Jump to content
Luke

2021 GT86 and BRZ

Recommended Posts

Has anyone else heard the rumours that the new car is going to be on the same chassis with only a mild power increase using a non turbo 2.4 boxer engine. 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/the-latest-report-on-the-2021-toyota-86-and-subaru-brz-will-piss-you-off-ar188506.amp.html

I think there might be some truth to this as surely there would of been lots of spy shots of a camouflaged test car driving around to test bed all the new components. 
Will the new one even look any different as we’ve only seen artists renditions rather than an official release from Toyota or Subaru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many things in that article that I don't agree with. The obvious one is a move to the 2.4l engine. Forget the numbers, it will feel much more flexible in real-world acceleration and pickup. Some people seem to be expecting a Supra for 86 money. Not going to happen. We should be grateful that such a car still exists in this age of anodyne electric bore-fest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumours of next having turbo or a bit higher displacement have surfaced again and again every year. Never happened in past years, and high (imho 90%) probability won't happen in future either. Especially now, when to past reasons is added another one - such souped up twin competing with low-trim 4-cyl supra.

Imho these rumours stem from two things, most obvious being simple wish for having more stock power by many that are less appreciating for what it is and expecting more strait line oumph (ignoring that it will go against original conception of "good enough for cheap" and certain to add 5-10K to sticker price, rather cutting potential buyers amount that can afford it, or at least nullifying any actual profits to manufacturer), and second being usual journalistic guess .. but what if it will happen, then their yet another rumour/guess will add some extra credibility and extra visits to their site/press/person voicing that rumour, increasing advertisement profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that it will use a different engine is a statement of the obvious though, it's founded on simple facts. If Toyota/Subaru want a car to last through a full life cycle (around 8 years), that car will need a turbo or a different engine running in a lower state of tune just to make the same power as the current car.

They simply won't be able to keep using the current engine - or any NA 2-litre - unless they strangle it even further. The FA20 barely scrapes through current emissions standards.

 

Saying it will use a specific engine is a bit more speculative, but I'd be very surprised if it's something other than the 2.4, probably with around 215bhp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those articles that wholly misses the point. The point is, it isn't turbocharged. How many manual NA RWD cars are out there still? Apart from the MX5, not many. I too expect it's going to be  the FA24 in NA form with around 220bhp. The trouble is using a Subaru engine is unlikely to fit in with the TGNA platform for obvious reasons. It would also ring true that it probably won't be hugely different from the current model.  The other issue is that there has been so much speculation that the sources available have nothing that is confirmed. 

I always look to my friends at Toyota to inform me of what is happening. There has been absolutely nothing as of yet. I think we may be waiting till September before we get any confirmation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And i doubt 2.4 bit. If maker of very best 4-cyl NA engines, honda, gave up, and made current gen type-r turbo .. then i expect it clear sign that our FA20 was already one of last high-perf NA engines. Emissions requirements simply make NA engines either too expensive to design to perform well and fit in regs (remember that twins should be cheap foremost, and they don't sell in large enough volumes to recoup R&D well). Someone like ferrari can afford to still make NA, toyota/subaru .. most probably will just follow honda and many other manufacturers, that already moved to smaller displacement + turbo. Emissions dictate that these days, and car manufacturers are in this business to make money, not loose it, by trying to keep at past paradigms despite changing times and against business sense. Yes, we, as enthusiasts will loose some things (and more the reason to appreciate our twins for what they are and what probably we won't get in future cars), but times change and world/manufacturers move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honda however was pushing for track dominance as apposed to driver involvement, to pull that off they needed boost.

However, I do agree the most logical option in terms of emissions is to turbo the car.

Both Subaru and Toyota have never been shy of boost in the past.

Curveball - The Yaris's 3 cylinder turbo has had a lot of investment to push it to the point it's at, it would be odd for it to only sit in that platform. Then again, the 4EFTE only made it into the Starlets and it depends on Subarus willingness to get it into the chassis.

I may have had too much coffee prior to writing this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reasoning, @Church is based on comparing the GT with an FK8 which is in a different class/sector where all hot hatches of this type are turbocharged. The GT86 does not fit within that niche, so I am not convinced that is a good argument. Whilst I agree, that emissions lead to the likelihood of the new car having a turbocharged engine, there is absolutely nothing that confirms this. 

On another note and please, no offence intended as I know English is not your first language, but it's 'lose', not 'loose'. Think of it as to 'win or lose', with loose being the opposite as tight. I know so many native English speakers use poor grammar, but saying 'loose' when it should be 'lose' really ruins your eloquence. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Addymk2 said:

 

Curveball - The Yaris's 3 cylinder turbo has had a lot of investment to push it to the point it's at, it would be odd for it to only sit in that platform. Then again, the 4EFTE only made it into the Starlets and it depends on Subarus willingness to get it into the chassis.

