I admit, wanting a car that nobody makes is a "me" problem, it's why I drove my 2006 WRX wagon until 2019 instead of until the 5yr or 10yr ownership mark - nobody made a wagon that could replace it at either of those points, I got fed up with the time I had to invest to keep it on the road, so I dumped it in late 2019 & settled for a sedan as a stop-gap; coming real fast on it's intended window of replacement too, I'm past my "3yr minimum", 5yrs was the original plan, but I'm not seeing anything on the horizon right now, so I'll probably go past that too; it's a Lexus so I'm not worried, I'm just bored. I have very little influence over the industry, manufacturers decided to stop making wagons, all I can do is buy what is available, doesn't mean that a wagon is a bad car, just that they stopped making them.

Subaru isn't going to fix the FA24D, that is not on me, that is on Subaru; I'm not willing to give them ~30k for a car that has a poorly designed and assembled engine, 1/3rd or so of the cars value is under the hood. They won't sell me a car without an engine at a discount so I can stuff something good in it's place either.

The BRZ/86 are 228hp and 2,800lbs ~12.3lb/1hp
The Mustang GT is 486hp and 3,800lbs ~7.8lb/1hp

The only 4-seat 6mt RWD options on the market with a decent power:weight ratio are 1,000lbs heavier than a BRZ/86.

The option are "slow" or "heavy" (or six-figures for a 911)

40k isn't what I'm willing to pay, I looked at the spread on the existing BRZ/86 models and made an estimate of what I thought it would cost.

45k for a BRZ/GR86 with 300/300 under/around 3,000lbs, sign me up.

Agreed. I'd love a Porsche for half the price. I can't believe none of the manufacturers have thought of that.

In a gen 1 with ethanol you can get close to 300whp with a basic setup for less than 10k and a stock block. For another 10K you can make whatever number you want before the trans lets go.

I mean, sure I would too, but I'm looking or asking for a porsche at half price; I'm looking for a BRZ/86 sized non-luxury car with a good power to weight ratio; I shouldn't have to pick up 1,000lbs of curb weight and/or ~90k in MSRP to get there.

Hard pass on the corn; closest ethanol to me is a ~40mile one-way trip. I'm not saddled with Cali 91, but pump gas is all there is. I may not live in Cali, but I do live in a CARB compliant state; essentially if it's newer than MY1998 my options are very limited when it comes to power mods & emissions, hence wanting a better engine option from the factory.

It sounds like the perfect car for you would be vintage. Hear me out. Look back to go forward. All the most fun cars are old analog drivers cars. GTV's, 2002's, 240Z's, and even those poor handling 911's.

Best part about going vintage is they are cheap to insure, fun to work on, and every dollar you spend has a reasonable chance to to get reimbursed should you decide you must have SAT/NAV

Old cars value goes up, no warranty to void, its a visage of your own personal expression and taste, and you cannot get more involved with driving than with an old car. Nothing new can even hope to compare.

I'm looking at both ends; the main advantage new cars bring is crash worthiness (wife & kids) and my wife will actually drive it.

I'm looking at 64-66 mustang (& 64/65 falcon, same car under the skin), 67-69 camaro/firebird, 66/67 Novas too. Also looking at 60's & 70's USDM Japanese imports, but 2+2 means a LWB 260z/280z and those are hard to find in decent shape. Have you priced a GTV lately? yikes. E30 BMW and Fox mustang are the newest cars I was/am considering, but the 80's/90's interior stylings are not very pleasing to the eye; typically the newer the interior design philosophy, the less appealing it is to me.

I live in a CARB state too and if I'm on 93 I pass my check. They actually sell a 50 state CARB certified version that will get you like 250wheel on pump gas. Either way you weren't going to do it, you just made what you thought was an unobtainable hypothetical to justify your point. Honestly, I would probably not recommend it since there are better high powered track platforms out there, but what you asked for definitely legally exists today.

What I asked for does not legally exist today, what I asked for was a 300/300 3,000lb curb weight car from the factory (10hp for every 1 pound of car ).

When evaluating options:
The cost of a 1st gen+turbo kit+install & tuning, with the knowledge that there is no room to increase power until the car is 25 years old, while also considering the shortened life span of a 12.5:1 CR Subaru H-4 that will see ~12lbs of boost, as well as the costs associated with the oiling & cooling concerns/upgrades that will also have to addressed, and drivetrain upgrades. Works is the only CARB kit I've come across that doesn't require modifying the crash bar for the intercooler. Edelbrock has the CARB legal supercharger kit for the platform as well, but that's "230-250WHP" ceiling until the car is 25yrs old as well.
I had also considered 1st gen with CARB legal LS swap, but that comes with an entire drivetrain swap and a lot of custom work that would be required to make it fit, and it also throws the "crashworthiness" argument for a new car out the window.

New car with 300hp from the factory is a much more attractive prospect than an NA car with aftermarket forced induction that makes "230-250WHP on pump gas" with the above considerations.

