Care to make that "old" comparison with the first 1976 930s?

234 HP
246 of Torgue.
Weight 2635#
156 mph top end.

How does a WRX stack up to that, turbo to turbo? Truth is it doesn't. Add a few modern upgrades to a '76 Turbo it is still, Super car catagory.

I suspect Ferry Porsche would loved the WRX but a super car it aint, even for 24K.

2003 Impreza WRX:
215 HP @ 6k rpm
Torque 217 @ 4k rpm
3085 pounds

Now that I have done a little research I am beginning to feel sorry for anyone that has to drive a WRX. ;)

last friday I was walking along in Burlingame California.

A red Ferrari 360 Modena spider pulls up, it was making that sweet hi-pitch exhaust noise, and everybody turns to look at the car. Sex on wheels came to my mind.

Parked on the same block, is an equally red Porsche 911 with a huge turbo tail. It couldn't get a first glance from most people on the street. The Porsche sure got out-classed on that one.

To the discussion at hand, there are some issues that nobody talked about yet:

1. final drive gearing(s) affect acceleration, don't they?
2. Power to weight ratio ... hm, you better take the weight(s) of the drivers into consideration too. Well, unless you plan on remote controlling your vehicle from the sidewalk.

Cheers.

Those WRX's looks like crap/generic...if I wanted a cheap fast car, I would just go get myself one of those 15th anniversary RX-7 and dust most cars thats well over 100K.

I just had a great game of cat and mouse with a Ferrari 550, a WRX and my '88 3.6 yesterday. Up to 60, it was even, up to 80-90, the WRX dopped behind and it was me and the 550. Above 90, the 550 just walked away like I was standing there. That thing kept accelerating at an unbelievable rate. I was happy to hang in here that long. The 911 and the WRX were more nimble weaving in and out through the slower traffic at the slower speeds.

All I know is redline in third comes real fast and I'm at 120 mph. Redline in 4th is just scarry fast. The 915 is what balks our 20 year old cars, even with a 3.6 or 3.8. Aside from the balking of the 915, gearing makes up for so much. On BB3, with Scruffy's short gear box and well built 2.7, Tyson was able to keep up faily well at my lower RPMs but I would pull away as he ran out of gearing and my motor was kickin in.

Krikey, I thought I had a fragile ego!

Some interesting insecurities on display in this thread. Apples and oranges, folks. WRXs are not 911s. They are a Japanese shopping trolley, seat four/five and have four doors or a hatch. They are cheap and they are two or three automotive geneations ahead of old Porsches. They are also bred around rally, not asplhalt performance.

Straight out of the box, they will go faster than old NA Porsches. Theres just no arguing this. If the old Porsches are hot rod 3.6s, modded this and that, well hey- its just an internet p1ssing contest. Try powering your bespoilered, lowered polished Carrera up a rutted forest track sometime.

BTW, it does take some commitment to get a WRX away quickly. The duel impediments of AWD grip and turbo lag mean the that you basically have to put 5k on the dial and step off the clutch. They actually go faster on slightly slippery suface which allows some AWD slip so the engine can overcome the grip. (Unlike the Mitsu Evos and the STii, which have the power to light up all four wheels.)

A valid critism of the WRX would be that, unlike the evil pedulum of the 911, it doesnt take a lot of driver skill to get close to the best out of a AWD WRX, under amost any road conditions. ofcourse extrcting that last xx% is where the skill is. The 911 as we all know requires that you learn to drive it or it will bite back.

However, the WRX remains probably the best value performance cars on the planet. "Car of the Decade" as voted by most credible car mag in the UK in 2000. They are the Pokemon/PS2 of performance cars, but they are here to stay.

Stuart 87 Carrera

Wasn't the original thread about a M3? As for the WRX, I think its a pretty cool little car for under 25K. As for a comparison, WRX rally car, 911 road. As for acceleration most new cars that are hopped up from the factory have great bottom end to about 70 and then they fizzle out.

An m3 from at speed acceleration should be pretty impressive as its weight shouldn't effect it all that much. 300 plus is pretty fast once at speed, whether its a BMW; Porsche; Nissan, or a Kia. The weight advantage won't matter in a top end drag race, gearing, aerodynamics and horsepower will.

But that's why the 911 is superior. Mastering it takes skill that doesn't come "out of the box."

As for biting back, I refer to my first sentence...

I have a wrx and a 77 coupe with a 3.0. The wrx might have beaten the 2.7 but I don't think it can beat the 3.0 with the lower gears I put in.
Don't get me wrong, I love my wrx. It's a really fun car and I have driven the hell out of it. I'm not sure if those specs someone posted a few posts back are right but for my my02 it has 227hp and 215lbs while weighing around 3000 to 3050. I found out that there was a tsb to get the clutch replaced for chattering a few weeks ago so I figured I have nothing to lose by killing the old one. So I tried launching it around 5k and it will light up the r compounds, and yes that was a 4 wheel spin. The car is pretty fun to drive and very forgiving so even a novice can drive it pretty well. If you feel the car starting to drift you just give it more gas and it pulls itself out of the turns like you meant to do that.
I have a few friends that have s2000's and I pull them easily until we hit 3rd gear. Then they blow by. I guess the wrx is geared for more of an offroad thing.
But again, this car will NOT beat my 911. The suspension is designed for different reasons, the thing is heavier, and has no nostalgic value. In 20 years it will be hard to find one still on the road. If anyone thinks a wrx is better I'll be the first to trade you mine for your nice classic 911.

