Autocar MY01 0-100 figures
04 July 2001, 01:54 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just got the latest autocar. Interesting article on 0-100-0 figures.
MY01 WRX no mods:
0-30 1.8 secs
0-60 5.7 secs (same as M5!)
0-100 17.03 secs (better than the figures evo published (thanks toofast!)
100-0 4.55 secs
Total Time 21.86
Not bad for a "heavy ugly old SLOW bus"
MY01 WRX STI 7 warrender 320 mods:
0-30 1.59 secs
0-60 4.57 secs
0-100 11.56 secs
100-0 4.47 secs
Total Time 16.48
Evo 7 warrender 340 mods:
0-30 1.62 secs
0-60 4.33 secs
0-100 11.71 secs
100-0 4.55 secs
Total Time 16.48
As a comparison
X - type Sport 3.0 23.21
Clio 172 23.65 secs
M5 18.11
M3 17.04
STI 7 (320 mod) 16.48
Evo 7 (340 mod) 16.44
550 Maranello 15.68
Surprised the sti 7 matches the evo 7!!! It gains after 60 and beats it on the breaks!
911 Turbo 14.30
Tuscan 14.04
But then for all you "i kept up with a sportsbike in a straight line" / bikes are pants people:
GSXR 1000 12.3 sec despite difficult launch!!
Anyone got classic shape UK Turbo / P1 figures?
Jza
[This message has been edited by Jza (edited 04 July 2001).]
MY01 WRX no mods:
0-30 1.8 secs
0-60 5.7 secs (same as M5!)
0-100 17.03 secs (better than the figures evo published (thanks toofast!)
100-0 4.55 secs
Total Time 21.86
Not bad for a "heavy ugly old SLOW bus"
MY01 WRX STI 7 warrender 320 mods:
0-30 1.59 secs
0-60 4.57 secs
0-100 11.56 secs
100-0 4.47 secs
Total Time 16.48
Evo 7 warrender 340 mods:
0-30 1.62 secs
0-60 4.33 secs
0-100 11.71 secs
100-0 4.55 secs
Total Time 16.48
As a comparison
X - type Sport 3.0 23.21
Clio 172 23.65 secs
M5 18.11
M3 17.04
STI 7 (320 mod) 16.48
Evo 7 (340 mod) 16.44
550 Maranello 15.68
Surprised the sti 7 matches the evo 7!!! It gains after 60 and beats it on the breaks!
911 Turbo 14.30
Tuscan 14.04
But then for all you "i kept up with a sportsbike in a straight line" / bikes are pants people:
GSXR 1000 12.3 sec despite difficult launch!!
Anyone got classic shape UK Turbo / P1 figures?
Jza
[This message has been edited by Jza (edited 04 July 2001).]
04 July 2001, 03:24 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by toofast:
<B>0-100 in 17 seconds is not better than an evo. It's around 12 seconds. [/quote]
Better than EVO magazine I think you'll find was the point.
Damnit I really ought to refresh the screen more often....
[This message has been edited by BT52b (edited 04 July 2001).]
<B>0-100 in 17 seconds is not better than an evo. It's around 12 seconds. [/quote]
Better than EVO magazine I think you'll find was the point.
Damnit I really ought to refresh the screen more often....
[This message has been edited by BT52b (edited 04 July 2001).]
Trending Topics
04 July 2001, 05:50 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember autocar testing the P1 and old shape back in 2000. The MY00 as I recall posted an unimpressive 0-100 of about 16.4 ish its total time was about 20-21 I seem to recall.
Can't remember the P1
Must have been a duff example MY00.
Glad to see the MY01 kicked the 172 into touch. Was it the new 172?
I am gonna have to buy teh mag.
Can't remember the P1
Must have been a duff example MY00.
Glad to see the MY01 kicked the 172 into touch. Was it the new 172?
I am gonna have to buy teh mag.
04 July 2001, 11:20 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
john banks, toofast,
The autocar figures are 0 to 100 and back to 0, so you cant compare these with 0-100 figures.
The autocar figures all differ from Evos EPR test figures which goes to prove that staistics dont prove anything...
