0-100mph-0 test
30 July 2003, 12:38 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Autocar they have got their who is fastest from 0-100mph-0 again. The STi PPP is compared against the Evo VIII FQ-300 and loses out.
I checked back to the same test last year, where they tested a standard STi7 (ie No PPP), and there is very little difference between that and this years STi8 with PPP.
Autocar test (0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 0-100-0)
STi PPP 1.75, 5.08, 13.17, 17.81
FQ-300 1.53, 4.42, 11.99, 16.65
STi7 Std 1.75, 5.29, 13.77, 18.40
I know this is only one test etc, but does the STi PPP really live up to its claimed performance figures of 0-60 in 4.6 and 0-100 in 12.2 as it was way off on the above figures?
I checked back to the same test last year, where they tested a standard STi7 (ie No PPP), and there is very little difference between that and this years STi8 with PPP.
Autocar test (0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 0-100-0)
STi PPP 1.75, 5.08, 13.17, 17.81
FQ-300 1.53, 4.42, 11.99, 16.65
STi7 Std 1.75, 5.29, 13.77, 18.40
I know this is only one test etc, but does the STi PPP really live up to its claimed performance figures of 0-60 in 4.6 and 0-100 in 12.2 as it was way off on the above figures?
30 July 2003, 12:46 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Evo has always been the faster car in tests, even the normal one tested against the sti8 ppp is slightly faster. I think evo's are given figures you can actually achieve. The P1 never managed 0-60 in the claimed 4.6 secs, so why would the figures for the sti be any different.
30 July 2003, 12:59 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasnt comparing it with the Evo particularly, it was more that the PPP car seems little faster than the non PPP.
I know the PPP give more low down torque, making it easier at low revs etc, but ultimately is it that much faster in a straight line?
I know the PPP give more low down torque, making it easier at low revs etc, but ultimately is it that much faster in a straight line?
30 July 2003, 07:58 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
having driven sti8 and sti8ppp driveability is much better with ppp and it seems to be considerably faster driving it but compared to p1 seems to slow down >100mph?aerodynamics of scoop
martin
ps-i was depressed with what car results as well!!
martin
ps-i was depressed with what car results as well!!
30 July 2003, 09:01 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Japanese performance magazine tested out the evo VIII FQ300 and the sti8 ppp and got these figures
EVO VIII 4.9 SECS 0-60
STI8 PPP 4.6 SECS 0-60
Seems 2 change every time theres a write up on them!
Didnt mention the 0-100 times though!
[Edited by TON3 - 7/30/2003 9:01:57 PM]
EVO VIII 4.9 SECS 0-60
STI8 PPP 4.6 SECS 0-60
Seems 2 change every time theres a write up on them!
Didnt mention the 0-100 times though!
[Edited by TON3 - 7/30/2003 9:01:57 PM]
Trending Topics
30 July 2003, 10:14 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: CTR EP3 & MX5mk2 letstorquebhp.com
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe its something to do with that the STi, PPP'd or not, is more difficult to launch and do not acheive consitant times, hence they vary between reviews??
30 July 2003, 10:18 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: CTR EP3 & MX5mk2 letstorquebhp.com
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, on this subject, does anyone actually believe the 0-100 in 8sec flat for the Tuscan S?....hmm press cars again?
And the one that shocked me....0.60 in 5.7 and 0-100 in 14.1 for the front wheel drive fwd Alfa 147GTA, have you seen how much that car wheels spins and they still got those times...less than 1 sec slower than the PPP!
And the one that shocked me....0.60 in 5.7 and 0-100 in 14.1 for the front wheel drive fwd Alfa 147GTA, have you seen how much that car wheels spins and they still got those times...less than 1 sec slower than the PPP!
30 July 2003, 10:47 PM
#12
Has the evo got all the electric trick gadgets like launch control, anti lag etc. as standard ?? There's a couple of half seconds right there on a standing start run!
04 August 2003, 05:07 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Solihull
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The big issue with performance testing ANY Subaru is heat soak into the intercooler and the rest of the intake system, if it's still in the std location.
I would imagine that Autocar may not have taken the time to get everything cooled sufficiently to get intake and intercooler temperatures down to normal levels, hence the slightly slower figures than we recorded in our testing.
Regards
Mike
I would imagine that Autocar may not have taken the time to get everything cooled sufficiently to get intake and intercooler temperatures down to normal levels, hence the slightly slower figures than we recorded in our testing.
Regards
Mike
04 August 2003, 05:39 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats good info if you are participating in next weeks Ultmate Street Car at Santa Pod. Do not think there will be much room to drive around off boost to cool charge temps down.
Are there any other ways to keep them low, before lining up at the strip?
Are there any other ways to keep them low, before lining up at the strip?
04 August 2003, 05:45 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Berk (s)
Posts: 2,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as the tests were carried out under similar "road" conditions for both cars, then the result would seem fair.
The difference seems to highlight the susceptibility of the TMIC to heat soak.
D
The difference seems to highlight the susceptibility of the TMIC to heat soak.
D
04 August 2003, 08:23 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
My mate with Deltadash Monitor and Defi's said that over 30mph and off boost I/C spray made no difference to inlet charge Temp suggesting that the TMIC is very effecient at speed in excess of that.
But temps do rise high after a blast and then at very low speeds
IC spays do seem to help when under 20mph
Tony
PS this wasn't a scientific test
But temps do rise high after a blast and then at very low speeds
IC spays do seem to help when under 20mph Tony
PS this wasn't a scientific test
04 August 2003, 10:06 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 4,518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at the totb thread - getting a scoob (any scoob) off the line to its maximum potential seems to be an art - and a pretty brutal one at that involving an almost wanton desire to destroy the clutch.
Why that should be any different on an evo I have no idea but times do seem to be more "obtainable".
Deano
Why that should be any different on an evo I have no idea but times do seem to be more "obtainable".
Deano
06 August 2003, 03:46 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For ***** sake MikeW 
"I would imagine that Autocar may not have taken the time to get everything cooled sufficiently to get intake and intercooler temperatures down to normal levels, hence the slightly slower figures than we recorded in our testing."
Isn't the point that you are supposed to sit in the damn thing and off you go?
Do all subaru/prodrive figures now include a time spent "cooling things down".
How come the EVO blasted the STI's @rse then.... had it been parked in some shade before it ripped off....
maybe they should start quoting the "time exposed to the sun" rather than TED so we can make sure we don't make any crucial mistakes due to car sun stroke...
How about just saying that the EVO kicked its **** and made Prodrive's figures look a mockery...
Jza
"I would imagine that Autocar may not have taken the time to get everything cooled sufficiently to get intake and intercooler temperatures down to normal levels, hence the slightly slower figures than we recorded in our testing."
Isn't the point that you are supposed to sit in the damn thing and off you go?
Do all subaru/prodrive figures now include a time spent "cooling things down".
How come the EVO blasted the STI's @rse then.... had it been parked in some shade before it ripped off....
maybe they should start quoting the "time exposed to the sun" rather than TED so we can make sure we don't make any crucial mistakes due to car sun stroke...
How about just saying that the EVO kicked its **** and made Prodrive's figures look a mockery...
Jza
06 August 2003, 03:50 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Death Star
Posts: 21,835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JZA, read the post again
Mike has a point and as far as I know the EVO does not have a top mount so would be not as badly effected by heat soak.
The big issue with performance testing ANY Subaru is heat soak into the intercooler and the rest of the intake system