Stock 2nd gens are putting down ~210-220WHP on dynos, I have concerns about the engine in stock form (oiling & assembly), I certainly have concerns about forcing 12PSI into that FA20.

That's why a car MY1998 or older is a more attractive prospect than a modified 1st gen BRZ, not constrained by CARB/emissions, fewer concerns about a heavily modified FA20 (or the poorly designed FA24 in the second gen).

I hear you on prices of the 2+2 crowd. But for 40k you can get into a GTV that is mostly show worthy. You would have a fun driver that you could work on as well. Now as you said, crash worthiness is not in the cards at all with an older car, but I was operating under the umbrella this would be more of a weekend fun car, not daily transportation.

In that case I have to rethink your use case. Classic mustangs are always nice and you can find nice straight 6 models for very little. A few badge swaps and you can build your dream car.

Fox body mustangs are particularly appealing. I have always wanted an 86 fastback as it was the last carbed mustang. I wish you luck finding a car that checks your boxes. I vote you build what you want from vintage steel. Make it the car you want. You get a hobby, and an asset when your done.

You literally didn't read anything I said, but it makes sense since everyone says they want a boosted brz and nearly no one does it. Here is the link https://jacksonracing.com/product/fr...harger-system/ It is CARB certifed and says +50% HP. 200 factory +50% is 300 hp. My boosted brz is just a hair under 2800lbs. And not only is it 49 state legal (i would need to remove my flexfuel set up and highboost pulley to be 50 state legal), it has the factory crashbar. So to reiterate, what you asked for literally exists today for the price you said or less and is literally CARB lega. Sorry you are are just flat out categorically wrong.


If you really want to get into the weeds, you technically don't even need an upgraded radiator for that setup and JR sells an oilcooler kit that mounts to the same bar the SC traction fluid cooler mounts to for under 1000$, OR you could go with their radiator/oil cooler setup for 1000$. Not to mention you aren't making 12psi on that setup. Probably more like 9 tops.



With that said just get a c6 z06 for 25-30k. It is 500hp factory and weighs 3100lbs.

The 2nd gen twins don't need a turbo unless highway pulls are your thing. They are the anti-highway-pull vehicles.

It's all about numbers and bragging rights with some folks.

The BRZ does not need more power. It's incredibly fun as it is. If you've driven one, you know that. If you think it needs forced induction buy a WRX or something else.

Definitely a second vehicle/toy that will get stored for winter, but I know I'll end up driving it as much as possible, likely daily most of the year until the snow flies/salt comes out. Worth noting that in the nearly 4 years I've owned my IS, I've only put ~24k miles on it & it handled family car duties until Oct 2022. Once we got my wife's Sorento PHEV last year, that vehicle took over the family stuff. I still have my kids in the back seat daily, but its mostly around town, rarely on the highway.

Having owned a first gen mustang, in the I6 cars, all of the steering, suspension, brakes etc. differs from the factory V8 cars; steering components are lighter duty/smaller diameter, ratio is 20:1, hubs are 4-lug instead of 5-lug, rear end is an open 7.5" instead of an 8", the vast majority were autos as well. Looking at prices of what's on the market in my area, it makes more sense to just get a V8 4spd car as a base; I primarily want to drive something and modify it, not start a project. Admittedly a 67/68 would be a better car to start with, as there is more room in the engine bay, but I like the 64-66 better (nostalgia is a hell of a drug) and it will accept a sbf or LS/LT between the shock towers, anything else requires some surgery.

Also having owned & heavily modified a fox, they're literally an engine, trans & rear end with some sheet metal wrapped around them. It's a flexible platform, engine bay is big enough to accept everything from a SBF, BBF, to a coyote with just a set of swap headers and motor mounts. Tunnel will accept a T56 with minimal "massaging" but no surgery. There are "swap kits" and standalone kits for IRS; it's also the last gen before drivers aides were implemented, pretty much any modern mustang brakes can be bolted onto it; definitely an easier car to start with compared to a first gen if I can find a clean one, but I also prefer the first gen from an exterior styling & simplistic interior standpoint, both have massive aftermarket support either way, but my time constraints (kids, wife, house, job, various local boards, etc.) mean I have to be realistic about the amount of free time to work on a car.

I did read what you wrote, and responded in kind. Whether you read what I wrote or not, comprehension eluded you.

A new BRZ/86, with a 5yr/60k warranty, designed for the 300hp/300tq it has from the factory, for 40-45k, is not the same as a used first gen, with no warranty, that was designed for 200hp/151tq, boosted to 300hp, for 40-45k.

The Works CARB turbo kit runs 12psi, it's the only CARB legal TURBO kit I've come across that doesn't require the crash bar to be modified.

JR & Edelbrock run 9psi SUPERCHARGERS, they also don't require the crash bar to be modified, but aren't turbo kits, I literally referenced the Edelbrock kit as well.

A corvette is not 2+2; also, where are you finding C6 Z06s for 25-30k? Asking prices start around ~35k for high mileage cars; Anything with under 60k miles on the clock and a clean title starts around 40k, and only goes up from there.