The autocar figures are 0 to 100 and back to 0, so you cant compare these with 0-100 figures.
The autocar figures all differ from Evos EPR test figures which goes to prove that staistics dont prove anything...
05 July 2001, 09:03 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last year Autocar used the old press 5 door MY00, which shall we say was past its best 
I have the mag at home, so if I remember will check what times it had tonight.
I have the mag at home, so if I remember will check what times it had tonight.
05 July 2001, 10:55 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
MarkWRX - I was comparing 0-100 for MY99 and MY01 as quoted in the post. Both not including braking time, MY99 is 16% quicker 14.6 compared with 17.0.
[This message has been edited by john banks (edited 05 July 2001).]
[This message has been edited by john banks (edited 05 July 2001).]
06 July 2001, 01:53 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by CraigH:
<B>Is this the same issue where Autocar said no Mitsubishi or Subaru can keep up with the M3, yet 2 beat it's times?
[/quote]
No, that was the issue before but if you are talking modified cars, I am sure the 5.0 V8 engined 500hp+ Hartage M3 conversion would more than hold its own against the Warrender modded EVOs and STis
<B>Is this the same issue where Autocar said no Mitsubishi or Subaru can keep up with the M3, yet 2 beat it's times?
[/quote]No, that was the issue before
but if you are talking modified cars, I am sure the 5.0 V8 engined 500hp+ Hartage M3 conversion would more than hold its own against the Warrender modded EVOs and STis
06 July 2001, 02:12 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gary,
I am sure something like hyperex's Impreza, would more than hold its own against a hartge m3 conversion, and you would probably have change for a superlight r as well, just incase it didn't.
0-100 in around 8 secs. nuff said.
I wonder how much power it would take to start giving the mclaren f1 a run for its money at 6.6 seconds up to 100?
I will let you know, if I ever build my project engine.
I am sure something like hyperex's Impreza, would more than hold its own against a hartge m3 conversion, and you would probably have change for a superlight r as well, just incase it didn't.
0-100 in around 8 secs. nuff said.
I wonder how much power it would take to start giving the mclaren f1 a run for its money at 6.6 seconds up to 100?
I will let you know, if I ever build my project engine
.
06 July 2001, 02:50 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Robertio:
<B>Found it
Figures for dodgey MY00:
0-100 - 16.31
React - 0.46
Total - 21.32[/quote]
So let me get this right. All the classic car shape owners have been telling people to buy an MY00 car rather than the MY01 on the basis that its LOADS faster.
Now the figures are saying its only 0.7 secs slower 0-100-0 (and indead to 100 its only .7 secs slower) - and its got a restrictive exhaust and ways half a ton more.
Thats very very interesting. All those owners who said they test drove an MY01 and its bollox slow compared to the ~MY00 - what do you say about that then????? Did you ever really test the car or was it a load of BS????
Still want a Tuscan!!
Jza
<B>Found it
Figures for dodgey MY00:
0-100 - 16.31
React - 0.46
Total - 21.32[/quote]
So let me get this right. All the classic car shape owners have been telling people to buy an MY00 car rather than the MY01 on the basis that its LOADS faster.
Now the figures are saying its only 0.7 secs slower 0-100-0 (and indead to 100 its only .7 secs slower) - and its got a restrictive exhaust and ways half a ton more.
Thats very very interesting. All those owners who said they test drove an MY01 and its bollox slow compared to the ~MY00 - what do you say about that then????? Did you ever really test the car or was it a load of BS????
Still want a Tuscan!!
Jza
06 July 2001, 03:10 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jza, as I mentioned above, they used an old press release MY00.