How about weight loss equaling more horsepower?
 

What is the ratio of weight loss to horsepower? Isn't it for every 100 lbs lost ten horsepower is gained? In short, if a stock SC with a 3.0, SSIs and adjusted fuel mixture making 200 hp loses 200 lbs, doesn't it have the effect of increasing the engine's output to 220 horsepower?

I'm not sure if this is true, but if pure mathematics are involved, I can see where a 220 hp SC at 2,300 or (better yet) 2,200 pounds would annihilate any car with equal horsepower and 1,000 pounds more. Given that, a WRX would have no chance. Factor in performance gearing and the (really) rather simple modifications one can do to their 911's suspension, and the corners would be much to the advantage to the 911, even as the WRX has AWD.

A 2.7 vs a WRX? I'd shiver a bit if I were the WRX. A 3.0? I don't think I'd try with much heart -- again, if I were the WRX.

WRX STi is a hell of a car and the most bang for the buck you're going to find these days. My brother in law just came back from a driving school for Subaru employees. He said that they had some "real" (whether WRC or not, I'm not sure) drivers and that the car is the real thing. I've already run across one with a different exhaust, turbo pop off. chip and some other bits. It's very very quick.
Now as far as a BMW goes, I also own a 2001 M Roadster with the S54 engine in it. Tuned as is it's making about 335 hp. I'm looking for more but it more than gave a good accounting of itself the other day to a ZO6 Corvette which tried to jump me at a light. (Wise old fart like me did have the good sense to be in the inside lane of a left hand turn stop light.;) He thought he had me covered but didn't blow by me like he thought he would. It was kind of funny. We didn't go much past 75 mph (because I needed to make another left turn) at which it was a neck and neck kind of run. I don't condone street racing even though in my sordid youth I did my fair share and once had the court documents to prove so. But that's over 25 years ago and a lot has changed. Quite frankly I don't have those testosterone levels anymore and frankly just don't get too exited by those with high levels of it. Besides, age and treachery always makes up for youth and enthusiam.
Then again, I've owned bikes that will scorch the paint off most street cars to 100mph and beyond if you have the cajones.
Unless you are in the low 10's in the quarter, your behind would be mine.

Regards to all,

Tom

Geez, this again....

Since it started with straight line acceleration between a 911 and an M3, can't we just all agree that (as a proxy for accelerative ability) power to weight is in the 3.6 911's favour? I think outright power and aerodynamics only come into it at much higher speeds...

And the WRX? There is too much misinformation. A standard WRX is a good car - handles well (but compromised to some extent by "safe" understeer etc), reasonable power, average looks.

A WRX STi of any type is a completely different animal. They all have 280-300hp (is the new 2.5 litre STI even available in the US yet?), close gearing, more performance oriented suspension, etc. I can't recall a SINGLE article I've read (and I am a magazine whore from way back) where the STI didn't compare reasonably favourably to the competition, especially with price as part of the equation. In particular, although the Subaru sometimes loses out on the track, it wins on the road (twisty roads). It definitely wins in the wet.


A regular WRX can be modded to STI level of power and suspension for relatively low levels of cash. You miss out on the close gearing, brakes and any extra electronic trickery...

So what am I saying? I would expect most unmodified 911s to be competitive with an unmodified WRX in a straight line. Power/weight is similar. rdane benefits from better gearing, power and weight than standard... thus he has quicker acceleration.

The only two data points on WRX's through corners here are from Jim (Superman) who said a standard one is crap at autocross (probably true) and stuart(j) who thinks they are fast on the track as well as easy to drive. Also probably true, especially if lightly modified.

No-one is making you buy one. However, since lots of you guys start from the standpoint of "my car will kick a WRX's ass" then don't trumpet it if you do and don't come crying to mommy if you don't.

Cam

Heres some hard data. I just checked some official times. Two cars, same driver, same track.

The pictured Rex is absolutely unmodified bar an aggresive wheel alignment, and is not an STi. Pictured on the 2000 Grand Prix Pally, Winton Raceway, Victoria. One hot timed lap, no practice, not even my car. 1m.46.83. I have gone quicker in my own Rex at that track, low 45s, but cant give an official timed result, offhand.

My 3.2 Carrera at a club event at Winton June this year, best time 1m.46.86. Best lap all day. A basically standard car, not lightened, rebuilt Bilstein suspension, lowered, sport muffler. Its taken me two years to get to that, and thats driving the ring out of the old b1tch.

cheers

stuart 87 carrerahttp://www.imagestation.com/picture/...f/fd3ae726.jpg

Stuart, DAMN you look pretty in that black WRX. It really is your colour.

Geeez Moses, see what you started!

It was dk blue. Know whats funny- did the hot lap with the air con turned on.......Luckily the clever people at Subaru fit a clutch that disengages the compressor under WOT.

PS- That corner look familar to you? No? Try turning your computer around backwards. What about now? :)))

stuart

StuartJ, http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/kao2.gif http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/kao7.gif

WRX STi's are here in the US and readily available. Most dealers are popping a premium on them and that's where you draw the line because no matter what it is it's still a throw away Japanese car that will be outdated in 6 months.

Tom

PS: I do like them, however!;)

Haha - a premium. Remember the premium on the BMW Z08 or whatever it was called.

Stuart - that is really interesting. Is Winton a twisty or hp type track?