Church

Yes, there is such option too. IIRC there was some product (don't know the right name) in way of aluminium plate that could be attached to floormat. Heel guard? Antiskid plate? Something like this. No clue how it feels using one though. Still, for winter-autumn rain-snow-dirt i'd get floor mats with rised sides, not just mat type, to keep dirt & thawned snow water in it, not to rest of interrior.

Nemesis: I'm 99% sure that fronts from earlier cars should fit.. At least first time hearing that there were any but cosmetic interrior changes (eg. one piece dash panel, maybe T&G2 for MY2017 .. lcdgauges on instrument panel .. what else?) As for hard wearing .. those weathertechs are more of like some hard plastic, not rubber. I hope that will mean that they will last longer under wear of heels due pedalwork. So far no own experience comment on that as i've been using it for just 1.5 year. But i've been through rubber floorliners in 2-3 years, hence it matters to me.

Both parking sensors & reversing cams help parking in cars with limited rear visibility like ours. But i prefer so much to see exactly how much space left then listening change of beep frequency. So if adding one or another, my choice would certainly be for camera. For caliper painting, Ade said it all. If you'll take it to the track (and i advise to, that's load of fun), at high temps caliper paint won't hold long. Original high-temp paint of performance brake kits may held better, but still will discolor by time. So i'd prefer to not care about looks/color of calipers, it's brake performance, that counts For bad weather floor mats i chose weathertech's, and fronts only, as there is rarely someone sitting in back. Nice thing would be addition of space saver wheel instead of stock tire repair kit.

Hmm, weird to hear that stock subaru is without BT support. For "everything", in my book there should be also navigation/gps antena (i guess, less needed, if this head unit can serve as output for smartphones with much better navigation options) and rear camera connection options, for some - also DAB. As for toyota's stock offerings .. their audio quality is no better (more polite way to say - crappy/shitty) then what you described for yours

Blameshift: will catted headers also be non-legal by your MOT rules? (eg. FT86SF or JDL?) Does check involves scrupulous visual check for possible aftermarket parts or just OBD reader for codes & exhaust gases check? There is also option like some here do, pile of aftermarket parts get switched back for MOT check and after passing it back to aftermarket. Not choice for me, as I wouldn't like to do two part switches per year, if nothing else, due need to pay extra for shop's work, due possibly weakening connections/threads and maybe need to buy new gaskets/O2 sensors, if they get damaged during switch, if eg. changing header 6 times per 3 years. I'd consider it if MOT checks had been once per two years though. P.S. Does torque dip really bother you that much? When everybody was posting about it .. yeah, i checked/saw it, but in real daily driving i usually drive & gearshift at low rpms below dip, at track, or at overtakes when DD, i downshift, and rpms are always above torque dip, 4K-redline. So in reality i don't care about it anymore.

I simply bought convex mirrors. They are not too expensive. This way i see wide enough angle without adding blind spots near car.

I'm ok with seating pose / available space only without helmet, so maybe something true about being made for japanese proportions :). Though it's not so much about my height, but probably leg/torso/hand length ratios. To clear with helmet i need to lower back of seat, then for steering wheel to be close enough i need to move whole seat front .. no ideal position in stock seats for me on track

BTW, extra camber might be for saving costs be simple round holes, just that predrilled at different offset/position then stock struts. So that normal camberbolts can be used, but range would be not from eg. 0 to -1.5, but eg. -1.7 to -3.2. Yes, it won't be able to replicate stock alignment, but i find it hard to imagine that someone more set on track use not running more static camber. Those inserts were mentioned more like reliable way to get adjustable camber and be able to use stronger non eccentric stock bolts. But on track it might matter less then on rally. But for "right spring rate" - tire choice used at track may differ a lot. One thing is eg. 215 MPSS, another wider RE71 cheater tires. And then there are something like Hoosier slicks. I guess, no coilover would fit them all best unless adjustable with wide enough range. And then there is potential extra grip/load from aero (in maxed out set something like this: Citing "No physical numbers to share yet, but our Ohlins had to go after aero v1.0 (10K/12K springs) because they were at full compression on the straights. The custom CSG/SRC Tiens have held up better but we still need to up the valving and spring rate."). Though i guess probably most hardcore setups will be probably accompanied by higher budget suspension (possibly custom) aswell.

