Unbelievable
 

I'm completely blown away by how well the RS3's, Golf R's etc get the power down and how quick they are to 60,100 etc from the launch. Shaun's motor on here is the perfect example.

A few months back I got talking to a fella at Knockhill who has a modified S3 8P and the figures and performance stats on that car are staggering.

It's running 554bhp, 0-60 in 2.8s / 0-100 in 6.2s / 62-124 in 6.4s / 1/4 in 10.5 @ 134mph @ Crail & 10.6s @ 132mph @ Santa Pod.


Unreal :eek:

The gap is gone - we are now the prey.

subaru's own fault for not moving with the times. Modern cars is heavier with no extra power.

It comes at a cost though. How much for a basic new RS3, then on top of whatever mods have been done? what about when you tick a few option boxes from the factory?

subaru looses at that point as well. seems to be the slowest of all of them now :(

If Subaru had stayed with the cdb and made a few internal modifications they could of kept up with the times ok.

Exactly an rs3 with a few must have options is approaching 50-60K. You could spend 20K on a new scoob, well any luke warm performance car and nuke an rs3, if performance is the only factor, but you would have to be mental to do that :)

100% agree.. look at the Prodrive P2.. I know it was concept but that was where Subaru should have been heading.

Great results on the S3. I thought it was the 2.5 that was supposed to be the monster. I would not be so impressed by the power figures as the actual 1/4 mile times and terminals which are impressive for the power figure too suggesting it is not overstated as so many are. Certainly the 480 HP claims from the supercharged 3.0 S4 at Crail were surprising were not backed up with times anything like as impressive as the power figure suggested they would be.

I'd hate to think of the costs involved of A, buying the car in the first place and B, modifying it to get to those figures.

Spend a similar amount of cash on an Impreza and you'll have yourself something that would be pretty untouchable.

Would it though? I'll need to ask Liam how much roughly it has cost him to get his S3 to this stage.

Personally I feel where these motors trump the high powered Impreza's and Evo's is the automatic gearbox, so slick in comparison to the manual and the time saved on that alone. Plus, they're so easy to launch.

The Golf/A3 platforms do indeed have a lot of potential.

Problem is getting the bits...need some good salvage yards for the bits :lol1:

Personally I'd get a MK7 shell. Golf R doner for most of the drivetrain/suspension etc. And a engine from a TTRS or RS3. If that's too expensive, then the 3.6 engine from a Porsche Cayenne or Passat R36...fit forged pistons, drop the CR and turbo it.

Of course this has already been done before by German tuners HGP, and they'll do a 700bhp Golf all for you just for the princely sum of €96000 :eek: ( http://www.hgp-turbo.de/golf-vii-sonderumbau.html ).

If I have kids by the time I decide to do a project like this, I'll use a VW Touran as a base car...the beauty of the shared VAG platforms is how much stuff simply swaps over.

Including purchasing the car he reckons roughly 42k all in.

You can pick up the car for 14k now so roughly 34k to have that performance and stats.

Are we really saying a 550bhp classic with a sequential couldnt match those times,

DSG is at least 0.5 sec if not more,

550 on a scoob with meth isnt new,

Sure it ran those times on race fuel, e85 or meth with 1 seat,

Still a great achievement considering it done it on rainsports at Crail

I'm not saying that no, in fact I'm fairly certain above I'm saying the gearbox is a huge contributing difference between the acceleration times. Stick a sequential box in a Scooby or Evo that's similar power etc then it may be a different story.

How much time is lost through manual H pattern gear changes?

For example I've got 500+ bhp in my Evo and I'm doing

0-60 : 3.6s
0-100 : 8.4s
30-130 : 12.1s
62-124 : 8.6s

1/4 mile in roughly 12s @ 120

All these tests have a few gear changes, it's hard to tell by viewing the data but I'm changing into 2nd gear before 60 so there's some time lost there, probably .2 of a second. So with 62-124mph I'm maybe losing .6 of a second, maybe more.

