Jump to content
Server Move In Progress - Read More ×
Create New...
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Quick Drive: 2013 Scion FR-S

      September 28th, 2012

      Drew Dowdell - Managing Editor

      CheersandGears.com

    Suddenly it’s 1986. There is a lightweight and nimble sports car from a Japanese manufacturer on the market that completely eschews what the American three are doing in the sports car segment. Only, it’s not 1986; vehicle weights have pushed upwards and outwards for past 30 years to the point where Chevrolet is now marketing its top of the line Camaro with a curb weight that makes a 1986 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight look positively anorexic. Sure, Chevy compensates for the chub by equipping the Camaro ZL1 with a tire shredding 580 horsepower V8 and an advanced magnetic suspension that does all the right things keep the Camaro on the tarmac, but eventually it starts to feel like you are piloting the world’s best handling 747. It is raucous and fun, but requires concentration and skill to keep things from going wrong.

    A full paragraph into a Scion FR-S quick drive and I’ve only talked about Chevys and Oldsmobiles. Back in the 1986, Toyota introduced a new Supra. It was not a muscle car in the tradition of the V8 powered pony cars from Detroit, but it had speed and agility from being blessed with a curb weight of about 3,000lbs and a 200 horsepower I-6. It was also intended to be a technological showcase for Toyota. As such, the price tag was relatively high.

    sml_gallery_51_475_1092099.png
    The FR-S is a return to this idea of light weight over raw muscle making the FR-S very refreshing to drive. The FR-S’ single biggest advantage is its low weight platform. At about 2800 pounds with an automatic transmission, the FR-S is a feather-weight in this class. The light weight also allows Toyota to equip the car with a 200 horsepower / 151 lb-ft flat-four engine jointly developed with Subaru to give the FR-S sporty performance without the raw muscle. The flat-four also lowers the center of gravity on the car to further improve cornering.

    During my drive of the FR-S, I found a light-weight, nimble, and carefree sports car with just enough kick to keep things fun. Low end torque is superb with more than a few instances of chirping the tires unintentionally at take off. Those of you hunting for raw V8 muscle will probably be disappointed, but the FR-S makes up for it with its willingness to be thrown around a corner and an engine note that will please almost any gearhead. Power is routed through a 6-speed manual or automatic to the rear wheels like its Supra predecessor. Steering is quick and precise with only a minor quibble with on-center feel; in either direction just off center, the FR-S doesn’t seem to want to pull back to center nicely. This leaves you making frequent minor adjustments on longer straight roads. Though quite sporty and nimble, the FR-S doesn’t punish you with a harsh ride.

    sml_gallery_51_475_207080.png
    Toyota pressed the reset button on the interior as well. The interior FR-S is at once modern and retro. My first thought when sitting in the car was the thought that this is what would happen if Toyota tried to re-create the spirit of the ’86 Supra without duplicating the look. This is not a bad thing; it is actually refreshing in an age of highly complicated interiors.

    Getting in is surprisingly easy for such a low car and I found a comfortable seating position right away. Toyota even equips the FR-S with an old school double-DIN head unit so the owner can swap in something more to his or her own liking if they wish. The head unit does include Bluetooth for hands-free calling, but that’s about the extent of the technology there. The version I drove was an automatic, but the look and gate of the shifter could fool your friends and neighbors into thinking you bought row-your-own. The rear seat is essentially unusable for adults unless the driver is very cramped or very short. Forward visibility is excellent, but I found visibility while backing up to be a bit more limited.

    Checking in with a base price of $24,955 and without high end technology or interior room, the Scion is not a Supra replacement no matter how hard the buff mags wish it. But that price makes the Scion an interesting alternative to the Camaro ($24,245 with steel wheels) and Mustang ($22,995).

    The Scion FR-S was one of my favorite drives during my time in Monticello, NY. It is just the car to hop in and go for a carefree ride on rolling country back roads with the windows down on a nice fall day. I hope to spend more time in one soon.

    The full gallery of pictures from the IMPA Test days is located here and will continue to be built as quick drive reviews are added:

    Year: 2013

    Make: Scion

    Model: FR-S

    Engine: 2.0 Liter horizontally opposed 4-cylinder with Direct and Port Injection

    Drive line: Rear wheel drive, 6-speed automatic transmission

    Horsepower @ RPM: 200 @ 7000 RPM

    Torque @ RPM: 151 @ 6400 RPM

    Fuel Economy: City/Highway: 25/34

    Location of Manufacture: Japan

    Base Price: $24,955

    Est. As Tested Price: $25,300

    Drew Dowdell is Managing Editor of CheersandGears.com and can be reached at [email protected] or on twitter as @cheersngears


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I wish Oldsmobile were still around to build a sweet little ride like this. It reminds me of the Quad 4 Calais, another small, nimble, good handling car, only it came from GM.

