Repeating of coarse.

No...what determines a good engine is power output vs physical size, weight, and fuel economy. HP/Liter and displacement in general is a meaningless argument.
Reliability is also a factor, but that may take years to determine.

I don’t know what to say...Hocking Hills with DaytonSubarus. It happened.
It’s worth noting that the BRZ and variants have received very good reliability ratings on the whole, so this situation was certainly an outlier, and as Quade mentioned possibly due to money shifting.
But I have seen lots of BRZ’s in the group…

First of all that’s not really very many miles. The car for sale here has ~58k KM on it.
And even then you may still be an outlier, or have a better tune than most.
I would not put much faith in the reliability of a high compression motor with added forced induction.

China is actually beating the US in environmental protection now (and that was before that big oil shill Scott Pruitt became the head of the EPA).
But yes my uncle is a member of a bi-partisan environmental protection action group.

The problem here is the Republican party has changed from what it was to a party of…

I wish doom on all sports cars that don’t have a manual (option).
But you are right about the engine. People place too much value of the nostalgia of prior engines....say like the S2000 O.o

Neither of them admitted to it, and I know at least one of them was running a tune, so it’s hard to say.
I have seen a BRZ money shift on track and not blow the motor (just spun out).

You seriously think a supercharged 12.5:1 compression ratio Subaru engine is more reliable than a Honda????

I went on a back road drive with a bunch of subaru guys, and TWO BRZ’s blew their motors in the same day, and neither of them had forced induction. This thing is a ticking time bomb.

It just depends. I know a lot of older people that do autocross and road race, but I know plenty who buy sports cars to drive on back roads or just cruise in but never take the car past ~4k rpm.

While I’m sure this car is a blast to drive, $18.6k is a lot to pay for a ticking time bomb that has no warranty and still doesn’t make 250hp (at the wheels).
For that much you could have an early Cayman, or C5 Corvette, and IMO those are much better cars and much more reliable than a supercharged 12.5:1 C/R engine.

That kind of depends. If it has a manual, and is a good drivers car then Supra it should be called. If it’s just another auto only GT car then sure, ditch the name.

Maybe if it looked more like the concept...and had a 2.0L engine.

Why? It could certainly be a very good car with a turbo I-6, and it most certainly would be a better drivers car with a manual.

The thing I worry is that this (Supra) will cost Z06 money, but not have bonkers performance.
Look at the other Japanese rivals the NSX and GT-R, both of which post blistering quarter mile times, but cannot quite match the Z06 on a track.

What about a standard WRX? Those are practical and fun, decent looking without standing out too much, and can easily be found with a manual.

Other good choices are a 4-door GTI, either of the ST’s, a Civic Sport or Si.
A Kia Stinger GT also seems like an attractive car in the mid 30's but is sadly automatic only. It…

Some Buick CUV, which handled much worse than a similarly priced Buick sedan.

Only if there is actually a manual transmission (bellhousing) that will mount to the engine. Supposing the turbo engine is the same block as the N/A then you might be able to do it, but the transmission likely isn’t rated for the torque the turbo motor puts out and might have issues in time.

No...more like 70-80% in 30 minutes (at a supercharger).
And this is a much cheaper car, so it might be a step backwards on purpose.

Uhh...what are the specs on the turbo-4 engine? Did I miss an article talking about that?

Likely two intercoolers, they are probably counting the heater core, and probably doubling up on something else.