Hi just been reading up about the specs of the wr1 , loads of places quoting they'll do it in 4.2? Wondering how as it's same power as an rb n they down as 4.8.. Just that there a 2litre, anyone shed any light on this 😊

 

It was quoted at 4.25s to 60mph.

I've always thought it was utter nonsense you'd be doing very well to get within half a second of that let alone under five seconds.

 

rb320 is a 2.5 litre, the wr1 is a 2.0 and basically just a slightly tweeked map wise sti.

 

Yeah that's what I thought, I have an rb atm and can't see a wr1 being half a sec quicker , more or less the same I would if thought

 

probably taking into account the dogsh1t 2.5 engine blowing its head gasket and ringlands

 

I wouldn't recommend doing it too often, but have you launched your car?

I found my 2.0 bug and blob UK STIs easier to launch than my 2.5 STI. The 2.5s seemed to bog down or run out of revs too quickly.

I would not be surprised if the 2.0 cars were marginally quicker to 60mph on that basis, though I'd expect the RB to be stronger at higher speeds.

 

wr1 dccd (not widetrack) plated diffs, better mapp, prodrive locked ignition side of ecu. all adds up to half a second. 316bhp standered..

 

I've launched mine once since I've had it, and only from around 4.5k. It went like a scalded cat, and stank of clutch for 5 minutes after. I could believe the 4.25-60, but you'd have to drive it like you don't give a hoot with a 6-7k launch and just bang it into second and 3rd. Not the way to treat your pride and joy.

 

4.25 must be face ripping , I used to have a c63 what do it in 4.5 and that caused massive neck ache lol

 

I always think these manufacturer 0-60 times are 'in theory'.

Enter weight, bhp, gear ratios and (perhaps) drag coefficient into a computer and it will calculate what the car could do.

Even then, there's no physical way a WR1 could out-do a 350 bhp Hawk Spec C.

Ps - might dislocate your shoulders as well.

 

I'd be surprised if that's correct,I doubt if my Evo is that fast 0-60 with 390 bhp

 

So what times have people clocked 0-60 on 1/4 mile runs with respective power? I'm sure in a thread I read the other day that someone had clocked a 4.2 to 60 with 350 bhp in a wrx. Don't forget the times would've been done in almost perfect conditions by a professional driver, that doesn't care if it breaks.

 

0-60 timed at Trax a few years ago mind.

380 bhp

3.59



I would think it's a bit quicker with latest spec 520 bhp


subaru wrx sti type ra 0-60 sprint at Trax silver…:

 

everyone know the 0-60 times at Trax are pure fiction

 

Oh...i suppose thé 11.57 quarter at thé pod with same spec was fiction aswell.

 

With sticky tyres and lightened presumably.

Makes the 'standard' WR1 time look a bit dubious doesn't it?

 

Toyo r888 only back seats removed and the weight of a full cage.

Was the first run on cold tyres ....

Runs after were 3.8 and 4.03 as bogged down on launch.
The first run it just hooked up and took off. Dccd fully locked and car had v5 ra 5 speed box and diffs.

About 5500rpm and side step clutch .. no launch control.

 

4.5 with 299/260 @1bar

2003 WRX with a 4k launch into a very strong headwind




I'm hoping for 4.2 or less with 333/307 on my next run.

 

0 to 60 times are pretty meaningless in the real world.

 

I've owned both that you mention, Spec C would have beaten the WR1 but not by a lot.

 

That's as maybe.

But it's what sells cars to anyone with a passing interest in performance (along with bhp).

 

I had a race with an AMG C63 2 weeks ago, in a straight line up hill i kept up with it. i was quite surprised, was expecting it to be faster. we caught up to traffic and i backed off and drove sensibly, he ended up driving like a complete **** trying to get away and beat me, he nearly hit 2 cars head on while overtaking in a 30 zone

4.5 seconds in a 300bhp impreza isn't far off, 4.2 might be a bit hopeful

 

Point is that it would, and despite advances in technology.
0-60 in sub-5 at the time the WR1 came out would have been supercar performance.

I loved the blurb I had when I got my Cat. The traction made up for the difference in power between a Cat and a Ferrari and BM apparently.

But if you're a thoroughbred it's not 0-60 or even 0-100, it's 0-endpoint.

However imo you can never get to 'endpoint' in this country, so I'm MORE than happy with 0-60 without wheelspin.

 

As (being kind) some AMG owners probably do.
Sort of 'mightier than thou' attitude, yet have to drive like ***** to actually prove it.

I wouldn't want to meet one, because even at 80% in mine over UK roads it would push the 'ordinary' driver (of a snob car) over the edge.

(Cue non-Subaru-owning members of SN....................)

 

No you definitely can't argue with that, trax's times are a finger in the air though

 

I'd say it's probably the most used part of a "city cars" performance so not at all meaningless. Whether or not us mere mortals can achieve the quoted figures is another matter but still relevant IMO as all things being equal, if one cars 0-60 time is 5 seconds and another car is 7 seconds then obviously the lower number wins the traffic light GP which is all that counts in the real world getting from A to B in rush hour.

Much like motor bikes, those that can afford the fastest / fanciest generally tend not to be the best riders / drivers, hence the Rover making a fool out of the Ferrari. and my old Honda VFR 400 leaving a Yamaha R1 rider for dead in Derbyshire while I was 2 up.

 

What isnt accurate with the timing gear used ?

Standard v5 sti ra limited is quoted around 4.2 iirc with 280hp.....

 

Agree These big bhp merc and bmw etc cars my well be great from 50mph to 150mph but if you can get the jump on them at the lights then you are the one smiling and they are the one making excuses to their wife

I posted a vid the other day of two people trying to get a good 0-60 in the new M3, one of the guys trying was from bmw and they were using launch control and struggling to get 5.5 0-60, not very impressive I think.