Imho that will be much harder to design at stated budget. Street coilover needs might be simpler. - should be more comfortable then stock, should look bling :), allow lowering, be at least slightly capable for rare trackdays. Probably with limited adjustability options to not make it too easy to dial in wrong settings and to not compromise quality for many-ways adjusting to fit within reasonably low budget. "Track focused" there are several problems that will make it much more difficult to design given stated purpose/limitations. - it is made for narrower niche, thus harder to save on larger volumes made. That niche is VERY narrow in numbers vs common drivers, yet VERY wide in variations, including some that want "racecar parts, yo", some that simply track more but on not very modified car with very varied tire choice from reasonable width semi-slicks to real slicks, some that build track-only car brought on trailer, some that have very heavy aero. To each different spring/damping rates fit best, thus further splitting in many already narrow niche. Some are also ready for more expensive setups to gain any advantage they can. Some, while wanting more track performance, still driving it daily and having some minimum acceptable comfort requirements. Imho nothing to fit all, or even majority. At very least track focused imho should: 1) no need for lot of lowering, just some, maybe range can be even less then street ones, after all, it's for handling/grip improvement, for which suspension actually needs travel to be able to .. well .. actually work to soak up road imperfections/kerbs hit in middle of high speed curve and so on :), instead of low-rider showroom hardpark thing to which looks (/questionable max lowering/drop/no wheel gap) matter more then handling 2) camber adjustment and extra range. for track one needs more camber (-2 to -3.5 front, maybe upto -4/-5 for drift setups), for better contact patch for extra grip and more even tire wear on heavy side-loaded tire. So are needed means to get that, in way of camberplates (will make it harder to keep quality yet fit in stated budget) and/or slotted lower mount holes. BTW, if slotted holes are used, i suggest designing in also some mount hole inserts to reduce chance of bolts slipping, for example like used on many rally coilovers. Something looking like these inserts (for rally coilovers i've seen even sets of such of different offsets), should make safer using camber bolts for fine-adjustment with such inserts, unlike if with slotted hole. If for saving budget camplates are made optional, then design coilovers to be able to used with some popular aftermarket camplates with upper spring perches of some of popular coilover types/their top bolt/spring diameters. 3) in general stiffer springs due on average higher loads, to lessen roll, to be used with stickier tires, maybe with more aero downforce. But by how much best/for most? No clue on actual numbers. Maybe sell few spring sets separately to choose right ones at purchase? Won't help much if dampening needs to well fit spring rates though, so i guess adjustment range needs to fit optimal some middle set. 4) as imho track focused owners might be willing to more to customize to find best setup for specific track/weather, to shave as possible laptimes, extra ways adjustment, that is actually working and is consistent might help on track focused coilovers more, also external oil reservoirs. But both will up price, but you already stated budget limits. Imho it would be simpler to fit them at twice or triple the budget. And if going for higher budget, imho also shock dynos included should be nice addition. But at higher budget range .. it will be harder to convince how they might be better choice as well known top tier manufacturer offerings. And as i mentioned, possible buyer niche already might be narrow. So maybe something of analogue of RCE Tarmac Zero with minimum of bells & whistles, more on quality/performance? If no adjustment, i'd go for default drop within inch. Eg. -15mm. 5) if there is adjustment, provide some initial suggested settings to start from, from testing data on tracks. 6) i'd go for lower diameter spring used, to have more clearance for potentially wider tires/wheels at extra camber. Will make it harder though to be used with stock top mount/spring perch, if thought of for budget savings ..

offtopic I'm sometimes missing ease of work with old cars/engines due huge open space under bonnet around smallish engine. Modern cars seem designed like lego, to use all available space, and when installing multiple aftermarket parts from different vendors, clearance issues are frequent guest. Or even worse, sometimes part alone needs replacement or removal of stock parts, eg. some oil cooling solutions - MY2017 MT airbox switch to older (/AT) one, or eg. airducts - fogs & washing liquid tank removal or replacing with smaller and so on .. When for bulb replacement one needs to rise car/remove wheel/arch liner, it seems to me that something somewhere sometime has gone wrong :). Ours are not the worst clearance-wise (though reading like official sparkplug replacement procedure involves lifting engine ..), but terror that is in some modern french cars, seemed a bit excessive.