I may have had too much coffee prior to writing this post.

I'm not sure about this one, though the power output is probably what everyone would like to see in a GT86. I have heard rumours, but that's all it is that it will end up in some hot Corolla in the future, but it is quite a specialised engine with a very high specific output. I am not sure it would be so easy to produce in the high numbers required should it be used cross platform as there is some hand finishing involved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still make NA work, the issue is meeting emissions with high specific output. That's why the FA20 is (allegedly) 100bhp/litre but a NA FA24 would be a good chunk less (<90bhp/litre). The Civic Type R is totally different: it's over 300bhp now, which would've needed a big displacement NA engine. So of course they went turbo! The last NA Type R, the FN2, put out 198bhp.

Subaru/Toyota aren't planning to increase the power significantly, and a 2.4 putting out ~215bhp is perfectly plausible. Unless Toyota/Subaru wanted more power (which they've shown many times they don't) or a significantly downsized engine, they will increase displacement rather than using a turbo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, spikyone said:

Subaru/Toyota aren't planning to increase the power significantly, and a 2.4 putting out ~215bhp is perfectly plausible. Unless Toyota/Subaru wanted more power (which they've shown many times they don't) or a significantly downsized engine, they will increase displacement rather than using a turbo.

I think, exactly this, Toyota are not looking to significantly increase power, the balance is actually right where they want it and to give it a load more power misses the point and USP of what the car is designed to do. It makes sense on a lot of levels too. I am not sure that there will be a 2.0 turbo Supra sold in the UK, but it certainly gives Toyota the option of introducing one, which would be far less likely if the 2.0 Supra and GT86 end up with similar power levels. There is also the GR Yaris, but I would not expect the new GT to have more power than that, so a figure around the 220bhp fits in as one would expect with the rest of the Toyota range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lauren said:

Your reasoning, @Church is based on comparing the GT with an FK8 which is in a different class/sector where all hot hatches of this type are turbocharged. The GT86 does not fit within that niche, so I am not convinced that is a good argument. Whilst I agree, that emissions lead to the likelihood of the new car having a turbocharged engine, there is absolutely nothing that confirms this.

I had mentioned type-r not as car class, but rather honda, as in my eyes best 4-cyl NA engine maker. I could have aswell mention S2000 (but not produced anymore) as closer class-wise, but mentioned type-r just as one of those that hanged on (really good) NA for longest .. and with which honda also gave up, which imho illustrates trends very well. NA got too expensive to stick with in performance engine class while still going along stricter and stricter emission regs, whichever the car class it's in. Only supercar makers may stick with NA in some of their cars longer, but that won't do for mass car manufacturer engine choice anymore. FI (maybe even electric charger), hybrid, full-electric .. but no NA enywhere but supercars & low-performance powerty spec or generic family cars. (also leaving aside NA high-displacement engines from american manufacturers. Heavy LS certainly would be bad match for something like twins balance-wise, and even muscle carmakers seem to be moving to smaller, with FI, engines (though it looks like moving from 5 or 6 lr displacement to 3lr+FI, eg. ecoboost mustang).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m personally glad that they’ve not switched to the new chassis with a turbo engine because I don’t think they’d get that sweet balancing chassis/ engine using one of the new modular Lego chassis that VAG group like to use to save a lot of money. 
I’ve said that I would be happier if they just stopped making the car altogether because they set out to achieve what they wanted and it was always down to the owners/tuning companies to fettle with them as much as they pleased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can still make NA work, the issue is meeting emissions with high specific output. That's why the FA20 is (allegedly) 100bhp/litre but a NA FA24 would be a good chunk less ( Subaru/Toyota aren't planning to increase the power significantly, and a 2.4 putting out ~215bhp is perfectly plausible. Unless Toyota/Subaru wanted more power (which they've shown many times they don't) or a significantly downsized engine, they will increase displacement rather than using a turbo.
You might be right on emissins but with that specific output 100 BHP/L would've even possible with the dual injection D4S toyota tech. Hence the same 2L on the impreza has about 160 bhp. I will expect if toyota D4S is fitted to the 2.4L ascent engine , we must be able to get to 240 and more torque than pure DI. Emissions , whether its 174g/km that we have now or a bit more, toyota can easily manage the overall fleet CO2 with their hybrid tech and hence they are not worried about carrying the Supra and GT86, when other manufacturers are slowing down or stopping their sports car line up in Europe.. Case in point Mazda. Not easy to get the MX5.. Supply restricted. Am not sure how Subaru will cope with EU emissions unless they join hands with Toyota. A bit like Tesla and Fiat deal where its them together for joint fleet.

