Well i sure am glad i spend 99% of my driving time on a strip then

 

Yes probably because your car is unreliable for road use as you have probably tuned it to within an inch of its life

 

1.2bar? Also seeing no abnormal knock voltages or excessive timing pull, sounds fine to me

 

what is your cars full spec if you dont mind me asking ?

 

Sure thats no problem... perhaps it'll put the thread a bit back on track

AUM engine code
jabbasport chip
GHL 3' downpipe/sportscat/scorpion catback with discreet tailpipes

thats the only bits that matter power wise but other than that...

samco hoses, samco turbo intake hose, forge smic, carbonio induction kit and a bailey recirc. DV.

If you want to know about interior/exterior changes shoot me a PM and i'll gladly show you some pics etc.

 

http://www.redlinerumble.co.uk/index.html
Mk2 golf 1.8T stage3 IHI 11.84sec qtr mile. over 120mph terminals. So what would a scoob need John equal bhp, 370, 380bhp. Also this golf did a sub 9 seconds 0-100mph. And a v-max at brunters of 170mph. No nitrous.

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 370
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1235
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 304.40
0 - 60 (Secs) : 3.55
0 - 100 (Secs) : 9.14
60 - 100 (Secs) : 5.59
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 12.18
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 115.44
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 11.78
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 119.40

Now this is qtr mile bhp, i wonder what rolling bhp it would need. I know the golf wont do a 3.55sec to 60mph so its making the time up somewhere. I would think when traction had been made. Anyone got a time of 11.8secs roughly in a classic and know there bhp?.

 

This has to be the second best reason ever to register on Scoobynet.

I've driven all sorts of cars over the years. I'm a 39 yo family man with 2 young kids so I really should be driving the 'executive saloon' by now. I could also afford to buy a car that is much faster than a Scoob with or without modifications, but no I choose Scooby because I think it is a fantastic car. I have just as much respect for people that drive Evo, Nova, Supra etc especially those that mod them through the roof.

I have so little respect for those that continually think driving is about racing, and beating/losing the **** off of car xxxxxxx - that's what tracks are for. I drive my car very fast but I'd also like to think I drive it with the road conditions, weather and traffic in mind. If someone wants to do a 2-300 yard sprint off the lights and there's nothing in front of us, sure I'll go for it. Will I **** my pants if I'm left standing, will I come on hear and gloat if I leave the other for dead. Nope, usually I'll ease off the gas and give the opposition the thumbs up and a cheery smile. 99% of them will do the same back and ease off the right foot.

The other 1% start threads like this.

Twatz.

 

Each to there own.

 

cupras r"s are quick cars, but i managed to beat one down a by pass pulled about 2 cars lenghs away,but i do a few mods its a 93 wrx import de-cat ,scooby sport system,hks air filter ,re-map running 1.2 bar

 

Good man. Cant fault ya.

 

Andy did 11.8sec with 369bhp on a standard turbo/engine, if memory serves me correct.

Bob

 

RR, my car has matched the Golf's quarter but I don't have dyno data to know how much over 400 BHP it needed. However, I'm not good at quarter mile gear changes although I can do the launches - I couldn't brutalise the box enough to get into the 11s, T-uk had to do it and he had trouble getting the best 60' with the best gearchanges before I broke the gearbox. One of the 11.8 runs had 2.0 sec 60', whereas it can do 1.8 sec 60', usually this would save you double on the ET suggesting an 11.4 might be possible. There was also playing with tyre pressures to come. I know the in gear increments were a lot quicker than the previous results we had but the terminals didn't reflect this. In other words it wasn't optimised, so the power required for the result (whilst unknown) is higher than strictly needed. However, this is my car, driven daily, done by T-uk and myself in a farm shed and driven by us, it has been to two timed drag sessions ever and done 120+ terminals both times with novice drag racers (us). Big difference between this and picking what I think is the best that has been done by a FWD VAG group car with a 1.8T engine dropped in, from a car that is clearly at the high profile drag days. Issues with gearing and driver can make up the difference between AWD and FWD, but I still think FWD is pointless for a car of that performance as a road car.

If we are comparing what other people's cars can do rather than our own, then the "best of breed" comparison at this level is Andy F's 11.8 with 369 BHP in a WRX RA, possibly a bit lighter than the Golf (although Mk2 at 1235kg sounds a bit heavy?), but he was on road tyres, was the Golf?

What's your best quarter mile?

The point of my contribution to this thread is to illustrate the fallacy of your continual insistence that massive power is needed in a Subaru to keep up with your Ibiza. I still reckon 400 BHP is enough until you show me otherwise. And so it should be - I think the 10% extra power should make up the 10% extra weight and that the AWD setup is an advantage not a disadvantage in most situations. At low speed or in poor conditions, the AWD setup will give traction, at high speed the extra 10% power is overcoming drag which is more important than weight at high speed.