Which by their own admission was dying on its feet, it had lost out to an S3 when tested in a previous issue of Car (not that I buy too many magazines or anything when they too said it was a poor example )
As you probably know most tested Scoobies (old style) put in times between 14.5 and 15 for 0-100 runs, even my less than healthy model is faster that that (based on 30-110 (on clock) plus 2 seconds (estimated to reach 30 and change gear)
Which by their own admission was dying on its feet, it had lost out to an S3 when tested in a previous issue of Car (not that I buy too many magazines or anything
when they too said it was a poor example )As you probably know most tested Scoobies (old style) put in times between 14.5 and 15 for 0-100 runs, even my less than healthy model is faster that that (based on 30-110 (on clock) plus 2 seconds (estimated to reach 30 and change gear)
07 July 2001, 08:51 AM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Adam M:
<B>Gary,
I am sure something like hyperex's Impreza, would more than hold its own against a hartge m3 conversion, and you would probably have change for a superlight r as well, just incase it didn't.
0-100 in around 8 secs. nuff said.
I wonder how much power it would take to start giving the mclaren f1 a run for its money at 6.6 seconds up to 100?
I will let you know, if I ever build my project engine.[/quote]
What's a hyperex impreza?? 0-100 in 8 secs if damned fast and would need over 400bhp per tonne
Is there a close-to 500bhp impreza?? 
mmmmmmmm horse power
<B>Gary,
I am sure something like hyperex's Impreza, would more than hold its own against a hartge m3 conversion, and you would probably have change for a superlight r as well, just incase it didn't.
0-100 in around 8 secs. nuff said.
I wonder how much power it would take to start giving the mclaren f1 a run for its money at 6.6 seconds up to 100?
I will let you know, if I ever build my project engine
.[/quote]What's a hyperex impreza?? 0-100 in 8 secs if damned fast and would need over 400bhp per tonne
Is there a close-to 500bhp impreza?? mmmmmmmm horse power
07 July 2001, 09:13 AM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If only the MY01 had decent looking lights, weighed a bit less and had the 250bhp variable valve timing engine it would be fantastic and I would change now. I know you can buy a light conversion and PPP but you end up spending far more and it puts it up against another class of car. As it is, although the handling is obviously superior it doesn't give you that punch in the back power delivery of the MY00, and so I'll never buy it - call me shallow, maybe. Shame that I would have to buy a PPP or STI to get the same fun when I change - would rather have 330i than MY01, and probably M3 or EVO rather than STI. And then you'll all slag me for buying a BM But the 330i to me is a much better machine then the MY01 except in the wet and a lot of the time feels at least as quick. Flame suit on - it's just that all the reasons I bought the MY00 have disappeared with the new model - now a Clio 172 can overtake as quickly (no turbo lag) and an S3 is considerably faster - for goodness sake even my V6 406 can go 50-70 in 5th quicker than the new Impreza, and only 0.6s slower 60-100 through the gears (11.9 vs 11.3) and it only cost £7k! A 156 V6 is faster still through the gears. The old shape Impreza does 60-100 in about NINE SECONDS. When I went to try a MY01 and turned up in the Pug and got back in it afterwards it felt just as quick Suddenly the MY01 has become unimpressive compared with the other choices at similar budget, whereas the old one blew everything else in its price range away. 2.5 sec slower to 100, 2 sec slower 50-70 etc etc. Now I am a huge fan of Imprezas but just could not entertain the new shape with that performance hit and an extra 150kg or so.
[This message has been edited by john banks (edited 07 July 2001).]
But the 330i to me is a much better machine then the MY01 except in the wet and a lot of the time feels at least as quick. Flame suit on - it's just that all the reasons I bought the MY00 have disappeared with the new model - now a Clio 172 can overtake as quickly (no turbo lag) and an S3 is considerably faster - for goodness sake even my V6 406 can go 50-70 in 5th quicker than the new Impreza, and only 0.6s slower 60-100 through the gears (11.9 vs 11.3) and it only cost £7k! A 156 V6 is faster still through the gears. The old shape Impreza does 60-100 in about NINE SECONDS. When I went to try a MY01 and turned up in the Pug and got back in it afterwards it felt just as quick Suddenly the MY01 has become unimpressive compared with the other choices at similar budget, whereas the old one blew everything else in its price range away. 2.5 sec slower to 100, 2 sec slower 50-70 etc etc. Now I am a huge fan of Imprezas but just could not entertain the new shape with that performance hit and an extra 150kg or so.[This message has been edited by john banks (edited 07 July 2001).]