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BRZ-123 said:

You might be right on emissins but with that specific output 100 BHP/L would've even possible with the dual injection D4S toyota tech. Hence the same 2L on the impreza has about 160 bhp. I will expect if toyota D4S is fitted to the 2.4L ascent engine , we must be able to get to 240 and more torque than pure DI. Emissions , whether its 174g/km that we have now or a bit more, toyota can easily manage the overall fleet CO2 with their hybrid tech and hence they are not worried about carrying the Supra and GT86, when other manufacturers are slowing down or stopping their sports car line up in Europe.. Case in point Mazda. Not easy to get the MX5.. Supply restricted. Am not sure how Subaru will cope with EU emissions unless they join hands with Toyota. A bit like Tesla and Fiat deal where its them together for joint fleet.

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk
 

It's not related to fleet CO2 at all. The FA20 barely scrapes through Euro 6 emissions, which restricts the amount of other pollutants but doesn't have any CO2 limit whatsoever. Technically Toyota could emit as much CO2 as they want with the amount of hybrids they sell, and still keep the fleet average low. The issue is the other pollutants. Subaru/Toyota actually had to recalibrate the FA20 (for the MY16) to make it compliant with Euro 6 - and it's the same reason Europe doesn't get the performance upgrades that other markets got on the facelift.

They won't get 240bhp out of the FA24 version whilst making it compliant with future emissions standards. Getting 240bhp is easy, meeting emissions requirements is where they'll struggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not related to fleet CO2 at all. The FA20 barely scrapes through Euro 6 emissions, which restricts the amount of other pollutants but doesn't have any CO2 limit whatsoever. Technically Toyota could emit as much CO2 as they want with the amount of hybrids they sell, and still keep the fleet average low. The issue is the other pollutants. Subaru/Toyota actually had to recalibrate the FA20 (for the MY16) to make it compliant with Euro 6 - and it's the same reason Europe doesn't get the performance upgrades that other markets got on the facelift.
They won't get 240bhp out of the FA24 version whilst making it compliant with future emissions standards. Getting 240bhp is easy, meeting emissions requirements is where they'll struggle.
A bit of a tangent but golf with their GTi had to put a GPF Gasoline Particulate Filter as they desperately wanted to avoid hybrid power train and keep it purist fossil fuel.
Am sure a GPF will do the trick, if other brands have why not them

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be fun if two Yaris 3 cylinder engines could be stitched together to form a short boxer 6, sitting right behind the front axle....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BRZ-123 said:

A bit of a tangent but golf with their GTi had to put a GPF Gasoline Particulate Filter as they desperately wanted to avoid hybrid power train and keep it purist fossil fuel.
Am sure a GPF will do the trick, if other brands have why not them emoji848.png

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk
 

GR Yaris has a petrol particulate filter (PPF). It's the reason for a 10bhp decrease compared to the JDM versions. Am sure the new GT86 will have one too. Can't find out if it's mandatory or not, but I suspect it will be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GR Yaris has a petrol particulate filter (PPF). It's the reason for a 10bhp decrease compared to the JDM versions. Am sure the new GT86 will have one too. Can't find out if it's mandatory or not, but I suspect it will be. 
Thank you. So then 240 bhp from a 2.4L minus 10 for PPF, Net 230 BHP.. I wish tuning was that simple against all the constraints. We now need to know the facts , than speculate on the back of rubbish articles from not trusted auto journalism

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think another boxer engine would be a wrong move, could Toyota not fit the 2 ltr BMW engine to the new 86 it would seem the simple option.
Why do you say no Boxer? Reliable and low COG. Toyota have a share in Subaru and also importing engines from Germany / Austria for a Japan manufactured car and in a Subaru factory makes no sense and will not happen. The partnership is based on Toyota Subaru and not BMW. So its unlikely.

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boxer is not the only means to get COG of car low. New Supra has lower COG then twins even with much higher and heavier inline-6. And boxer has drawbacks like limiting space for wheel clearance (imho main reason why our cars stock have relatively shallow max steering angle vs other cars of similar size) and is more PITA to work on due reduced clearance in engine bay (recalling official procedure on changing plugs .. with lifting engine up for that). I'd rather wish for Honda inline-4 high-rpm screamer with 9K redline :) and more advanced variable valve tech. Losses in COG could have been a bit compensated with lower overall weight of engine and even higher power per displacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Porsche? :)

In my eyes boxer in twins has only one characteristic by which it's above alternatives. It allowed for car to look better, as in higher engines + current pedestrian safety regs in other engine layout cases would ask for supra-ish fat bulb up front, instead of low ferrari-wedge sleekness. On other accounts .. COG from engine alone is overrated, powercurve nothing special and many complain about torque dip for it, and pure performance/higher rpms imho are easier to design in inline engine imho, with potentially lower weight rest being same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×