The $5k Subaru would replace the Forester, and basically only be used for days where driving around in a RWD sports coupe I really like is a bad idea.

So if the BRZ is going to be the new entry level sports car for Subaru, what does that mean for the Impreza? Will it become even bigger maybe replacing the Legacy as the middle of the range. Then the Lagacy will become the high end Subaru competing with the larger German saloons.

I don't really consider the Impreza a sports car at all.

This. Even the STI isn't a "sports car." The WRX and STI are plenty fast, but without significant modification they aren't sharp handling cars.

If the BRZ was available in AWD, my parents would probably be on the waiting list for one... Been looking at the blah G37X coupe. I think I talked my dad into an early/used GTR as an alternative though, time will tell.

After close to 20 years of "wanting"/talking about getting a driver 911, and the full build of his old Vette, my dad dropped the idea of getting a 911 as the maintenance isn't worth it to him. Now he's thinking Japanese luxo/sports coupe.


The BRZ is about half a foot shorter. There's a pic floating around comparing profiles of BRZ, Miata, Genisis coupe, Mustang - the Genisis and Mustang being nearly the same length, while the BRZ and Miata are close. BRZ is also about 4" narrower that Genisis/Mustang.

The Impreza is nothing more than an econo-box. The WRX and STI are overpriced hopped up versions. No different than Civic, Civic SI. And Subaru really needs to step ip the fuel economy to keep competitive. Most people don't need AWD, and aren't willing to pay the premium at the dealers and at the pump for it.


That said, I'm quite happy with my econo-shit-box, one that didn't even come from the factory with a damn stereo or sound deadening/insulation. Cheap bastards.

(IBFlamedBecauseRaceCar)

I agree I'm banned from RS25.com for arguing that point. Look at what happened to the civic after the fit came out, it got fatter and softer. I see the impretzel doing the same.

Technically, the BRZ isn't a sports car either. It's got two too many seats and one too many roofs.

The number of seats might have something to with insurance and registration cost differences that could hinder global sales.


That being said, my belief is that basically every Porsche aside from the early tractors, Cayenne, and Panamera, with some randoms mixed in, have been sports cars. And, aside from the 356 Speedster, 550 Spyder and other early race homologation specials, later Speedsters, Boxster, Caymen, and a few other random models, all production models have been 2+2. And, all of those were sold in larger numbers in the 2+2 hardtop, sunroof, targa, panarama glass roof, other other enclosed variants, than their soft-top siblings.

Just sayin'


* I forgot the Porsche/VW 914. It was a two seater. Mid/Rear too. Then again, most Porsche purists don't think of it as a "real" Porsche.

The strict/traditional definition of a sports car is a closed wheels, two seater, with no roof. Off the top of my head, the only sports cars for sale today are the Miata, Elise, and Boxster, since the s2000 and solstice/sky got canned. And I guess there are some kit cars out there like the Caterham Super7 or the FFM Cobra replicas that are true sports cars.

Cars people call sports cars, like the 911, Vette, most Ferraris, etc are all actually GT cars. Definitions from the 20's aren't all that useful today since the lines between genres have been so blurred over 100 years of car design. My point is that it's a futile exercise to argue about whether or not an Impreza is a "sports car" when cars that people almost universally agree are sports cars actually aren't.

I still like my econo-shit-box ;) :banana:

I wouldn't deny categorizing certain fixed-roof cars as not being "sports cars." The puny-ass, useless, insurance-classification-busting back seats don't do it either. As pointed out, a 911 of any variation is a sports car. A Corvette is too, and I would argue more so when it's a coupe and not a convertible. The 350Z and RX-8 are sports cars too.

I can buy the argument that a GT is not a sports car; however, it takes more to be a GT than 4 seats, 2 doors and RWD.

I absolutely do not classify all 911s as sports cars. The 911 Turbo is the pinnacle example of a GT car. In fact, I would categorically reject all AWD cars from sports car classification.

But once again the problem here isn't with agreeing on which cars are or aren't sporty, it's one of agreeing upon the definition of "sports car" in which to place sporty cars. Since the term isn't well defined, it's almost meaningless as a descriptive category.

Understood. I would argue that a car that handles reasonably well for its price and era, and isn't good for much beyond moving two people around at brisk speeds, is arguably a "sports car." Performance has to be placed a little ahead of comfort, and way ahead of any sort of practicality. A GT car differs in that it sacrifices some of that performance (more handling than power of course, a true GT is plenty fast) for a lot of comfort. A GT is something you want to be in for cutting a 9 hour trip to 6 hours. A sports car is for 2 hours of going nowhere at 60-80 mph.

Now with less roof:

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18go.../ku-xlarge.gif

http://jalopnik.com/zone-out-on-this...-con-451362521

Why don't they just call it the Scion MX-5?

So apparently the BRZ STi is a thing now:

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18w0.../ku-bigpic.jpg

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18w0.../ku-xlarge.jpg

http://jalopnik.com/the-subaru-brz-s...ked-1024198473

http://sti.jp/index.html

I bet it's an appearance package.

But if it's not... if there's a turbo, supercharger, or flat-6 under the hood... I'm buying one.

Seems likely they'd go the turbo route in order to follow past recipes for success and stay within their core competencies.

I was just reading that the chief engineer (Tetsuya Tada) wasn't interested in going turbo. "I think 300bhp with a turbo and 200g/km of CO2 would be tasteless in this day and age. We're looking for a surprise. Something unique. For example, a hybrid motor." Are his exact words.

So the BRZ STI may (not) be the car your expecting.

That almost makes it more intriguing.

I'll only buy one if it has a KERS (system).

Update from Jalopnik says that this is a tS version, which

http://jalopnik.com/the-leaked-subar...l-s-1030254979

So, still sort of exciting, but not exactly OMGWTFBBQ!!1! level of excitement.

Yep, not surprised, and still not interested.

Honestly, I think the car would be best if they started with this tS trim level car, and put a mild supercharger on it. Figure a 10:1 2.0L with a twin screw making a non-intercooled 6psi or so. Like 225-250hp at the rear wheels, or under 300hp at the crank. So, still not as fast as the Impreza STi on a drag strip, but a class higher than the car currently compares to at the road course. i.e. instead of going after S2000's and RX-8's, it's going after Cayman S's and Elises. I'd pay mid $30k's for that car.

Well it was exciting while it lasted.

Debbie drove an FR-S at autocross this weekend and sure seemed to enjoy it

So Tommi Makinen built a AWD Toyabaru for Rally Finland at the request of the CEO of Toyota. It didn't actually run competitively, but ran some of the course at speed for promo purposes.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/115232

http://cdn.images.autosport.com/edit...1406896973.jpg

hmm.....

EDIT:

And it appears another one (built in Germany, where the old Toyota WRC team was based) will be car 0 at the German Rally later this month.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/115204

It looks like the German car isn't AWD.