    Sadly, GM seems to have abandoned the small coupe segment, and after raising 5 kids, I think I'm pretty much done buying 4 door cars.

    NICE review, thanks for writing it. This may well be my next car, although I like the Focus ST and the GTI as well.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm jealous you got to drive one without the begging drone of a salesperson in the passenger seat. While I'd purchase the Subaru on principle, the truth is, both of these are delicious throwbacks to a better era. I am thankful they're on the market.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm hoping that Subaru brings one to the MAMA meet on Wednesday. I didn't drive the Subi at IMPA because I wanted to try for a variety of cars and had limited time.

    I'm surprised I haven't had more reaction from this review, I believe it is the first Toyota product to actually be reviewed by a staff member here.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So they have a stupid high HP motor with no Torque. Another ugly design like the Honda S2000. I see no purpose or use for cars like this other than stupid young people driving them with no skill causing more accidents.

    If they actually put some style into it like the Supra had from the 80's it would be far better, but the outside is a jelly bean to me which I hate that look and the inside is a blah layout.

    For having gone to college in Japan, I have seen much better auto's on the street over there compared to this. I do not understand why they think the American public is freak-in conservative in willing to deal with new technology and pushing the style envelope.

    Sadder yet is that the American car companies seem to ignore building a solid light weight commuter car that can have style and speed.

    Perfect option would be for Chevy to build the 130R with a Katech 285 Push rod V4. This would rock everyone's world.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't have torque graphs handy, but this car is light enough and geared right for enthusiastic driving. I wouldn't call it torque deficient at all, it was right where it needed to be. Subaru boxer engines have always been good at low end grunt... that they added direct injection to it only makes that better.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Common wisdom tells us to never buy the first production year of any automobile, since that’s when all the bugs not found in pre-production testing tend to surface. In the case of a car as anticipated as the Scion FR-S (or Subaru BRZ), sometimes emotion wins out over common sense.

    As early buyers of the FR-S and BRZ are finding out, some cars aren’t quite flawless in execution. Autoweek reports that owners of early production models from both manufacturers are reporting intermittent rough idle and engine stalling issues related to ECU programming.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This IS Junk. I also have an upcoming "road test" with this car and a Ford ...wait and see just how awful the Toyopet product actually is.

    Toyopet, huh? Are you Sixty-8 in disguise or something?

    Seriously though, I know you're entitled to your opinion, but the FR-S/GT-86/BR-Z has proven itself to be a good sports car and the issue you mentioned can be easily sorted out with a quick ECU reflash. It isn't like the engine is developing sludge issues at 5,000 miles or anything stupid like that.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It isn't like the engine is developing sludge issues at 5,000 miles or anything stupid like that.

    ....WAIT for it !!!

    Honest, It IS Just a matter of time before this too becomes another RECALL victim...and really Who wants another Celica anyway ??

