
|
|
Mike Kojima posted on December 22, 2011 02:09

A Tech Look Under the Scion FR-S!
By Mike Kojima
Recently the Scion FR-S or Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ has been officially unveiled to the motoring public. Most of the stuff about the car on the web has been pretty pictures and cool videos of Ken Gushi sliding around in the rain. Now that the first close to production Scion FR-S’s have been officially rolled out and press embargos have been lifted we will give you a technical look at the car's underpinnings with some engineering commentary.
 |
| The FR-S suspension is conventional MacPherson strut. The Greddy car had a prototype set of Greddy coilovers. The only adjustment in the front alignment is the toe which is typical. No provision for camber or caster adjustment is present on the stock car, at least this stock prototype! The front suspension has a good amount of caster, king pin inclination and trail which is good for camber gain under cornering, straight line stability, good on center feel and good self aligning torque with minimal scrub. These aspects of the front end geometry are reminiscent of the Nissan S Chassis and older BMW's, good things. |
You are probably dying to know more about the chassis and suspension. Is the car the real deal or is it marketeering hype riding on the DNA of the old AE86. Is it or isn’t it? Well let’s go and take a look. The car we got to see carefully is the black street car built by Greddy which was on display at the official Scion reveal a few weeks ago.
 |
| The prototype coilovers may have little droop travel as the car was not lowered much but the position of the lower control arm and ball joint indicated a pretty low front roll center, at least with these particular coilovers. The front control arm was perpendicular to the ground under full droop. This means that the roll center when plotted will most likely be under ground . Implications of this are a high roll couple and lack of negative camber gain under roll. This means that the car will need stiff front springs and or anti sway bars and a lot of static negative camber when lowered or the car will tend to lose front grip at the limit, at least when lowered significantly. A lowered FR-S is going to benefit from extended stud ball joints and tie rod ends like those that Whiteline sells for the EVO and WRX. |
At the event our freelancer John N. Frink and Annie Sam got a fleeting view of the undersides of the car and managed to snap a few pictures. A few days later we managed to look at the underneath of the Greddy car while picking up some stuff for Project EVO X. Since the car is no longer a secret and the specs have been released, the nice folks at Greddy let us take some pictures of the underside.
 |
| The tie rod is out of plane from the lower control am and the inner tie rod joint is out of line from the pivot. It looks like the FR-S will toe in under dive and roll which is good for stability but not necessarily the best for steering response. The Nissan S chassis for instance has a close to ideal steering rack and tie rod location for little bump steer. The FR-S's location is more indicative of stability under braking. |
More FR-S Content!
Thursday, December 22, 2011 6:06 AM
The more I learn about suspension geometry the less I know. Anyway, I hope this marks a shift in the auto industry towards cheap driver's cars. The gauntlet is down, the first salvo fired, yada, yada, yada...
Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:36 AM
I think LCAs would be the first thing I'd buy on one of these cars. How long will it take to bring something like that to market?
Thursday, December 22, 2011 10:39 AM
The more I read about this car the more Im convinced its all marketing HYPE! Shitty brakes, shitty tires, mediocre suspension design, 0-60 in more than 7 sec, priced nearly the same as a WRX, etc. Maybe it will be amazing, but Id put money on it needing serious after market development before that happens. Out of the box this will be lack luster IMO.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 11:16 AM
The stock brakes are not shitty for a car of this weight, two piston base WRX brakes are a lot for this car in stock form. Brembos would raise the price of the car around $2000 then it starts to get into a higher price point. The suspension is not mediocre either, like the article says, it is well designed for the car's power level, not to many cars with 200 hp have a good suspension set up for 500 hp. The AE86 was zero to 60 in 9 seconds with a 16.9 quarter mile time but people loved that car and it was fun to drive. If you want more car to start with, get a 370Z or a Mustang. They cost more though, are bigger and heavier. For something about the same, a Miata is about right, but then again you have lower grade of brakes,suspension designed for lower hp, etc.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 11:51 AM
So it has brakes, power, suspension of a small car with the price taq almost equal to a WRX. Thats my complaint. This car should be a 20k car, but is now 25k+. And Im not just a power snob or brand loyalist. I like what I find cool, and this car has yet to do it. Its all just a pissing match though until the real deal hits the road.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 11:56 AM
***Mike pretty much hit every point directly on the head. As for the simple suspension components, I think release time will depend on how much testing (mileage and usage) the manufacturer wants to put on them. The front lower control arm and rear toe link are stupid simple!! Dallas, I'll hold off until we hear the actual price tags. Also keep in mind that this engine probably doesn't carry much price savings over the EJ255 and the car comes with some standard things that the WRX doesn't.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 12:01 PM
It has big brakes, lots of power and excellent suspension for a small car of this price point. It is a different type of car than a base WRX. You can complain that the base WRX is underpowered, underbraked for the weight and power potential and the buttery transmission nukes like glass when you try to put much more than stock power through it, oh and it is slightly more expensive than a FR-S. The argument goes both ways and I think the FR-S wins this one. Put it this way, I am going to get one as soon as it is available and I don't get excited about cars much now days!
