Matteeboy

Great write up Shaun!

stevebt

iTrader: (8)

So when are you going for more power

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Nice write up Shaun, glad you like it so far.

I totally agree about your point that this is the car the STI should be these days, but to be fair it is a fair chunk more expensive than the STI.

Butty

iTrader: (2)

If it really has to be compared to a std Scoob model then I'd suggest the CS400, but that was £10,000 more than the A45.

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Nice report, I can imagine you cringing with all the theatrics going on around you. As petrol head all you want to do is get in the thing and drive!

fat-thomas

iTrader: (4)

And the a45 is still far better...go figure

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Yeah, but was the female unveiler fit?

Littleted

The reveal is a nice touch, I remember when I went for mine, your like a hawk looking all over for it, nothing there I say to the wife, th MF better have it ready, I went to sit down in the plush customer area then I spotted something under wraps, I thought ooo new MB coming out wonder what model it is, then I clicked oooo Eck.

Glad your liking it Shaun wait till you fettle it, I've had that box out my car now for 2 days it's coming of EBay tonight and going back in, your in for a treat

FYI the settings on the boxes run from 1 to 9 UK normally run them on 4 to 6 6 being if your religious shell user, I sometimes can't get shell so I run settings 5, anchorman on the aclass forum runs 6.

Settings 5 is 1.86 bar. 6 is 1.9 the turbos I'm told by RENNtech top out at 2. Hence why the stage 2 they do you get a new turbo, but they still limit the torque just 555nm of torque,think the gearbox tops out near 600, there's a page on it on the aclass forum page 2, they also give you a warranty unsure what it covers and pity it's germany....

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

555Nm... Or 409lb ft in real money. Nice!

Littleted

http://www.aclassclub.co.uk/forum/th...topic5057.html

Page 2 Luke mentions stats, but seems impressve

STOCK: 328 AWHP / 374 hp at crank / 442 Nm engine torque

STAGE 1: 361 AWHP / 414 hp at crank / 514 Nm engine torque

STAGE 2: 393 AWHP / 460 hp at crank / 540 Nm engine torque

I run stage one

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

High time for Stg. 2 then...

Carnut

With the gear box in the A45 I'd imagine a Subaru would have to be at least an extra 50bhp to compensate for having a 6speed manual.

Ted, stage 1 in your car must be a rocket ship, on the B roads i can't even see the average driver in a new gt3 could take you on.

Great write up Shaun, I'm really really happy for you not one bit jealous, really happy.

Littleted

It's kinda weird Carnut, the cars very fast normally but as some say it's like at the top end, Mattys M135 feels nice because it's lowdown and just keeps coming,

When I added the box as with all maps I could tell but it wasn't massive, I think in all my mapping cases I expect too much.

However since I removed it and have run the car for a few days without it's very apparent I need it back the cars a real beast with it. Settings 6 must be awesome but not going to tempt fate...

Gonna get my fat **** outa bed now and pop it back on.

Stage 2 yeah I'd love it but nobody does them apart from Luke at RENNtech and he's has inside info from AMG as his boss in the states from RENNtech America is X AMG so the info is true and beneficial for them. I had to choose them as they in my book seemed like the safest bet for such a new car.

If I didn't go RENNtech I'd prob import it from Australia through Willall or maybe rebellion

None of these names I'd ever heard of before I went MB Subaru is a differing world.

fat-thomas

iTrader: (4)

How many wrx wagons have beat you from the lights already??

Littleted

lol none

Shaun

So let's compare "on paper" the CS400 vs A45 AMG performance:

CS400
394bhp/381lbft
0-62mph : 4.6s
0-100mph : 10.7s
1/4m : 13.0s

A45 AMG
355bhp/333lbft
0-62mph : 4.6s
0-100mph : 10.0s
1/4m : 12.60s

For a car that weighs more and has less peak power (by over 10%), it has the CS400 nailed on paper.

So it certainly highlights that peak power figures mean diddly squat, as it's all about the whole package.

One reason for the straight line performance advantage, without doubt, will be the gearbox. I also suspect the Haldex system will also give an advantage, that once traction is stable, FWD will be utilised saving transmission drag.

If you delve deeper in to the facts and figures, you'll also notice another "thing" with how the CS400 is set-up..... it's powerband and most importantly, the area under the curve.

The CS400 produces it's peak torque 1800rpm later than the A45, and it's peak power 250rpm earlier than the A45. The A45 holds it's peak torque until 5k, I suspect the CS400 will fall off as soon as the peak is reached.

Another comparison would be how the cars "go" around a track. I always think this stuff is pretty subjective, unless the same driver and conditions.

I'm certainly not going to say which car I think is better (so no bitching please lol), and I couldn't as I haven't driven a CS400.

It's an interesting comparison though.

Carnut

I'm sure what you have said is correct Shaun, i myself pointed out a few posts up saying how the gearbox must compensate for around 50bhp but from what i come up with on Google etc and speaking to someone who had a cs400 the 0-60 time is 3.7.
I'm not sure that really matters though, the cs400 would have to be 450bhp at least and much superior in the handling department to make up for being less of a car elsewhere. (Unless you only want performance and a flat four.)

Matteeboy

Seems a bit slow for the CS400; same figures as my M135i!

