WR1 costs less than 30K

WR1 can fit 5 adults

WR1 can fit a weeks worth of food shopping in the boot

and still hit 0-60 in around than 5 seconds

911 may struggle with those high performance stats

 

this is class... i love scoobynet........the reasons for buying a WR1 get better and better each day

 

just wait till I fit the roof rack & tow bar

 

Hawkeye ... what is your problem??? Why would I waste my time to tell a complete bullsh!t story about racing a turbo if it didn't happen ... so you've driven a WR1 on your own and high speeds and utilising all the power in every gear have you? I very much doubt it unless it was a very trusting friends or Mike Woods car. I doubt it on both!!

W@nkers like you who know everything and are the best drivers in the world should be banned from here as you just like posting to add insult to injury.

 

This was never in question, but if you think that the WR1 is as fast as a 911 turbo in a straight line then you are seriously deluded. If you believe the published claimed figures, then the WR1 will do 0-100 in 10.67 seconds, the turbo takes 9.3. Has any review or official test been able to reproduce the 0-100 time claimed by Prodrive?

A better question would be: Will anyone from Prodrive claim that the WR1 is as fast as a 911 turbo in a straight line up to the speeds you are claiming?

 

ok gangsta im not going to get into an argument with you as youve obviously made your wind up, neither am i going to resort to petty remarks regarding my hairy palms

my MY02 sti isnt standard hence my comments, i have had the pleasure of driving a wr1 to my limits on the road ( yes a very trusting friend) look at my thread regarding the outcome...

enjoy your car....

paul

ps Gangsta I dont know everything Im not the best driver and i dont post to add insult to injury you seem to do that quite well on your own, I do no one thing a Wr1 will not keep up with a 911 turbo not today not yesterday not anyday........

 

Of course I dont believe that the WR1 is on par with the 911 turbo it's really funny that you would even start to compare the performance of a WR1 & 911, my point (albeit poorly written) was that one car is a performance sports car and the other was a performance saloon car, the two are leagues apart...

 

er ok! so you were hitting the hundred mark in around 9.3 seconds

Titter

Maybe he was running it in?

 

A WR1 in a 0-200km/h-0 test would still try to accelerate up to 200 km/h whilst the Porsche Turbo (996) would already have come to a full stop.

Davyboy, 9.4 secs for 0-100 mph, 14.7 secs for 0-125 mph

You need family-packs of twisties to keep up with that

 

Agreed but without the rather fetching steering wheel cover

 

lol - I was being kind!

 

Evidently not

Gansta Smurf has secretly been testing the PFC (Prodrive Flux Capacitor) which has achieved astonishing results in a straight line

Maybe the Porsche driver was sared you were about to understeer into the side of him come the first bend

 

I don't know gangster smurf from adam, but I believe every word he says. Just over a second difference is nothing in a real-road situation. And thats from a standing drag start, perhaps in his situation he was chasing the 911 from rolling speeds (20-30mph) and was in a better gear, or got on the throttle slightly earlier. And so on and so on and so on.

We aren't talking dragstrip here we are talking real world situations. At 100mph, if the porker was 1 second ahead of the wr1 then the wr1 is practically on its bumper, hence KEEPING UP!

 

ROFPMSL @ C - oh and im the one who posts just to add insult to injury


hold on am i missing something..

lets say car does 0-100 mph in 10 seconds

the porsche is 1 second ahead therefore at least 10% faster, the distance would have to be a car length at least, so not really keeping up...... dont think it would be stuck on his bumper.....


IMHO

 

I agree Nick.
I had a similar experience at Rockingham & it was a lot of sideways fun but afterwards Mike Wood took me around for a few laps in his STI PPP & drove in a perhaps slightly less entertaining manner but considerably quicker, with no understeer.

Darren

 

Only prodrive can get those figures!

The Porsche figures you or I could get, and many magazines can go faster.

 

Trouble is now its a lose lose situation, what they whould do is show the stig how to drive the thing properly otherwise everyone will say..... they only got that time cos they had a trained driver to do it blah blah blah, all the other manufacturers then whinge its not fair...... or do they...... personally id love to see footage of a WR1 being driven properly on any show whether against something or not..... top gear is entertainment and nothing else you only have to look at clarkson's videos to realise that.

hawk

 

yes but you are missing the point completely!! You were'nt there! You didn't see who got on the throttle first, who had the confidence to do full-rev upshifts (do YOU have the pulls to do a full-throttle upshift from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 3rd in a 911 turbo???) and so on.

You lot are not much better than trolls, you can't see the wood for the trees.

 

Well thats as maybe, but I can filter bull****.

 

davyboy, not sure if you've driven a 911 turbo or similar, but I think the average punter would be much better getting a fast time in a wr1 than a 911 turbo on an average road (ie not a dragstrip / race track / perfectly flat 3 lane motorway)

 

I disagree.

130 bhp counts for a lot.

back at ya

 

edcase here we go again....... maybe gangsta should have explained the encounter more then.......

the facts someone in a WR1 comes on here and states

"I raced a brand new Porsche Turbo on Monday night (with a witness) and was completely equal with him through all gears. "

then what are we to believe if he'd said full throttle shift's etc etc then maybe yes there would be more credibility to the story he never said it was a rolling start a standing start or anything just that he kept up with it...... thats why people flamed him (me included)

so which side of the moral-high fence do you sit now ed (you troll basher)

 

Perhaps you should of asked more before assuming bull****!

easy to turn it around

 

Too busy to argue, I've made my point.

In a real world, real driver, real road situation, 1 or even 2 seconds doesn't mean ****. People make mistakes, have not enough / too much confidence, have to deal with bumps / cambers / traffic etc etc.

Also my definition of 'keeping up with' is markedly different to yours.

Having driven a 340bhp Sti and a new 911 turbo, as well as a 355, I can categorically tell you its a damn site more comfortable and confidence inducing for an average driver (not that I'm an average driver of course, I'm merely projecting :P) to gun it though the gears of a 4wd trick-diffed 320bhp car than it is a rwd, rear engined car with more than 420bhp.

regards

 

phil maybe we should have asked more but why post saying something like this without describing the encounter a bit more...... come on youve got to agree on the face of it, it sounds incredible........... but if gangsta posts more up regarding the encounter im willing to eat my hat....

never say never

 

thanks phil, thats exactly what I was trying to say.

 

You drove a 911 Turbo and were unaware it was 4WD?

Dave

 

Oops!



and another thing, its more like 1.5 seconds not 1.0.

This equates to around 15% faster.
Maybe my definition of an 'exact match' isn't an exact match for someone else's definition of 'exact match'?

To me, a 15% difference isn't an exact match. Heck it might even be somewhere around a 15 yard loss every 100 yards.


Lets say a scoob is 1.5 seconds quicker to 100 than an evo. but a fella with an evo claims he can match the scoob exactly. Would you be having it?

 

davyboy youve beat me too it i think im an idiot i thought all new 911 turbos were 4wd too if that isnt the case then it makes gangsta's case look a bit stronger

 

yes. well that renders that part of my argument obsolete but the rest still stands