Notices
ScoobyNet General General Subaru Discussion

Official performance stats for a 2.5 WRX Hawk Eye Saloon

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 3, 2012 | 02:44 PM
  #1  
Leebo310's Avatar
Leebo310
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: Kent
Default Official performance stats for a 2.5 WRX Hawk Eye Saloon

Can someone confirm exactly what the official stats were please?
I know they don't mean much in real world driving but there seems to be a bit of a difference between the ones quoted by Autotrader and the ones on PH and I was just wondering which were the true figures?

PH
227 BHP
0-62 in 6.4 seconds
Combined MPG 31

AT
230 BHP
0-62 in 5.9 seconds
Combined MPG 27.4

Thanks!
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2012 | 06:29 PM
  #2  
phoenixgold's Avatar
phoenixgold
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Default

The leaflets at the dealer when I bought mine agreed with the autotrader figures for the BHP and 0-60 if that helps! I didn't look at the MPG as I didnt' see the point! It certainly never went anywhere near 30MPG while I owned it!!
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2012 | 10:36 PM
  #3  
paulbu's Avatar
paulbu
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Default

Vehicle specification figures quoted on both AT and PH are quite often a load of garbage. Road tests by the likes of Evo magaazine etc in 2006 had the Hawkeye WRX at 230PS (227 BHP), 27.4 mpg overall and 0-60 in 6.2 secs.
Arguably the slowest turbo Impreza ever.
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2012 | 11:11 PM
  #4  
Leebo310's Avatar
Leebo310
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: Kent
Default

Originally Posted by paulbu
Vehicle specification figures quoted on both AT and PH are quite often a load of garbage. Road tests by the likes of Evo magaazine etc in 2006 had the Hawkeye WRX at 230PS (227 BHP), 27.4 mpg overall and 0-60 in 6.2 secs.
Arguably the slowest turbo Impreza ever.
I drove a 2010 plate 2.5 WRX and that felt a lot slower than the hawk eye!
Reply
Old Aug 3, 2012 | 11:53 PM
  #5  
Tomwrx's Avatar
Tomwrx
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (54)
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 1
From: irvine,ayrshire
Default

227bhp was standard for the hawk unless u had the ppp which was 260 i think.

mines was 227bhp when i got it at 10 months, nowhere near that now lol
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2012 | 12:18 AM
  #6  
MattyB1983's Avatar
MattyB1983
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (51)
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,716
Likes: 46
From: Around
Default

227bhp in a car that weighs as much as a small country....lol....
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2012 | 09:48 AM
  #7  
lgtuk's Avatar
lgtuk
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
From: Woking/Colchester
Default

Bang a better breathing exhaust on and your straight upto 254bhp anyway and no need to remap as running spot on only 6bhp short of ppp
Reply
Old Aug 4, 2012 | 11:55 AM
  #8  
paulbu's Avatar
paulbu
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Leebo310
I drove a 2010 plate 2.5 WRX and that felt a lot slower than the hawk eye!
Standard Hawkeye WRX, standard hatch WRX, same power, same weight, there should be no noticable difference in performance. Maybe the hatch was a bit more refined and felt slower because of this.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Scott@ScoobySpares
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
61
Jan 11, 2021 03:08 PM
Scott@ScoobySpares
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
7
Dec 14, 2015 08:16 AM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
20
Oct 22, 2015 06:12 AM
super_ted
Wanted
2
Sep 17, 2015 08:11 PM




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 PM.