A mapped WRX Blobeye driven off-boost should be getting 95-125 miles off £20.

Sometimes if you live at sea-level your MPG will suffer as every cold start journey will possibly be uphill. I'm fortunate to live 95m above sea level so trips to town from cold don't heavily affect my MPG averages.

 

Your claim of 12.8 (which you initially denied achieving before I quoted an old post of yours) and over 400 bhp needed for it was backed up by a user who knows you, your cars history and your partner Emma.

Admit it, the STI is severely compromised at elevated power levels.

To compete with a WRX you have to go the forged route and consider a more acceleration friendly gearbox.

 

You were there remember, my car is standard you just won't admit it as it ruins you're silly wrx claim.

Carry on trolling as for the compromise I wouldn't know as I've never been at elevated power levels.

 

My old RX8 did 95 miles on £40 in mixed driving

 

15mpg - That's pretty much on the ball if you were paying £1.40 a litre

Many claim 18mpg when driving moderately. ...and that's just the oil

 

Sti envy. No one in there right mind would pick a wrx over an sti for performance. There isn't even an argument. And anyone that argues is just envious because the premium was too high

 

My 332bhp WRX


332BHP STI


WRX wins every time, and by some margin. Increasing the power in the STI will only make launching trickier.

I don't know how many more links and timeslips I have to post to prove the WRX is considerably faster.

Evo magazine 1/4 test

437/390 RCM Bug STI 12.5
333/307 Blobeye WRX 12.6
400/360 Gforce 3 12.7
350/356 2005 Type 25 STI 12.8
355/335 Gforce 2 12.8
335/280 2004 Spec C STI 13.0
330/330 TSL 333 STI 13.6
305/298 MY04 STI PPP 13.7s - Subaru claim 13.4 lol.
316/310 WR1 13.7s



Tommy and other STI fanboys will claim driver skill for the consistently quicker WRX 1/4 times but ironically he and many others have ridiculed my launching technique, granny shifting and budget tyres!

 

Videos mean nothing Its partly driver skill my sti did 12.8 at standard power that's only 0.2 more than you managed with 70 bhp more!

 

I still think the RX8 is a great car though

Never really got the supposed high oil consumption bit though, mine used about half a litre per 1000 miles and of course that's using 10/40 semi synthetic which is pretty cheap. I've owned loads of cars that have cost more in oil than the Rex.

 

Your STI had 430bhp as confirmed by yourself and a SN member who knows you.

http://www.dragtimes.com/Subaru-Impr...lip-22476.html

Big fat 2009 WRX running at 12.6 with just 350bhp.

That would take some skill in an sti!

But here we go again, STI drivers can't launch for ****!

 

What the hell is a Gforce 3 btw?

 

No I don't this is something you made up my friend

 

Why are you running a FMIC at 256bhp! I thought you were one of the staunchest only needed for over 400hp supporters!

 

i like the look of them in the front

 

I agree. Big visible FM's look a bit cliche on Golfs and Peugeots 306 HDI's etc but they look almost OE on Jap motors.

Can't say I need one at just 307lbft.

 

me either at 260 bhp but i like the look, it will go with my wrc sticker kit and stick on roof vent im getting for xmas.

i might connect up the pipework in the new year.

 

I'm just browsing WR1's doing the 1/4 mile and there are some shockers.

600bhp WR1 recording a 12.0
WR1 getting a 15.1

I know driver skill plays it's part but the 300+ STI's seem a genuinely hard car to get going

I mean the decently launched STI racing this WR1 has 348bhp/401lb and runs a 13.9 - I was running 13.7's with just 285bhp/273lb!!!!!!!!!


How can you argue with the WRX???

 

Don't know where my petrol is going then?
Are you sure about that mpg? 95-125 kilometres sounds more realistic

 

the videos are all b0llocks it has no bearing on the cars capabilities more the driver hence my 12.8 with 260 bhp

 

There's plenty of WRX owners on here giving their figures of 28-36mpg.

Very rarely less or more.

From what I've read, and I've read a lot of MPG threads, STI owners quote anywhere from 18-25mpg when driving steady.

 

The 100's of videos and timeslips I've seen say one of four things.

A.) The WRX is significantly quicker.
B.) The STI is extremely hard to drive to it's potential.
C.) Both A and B.
D.) STI drivers can't drive and WRX owners can.

 

Haha wot a ***

 

all you have proved is you have sti envy but its funny watching you make up crap and trawl youtube though.


im an sti driver and i did 12.8 at 260 bhp, you cant even argue this fact as were there remember

 

I don't go by the gallon but i pay about £1.48 litre v power and the most i can get generally is 75 to £20. Once i done 82miles but i think it was running on air lol

 

I like D lol

 

youtube doesn't make up STI/WRX times.

13.5 from a 240bhp PPP WRX


...makes the 13.9 from the 348bhp STI look silly. I won't mention the WR1 with at least 316bhp's time.

 

1.48 seems a bit steep!

75miles off £20 at £1.48 is 25.21mpg

82 miles is pushing 28mpg.

 

thing is matt me and my mrs both had imprezas, one a wrx and the other an sti.

guess which one we sold because it was slow

 

Don't know where i got 1.48 from? Probably an old price.
I just checked a couple of fuel receipts.they differ from 1.38-1.28 litre. Whats that per gallon matt?

 

At £1.38 per litre your pushing 23-24mpg, that's not that bad if you go on boost often and have decent sticky tyres running around 30psi.

Maybe change your oil and plugs if you haven't done so for a while and see if things pick up a bit.

I'm unsure what MPG you'd get from a faulty MAF sensor, tired fuel pump, post MAF air leak or front Lambda sensor etc.