Depends on your skills and available tools/facilities. Also wasn't range of cheapest exhaust headers (manifolds) from ~£400? One still should add tune to fully use freer flowing and better scavenging of new catless manifold.

If choice is between TD's EL or UEL, not anything else, then my own preferences would be if their EL fixes torque dip like Ace's do or doesn't. I like more EL's high pitched "race eng" sound to UEL burble, but not willing to sacrifice wished performance & character for sound. If their ELs have that dip, i'd probably would go for UEL. No dip and stronger mids fits better to my liking then potential slight gains (vs. UEL) only at very top, which are rarely seen and for short time, both if daily driving at lower rpms and if pushing out max like on track, as soon gear will need to be switched and it's back again mid rpms, even if spooling till redline.

And as side gain right size wheels will also be lighter. ESPECIALLY in form of very light forged ones like CE28

rob275: but on which wheel width? As for tire sizing choice, i guess - for a bit more playfulness & a bit better acceleration?

Oh, there was even DIY mod for stock catback probably much cheaper, valve can be also not electric actuated but eg. by some lever or (hmm, don't know the english word - metallic wire in flexible tube) for further cheapening, just that imho catback that wasn't designed with such feature in mind, probably won't sound well in one of modes. For example i don't want exactly "uber loud" in "loudest" like with some muffler-less direct output testpipe .. just loud enough and of tone i want for it to be main mode unless i want to cruise for long or to keep better relationship with neighbours, when i switch back to quiet mode. Still, my wish still stays - if no catback is best for every situation out there, then have one that can be operated at different modes with easy enough to switch (bolting in some extra "silencer" or having to crawl under car to switch is not "easy enough" by my book ). Nice, if not more expensive than +300$ over "normal" catback.

Quieter or louder in addition to own subjective feel of what is what also may depend on use. I would love louder exhaust for short trips or on track .. but if i often cruised on highways for few hours each trip, i'm sure i'd get tired from loud constant noise and would prefer quieter one. In ideal world all the exhaust offerings would have remotely actuated valves to make it quieter or louder on press of a button

Long time ago when tire choice and performance was rather limited, tire stretching was cheap-man-hack to stiffen tire sidewalls/eliminate cheap street tire sidewall flex for performance use. These days when one can choose tire of his liking with needed grip/handling without resorting to such hacks, here are no more practical reasons to do so. I guess people still doing something like hella-stretch do so for reason as it may look cool in eyes of some limited niche community .. but just as with hella-camber crowd personally i would never care of opinion of that niche weirdos that may consider as cool and follow their taste to make car worse and less safe. Eg. it's not that hard for overstretched tire to dislodge from the rim in addition to MOT failure depending on local regulations and possible problems with insurance. There might be also more edge wear. I guess nothing wrong with slight stretch, but 225 on 9" (with 235 minimum, ideal 245-255 and maximum 265) seems going overboard with cons outweighting pros. Hella-stretch won't make one famous drifter of 30 years ago. So won't hella-camber. Imho it's not "cool", it's "stupid".

Nicebiscuit: probably also no electric lights for sunscreens, no seat heating, no foglights?

