chopperman

i think so. I think it was someone claiming a 0-100 in a time far quicker than even the Prodrive over optimistic times.

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Well im sure a company such as Prodrive wouldn't fib about 'official stats' so I guess that means you will just have to sit back and accept that on paper (and on track FPMSL) the WR1 appears to be the better car

PS Maybe they did the test downwind in gale force winds

Busterbulldog

iTrader: (1)

I bought a new one in early 2005,I paid £24,500 for it brand new(list was £30k). At the time the colour looked great, if I remember correctly it was this colour due to Peter Solbergs world rally wins.He was called the iceman,hence the ice blue colour. I liked mine,in 2005 it was the dogs bollox.Myself,at the time I wouldnt have considered an import ( still wouldnt),I prefered to have a dealer to hand....thats my reason.

chopperman

Better car to what ?? The thread was just about the WR1 0-100 times. Nowhere in this thread that i've seen has anyone even mentioned RB320 times if that the car you're referring too? The thread was about someone claiming a WR1 does 0-100 in 10.6 secs when it weighs 1470 kg and only has 316bhp. This was discounted by most as a fantasy so the thread then was re-framed to handles better or is better on track that bla bla bla. An act of desperation it would appear

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Do I remember reading a thread somewhere that said the WR1 was the fastest uk based impreza 0-62 before the CS400 came out??

On paper of course

chopperman

Not sure what this has to do with my post but what was the time you read ?

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

I think it said 0-60 was in 4.25 secs

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/subaru/...subaru-impreza

thenewgalaxy

The published figures are nonsense for the Cosworth in stock form. 3.7s is very fast indeed. 0-62 is around four and a half going off what I have read on test. I have no intention of finding out if that's true!

Assuming that figure and going by in gear acceleration from a GPS thingy in mine 0-100 could probably be a fraction under ten.

chopperman

Wow, especially when you consider there would be 2 gear changes in the 4.25 secs I'm sure some of these mag jurno's get a back hander for printing these figures.
Unless of course the WR1 will do 62 in second gear ?

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Well the WR1 is an amazing bit of kit, it wouldn't surprise me if it could do 62 in second

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

You might not have tried to do the 3.7s under the same conditions as the journalists e.g. down a hill with the wind behind you

thenewgalaxy

Going off torque stats these are the theoretical times possible for the special editions I can think of, plus other cars mentioned in the thread

Impreza Turbo 2000
0-60: 6.5
0-100: 17.0
60-100: 10.5
1/4 Mile: 15.2

Prodrive P1
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 12.7
60-100: 7.9
1/4 Mile: 13.3

WR1
0-60: 4.9
0-100: 12.8
60-100: 7.9
1/4 Mile: 13.3

2005 WRX STi PPP
0-60: 5.1
0-100: 13.1
60-100: 8.0
1/4 Mile: 13.5

RB320
0-60: 4.9
0-100: 12.8
60-100: 7.9
1/4 Mile: 13.3

STi 330s Hatch
0-60: 4.9
0-100: 12.5
60-100: 7.6
1/4 Mile: 13.3

Cosworth CS400
0-60: 4.2
0-100: 9.8
60-100: 5.6
1/4 Mile: 12.5

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

So what you have just proved is that in the real world there is no difference between most of those on the road.

chopperman

I think those times are probably more realistic than the times in any sales brochure or motoring mag . Even to pull these times i think there would be no mechanical sympathy at all

chopperman

Unless you're sat about with your school mates playing Trump cards there is no difference in the real world.

thenewgalaxy

And seeing as the STi Spec C Type RA-R is often quoted as having some insane times, I've put that one through too in base spec:

0-60: 4.6
0-100: 12.4
60-100: 7.8
1/4 Mile: 13.1

Modded to 400bhp as a lot of them are with an uprated turbo, exhaust, filter and remap the weight advantage makes it a bit of a monster!

0-60: 3.8
0-100: 9.4
60-100: 5.6
1/4 Mile: 12.3

Many of the newage guys running around 350bhp can expect something like this:

0-60: 4.6
0-100: 11.7
60-100: 7.1
1/4 Mile: 12.9

And just for comparison, an E92 M3 should be doing:

0-60: 4.8
0-100: 10.6
60-100: 5.8
1/4 Mile: 12.8

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

OMG are we actually agreeing on something

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Well there is no need for the stig any more, you might as well keep going and do your own power lap style chart. Interesting to see the differences and how we should of all probably gone for an E92 M3 and modded on of those for great times instead of butchering our scoobys lol

thenewgalaxy

Mmm yes and no in my opinion.

