Subaru has released a single image of its upcoming hot BRZ STI model, which is due to be revealed in early June

The Subaru BRZ STI is coming, with carbonfibre aero parts and the possibility of more power from its boxer engine. 

Subaru hinted at the car on social media, simply captioning a photo of the BRZ with STI-branded carbonfibre rear wing with 'Stay tuned…6/8/17. #STI'. 

The first part of the text may hint at a higher state of tune for the BRZ’s 2.0-litre naturally aspirated flat-four engine. Subaru’s only other STI-badged model is the WRX STI, successor to the Impreza WRX STI.

The standard WRX sports saloon, which isn't available in the UK, produces 268bhp, where the WRX STI produces 305bhp; an increase of almost 14%, thanks to direct injection, turbocharging and Dual Active Valve Control.

The standard WRX's engine is a developed version of the BRZ's, so it’s possible that the changes would be carried over to the BRZ STI, or alternatively, the WRX STI's 2.5-litre engine will be shared with the BRZ STI. 

The standard BRZ weighs 1231kg, with 55% of its weight over the rear wheels and 45% over the fronts.

The BRZ costs from £25,040, so the STI model could well cost more than £30,000. In this price bracket, it would have the Lotus Elise to contend with.

Read more:

New Subaru XV to go on sale in 2018

Subaru Levorg long-term test review: final report

Subaru Ascent name confirmed for upcoming seven-seat SUV

Subaru BRZ SE Lux 2017 review

Our Verdict

Subaru BRZ

The Subaru BRZ 2+2 coupé is the marque's own product from its collaboration with Toyota, which also resulted in the GT86

Join the debate

Comments
11

31 May 2017
Pretty please

 

Hydrogen cars just went POP

31 May 2017
xxxx wrote:

Pretty please

I think they said at launch that there isn't enough room for a turbocharger.

They didn't mention a supercharger, though... ;-)

31 May 2017
I don't understand the point of turbos for he following reasons:

too much power low down = Traction control overload and throttle cut.
Throttle turned into a switch instead of a pedal that you can never adjust to feed in power.
No revs = so turn power delivery into diesel mode (7000rpm is better fun than 5000rpm.
Sluggish throttle response as turbo spools up.
Heavy fuel consumption when spooled up, but that never are in emissions test hence discrepancy between real world and test economy figures.

31 May 2017
topsecret456987 wrote:

I don't understand the point of turbos for he following reasons:

too much power low down = Traction control overload and throttle cut.
Throttle turned into a switch instead of a pedal that you can never adjust to feed in power.
No revs = so turn power delivery into diesel mode (7000rpm is better fun than 5000rpm.
Sluggish throttle response as turbo spools up.
Heavy fuel consumption when spooled up, but that never are in emissions test hence discrepancy between real world and test economy figures.

Not sure when you last drove a turbo: Some of what you say was true of turbo engines in the past but not so much nowadays - better engineering and use of dual turbos with different sized (small/large) turbines has negated many of the problems and created much more linear power delivery and overcome the lag associated with large single turbos.
There are still some cars where the turbo isn't as well integrated as it could be but purely from an engineering perspective that doesn't have to be the case these days.

31 May 2017
an America only model. Hope this is not the case but it will depend on what the mods are ? If its just a hot cam version with tweaked exhaust and Halfords style rear wing then maybe not such a loss.

31 May 2017
If this has the same engine then it's totally pointless. This car always needed another 30-40hp to get it in the groove.

31 May 2017
It's always struck me as pointless offering two identical cars from different brands except you could argue that the Subaru is the real deal, while the Toyota is just a badged version of that car with a better warranty. But rather than go the costlier turbocharged route, it would have been good if one maker offered a stripped down bare bones lighter option to more performance. Then again, today's cossetted customers probably wouldn't buy into it, and lower weight probably equates to lower profit...

31 May 2017
So in what way is the Toyota's warranty better?

Where has all Japanese design went to?

31 May 2017
The stated rear-biased weight distribution isn't even close to accurate. It's front-heavy, usually reported as 53%F/47%R.

1 June 2017
I stand corrected - both manufacturers provide 5 years / 100,000 miles cover, thank you. For some reason, I thought Subaru was only 3 years.

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Skoda-Karoq 2.0 TDI 4x4
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Diesel version of Skoda’s junior SUV is unobtrusive and undemanding, but we’d still go for the silkier petrol version of the Karoq
  • Audi Q7 e-tron
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Expensive and flawed but this understated diesel-electric Audi Q7 has a lot to offer
  • Citroën C3
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Is the third gen Citroën C3 ‘fresh and different’ enough to take on its supermini rivals? We spend six months with one to find out
  • BMW X3
    First Drive
    15 October 2017
    A satisfying rework of the X3 that usefully improves its handling, cabin finish, space and connectivity to make this BMW a class front-runner again
  • Vauxhall Insignia Country Tourer
    First Drive
    13 October 2017
    Off-road estate is now bigger, more spacious and available with torque-vectoring all-wheel drive, but is it enough to make its German rivals anxious?