I don't care who builds it, a 2,800 lb RWD car at 300/300 is going to spin the tires too easily to be driven by the masses.

The only other thing I have to say is if you actually want the engine to survive you aren't going to run a positive displacement SC. Also if you track with a turbo you are going to have insane heat issues. I got a c38 with high boost pulley to avoid heat issues, and after putting a bigger koyo rad and hood vents on my car I still have heat issues. I have nothing else to say other than Move those goal posts!





With up to temp 200tw tires 300 crank should be fine, 300 wheel gets kind of sketchy, that is about the point where if I drive like a caveman bad **** happens. Going over that imo as a very average driver is flying way too close to the sun. If i had to do it all over again I would just buy a used c6 z06 instead of making a built and boosted brz that has nearly identical p2w. Way better platform for autocross or track sprint, and classed way better too.

Agree, would end up needing wide/sticky tires and being generally less fun in most ways for most people. Even a G16 detuned to similar power as FA24 would probably be a handful with the boosty torque.

Why does it need to be a 2+2? The back seats in my FRS are pretty much useless.

Is this thread about a Rav4? Highlander? F-150? No; we're talking about a lightweight 2+2 RWD coupe, I just want one with a good power to weight ratio. This is not a car for "The masses".

On the tire spinning comments - my ~2,900lb fox body with a ~58F:42R weight distribution, at 300RWHP w/3.55s & an Eaton LSD had no trouble getting traction on 245/45R17s ~300TW summers. Tires have come a long way since then; you realize the throttle isn't an on/off switch, right?

Scroll all the way back and look at my posts in this thread; I have been saying essentially the same thing from the beginning: I want a 300/300 BRZ/86 from the factory; there were rumors that the G16E-GTS would make it's way into the car, it would be the simplest choice, as neither Toyota or Subaru make an NA-4 that makes 300hp (and if they did, it certainly wouldn't make the torque). I guessed an MSRP around 40k in July for that theoretical trim/model, but would be willing to pay 45k for one if it was made.

You are the one who suggested a boosted first gen, not me, I outlined the issues of putting boost through a high compression engine & a driveline that was never designed for it (heat, increased wear/reduced longevity) you were the one who said "you don't technically need to increase cooling", I disagreed; now you're back peddling and talking about your own heat issues in your boosted BRZ where you've made attempts to address cooling.

I haven't moved a single goal post - I want what I've always wanted, based on a lifetime of owning & modifying performance/muscle cars. A lightweight, 6mt 2+2, RWD car with a power:weight of 1hp:10lbs (or better) from the factory.

If I'm going to heavily modify something, I want it to be older so I'm not restricted by CARB compliance.

I have kids in the back of my car every day; this would be a second car, not replace my daily, but I know I'd likely grab it's keys over my IS keys, until the snow flies that is.

I mean I owned a BRZ on 'tires that have come along way' and you could spin them easily especially if the roads are wet. So now we're upping the HP by 50% and the torque by 100% and everything stays the same but 1" wider tires. I mean you said same power to weight on 245s right... Car for the masses? Yeah any car under $50k is a car for regular people, who will be dumb and crash them very easily with your desired specs.

Throttle on and off? Tell that to my stock brz that could barely move out of my driveway with a dusting of snow on blizzaks.

insurance also likes to see 4 seats vs 2.

That doesn't help BRZ insurance rates stay low

Hint: They are sky high

Listen, if a set of 275 Michelin cup 2s can't protect cars and coffee attendants from an idiot in a Mustang/Camaro/Challenger/Corvette, I'm not expecting 300TW 245 summer tires to save them from an idiot in a 300hp BRZ.

300/300 228/184 are peak numbers, there is not a ~72/116 delta across the rev range between the G16 & FA24.
With regards to my former fox body: a ~300whp Windsor V8 is at 250ftlbs by 2,500rpm, cresting 300lbft by 3,500rpm; a G16 won't see 250ftlbs until ~3,500rpm, hitting peak torque at 4,200RPM.

A 300rwhp fox will be more likely to break the tires loose/harder to launch than a 300chp BRZ with a G16 on the same tires.

Mustang & Camaro can be had for low/mid 40k with a significantly better power to weight ratio than what I'm looking for, and those are the garden variety GT/SS1 models, not the more powerful trims.

Nissan 350Z was 306hp/268tq at 3,300lbs
Nissan 370Z was 332hp/270tq at 3,400lbs
-Nismo 370Z was 350hp/276tq at 3,300lbs
C5/C6 Vettes were 345-500hp at 3,1xxlbs
Base C7 Vettes were 455hp at 3,400lbs

10:1 isn't an insane power to weight ratio for a performance car, I don't know why everyone seems to think it is.

There is a huge difference between "I can get the tires to spin, especially if the road is wet" and "tires spin too easy because the car has too much power". Were you on the stock eco tires? or were you on a decent set of summers in the 300-350TW range?

Even though I've said this is a car that wouldn't be driven in the winter (and I actually did drive that fox year round on snows): If your stock BRZ had trouble getting traction on blizzaks in "a dusting of snow" it's not the fault of the car.