Shaun

You're right mate..... just looked further in to it and quite some conflicting information about the "claimed" times, as there doesn't appear to be any tests done that back up those claimed figures..... which is weird to say the least. The main stream magazines normally perform their own timed tests. I'm wondering if there was a block on them doing this.

Shaun

Mmmmmm.... http://bbs.22b.com/forums/showthread...400-v-P1-v-RB5

Work that one out..... a proper media event was arranged for/with autoexpress, yet they never published any performance figures.

Anyway...... I'm going out for a drive.

Carnut

This vid
Subaru Cosworth Impreza vs old Imprezas review - …:
On the 22b forum they give the CS400 a hard time but in the vid the driver says he gets a really bad start but he still gives the rest including the 22b a spanking.

Mattee, i would have your car over a CS400 (i think, I'm sure) but come on, it would eat your car.

Sorry if you weren't implying it could.

Shaun

That's what is discussed on the 22B thread..... one of the members owned and drove the 22b in that test. This is what he said:

"From 0-120mph the 22b toasted the Cossie, and on the last run it was 130mph before he got past!!

I think we were all a bit underwhelmed by it, what with the massive lag it had, then it ran out of puff after 6500rpm. No way it's running 0-60 in 3.7 or 0-100 in 10, it was about 4 lengths behind at that stage.

My car runs @ 320 bhp and at 100 mph the new car was approx 4 lengths behind !
It just never got anywhere near off the line up to 1/2 mile and that was with 7 attempts.

I think that was the reason that Subaru asked for standard(ish) cars as they probably suspected it wouldn't fair that well.
A fully modded 22B would've probably been even further in front.

It did catch me at @ 120-130 mph which was about 3/4 mile."

So it appears it was organised by Subaru/IM - that would explain why no performance stats were given if the CS400 didn't perform.

stevebt

iTrader: (8)

If you bought the CS400 impreza the desire to mod it would be too great then your exactly where you were, getting the A45 means you have a nice car which you will probably map and that's it

Matteeboy

I know my car is slower but those stats are the same as my car. So they are too slow: I'd expect sub 4s to 60 and around 10 (or less) to 100. And is expect one to toast an A45 too.

Littleted

i must say i thought the cs400 was advertised as 3.7 to 60...

that 22b nearly had him and its 120BHP lower but prob ver light

Shaun

There may be a whole world of difference between claimed and actual though.

It appears the figures I found (and quoted) are from an independent Spanish magazine test, and since these appear to be the only independent ones available, it looks like other reference sites are using these as the actuals. **** knows.

Steve,
You're right.... at least on your last point. Tuning box/remap will be your lot on this one.

Shaun

Just come back from a blast for around 80 miles.

I'm going to be honest and say I probably couldn't live with the ride and seats as a daily driver. The seats are awesome when you're on it, but really hard. Perhaps it's because I'm getting old (lol), but they are not that much more comfortable than the proper race seats I put in the SPEC C.... they hold you in and all that, but are as hard as nails.

This car is quick on B roads....... like exceptionally quick. This is what makes it feel akin to a well sorted JDM Scoob to me. Just point and squirt. Brilliant. These double clutch boxes are just so good.

I haven't done that many miles (probably 300 since picking it up), but the fuel economy is a shocker to me. Not that low figures would have concerned me, but this thing is just great. I covered a mix of comfort, sports and manual driving this afternoon, across country and around town. Quite a few spirited runs (you just got to do this with the exhaust pharrrp), revving out through the gears - Ted will know what I mean when I say this. Got back home and looked at the MPG....... 29.7mpg.

I did about 25 miles initially in Comfort, cross country (up to 60mph as traffic allowed) to start off with and the MPG was 36mpg average just as I hit the town driving. This route is quite up and down and windy. It's a great road if there is no traffic. If I do the same route in my Diesel, at the same speeds - it will average around 42mpg...... it's not a great route for economy, but the comparison between the A45 and my Diesel is crazy.

Pretty impressed with that.

Carnut

As i said in my post with the vid, the driver in the CS400 at the end of the race says that he got a bad start.
The guy on the 22b forum is obviously going to play it cool and say something like 'i didn't think I'd BEAT it'
You can easily loose a second 0-60 if you bog down off the start.

Vtec-Abuser

Welcome to A45 ownership Shaun Got yourself a beauty there mate. I nearly went for Cosmos myself, but feared the cleaning of it would get to me in the end. I see you have become a regular on the A5 forum already, so look forward to seeing you over there.


I have tried all the settings on mine and there isn't much of a difference between 5 and 6 mate. 6 is slightly more aggressive in the mid range, but that's about it. Performance wise you wouldn't notice any difference IMO. My Vbox backs this up too (1-2/10ths over 100mph).
I do find 6 is the best all round setting to be on though and given the difference in boost levels etc it's certainly not going to do the car any harm over running setting 5. I do an awful lot of motorway mileage in mine, so it spends most it's life having an easy time. As soon as a RA or nice back road comes in to play though, it gets a spanking
Get it back on the car, stick it on 6 and stop being a tart!

Littleted

LOL ok, I popped it back on last night and it actually makes you grin its that in ya face,

Only way I can explain it is, when ya take ya car to garage and they give you a lesser model, that's what I felt like with it off , well Kind of.

Are you religious with VMAX the mate ? or do you slip into 97 ron zone sometimes ?