Let's take a UK Turbo 2000 being driven by a 20 year old kid listening to Radio 1 with a bit of ability and zero common sense and pit him against, say LuckyWelshChap in his Type 20 listening to Radio 4 who is generally a sensible and considerate person. I suspect he'd yield long before either car was tested too much and the older car would waltz into the distance with the VTA dump valve chuffing away.

If we took two good drivers, one in a WR1 and one in an RB320 and let them have a spirited run on a good B road I think two things would settle it, the RB would pull away. Firstly the torque of the RB would give the car a significant advantage and mean less gear swapping and secondly, assuming stock tyres and suspension, the RB would have a little more grip and more importantly, the driver would have more confidence towards the limit of adhesion (superior damping and tyres) assuming it was sensibly driven. Had they fitted it with RE070s as standard it would have been even quicker those tyres are monstrous on the road (if a little unsympathetic with regard to ride quality). Things like wider tracks make a difference on track but as part of a package make the car that little bit easier to drive fast.

I'm speaking from my own experience of having driven these cars by the way, and I'm not referring to the track where I'd assume an RB320 would comfortably outlap a WR1 on any type of circuit be it power or handling type.

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Well I have done several spirited runs in the past when my wr1 was standard with the rb320 and you are right, on hills the rb320 creeps away with its extra torque. Obviously both cars being driven sensibly within limits and not on the ragged edge.

thenewgalaxy

Yeah, it's not like it would streak off into the distance but it has that edge. And that's assuming two sensible and considerate types, not two stigs lol.

I've driven both cars fairly extensively without owning but went from a bug ppp STi to a hawk ppp STi to a widetrack blob ppp STi and the thing I missed about the Hawk was the shove when you weren't quite in the right gear. On private roads (i.e. not the motorway lol) it was great because I'd leave it in top, if you booted it at around 75 it would leave that Passat up your back for dead whereas in the bug and blob I'd drop to 5th.

Kind of as mentioned before though - and I'm sure Chopperman would agree with me (because I like his car and have nice watches too) - a forged 2.5 running 350-400bhp or more is a monster of a road car engine for the same reason that there is such a belt of torque available in higher gears, it's almost like they become your preferential gears for spirited driving rather than the more frenetic delivery of the 2.0 engines.

chopperman

I had a burn up with a WR1 in my RB when it was standard. They were both neck and neck when i was in first and second gear. By third i started to pull in front slightly. By fourth i was pulling away by some distance. And no he didn't give up as i spoke to him at the same meet we were both heading to. I put the extra performance of my RB down to torque and closer gear ratios keeping me in the boost zone. On paper the WR1 may look a fraction quicker because its 25 kg lighter. But it didn't take the torque of closer gear ratios into account. Now with 380/440 and flatfoot shift its quite a bit faster. Only takes a few tweaks with either car to make a huge difference

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Yep I can believe that, more torque would have a better effect higher up the gears so would expect on a drag race the rb320 to pull away as speeds get higher. Plus its more aerodynamic with its smaller scoop, diffusser etc.

thenewgalaxy

Don't be daft the WR1 has a 2.0 engine which is far superior and yours will still explode even though it is forged. If you had any real sense you would't have wasted all that money on a silly UK special edition and bought a JDM car because they rev to 8000rpm!

Megaman what have you had done to your WR1 by the way?

chopperman

Megaman

iTrader: (4)

Well after my super strong 2L engine exploded at 150mph on track I had a forged 2.5L engine dropped in with appropriate mods to get it to SC450 spec.

LuckyWelshchap

I steered clear of a comment that would muddy the waters but in view of your astute observation, what about universally accepted 'independent versions' such as the Type 20 and Type 25?

WR1, RB320, whatever.

There were/are a lot more of you but just take a look at 5th Gear:


The REAL deal.

Oh - and the 0-100 of a WR1, RB320, T20 and T25 are almost identical - if you take gravity into account - and use it .

chopperman

Very nice

LuckyWelshchap

The P1 figures are confirmed by The Sun iirc.
It said that the P1 was a Ferrari beater (or was it beta????)

LuckyWelshchap