So a sequential would probably make a huge difference, but then you're talking another huge expense which in theory makes the S3 look even better.

I'm actually a bit confused by my 1st to 2nd gear change now that I'm looking back at the data. I'm sure my rev limit is set to either 8k or even 8200k. I must be shifting slightly early but I'd still expect my speed to be closer to the 60mph when I change gear than what it appears to be. Some time lost there maybe. I'll need to check the 6sp ratios and compare.


So in theory how much are we talking about spending to get an Impreza to do them sort of speeds and times, the same as the S3??

let's start off with a blobeye sti, let's say a nice example for 8k.

How much until we achieve 10.5 @ 130+ mph?

0.5 seconds over what test? The 62-124mph?

And I never mentioned the rainsports that are fitted :Suspiciou do you know the car? Lol!

A manual gearchange takes a lot longer than 0.2 seconds (20ms).

I think the first Audi TT DSGs were listed as having a 20ms shift time.

Add a zero in that; TT 3.2 S-Tronic was measured on average at 200ms although it was often touted at 8milliseconds. Which after many forum arguments has been discredited as marketing.

Whilst the actual gearshift between an odd gear to an even, which just switches from one clutch to the other (so no actual physical gearshift, just clutches swapping between gearsets), it "could" be done in 8ms. It doesn't though; a 8ms balls out clutch engagement would be a big jolt on the drivetrain probably mince the dual mass flywheel or something else pretty quick whilst under warranty, so engagement is slowed along with the mapped throttle closing/opening to rev match and smooth power and stop the revs flaring, so whilst the next gear is engaged you are not quite getting full power at the wheels.

Newer models are quicker; even the diesels. But it does vary from FWD to Quattro/4motion cars and if it's the dry plate or wet plate box..the dry plate seems to give a rougher engagement which can feel quicker, but it's probably not.

Driven a 3.2 DSG TT and it's about right; its slower on downshifts than up shifts and doesn't quite let the engine flat shift like you shouldn't do in a manual :Nono: But yeah I do on occasion and it seems to cope, but there is a delay valve in the clutch pedal that slows engagement, annoyingly.

Anyhoo that still makes a slow DSG reliably twice as fast as the average unreliable manual gear change.

Sorry, yes, unfortunate typo. Didn't realise it wasn't actually true, though!

Over the standing quarter.

Yea cars facebook famous haha.

Gd to see how far it will be pushed.

Recently got new fancy clutch packs fitted expecting low tens when setup.

If its just times

Id rather a classic for weight benefits

But 6 speed takes a little of tht away.

Forged 3k deck closed 4k

Turbo mani etc 2_3k

Fuelling 1500-2k

6 speed 2k

Syvecs or cheaper alternative 2k 3k.

Id say car plus 20k you would get change back and run a 10.

Will never daily anything like that s3 tho.

The jekel and hyde of it couldnt be matched in anything jap imho

My stock internals blobeye ran a 12.7 @ 110 with 400bhp and another mate ran 11.9 in a stock internals bugeye around 450 ish

Seem to remember on the VWROC there was a lad with a MK7 Golf R that ran a high 10 with fairly basic modifications.

DSG car (obviously!)
Decat Downpipe
Intercooler
Intake
Stronger Recirc Valve
Big Bore Intake Pipe
DSG Map
Custom Engine Map

I think he was running a touch of meth in his fuel, but the new breed of hot hatches are no joke with a few mods and the auto boxes with launch control. There are a lot of MK7 Golf R DSG which will pull 11s on a 1/4 mile all day long, the game has moved on a LONG way since the Subaru was fighting Evos for the 'affordable road rocket' honours.

I love Subarus but there are absolutely no Subarus (or Evos) that I'd want as a daily over any of the MQB-platform VAG cars if I'm honest.. as a fun car that has some soul and occasion though, the VAG stuff is a bit bland after a while and that's why I've decided to move away from my Golf R to an M3.