IIRC only oem style aftermarket crank pulleys with integrated vibration/harmonic dampening for our cars are: - ATI Performance Products Super Damper (7.07" diameter = 10% underdrive compared to stock) - Fluidampr crank pulley, 5.7958lbs. Even heavier then oem cp. Supposedly smooths out / prolongs life / and by their tests supposedly even add a bit performance. From differing from the rest there is also TODA Racing undersized crunk pulley. Single piece / without dampening though. All the rest aftermarket CPs - stock sized single piece from billet oem sized crank pulleys without dampening of varying weight/color/price. P.S. Possible that BRZ has lighter by 1lbs OEM CP then GT86/FR-S. There always were LOT of flamewar whenever talk about lightweight crank pulleys/flywheels for supposedly very balanced subaru boxers surfaces again. From what it seems from digging through many of those threads: 1) not worth to go overboard. People had run for long mileage with lightweight crank pulleys OR lightweight flywheels. NOT both, as there already been several cases of shot bearings after 10-20K miles for FA20 / EJ25 engines, as reported by shops. 2) saw mention, that AT owners may prefer LWCP, MT owners - LWFW (what the reasoning? :/ ) I arrived at thought, that there is not much to be gained performance wise from lightweight pulleys (especially price/performance wise). Most of gains may come from dyno error or manipulation too. So unless it's for looks/bling reasons, or unless it's for high-budget track-dedicated build (with lightening everything possible, stripping interior, removing AC, change to also lightweight wheels/axle/battery/race seats/etc/etc), then LW CP or FW worth only if track use is not occasional but one that owner focuses most. It may ease/quicken gear switches due faster rpm fall-off for rev-matching, but does it matter for daily driving? Is it worth to compromise long-term engine durability for that? For me - no, as i naively hope to drive mine for 150-200K & 10 years if i don't total it . So if i'll ever go that route, most probably lightening from clutch side. Or going undersized route, not lighter one. (and ONLY if it won't make me use non-stock belt and won't interfer with other parts, eg. oil cooler and so on)

Isn't video input often restricted depending on car state? As in it should be parked/handbrake on and such?

Also for header choice "for down low" i'd think of Ace CS400. They may have less power at redline, but more at lower/mid rpms. Pitty ace headers cost a lot, so that it may make sense to add a bit more and get some forced induction, that will add heap of power and torque at low rpms for sure, way more then NA tuning even in best cases.

Also when in neutral there are less mechanical losses due no need to turn gear shafts and engine itself at higher then idle rpms. And if one wants to keep same speed (not engine braking) fuel will be fed anyway. So it's choice between neutral / clutch-out or keeping accel pedal light pressed. Clutch out will wear it's bearing, feeding less but still feeding fuel will not be more economical. BTW, scenario of "neutral coasting" - i meant mostly downhills, where hill steepness is mostly sufficient to keep speed constant when self-rolling. Of course for downhills in general there are also exceptions, if they are TOO long variable speed or TOO steep, where one needs to use brakes, and by then it's really better engine-brake to not overheat brakes. From your described reasoning not-in-control imho is most important one (though i'd change 'not' to 'less'), and in city traffic where one has worse visibility behind misc objects like trees/hauses, indeed it's better to not lessen options of available emergency-maneuvering to just steer around & brake due extra lag needed to put into gear. But on highways, with visibility far ahead? Imho - why not.

It's not so much exactly about torque dip, but rather moving optimisation to lower rpms - but on NA (and even more so if with stock ecu tune) one can also consider crawford BPB intake spacers for more oumph down low. Yes, once someone decides to go for proper catless headers & proper tune gains from it diminish, but if from beginning one doesn't aim high budget wise but want better performance at low rpms for daily driving - why not?

On track one won't feel torque dip (at ~ 3-3.5K), as rpms are usually 4K to redline. During daily driving .. yes, it can be felt, if accelerating from coasting speed rpms to overtake speed while staying in same gear as if on some turbodiesel .. but i just prefer to drop 2-3 gears down for some audial pleasure and actual acceleration anyway, when need to overtake. When everybody talked about it, it was noticeable .. but now after driving for 2 years it being there doesn't matter. For honda it's VTEC-yo, for ours it's infamous torque dip. Just don't mind it and spool up this little high-redline engine puppy

Not missing gears imho is closer to what rev-matching is. - Each synchro has to work(heat up/wear) less to even out engine/shaft speeds prior gear is engaged if difference is divided by closer gears synchros switched in sequence. Let's say, if synchros do well with evening out difference of 500rpm, it's 8x times more work(&heat & wear) to even out 4K rpm difference, like if with some 1-2-6 gearswitches, or downshifting after heavy braking, it's worth to wait prior 2nd gear upshift to 6th extra second or two for engine rpms to drop before put in 6th, and throttle-blip when heal&toe-ing in 2nd case. Worth also blip throttle after coasting in neutral.