000 depending on your model. It'll take a weekend of solid work to replace but it's not especially difficult to do and the peace of mind would totally be worth it.

I moved to downtown Cleveland so I sold my 996, but had I planned on keeping it I definitely would have gotten the kit. With the IMS retrofit kit, the 996 has got to be the best bang for the buck when it comes to sports cars.

Under $25,000 for a low miles, luxury sports coupe that's also very reliable, comfortable and exciting? Pretty solid deal.

 

[Lucky Forward]

Ford launches ‘new’ ’65 Mustang

Everything old is new again — especially when it comes to the classic 1964-1/2, ’65 and ’66 Mustangs.

Like many makers, Ford has a catalogue full of parts for those original pony cars, everything from brakes to seats. But now, it seems, you can even order all-new, factory-approved Mustang bodies rather than having to scrounge up rusted and dinged-up originals.

“The 1964-66 Mustang is the most restored vintage vehicle,” said Dennis Mondrach, Ford Restoration Parts licensing manager. “But the number of original 1964-66 vintage bodies is shrinking every year. Most of the original Mustangs left in scrapyards are rusted or wrecked beyond repair.”

So, for those determined to have an “original” Mustang, Ford turned to Pennsylvania-based Dynacom International, which was given access to original technical drawings, blueprints and specifications for parts. The supplier is producing precise duplicates of the original body – albeit with a few modifications that customers are likely to appreciate.

“The new body shell is made of virgin metal and uses modern welding techniques,” explained Mondrach. “It comes rustproofed, and after final adjustment and finish preparation of the body panels, it is ready for painting and final assembly.”

In fact, the steel used in the new bodies is a higher grade than the original Mustang’s, according to Dynacom Vice President Jim Christina.

“We use a modern universal automotive-grade steel that is actually stronger than the original, and modern welding techniques along with more welds to strengthen the body,” he said.

The ’65 Mustang body includes virtually all of the original car’s sheet metal from the radiator support to the taillight panel, including trunk id and doors. The only thing missing are the hood and front fenders, which are sold separately.

The body kit costs $15,000 and is shipped directly to a customer.

The kit can be transformed into anything from the original ’64-1/2 Mustang – which was introduced by one-time Ford President Lee Iacocca at the New York World’s Fair – to a ’66, depending on the powertrain and trim parts.

Someone purchasing the body shell simply has to transfer the engine and transmission, electric systems and other parts from a beyond-repair original Mustang – or they can order just about all the replacement parts to build an “original” pony car from the ground up from Ford’s restoration catalogue, at fordrestorationparts.com.

Meanwhile, the maker also has body shells for the 1967-68 and fastback 1969-70 Mustangs available.

Ford will debut the new ’65 body shell at this week’s SEMA Show, the annual aftermarket extravaganza in Las Vegas.

 

[otake]

Premium. My mom has a 2009 (same engine) and the dealer filled it with regular we took delivery of it. It felt sluggish, I ran the tank dry and filled it up with 93. The ECU adjusted timing (timing relates to the combustion process) and the car felt much, much better after about 25 miles of driving with the 93.

ECUs in modern day cars aren't tuned to just accept one type of gas, if they are it'll only be for premium, which performance oriented cars usually specify. First of all, regular gas is dirtier gas - it'll eventually clog up your valves and hurt your motor's performance. Premium is cleaner gas and detonates better as well, preventing engine knock issues. Also, premium has been found to provide better mileage results, simply because it allows the engine to run more efficiently and combust properly.

Any higher-compression motor, anything above the 9:1 mark should be using premium only, even if the manufacturer says regular is okay. A low compression motor, say, 8:1 can do on regular for its entire duration. Your VW has a compression ratio of 9.5:1 - that's decently high and definitely requires premium. It's also a 2.5L 5-cylinder motor.

Use cheap gas on a higher compression motor, and you'll experience some knocking - you may not hear it, but it'll be there and you'll prematurely wear certain components of the motor. Trust me. You can use regular on occasion, and your ECU will compensate by decreasing ignition timing to prevent as much engine knock as possible, even on a performance car - but it is not advised to do it for prolonged periods of time.

Thanks for your detailed response. I've been running it on regular for 1 week and have felt it odd, I'm going to fill it up with premium and post results.

 

[Epic Tales of Penis]

Hey guys. What's a good site that can host pics without bandwidth issues leading to broken urls?

Going to snap some pics of my car tomorrow for this thread.

Thanks.

 

[Darth Pinche]

Some early reviews just released about the FR-S says it is very good for a small, fun, tossable sports car. They were not going for brute strength or 0-60 times, but a fun experience. Sounds good to me, but I hope the Subaru BRZ looks better.

Autocar UK review

 

[Yeah_its_Bob]

Some early reviews just released about the FR-S says it is very good for a small, fun, tossable sports car. They were not going for brute strength or 0-60 times, but a fun experience. Sounds good to me, but I hope the Subaru BRZ looks better.

Autocar UK review

The cars weight is great wasn't expecting that. Its lacking a bit of hp and torque. I would had guess 220 the least. Hopefully the Subaru one steps it up a notch.

 

[reilo]

but I hope the Subaru BRZ looks better.

Autocar UK review

A Subaru looking good?

lol.

 

[Gouda Jouji]

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2105

More pics from that brochure, shows a bunch of colors plus the instruments and center console.

DEM STEELIES