imprezaWRC

http://www.foamcow.net/cabby/pics/EVO1003P103.jpg

look at the figures of Spec C

Behind this animal , CSL and GT3 is nothing

john banks

GT3 is far quicker!

imprezaWRC

yeap from the 0-70mph it's far quicker but look at the 3rd and 4th gear responses

sti-04!!

Had a play with a porsche thing yesterday & it was good fun, no idea what it was though when i was passing it i seen "carrera" on the lid, guy gave me the thumbs up & i went on my merry way

Stephen

imprezaWRC

john banks

It is far quicker once rolling full stop! Just because the gears are numbered the same doesn't mean they are comparable. Road speed in each gear is what counts.

You need to compare 3rd gear on the GT3 with 4th on the Subaru, then the Subaru is obliterated - look at the road speeds achieved in each gear.

GREEN SCOOBY

I dont get it John as they both have 6 speed boxes,do you not compare the times in the same gear as each other?

Neilo

because the ratios of each gear will be different for each car, i.e. the maximum speeds that they can acheive in a given gear will vary. They are generally matched up to the cars power delivery.

E.g. in 3rd gear the GT3 would probably be easily able to do over 100, the Spec C would have blown up long before that as its gear ratio is different.

So, if a car is capable of doing higher speeds in the same gear....then the test is fairly irrelivant and what John says is correct

Neil.

john banks

Exactly, my present 6 speed gearbox results in far quicker acceleration in 3rd gear than the old 5 speed, until you realise that the 3rd gear is like the old 2nd gear, it is just a different number on the gearknob, result is the same - you have to change at about 70mph or so.

Big lazy V8s use tall gearing and low rev limits, VTECs, M3 engines and STis use short gearing and high rev limits. You need all this info and more to compare in gear times intelligently.

GT3 can get along with a combination of high rev limit and longer gearing than the Spec C - helps traction by not having the short gears too short and useless, also you can get away with longer gearing to some degree if you have no turbo (no lag). From the GT3's performance credentials the gearing and whole setup looks fantastic. Would love to try one

GREEN SCOOBY

mmm, ok then so whats the point in the mags doing these tests I am still a bit confused.So something like a Lambo that does 60mph in first and 100 mph in second is better than the porsche because it can do this speed in these gears where the porsche can not? I thought the whole point in the Subarus,m3s and type r civics being shorter geared was to make the acceleration faster in these cars.Still confused and missing your point.

john banks

No, longer or shorter gearing is not "better" or "worse".

It is about matching the engine's power delivery and rev limit to the gearbox.

Shorter gearing alone doesn't make a car quicker, in a lot of cases it is slower because you waste time changing gear. My 1/4 times got longer when I put a six speed in because I am always throwing gears at it.

Mags do the tests but you have to be a little discerning in your interpretation of the figures.

You can't compare one car in 3rd gear with another in 3rd gear if the road speed in gear is wildly different.

If your engine makes more average power from 6000-8000 RPM than it does from 4500 to 6000 RPM and then you are not measuring it in its power band if you use a gear higher than you need to against a competitor that is screaming its best near the limiter.

john banks

Compare 60-80 in third gear... GT3 2.7, Spec C 2.6. Is the Spec C faster - hell no, you'd still be in 2nd in the GT3 if you were trying to get the best performance out of it, and the time would be only 2.0. You couldn't be in 2nd in the Spec C.

At almost any speed rolling if you select the right gear in each car the GT3 will pull away from the Spec C.

The fact that the GT3 has 10mph on the terminal on the quarter is a good illustration. The amount of modification you have to do to your Scooby to add 10mph onto the terminal is more than considerable.

GREEN SCOOBY

Right. I think I am getting you John.We are talking about acceleration in the best gears when the car is in its best power band for best acceleration? Like what you would use in real life when overtaking? So say 50-70 mph should be tested in the best gear to match the car instead of road testers saying it has to be measured in 4th gear? Say for an example my 97 turbo according to Autocar does 50-70 in 5th gear in 9 secs say and then a lower powered golf does the same in 8.5 secs say. We all know the Impreza is quicker and I know at that speed and in that gear its not really on boost and ready to go fast unless you drop a gear, but the golf is faster because the engine and gearing is more suited for the car at that point? Hope this is along the right lines,I am not as technical like you but I am learning,I hope mate.

GREEN SCOOBY

If I have that correct though, is it not right in assuming the porsche should be faster any way due to the amount of power it has compared to the Subaru? I would have thought so? If the spec c had the porsche kind of power would you expect to see both cars doing around the same times? This is the sort of question I get asked all the time, is my 208 bhp car faster than a 276 bhp mitsubishi? the answer is no! because it has so much more power,but if my car had the 276 bhp of an sti it would be more evenly matched.

john banks

The GT3 seems to make particularly efficient use of its power. It has no AWD losses, is more aerodynamic, and its power to weight figure is better. Not unbeatable though, but it is a tall order for any Scooby to do so and it would need to be fairly heavily modified. Trouble is, the usual recipe for making a Scooby a lot faster is a bigger turbo, it will then make more headline power and torque, but the average power put down at the wheels in a real world situation may not improve that much.

Paul_M

GT3 is pretty awesome looking at that article and is noticably quicker than the Spec C everywhere above 60 (Spec C is faster off the line up to 60 MPH due to AWD but everything above that GT3 is quicker).

