FT-86 to be named FR-S...

[cracka]

Exactly. Time will tell. Say no more...

Thank fuck you enlightened me.

BRB taking both turbos off v12.

[Nero]

And heres a list of BRZ/86 parts...

http://hosted-p0.vresp.com/1070939/a63bc0175d/ARCHIVE

How the hell does AVO justify: "The AVO rear suspension mount reinforcement bracket corrects a significant weak point on the BRZ and FRS. The standard stabilizer mount point is very flexible, and has been known to break when stronger rear stabilizer bars are fitted. Or even with standard rear stabilizer bars when the car is driven too sportily! The AVO mount fixes this problem in an elegant manner, and is compatible with any rear stabilizer bar that uses the standard rear bracket, including the AVO stabilizer bar upgrades."
How long have the cars been released?

[noobd]

the only thing i would be worried about is the fact its made by subaru. historically subaru arent known for over engineering their motors.

and justen.. would you have gotten that same power with boltons from a 1uz vvti?

Nope. VVTi editions have toothpick rods.

[noobd]

That Avo suspension mount bracket seems like a load of shit.

[Nero]

Well I can explain it this way (and in doing so I'm not agreeing with the position): UZFE is what...25+ years old? (designed/developed 1985-1989 released 1989?) meant for a luxury car or at least heavy cars? The age is significant as modern (i.e. designed past 5 years) engines are far more optimised for emissions and weight/size than 25 years ago. There is far less excess fat on them. Re purpose simplest way to improve engine NVH 'back then' was to add mass to engine, particularly as market segment needed prestige.
FWIW I think the ft/brz engine could take a small amount of boost running on E85/PULP, but it will be tight.

How about you explain how you know this? Seeing there are quite a few here that have excellent evidence to the contrary....my 411rwkw from a stock n/a UZ with bolts ons as an example

[Billzilla]

Well I can explain it this way (and in doing so I'm not agreeing with the position): UZFE is what...25+ years old? (designed/developed 1985-1989 released 1989?) meant for a luxury car or at least heavy cars? The age is significant as modern (i.e. designed past 5 years) engines are far more optimised for emissions and weight/size than 25 years ago. There is far less excess fat on them. Re purpose simplest way to improve engine NVH 'back then' was to add mass to engine, particularly as market segment needed prestige.
FWIW I think the ft/brz engine could take a small amount of boost running on E85/PULP, but it will be tight.

Pretty much.
I looked at various engines to turbo for the Mallock, one of which was the Toyota 1NZFE 1300cc. I decided that the block would be too weak for the amount of boost & power that I want so I had to go back to the old reliable Suzuki G13B. But I'm sure that the NZ engines would be able to take 5psi - 10psi without too much trouble.

[Jim]

I'm waiting for the LS1 kit :p

[cracka]

How the hell does AVO justify: "The AVO rear suspension mount reinforcement bracket corrects a significant weak point on the BRZ and FRS. The standard stabilizer mount point is very flexible, and has been known to break when stronger rear stabilizer bars are fitted. Or even with standard rear stabilizer bars when the car is driven too sportily! The AVO mount fixes this problem in an elegant manner, and is compatible with any rear stabilizer bar that uses the standard rear bracket, including the AVO stabilizer bar upgrades."
How long have the cars been released?

Easily. Every gen 4 liberty that gets an upgraded rear sway bar, and anything more than 215 economybus tyres snaps the swaybar shackle mount off.

And the BRZ is identical to those.

And I use the AVO mounts on the gen 4.

And the AVO mounts have not broken, unlike the stock ones which snapped clean off the subframe.

Which are identical to the BRZ ones, once again.

Hope this helped. AVO = justified, due to 8 years of seeing the BP/BL liberty faults, and now GR impreza faults, and low and behold, what do you think the rear subframe of a BRZ looks identical to?

[Race Spec]

Well I can explain it this way (and in doing so I'm not agreeing with the position): UZFE is what...25+ years old? (designed/developed 1985-1989 released 1989?) meant for a luxury car or at least heavy cars? The age is significant as modern (i.e. designed past 5 years) engines are far more optimised for emissions and weight/size than 25 years ago. There is far less excess fat on them. Re purpose simplest way to improve engine NVH 'back then' was to add mass to engine, particularly as market segment needed prestige.
FWIW I think the ft/brz engine could take a small amount of boost running on E85/PULP, but it will be tight.

That was more or less along the lines of what I was thinking.

I recall back when MX5 and 350Z turbo kits were released (for example) and when these things were squeezed too hard, it ended up in tears. AFAIK, feeding a small amount of boost into a big capacity V8 is always a safer bet than doing the same to a 2.0L 4 cylinder if properly tuned. I always thought that it comes down to hp per cube...?

[Race Spec]

Dp

[Billzilla]

That was more or less along the lines of what I was thinking.

I recall back when MX5 and 350Z turbo kits were released (for example) and when these things were squeezed too hard, it ended up in tears. AFAIK, feeding a small amount of boost into a big capacity V8 is always a safer bet than doing the same to a 2.0L 4 cylinder if properly tuned. I always thought that it comes down to hp per cube...?

So you're saying that adding too much boost to an engine that can't take too much boost will break it, and that a big engine with boost will make more power than a small engine with boost?
Wow.

[Nero]

I understand your reasoning...but AVO are effectively claiming a long standing weakness on a car that has just been released and that no one has upgraded bits on. Also similarity visually does not mean 'the same as' in function. I suspect that some of the breakage could be down to lack of compliance in poly bushes.

Easily. Every gen 4 liberty that gets an upgraded rear sway bar, and anything more than 215 economybus tyres snaps the swaybar shackle mount off.

And the BRZ is identical to those.

And I use the AVO mounts on the gen 4.

And the AVO mounts have not broken, unlike the stock ones which snapped clean off the subframe.

Which are identical to the BRZ ones, once again.

Hope this helped. AVO = justified, due to 8 years of seeing the BP/BL liberty faults, and now GR impreza faults, and low and behold, what do you think the rear subframe of a BRZ looks identical to?

[cracka]

Compliance my arse. They break with stock bars and wide rubber. Looks same = is same. Mass produced car from the spare parts bin. Subaru spent 15 years developing the rear end steel/welds/etc. Means same.

[mc68]

I understand your reasoning...but AVO are effectively claiming a long standing weakness on a car that has just been released and that no one has upgraded bits on. Also similarity visually does not mean 'the same as' in function. I suspect that some of the breakage could be down to lack of compliance in poly bushes.

theres more than a 'similarity' about it. The rear ends are Identical to GR imprezas.... They will break, Forgive that company for jumping the gun, and perhaps not wording it the right way.

[mc68]

..