Edmunds Dyno-Tested: 2013 Scion FR-S

Mook

El Presidente
Admin
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
166,276
Reaction score
4,071
Location
Elgin


Yup, the dyno rollers, they just keep a-turnin'.

Immediately after wrestling the 2012 Mclaren MP4-12C to the ground, we turned our attention to the car you see here, the 2013 Scion FR-S.

Although it costs nearly one-tenth the price of the quarter-million dollar British supercar, the Scion FR-S arguably carries more significance to the automotive landscape. It marks the return of the tin-top sports car to the common man.

And InsideLine.com is the first to dyno-test it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMsRYPRTUSY

Our usual instrumented performance testing of the Scion FR-S will be coming to you in the near future, but we're not allowed to share that with you just yet.

For now, let's see how its 2.0-liter FA20 flat-four fares on the dyno.



By now you know this car by heart because you've read our First Drive of the FR-S and learned the 10 Things You Don't Know. That it's said to generate 200 horsepower and 151 lb-ft at the flywheel. That the FA20 engine is essentially all-new, sharing some basic architecture with the Subaru FB-series engine. That it's equipped with two -- two! -- fuel systems, a direct injection system and conventional port fuelers. And that that fuel system came from Toyota and is called D-4S.

We strapped the poppin' fresh, harlot red FR-S you see here down to the Dynojet 248 dyno rollers at MD Automotive and got busy. And when I say fresh I mean it -- the VIN tag reads "00003":



Let's see, yup, 173 horsepower at the wheels is about what we'd expect based on driveline loss... its fuel cut is exactly where the tach touches red at 7400 rpm, and... what the heck is that?

That hole in the torque curve is... strange. Little dips and rises are expected, sure, but at 4000 rpm the Scion appears to lose about 14% of its torque. It was no fluke, either, as it showed up on every run exactly as shown above.

The dip is a bit illusory -- it's magnified by the unusually high (for a normally aspirated 2.0-liter engine capable of making use of 7000+ rpm) lump of torque that immediately precedes it 2500 and 3200 rpm. Apparently the dip was purposeful on the part of the FR-S/BRZ powertrain engineers -- they intentionally traded some sauce at 4000 rpm in order to gain some driveability lower in the rev range. Okay. But it's still weird.

From 4500 and 6500 rpm, the FR-S delivers a flat 140 lb-ft -- only a few lb-ft shy of its peak 143 lb-ft -- which means that the engine will remain in the heart of its max capability when you're shifting near redline like you'd do when on a racetrack or driving on roads worth driving on.

As much as I dislike "per-liter" metrics, generating more than 70 lb-ft of torque per liter -- to the wheels -- with an n/a mill is doing something right, particularly over the proportion of the rev range that this FA20 is doing it.

Let's talk consistency. This car produced the most repeatable runs on the dyno that of any car in recent memory, each trace overlaying the previous one precisely. That's got to count for something, right?

Now that we've confirmed that the FR-S is performing to expectations, it's time for a quiz. Quick, name another car in the FR-S' price range also has a 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine rated at an identical 200 hp?

The Volkswagen GTI!

And it turns out I tested a GTI on this very dyno. Okay, it's a 2010 model, but the GTI hasn't changed since then. Here's how the FR-S stacks up against the GTI:



First, let me be absolutely clear on this -- on no planet is a front wheel-drive hatchback an equal substitute for a proper rear wheel-drive sports car. All we're comparing here is two cars of equal rated power, cylinder count and displacement that are offered at the same price point. But, man, look at the difference in output. At no point does the GTI give up anything to the Scion, and at 3800 rpm there's a gap of nearly 100 lb-ft of torque between them.

Of course, the GTI is turbocharged and not normally aspirated, but nobody told VW they couldn't do that. On the other hand, the FA20 in the FR-S has revs on its side. Its additional 1000 rpm is not enough to surpass -- or match -- the quite-underrated GTI.



Now imagine a turbocharged FR-S. That's all you can really do at this point since a) it hasn't been officially confirmed by the factory, and b) you'll have to wait at least a year and likely longer for the factory turbocharged version.

But let's not get too carried away just yet, as there's still plenty more about today's FR-S that's worth exploring. Stay tuned.

--Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor

 

ilikemtb999

I eat dirt
Donating Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
69,869
Reaction score
1,215
Location
Denver, CO
I'm down. Too bad they'll all blow up.

My car dynos not too far off that.
 

jprophecy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
221
Reaction score
0
173 hp to the wheels out of a n/a 2.0 four cylinder is not bad at all. The torque is lower than I would have liked to see, but still not bad drive train loss. Car is only rated 200 at the crank.

Also there will be no factory turbo unless they do some redsign. There is no room for it.
 

jprophecy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
221
Reaction score
0
There is always room for turbos
No there is literaly no where to put one. This has been confirmed already by toyota and subaru that there is no room and factory boost will not be produced. Ask me how I know lol.
 

32vMonte

Car is broke
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
762
Reaction score
0
Ehh you never know a company may take this car and make a turbo kit for it and make 400+ to the wheels and prive it can be reliable.

I like the way the car looks I just wish the motor would have been a inline 4 cylinder honestly or even a v6. Better yet like other said a small v8 would have been sweet.


EDIT: Okay I like the car a lot but those wheels for some reason make me wanna puke lol
 

Primalzer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
25,261
Reaction score
25
It's not meant for all out straightline speed. they used that engine and drivetrain combination for chassis balance. Yeah it'll probably be out run by cars with 100 more HP, but that's not the point of this car.
 

ilikemtb999

I eat dirt
Donating Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
69,869
Reaction score
1,215
Location
Denver, CO
Lol reliability and Subaru in the same thought.

It's a flat 4 to get the CG as low as possible.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Top Bottom