Scion FR-S vs. Subaru BRZ (drag coefficient 0.27 - 0.29)

[Gasoline Fumes]

But I don't like the look of 45 series tires!

[crisco]

Originally Posted by Gasoline Fumes

The following comes from the 2013 brochures.

The Scion FR-S has a Cd of .27 and no rear spoiler.



The Subaru BRZ Premium has a Cd of .29 and no rear spoiler.


......

It's because the BRZ is going to the left and the FR-S is going to the right... and as we know the jet stream goes west to east.

[NeilBlanchard]

If the wheel arches are more or less flush, and/or the floor pan maybe a big part of it. Side taper is hard to know, as well.

[MileMonger]

Originally Posted by Blue Angel

The first thing this car needs for better fuel economy is a taller top gear (or a 7th gear), not narrower tires... a manual FR-S is only rated at 30 MPG highway, and a Corvette is rated at 26!

A bit more info about that from the Scion website:

MPG[4] (EPA City) (MT/AT) 22 / 25
MPG[4] (EPA Highway) (MT/AT) 30 / 34
MPG[4] (EPA Combined) (MT/AT) 25 / 28

I think they have some AT system that gives better averages than a manual, but I'd like to see an ecodriver's numbers on a manual.

This info is also on the Subaru website.

Also,

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

You mean the JDM car right? One of the things they cut from the FRS was those belly pans.
Eg: Aerodynamics discussion - Scion FR-S Forum | Subaru BRZ Forum | Toyota 86 GT 86 Forum | AS1 Forum - FT86CLUB

According to the first post there Subaru claims:

no underpanel, no wing: 0.29cd
no underpanel, with wing: 0.28cd
with underpanel, with wing: 0.27cd

That's great! I was wondering if it was worth it to have it removed for greater MPG if I was to get this car, though I think it looks a bit nicer without it.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by MileMonger

I think they have some AT system that gives better averages than a manual, but I'd like to see an ecodriver's numbers on a manual.

That's great! I was wondering if it was worth it to have it removed for greater MPG if I was to get this car, though I think it looks a bit nicer without it.

Nevermind eco driver, normal fuel wasting drivers get 30+ mpg with this car, and it'll cruise at 50mpg+ if you're going 50mph. EPA tests are total BS.

The stock spoiler is kind of ugly but some of the aftermarket ducktail spoilers look a lot better and would have a similar effect I imagine

[ultimx]

I heard on the AT the fd was lower than that of the MT. Idk how true it is but it's something to consider.

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by Blue Angel

?a manual FR-S is only rated at 30 MPG highway, and a Corvette is rated at 26!

Make that 29 for the Vette.

Fuel Economy of the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

it'll cruise at 50mpg+ if you're going 50mph. EPA tests are total BS.

The EPA test isn't BS; you just have to understand what it's testing. At no time does it test steady state cruising at 50 mph.

ANY car will beat its EPA highway rating when cruising at 50!

[MileMonger]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

The EPA test isn't BS; you just have to understand what it's testing. At no time does it test steady state cruising at 50 mph.

ANY car will beat its EPA highway rating when cruising at 50!

Any idea if these EPA tests take into consideration prioritizing shifting into higher gears for fuel efficiency, or are they shifting up just enough to be in a comfortable gear? Sorry if it's a newbish question but I don't drive stick, I've just seen people skip up to their highest gear once they've reached the speed limit (mostly 45 mph roads).

[MetroMPG]

It's a good question. And no, the way a manual is operated during EPA testing is not particularly efficient.

See: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ing-27416.html