I think 10.60 has to be correct as they wouldn't be able to publish this information due data protection. The STI is probably a lot slower as its not got a much horse power which would mean that with less power its not going to go as fast which would mean that the more power a car has that it would be a faster car and 10.6 is faster than 12 so the WR1 win's and is a much better car in every possible way.

 

Much better car than what?

 

 

Oh dear

 

Bless him.

 

School holidays are here.

 

As people have said the general consensus is that the book figures are a little optimistic to say the least...but i know of someone that claimed to get their 2003 STi PPP from 0 to 60 in 4.8 seconds...close to the 4.6 quoted

A Redline launch and then smashed the car into 2nd without the clutch and bounced it off the Redline in 2nd...apparently a UK 6 speed will do 60MPH in 2nd when hard on the limiter...

...just shows how hard you have to try to get near the book figure and i certainly would never treat my car like that...in fact i have never treated a hire car that bad

For me...If Prodrive say the car will do a 0 to 60 launch in 4.6 seconds who am i to try and prove them wrong...I'm very found of my engine, gearbox, diffs, tyres etc

 

Well who am I to argue
They are marginly better on the road to a normal sti of the same era although the wr1 has the dccd which i dont think was on the sti of the same generation. So more fun in the snow

Agreed, in reality you will put a lot of wear and tear on the car if you try to get book launch figures out of the car. Get a normal 2003/2004 sti on a track vs a wr1, not convinced there will be all that much noticeable difference.

Must admit on track the wr1 in my opinion is more fun than the rb320 as the rb320 is a lot torquier so you use less revs, keep in a higher gear making track days easier and less of an effort which reduces the fun. In the WR1 you are revving it high to keep in the power band, in a lower gear normally to compared to the rb320 and are constantly working the gears. WR1 has more feel through the wheel and feels more nimble. The rb320 with its wider sticky semi slick corsair tyres has more grip but is a completely different feel to drive.

In my opinion of course as I know plenty will probably disagree as the RB320 has the rep of being the best car subaru did before they spoilt them.

 

If a WR1 weight is 1470 kg it would need around 375 bhp to get near 0-100 in 10.6 secs. I think a standard WR1 was 316 bhp which would do 0-100 in around 12.8 secs.
I don't think this calculator is too far off the mark.
http://www.torquestats.com/modified/...bmit=Calculate

 

Handling wise the WR1 aint even in the same league as the RB320. RB320 doesn't under steer for a start

 

But the 320 does unfortunately have the weakest engine known to man

On a plus point though the 320 is a good looking car, not sure I could pull off the awful WR1 colour

 

Love the RB 320, which looks like a fab car also. However the extra width of the tyres means that there is more drag which means that it needs more energy to over come mechanical contact grip patches. Doing some rough calculations (and I have timed this in my head by counting seconds, one thousand, two thousand, three thousand etc) the WR1 can get to 100 in eleven seconds (I counted eleven thousand, glanced my speedcounter - 100). In terms of top speed they are identical (take 10 mph off of the highest top speed from speedcounter). At the end of the day they are both great, so we should not be arguing - the WR1 just happens to be a little better / faster.

 

Are you being serious?

 

Are you seriously suggesting that the WR1 is a superior car to the RB320?

Edited, with apology.

But anyone who can claim that the WR1 is a better car than an RB320 is seriously lacking in knowledge.

 

Absolutely love the way you have described how to count, ******* priceless

 

Just proud to explain in detail something that required a lot of effort

 

the engine etc in the wr1 is better than the chocolate crap fitted to the rb 320 but I could live with an engine rebuild to make a reliable car.
the god awful colour of the wr1 I couldn't.

 

I've been having a real crap day today and this post had me rolling with laughter. Cheers

Oh and for the record, i tried your timing method and my RB did 0-100 in 5 seconds. I'm happy with this result so think i will stick to your method in future.

 

im pretty sure they use the same timing method in f1, oh and a Ferrari has much wider tyres than my car so im sure im faster to 100 due to some crazy contact patch shizzle.


where are these tools coming from lately??? dam school holidays lolololol

 

Its funny how he calculated the extra C/O loss difference in the wider tyre but i wonder whether he included the difference between the WR1 17" wheels and the RB320 18" wheels ? I must admit, the maths needed to work all that out is way beyond me. Mabe WE could help me out here and post up the mathematical formula he used ?

 

wr1 has 18 inch pf7s

 

This is a pretty unbias test between a few subaru's including the WR1 by a well respected Magazine

http://www.litimports.co.uk/images/p...e/evopage8.jpg

 

the op should know the universal timing method used in f1,wrc,touring cars is

1 elephant
2 elephant
3 elephant.


try this method and report back.....

 

I believe this is him working on it last night...

 

I think WE needs to change his location to "Way out there" as opposed to Earth because he's definitely from another Planet.

Mental pictures of 1 one thousand 2 one thousand have got me in stitches as i type this.

thank you very much that has to be one of the best ever posts on Snet.

 

Then after such mathematical genius he resorted to counting 1 thousand, 2 thousand ect as a timing method This is comedy gold.

 

who worked that out for you, your goldfish?

 

Blobeye Spec-C 320bhp and 1370KG=11.1 to 100mph
WR1 320bhp and 1470kg=10.6 to 100mph????? Er....No!!

Same with the 0-60 times, Spec-C booked at 4.3 and WR1 at 4.25

Edited to add its the same as any other version 8 blobeye with the addition of dccd which was already available on the JDM cars,sportscat and a remap.

 

Thanks for the mixed bag of emotions. I’m sorry if I have upset a few of you, but please don’t shot the messenger. In additional to attaining a GCSE in CDT I further studied astrology, hence know a thing or two about aerodynamics. So just a quick lesson – of course a Ferrari is going to be faster. Contact patch is irrelevant if a) your co-drag efficient is sub .33 and b) you got potso cash in an off shore account. Much there is on the iterweb (URLs) about the handling characteristics of the WR1 v RB320. The issue is that the RB320 will typically not under steer due to the rev limiter (right foot) of the RB driver. Most have leather seat upgrade so that they can wipe the seats clean if any of their shopping bags fall over on the way back from Asda. Also – RB's should check this, the Michelin Corsar tyre has a directional tread pattern which was side specific – nearly 78.64% of them were fitted on the wrong side. Whilst outer nub textuals may say (left or right) it’s a yellow square on the inside wall which should have the acronym “PEN15". You can either take the wheels off and check or run your hand around the inside wall as the lettering sits proud of the tyre. If you struggle to feel "PEN15" then I'd take to a main Subaru dealership and have them look for your "PEN15". Quite a few RB's are finding they don't have one.

Please have patients with me as I'm new to Subaru's and have a lot to learn.

I would just like to thank "thenewgalaxy" for the retard comment - my legal team will be working with you on a twitter-esque slander "settle on the steps" package - I'm hoping this will pay for a full decat system and one of those magic tree 'new car scent' smellys (mum always comments on how clean the car is with a fresh one opened). For this I thank you.

If you need any more tecnica (see what I did there) help feel free to PM me.

Best WE!

 

I like your style WE.