Thursday, December 22, 2011 12:53 PM
Mike, you're the man! Exquisite details, great shots, the enthusiast is no longer uninformed. Consulting? I think you just laid out an entire aftermarket parts plan for the aftermarket manufacturers. Haha, I knew a project FR-S/BRZ was lurking around the corner!? Those brake lines could also use a braided SS upgrade. As far as the price point, I agree that I would've liked to see it closer to 20k than 25k for sure but I've come to the realization just recently that I've been living with 10yr old price points, in my head, for new cars. I mean, Jeep Wranglers sell for more than 30k new now. That seems ridiculous to me just because I remember when they were in the low 20s. Even at my youthful age, I get to say sometimes I'm living with the memories of the past...
Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:23 PM
What are initial thoughts for stock class autocross, where the duller points of the stock geometry and bushings will be tested? Next year SCCA Solo will allow either the front OR rear swaybar/endlinks to be upgraded, the first "major" Stock class rule change in years. Crash bolts may very well be an option for the car, too. Could it hang with the MX-5 and RX-8 in C-Stock, or should we hoping for D-Stock against the Integra Type-R and friends?
Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:36 PM
@ Dallas J: This car isn't designed to dominate the drag strip, it's supposed (and we'll see if it makes good on that promise) to be a light, relatively inexpensive, sports car. That doesn't mean it needs 300HP, and a lot of its value will show up when you drive it up PCH, not when you look at timesheets after a trip to the drag strip or road course. Numbers are cool, but the cars that are classics were fun to drive and put a smile on your face, not dominated every contest of speed they entered. @ Daewoo: I think the stock control arms are more than adequate for most people. Adding ball joint spacers will correct much of the geometry issues when lowering. Or, you could leave it stock height (or close to it), as it looks pretty good that way.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:49 PM
That's the same suspension and uprights as an 08+ impreza, so the 04-07 rear calipers and rotors will not fit. You will most likely need to use 08+ calipers and an 08 sti rear rotor re-drilled to 5x100. And that does look like an 08+ caliper painted gold- the shape and brake line fitting are a bit different from the early cars. And unfortunately the Whiteline RCA isn't going to fit, the ball joint is a lot different on a Subaru. I do like that this places the pivot down in the control arm and not up in the upright.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 2:10 PM
Are you sure about the rear brakes so I can change it?
Thursday, December 22, 2011 2:12 PM
Looking forward to Project FR-S! What will you guys cook up for this car? hmm...
Thursday, December 22, 2011 2:15 PM
yes. in the front everything up to the 2012 sti's calipers will fit, but in the rear it has to be 08+ Stoptech needs to make their 08+ sti rear rotor dual drilled.

Thursday, December 22, 2011 3:10 PM
Mike, Thanks for the awesome article. I am also super excited for this car to come out. A few notes: - Subaru typically uses the upper strut mounting bolt (on the hub, not at the top) for camber adjustment. is that not the case for this car? - I also don't get the 5 x 100, but seeing as this car basically seems to use off the shelf WRX components, I'm not too surprised. Only the STI uses 5 x 114 wheels, but the hubs are different and not interchangeable with WRX axles, struts etc... Also weird since I don't think any Toyotas use 5 x 100. - I have no idea why anybody would change the front control arms. They are strong and I doubt major geometry changes are needed other than the mentioned roll centre adjustments. A good option for upgrades would also be the Group N bushings from Subaru. They are firmer, but still rubber, so a bit more compliant for every day use. The Group N parts are easy to get and generally good for any performance use. I'm sure many of the Impreza Group N stuff would fit this car. I'm such a Subaru dork.