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I had never driven an Infiniti Q50 before, let alone ever really looked at them.  I also didn’t know much about these cars. I was supposed to be assigned a medium sized SUV, but remarked I wanted the luggage area to be hidden.  The rental agent told me they could not guarantee the presence of a retractable cover. (Why would they order a car without one or why would someone take one?  eBay?)  They didn’t have any SUVs anyway, and I got put into an Infiniti Q50.  I checked my phone to verify the cost would be covered by my insurance and the credit card parameters.  It came in at around $43,000.  That’s if new.  That said: “no worries.”  However, this unit would be a much-depreciated 3+ year model with 57,000 miles.  I relaxed.  At any rate, I put less than 500 miles on it over a week.  As one walks up to it, you can tell its heritage … and rather quickly.  You can instantly see similarities to the Nissan Altima in the instrument panel’s main cluster and in the switches much the same way that a CT6 by Cadillac and a Cruze by Chevrolet share dials and such.  However, the assembly and detailing are nicer in the Q50.  It had leather seating, which I don’t care for in a warm weather location, that was comfortably contoured and nicely finished.  The same could be said for the doors and other trim and fittings.  Inside, I liked the way that the dash, center stack, and console flowed together.  The scalloped tops of the dash hearken to those of the very last Impala, which had an attractive dashboard on various levels. The center stack is slightly like that of an Olds Aurora.  These comments go along with the often-cited commentary that this car is traditional and old school in a lot of ways, thus not breaking any new ground. The least favorable aspect of the interior is operating the various touch screen and stalk functions.  Some are redundant and confusing.  However, for one, it is possible to pull up a clock that resembles old school chronometer and have it sitting at the top of the center stack. On the interior's plus side, there are perfectly contoured and angled slots to store water bottles at the base of the front doors.  On the minus side, there is a remote latch release for the trunk, but not one for the fuel cap door.  (The fuel cap door remains closed if the car is locked.) I figured that this Infiniti would have a V6.  It was no ordinary V6, but 3.7 liters worth of V6 with twin turbochargers.  Rarely does one need this much power and, in one week, I got aggressive with the throttle in one merging situation and one passing situation.  It is up to the task and kicks out a little torque steer.  Its hum is a rather muted purr.  As would be expected in what is supposed to be a premium car, the automatic transmission is a geared unit.  It has 7 speeds.  The first 2 shifts can be felt while the remaining shifts are not.  However, if in stop and go traffic, and alternating speed, those early shifts can be a little less smooth as the transmission seems to hunt.  (It could also be how many miles were on the unit.) Why 7 speeds?  How about 6 … or 8?  I’m talking even numbers! With the powertrain comes the requirement for premium fuel.  Also, compared to many full-size Japanese cars working with 4 cylinders and turning in commendable gas mileage, this car with its V6 is a little thirsty. Ride, handling, and noise are related, but different enough.  The ride was supple and controlled, but not much more so than that of an uplevel 4-cylinder sedan.  Handling was better and this Infiniti tracked accurately and nimbly.  Also, the Q50 was fairly hushed, but I might have expected a little more isolation and a higher premium "feel" for the price jump from a Nissan to an Infiniti. Its exterior features that extra chrome and trim to make it uplevel within the Nissan family tree, yet the greenhouse is an almost familiar one.  This car delivered on one greenhouse dimension I’m fussy about - rearward vision from the driver’s vantage point is very good. I don’t know how the order sheet was configured when this car was purchased. There was an indicator for forward alerts, but I never got to experience it in action.  Also, whether on the rearview mirrors or inside of the front pillars, there was nothing to warn of side traffic and there weren’t parking assists that kicked in.  Perhaps they were there, but the car was not put in a situation where they’d engage.  On another rental car of a lower price point, those were always at work and perhaps a little too eager.  I almost prefer the latter. I didn’t read any reviews about this car before beginning the rental or during the rental.  I echo what they have to say.  For its niche, it doesn’t drum up much enthusiasm.  The best point is its more premium handling while the negatives are some difficulties in setting it up when first getting in and its slight thirstiness. If something about this overall package is appealing and a person connects with the Q50, then the consumer will probably go for it.  I don’t know how it will hold up and how much it will cost to service over the long haul.  While there are no Toyota and Nissan dealerships in Beverly Hills, California, as an example, there is a Lexus agency there while the Infiniti dealership seems to have closed.  Infiniti seems to want to ride the same wave that Lexus is riding, though I’d think piggybacking onto Toyota might be a more lauded genealogy. This is very much a personal decision and you’re on your own.  I was going to turn in the Q50 after a day to see if I could get something more familiar to me but decided to keep it.  Exchanging cars is a hassle.  Once past the learning curve and adjustments, it’s fairly easy to live with, but it’s neither a remarkable nor compelling vehicle. - - - - - PHOTOS FORTHCOMING
    • The two big things you need to know are How Acidic and how well it drains or not. I took a class last year on how to grow the American Chestnut. American Chestnuts like to be high on hilltops with very well-drained soils. There's a geomapping tool in Pennsylvania that uses known land and altitude data to populate the best places for Chestnut plantings, and my property is one of the best in the county.  What I used was a mix of planter soil and something called Pittmoss, better than Peatmoss. Its manufactured here and is mostly recycled newspaper. It's good for containers because it holds moisture better than peat.  Just put them in some 5-gallon buckets and let them go.  I need to move them around a bit soon. True genetic American Chestnuts are very hard to find. If you find them online, they are most likely crossbred with something else that is blight-resistant. I got my seeds directly from the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Chestnut Foundation at one of their research centers at Penn State.
    • They look like sticks right now, lol. Their leaves are just starting to come back. But here's what they looked like going in.
    • My wife gets starter trees for landscaping, and we use 5-gallon plant buckets that have the holes already, but you could use a normal 5-gallon bucket and drill some holes and put it in a planter plate to hold water to help with feeding. We always just use miracle grow soil and the trees are doing really well. We have a bunch of Leyland Cypress trees to be planted once I finish the yard retaining wall and new fence.
    • Speaking of growing trees in buckets/pots, did you over-research what type of potting soil/media to use? I think I'm going down a wormhole of too much information and overthinking.  What did you end up using? 
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings