ScionFred

iTrader: (1)

Saved for posterity. LOL

So by your fanboy logic, a few hundred miles at just over 400whp guarantees 100% reliability at anything less than 400whp?

You could be right (anything is possible regardless of how improbable it is) but I can't help wondering why Lexus chose to use a heavier duty trans for the 300bhp IS350 if this one is as robust as you claim it is.

BTW, didn't someone break their "nothing to worry about" manual trans already?

rhythmnsmoke

Car went air born from a high speed run. When it landed, a shift fork didn't like that from what I understand. That was at 461whp. Car went 11.3 @ 127mph when it had 438whp.

If you don't consider this being "above" expectations, then you are just trying to be thickheaded for the sake of being thickheaded.

ScionFred

iTrader: (1)

Let's just say that I remain far less confident than you seem to be regarding the capabilities of the stock '86' transmissions to withstand long term abuse at double the hp and tq levels they were designed to handle. I am surprised that the AT is holding up at all to 400+whp. That's far beyond my expectations but I still wouldn't try it without at least budgeting for a trans rebuild or replacement. IMO ~300whp is a more realistic HP level for a reliable AT DD.

As for the HP being acheived from the FA20 with FI, it's pretty far beyond what I expected. It seems that E85 is THE solution to FI with 12.5:1 CR and it makes perfect sense. I think it's great and applaud those who've accomplished so much already. Unfortunately, FI + 12.5:1CR + stock internals + 91-93 pump gas is still a pretty risky proposition even at 150whp/liter. Probably best to add WMI and monitor those EGTs carefully if, like me, you can't run E85 exclusively due to lack of availability.

rhythmnsmoke

That's what I said in the comment you quoted and called fanboy logic. In my opinion, the multiple dyno pulls, track passes and daily driving at 400+whp they have been doing has put some validity to my logic that 300whp should be daily driveable and livable with reliability. You may need to see more to validate, but I've seen enough for my own personal comfort to make that assessment.




All of the shops of course are not pushing pump gas that hard. It has been between 270-300whp on pump and that is where everyone for the most part has been leaving the numbers when it comes to pump gas. So across the board it's collectively displaying....

300whp on pump gas
400+whp on e85

ScionFred

iTrader: (1)

You said "300whp or something less than 400". That includes 399whp and I can't agree with that. I can agree with you that ~300whp appears likely to be reliable with either trans. Obviously the MT will handle more with clutch upgrades.

I have to admit that the prospect of turbocharging the FA20 is looking far better than I previously expected. Great driver's car, sports car and tuner car. It might even be my next car.

rhythmnsmoke

Com'on man...lol. That's a bit **** there. Who is going to say it includes 399whp? I would expect a little common sense out of an individual to know that difference between 399whp and 400whp in terms of reliability is "none".



Yea it's not looking to shabby to say the least.

Roller_Toaster

iTrader: (1)

I can't wait to run into one in my xB on a local Ky road :D

Well, not run INTO one...you know what I mean.

__________________

rhythmnsmoke

Ky isn't that far away from me. You can "run into me" in my tC

Roller_Toaster

iTrader: (1)

that would be fun! I love tearing up a twisty road with a fellow enthusiast :D

ScionFred

iTrader: (1)

C'mon man.... when you say that there is nothing to worry about with the FRS auto trans at 300whp or something lower than 400 because one has been holding up for weeks at 438whp, how should one interpret that? If not 399whp, how about 375whp? 350? just how much whp is nothing to worry about?

I said 399 but really meant 300-399 because I am far from convinced that anything over 300 is nothing to worry about with a trans that Toyota didn't trust to handle 300bhp.

rhythmnsmoke

You should interpret that by using some common sense. If one goes on to suspect that...."Oh he said below 400whp, so I should be good at 399whp"...well to that I would say, you lack common sense. Ultimately it boils down to what you feel comfortable with leaving the power level at. I would even do 350whp. The lower torque I'm sure aids in helping prolong components. It's not like you spend 24/7 blasting around at full boost.

rhythmnsmoke

Tracks though is where we can open up the throttle and go as fast as we want. All the while not worrying about going to jail.

ScionFred

iTrader: (1)

So when you said that something less than 400whp is nothing to worry about, what you really meant was that 350whp is a realistic upper limit that you would attempt yourself. Thanks, that's all I wanted.

Despite previous and current differences I'm not simply out to bust your ***** over vague statements. I just took exception to the way you worded things. "Nothing to worry about at 300whp or something less than 400whp" is a pretty bold claim to make this early in the game, IMO.

Anyway, enough semantics. When do you plan on buying your FRS?

rhythmnsmoke

No that is incorrect.

For someone who is a little conservative and wants longevity, I would venture to say keep it at 350whp max. Two reason really, to ensure longevity and second...350whp in this light rwd car is plenty quick for the street. It should eat quite a few cars at even that power.

Now for me....I'm not as conservative. I would push 400whp from a personal stand point and still expect a bit of reliability out of it based on the abuse that has been given to the car under 400+whp conditions thus far.

I don't expect many people to be as ballsy as I would, so I would not give any advice based on the presumption that they are as ballsy as I am. I'm sure there are more people on a conservative approach and probably would be happy with even just 230whp or so.

scikotictc232

This is not the way I remember Scionlife back a few years ago when everyone was excited to share and openly discuss new things without bashing each other and resorting back to school yard names. Bottom line is no one on this post even owns an FR-S or BRZ let a lone had a chance to open one up to see where the weak points might be . second I have seen where it was compared to the tC, lets be realistic here no one knows how this motor/ trans combo will hold up as it is not 100 percent scion. Subaru has put together some great stuff, Scion - Toyota has also been known to have great reliability. When it comes to assuming that different things might break because it was used in previous models, lets not forget that the case may be the same but the internals may be beefed up. It is obvious this car was not meant to be an affordable grocery getter, but a car that was designed with track time in mind and to be affordable to enjoy. This car has also had many years in the making and I'm sure both companies want something that is going to stick together. We cant assume what this car may or may not do. I had seen many of the tC guys blow motors for different reasons, when I went boosted I pushed my car but also took care of it and did not neglect it, I sold it when I was in school in Wyoming and to my knowledge is still boosting today. The bottom line is that it is ridiculous to claim any figures based on different cars as to my knowledge every aspect of this car has been overlooked before being released. I am also in the market for the new FR-S and BRZ as to why I have resurfaced on this site, not to bash on anyone but to see what the owners felt of the car and where the Pros and Cons lay with this new foundation. One thing is clear, and that is this car was designed to spend time at a track and 400 whp is not truly needed for a car this light to be competitive, that is where suspension and tires come into play as an overall car not just power-train.

__________________

r2d2michael

so any updates on the auto tranny holding up? lol