Thursday, December 22, 2011 6:57 PM
I'm pretty excited about this car. True, it isn't the fastest 0-60 for the money, nor does it have a pimp Al wishbone suspension. It does offer a package that's not out there right now, which appeals greatly to me as someone who has owned 240SXs and an E36 M3. Stock it is really light for a car in 2012, the engine has adequate power for a momentum style car, and the suspension seems to be pretty solid. Plenty of great cars use McP struts, no issue with that in my book. There's nothing out there like this; the MX-5 is a two seat convertible with less power and seats, and pretty weak styling, while the RX8 is axed and has weird styling and questionable reliability along with horrid fuel economy and a very peaky powerband. It also weighs a bit more. The V6 Stang, Gen coupe, etc. are larger and heavier. I'll consider buying one for sure. New- I doubt it, definitely not in the first year. But as long as nothing disastrous crops up, this sounds like a great fun DD with autocross and track potential. 2800 lbs, RWD, stock helical LSD, suspension designed with dynamics in mind- this is everything I wished my first S14 240SX was 8 years ago.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:22 PM
@ErikO - Every generation of FWD Celica and the Scion Tc are 5x100.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 10:06 PM
I guesstimated some power numbers. It should put down roughly 167whp stock. With intake, headers, exhaust, test pipe, and a tune, I think it'll put down about 189whp if maintaining the stock rev limit or 7400 rpms. If it can be bumped up to 8k rpms, then maybe 216whp. What the engine really needs is a built bottom-end and boost :)
Thursday, December 22, 2011 10:14 PM
Jim, I think this car will be faster than the RX8. It should have a more usable power band for one. The RX8 has 225 width tires on a 3065lb car. This car has 215 width tires on a ~2700 lb car, so this car has ~10% advantage in tire width vs. weight. I think it also has a torque:weight advantage over the RX8 with similar power:weight.
Thursday, December 22, 2011 11:26 PM
More good news from MotoIQ! Thanks Mike!
Friday, December 23, 2011 12:20 AM
ErikO, this car did not have an eccentric on the spindle bolts. Jim R, sorry I am not up on the latest in Autocross classifications and whats hot. I would think this car could be killer if it was classed correctly. I think this car with about 350 whp from a well sized snappy turbo would be super fun.
Friday, December 23, 2011 12:55 AM
surprised they don't have an eccentric bolt. oh well, nothing a die grinder can't fix.
Friday, December 23, 2011 3:11 AM
Brilliant article Mike! @MCarp22, all AWD Celicas had 5x100 also! VW uses this pattern on some cars, but thats about it. Out of stock imho its the best daily driver. For racing - every oem car needs aftermarket tuning. We still dont know about OEM sport versions of FRS/BRZ/86, TRD seems to have modified 86 suspension, but who knows by what margin..
Friday, December 23, 2011 3:17 AM
Great article Mike ! Quick (dumb) question, since the 5X100 bolt pattern is not very common, how about swapping the whole STi hub?
Friday, December 23, 2011 3:25 AM
@JDMized the hubs are different (fix points). Some crazy aftermarket company might create some wild suspension modifications for STI hub, but that would be going in the wrong direction.
Friday, December 23, 2011 6:41 AM
So 5x100 is not a frequently used pattern, but the WRX is enormously popular and there are lots of wheels for it, so I don't think this is a big deal. Finding something in the 17x8-17x9.5 range that fits should be cake unless the offset is bizarre, but I doubt it.
Friday, December 23, 2011 7:14 AM
It's much harder than you'd think to find a nice wide 17" wheel with the correct offset for an Impreza in 5x100. One of the reasons I swapped to 5x114 hubs on my 04 STi. The other reasons were that the 5x100 hubs were weaker, which wore out quickly on the STi, as well as causing caliper knockback on track. Super irritating, but not sure if either of these will be issues with the GT 86.
Friday, December 23, 2011 9:46 AM
Even worse if you have a 5x100 VW, as anything not made by BBS has offsets better suited for a Subaru. Oh well. Easier to go out than in at least.
Friday, December 23, 2011 10:40 AM
Mike, I should have some parts that will bolt right up for adjustable bump steer and to replace that inner bushing. Stoked on the layout here since it looks like we will have a good headstart on the aftermarket :)
Saturday, December 24, 2011 4:04 AM
thera are a few 17x9 5x100 wheels in the appropriate offset out there from volk, enkei, rota, 949, etc. I don't think it will be too hard to do a 5z114 conversion, but I'll wait to get my hands on one before I expand on that idea. Also I forgot to mention something about the brakes: The calipers are on the front of the rotor, and sti brembos have staggered piston sizes. So to use them, you will have to swap the bleeders and crossover tubes to the opposite side of the caliper or else you will have severely uneven pad wear. FHI 4-pots don't have staggered pistons so you could just swap them left to right.
Saturday, December 24, 2011 8:36 AM
I love the article for sure. It oozes the details that all of us want to see. One thing is for sure is that until all of us have been behind the wheel of the production car I think we should keep the pissing and moaning to a minimum. The details Mike has shared are REAL world details that give us some insight in to the performance. I wouldn't deduce too much negativity until you (all of us) have driven the thing!
Monday, December 26, 2011 4:37 PM
@ Jamal: I don't think you could stuff a 17x9 under this car without seriously stretching some tires though...
 
|
|
MotoIQ Proudly Presents Our Partners:
|