What does impress me is that the Spec C is quicker than the 355BHP M3 CSL in the 0-140 test even though it has more drivetrain losses and almost certainly worse aerodynamics than the M3! Not bad considering it's less than half the price

Paul_M

BTW If it were the 911 Turbo they were comparing it would absolutely obliterate the Spec C in all tests... AWD and 430BHP? (Can't remember). Maybe not as quick as the GT3 round the track though as it's heavier and less track-orientated setup.

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

EVO did a track test of some of the above cars, Spec C v GT3 was one of them, the GT3 was quicker on the straights, the Spec C quicker in the corners, the outcome was they were both as quick as eachother, both driven by professional drivers (ie Takuma Sato was one of the drivers, i think the other was Justin Wilson).
The above though doesnt equate to real world driving, then you dont take into consideration other road users, hazzards and off camber corners..... but the drivability of any car and the use of its available power will be of better use in a day to day driving situation, ie 4th gear out of a 30mph corner over a car that needs to do it in 2nd.
Spec C, (MY03) quicker than an E46 M3 (proven on more than one occasion ), GT3, an absolute animal of a car in comparison

Tony

Daz34

Sorry Tony can you just remind me again what car it is you drive?

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Tony

gatty

hello tony just raced e46 m3 i left him scratching his head...........? i dont think he liked the fact a white unbadged scooby has just blew him away! feels great

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Gatty
Its even better when you do it in gear as he thinks your only a wrx

Tony

PS, try an M5, kept with one of those in 6th, they are a little quicker than an E46 M3 though

tuscan57

how accurate are those specs anyway? (maybe nothing) the fuel tank for one is only 50 litres not 60!

no im not knocking the spec 'c' im looking at buyin one!

automodellistagt

i saw an m3 csl yesterday at tesco, its got fake carbon fibre on parts of teh front, apart from that it was yummy

Adam M

Are you saying that rpm for rpm with a bigger turbo you may be worse off, and is it due to boost threshold?

I know I have a 300rpm more than when I started but the big turbo has more torque everywhere. There is no point on the power graph at least where I am down in power/torque.

In fact peak torque on the vf23 was 279lbft, new engine makes that 2600rpm on the dyno, which is just about the threshold of the vf23!

Are you saying that traction is the problem? btw. I realise mine is heavily modified.

john banks

See how it feels on the road Adam trying to get spool up in 2nd gear and then tell me that a normally aspirated engine of similar power wouldn't obliterate you whilst you wait to spool up. Not to mention that coming out of a bend the NA car has a much more real connection between throttle and torque meaning he can feather it far more accurately.

Changing gear and waiting for the turbo to spool up may not seem to take long, but a powerful NA car can take chunks out of you in that time! In terms of average power put down over a short time you could be surprised?

Of course if you have a comfortable excess of power you can always get it back given time and space, but if your AWD turbo car has similar power to weight to your high traction RWD NA car you're toast.

If you are running a 2.0 and put a big turbo on, you can really lose out in real world response. I think we often go too big for our road cars.

The only two setups I've had where it felt virtually lagless in any gear at any commonly used engine speed were the original 2.0 with TD04 and 19 PSI before 2500 RPM, and the 2.5 with 20G which did 15 PSI by 2500 RPM. In either car as long as you were over 3000 RPM it was pretty good. Quite a lot of times you are at only 3000 RPM and want instant response Now I have to wait until 3300-3400 even in top gear before getting that virtually instant full torque rather than the exciting but crude elastic band followed by kidney punch feeling. The latter makes a less driveable, mature car, and makes it positively dangerous in the wet even with AWD.

To run 1 bar you are depending on a laggy situation to double your torque, so you've removed a lot of control. 1.5 bar gets a bit more excitable but less driveable, 1.8 bar is not pleasant except in very good conditions.

I am not an expert driver, merely average, but a high boost car whilst feeling exciting can be quite crap in the real world if you want to drive quickly but predictably and safely.

I think you may have a few scares if you drive your 2.5 at full boost all at once!

Adam M

valid points john and it all makes sense.

thing is a normally aspirated car of similar power requires either a very high revving engine or a very heavy large capacity engine.

Having said that I have been in blow dogs gt3 rs and it was devastating. He wasn't even exploring the handling when I was in the car! I can't imagine in light of what I felt in that car being able to stay with it on the track, but then I haven't been in a 555bhp and 555lbft impreza yet! (you have to like those figures just for coincidence value!).

Totally agree with what you say on the torque proportional throttle response though, and nothing can ever change that. Except for continuously variable compression ratio with selectable exhaust flow path to bring in the turbo pipework, and perhaps very variable cam timing.

john banks

ISWYM, also added a bit to my last post. Take it easy when it goes on the road!

Adam M

john, I am expecting what you say exactly.

I also know that the engine in the car will be limitied to 1 bar then slowly raised as I get used to it.

btw I get 5.6 psi at 2500 and 16 at 3000 which is plenty.

I appreciate the words of warning and am pleased to hear did the right thing by choosing the more drivable option rather than going for stuipid top end figures.

I am just praying that having 255s all round might give me more of a chance than others with similar power.

If you are concerned, if it makes you feel better, then I drive like a woos most of the time, but I know I have been able to keep it on the straight and narrow if it steps out on me which it will.

john banks

255s may give a snappy breakaway when it does slide though?

I'm a wuss driver too, although I'm better following ditching the UK suspension for P1 stuff as it is far more confidence inspiring in bends, Job's geometry settings are very conservative indeed but it keeps the back end in check, I like to apply lots of torque whilst winding the steering off and then it feels fun but controllable.

Wheelmen like Job and T-uk deliberately unsettle it into the bend and do the hooligan thing not at all threatened by 400 lbft. Astonishing really. One big off is enough for me and I've been there already in a previous car