 

So to put your post into basics. Your saying 400bhp roughly. Golf was on R888's, road legal slicks.

What amazes me is that this aint a pissing contest to me, i like seeing the scoob boys bite but its about finding out what it takes in real world conditions. I aint ruled out owning a scooby and it aint about badges its about performance. It could say kia on the back as long as i like it and it performs i dont care.

As for fallacy John then surely once traction aint an issue it must need more bhp than me. 1. To make up for the weight diff, 2. To counter act trans loss even if it is a lot less than we believe. 3. And possibly aerodynamics.

Also on the fallacy front John show me off this thread where i have said a scoob needs X amount of bhp to match me, or 400bhp or 400bhp+. I respect your opinion and accept you are clued up on tuning more than myself. But i dont remember mentioning a bhp required over the last 15 pages or so.

 

Of course it is a pissing contest, I don't know any young(ish) man with a fast car that isn't interested in its relative performance, it doesn't mean they do street/road racing though. I can tell from your posts you're very bothered about what you can beat whilst portraying an air of cool that you like to wind up Scooby boys In the same way, I'm also bothered and cover it up pretending I'm not. Your car's acceleration is clearly impressive otherwise I wouldn't bother arguing with you Agree there is a huge amount of fun having an underdog badge on a fast car.

 

Re your edit, I believe we thrashed this one out in a previous thread

 

Seriously John i have to admit i enjoy seeing the faces of Scoobs/evo boys when i drive off, but dont get confused between brand loyalty and moving onto a diff car which may provide me with greater performance. So when you see scoobs getting a slating you should check my posts on another site we use. I have been very close to buying a scoob so close it was almost a done deal. Also look and see who defends the scoob and gives a fair impression and openly admits they would buy one if i felt i could achieve the performance i req within my budget and it was reliable. Theres very few who say it but i do. Now as for pulling scoob owners legs i can only show you this post (look for the fishing going on) i know they will bite its easy and fun. Now remember these posts and when/if i get a scoob i will come back and give a fair honest comparrison and i will also tell people what bhp was required for the cars to be equal on rolling runs.

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthrea...ht=guisborough

 

LOL was that an admission that i was right and you were wrong John. Over the last 15 pages i said. Let the pissing resume. Cheers John LOL.

 

I've offered a spanking on the other BBS We could even try different boost levels to see what is required

 

Ive got to say i am really diappointed with this Seat thread,oh its faster oh its better oh it will beat my Scoob.Horse****! let me remind everyone that this Italian,pasta eatin,mafia joinin pile of parma ham pish is front wheel drive and while it may give u a fright at 120mph the fact remains that it is front wheel drive and off the start line will be left behind ur AWD baby along with the Civic type r wheelspining going nowhere.Anyone thats been to a shootout knows the only thing to get off the line quick are 4WDs.Watch the Cupra blow up over the years,its a SEAT.

 

Complete and utter dipstick

Italian....LOL

There is more evidence/proof that a subaru will blow up well before a 1.8T SEAT.

editied to say......Standard Mahle pistons have been tested to 700bhp without failure!

 

lol you MMMUUUPPPPET!! seat are SPANISH!!!

 

That should read, Spanish, paella eating, basque separist joining pile of tortilla pish....

 

m8jof you've completely underestimated the 1.8T I'm afraid - I can even harrass a bugeye in our (standard) Octavia vRS especially if you catch the WRX in the wrong gear. It will spool up a turbo like a 2.0 Subaru and make similar power at similar boost level whilst returning 50% better economy. The Ibiza will do all this with 10% lower weight than a classic Subaru. Agree on FWD to a point.

 

Lets do it, it would be intresting to see what boost you would require to match and then how much to go past. We need to come up a way of going about it.

m8jof behave yourself.

 

I can't believe that I've just wasted an hour and a half reading through this post. The only saving grace is I'm at work and got paid for said hour and a half!

I love my car to bits - 1994 Subaru Impreza WRX, and that's all that matters to me. All this, my car is faster than yours, mines been remapped etc, it's like pissing into the wind. At the end of the day they are both pretty cool cars IMHO. Cheers.

Ben

 

cupra r's aint "cool", lets get that part right now ok

 

Whatever.

 

Im off to look at part ex'ing my sti 4 for a cupra r tomorrow.Wanted one when I got the sti but I couldn't stretch to one.Now I have a better paid position I can so thats what i'm looking at doing.

Quick cars as standard,easy to boost the power and they actually come with decent brakes as standard,not like the complete load of toss that is fitted as standard to my sti.

Colin

 

hmm, dont think you'l like the cupra coming from an sti man, nice power but ur gonna lose handling and presence big time!

 

sorrrryyy then let me re phrase that for you ok, i dont think cupra's are cool, is that fair enough with you benjamin???