Classic Scoob comparison
28 February 2006, 11:02 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Classic Scoob comparison
I was bored so put together this comparison table of data for cars a few of us at work have. Data is from "Evo Magazine" and just goes to show how well the Classic Scoob does against the modern cars 
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo Astra VXR
BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 237@5600
BHP/ton 166 165 177 173
Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 236@2400
Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 152
Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 1393
0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 6.7
0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 17.4
60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 10.7
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo Astra VXR
BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 237@5600
BHP/ton 166 165 177 173
Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 236@2400
Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 152
Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 1393
0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 6.7
0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 17.4
60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 10.7
Last edited by Daz1121; 28 February 2006 at 11:19 PM.
28 February 2006, 11:21 PM
#4
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bubba po
<waits>
"The classic scooby: still the daddy!!"
That should get the ball rolling nicely!
NS04
28 February 2006, 11:56 PM
#7
Originally Posted by Bubba po
The Astra has a good peak torque figure and at low revs, too.
Why doesn't that translate into scoob-slapping performance, especially in the mid-range?
Why doesn't that translate into scoob-slapping performance, especially in the mid-range?
....and maybe a bit more
Trending Topics
01 March 2006, 12:02 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: west cork, ireland
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
_________________Civic Type R__Clio Sport 182_Impreza Turbo_Astra VXR
BHP@rpm___________197@7400__180@6500__215@5600__23 7@5600
BHP/ton______________166_______165_______177_______173
Torque (lf/foot@rpm)__145@5900__148@5250__214@4000__236@2400
Top Speed (mph)________146_______139_______144_______152
Weight (kg)___________1204______1110_______1235______1393
0-60mph______________6.8________6.6_______5.4_______ _6.7
0-100mph____________16.9_______17.5_______14.6______ 17.4
60-100mph___________10.1_______10.9_______9.2_______1 0.7
BHP@rpm___________197@7400__180@6500__215@5600__23 7@5600
BHP/ton______________166_______165_______177_______173
Torque (lf/foot@rpm)__145@5900__148@5250__214@4000__236@2400
Top Speed (mph)________146_______139_______144_______152
Weight (kg)___________1204______1110_______1235______1393
0-60mph______________6.8________6.6_______5.4_______ _6.7
0-100mph____________16.9_______17.5_______14.6______ 17.4
60-100mph___________10.1_______10.9_______9.2_______1 0.7
01 March 2006, 12:06 AM
#9
No, no, no....you need to use the code tags
Code:
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo Astra VXR BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 237@5600 BHP/ton 166 165 177 173 Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 236@2400 Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 152 Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 1393 0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 6.7 0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 17.4 60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 10.7
01 March 2006, 12:22 AM
#10
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by theotherphil
No, no, no....you need to use the code tags
Code:
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo Astra VXR BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 237@5600 BHP/ton 166 165 177 173 Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 236@2400 Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 152 Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 1393 0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 6.7 0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 17.4 60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 10.7
....I believe the figure in Autocar was 5.2 seconds.TBH I've never had much time for those who claim the Impreza isn't a fast car. It IS a fast car, certainly not the only one and, of course, there are faster cars and the magnitude of its advantage over the opposition has diminished over the years, no doubt about it. But what is impressive about the above is how there is still- after about 10 years since its UK launch- nothing for the money that is demonstrably faster!
Respect is due!
Ns04
01 March 2006, 08:44 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 2,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course all us classic owners new this all along ;0)
Couple of other points to mention - from Autocar :
30-70 for the classic is 6.6s for the early models, and 5.6 for the facelift.
Top speed 137mph for early, 144mph for facelift.
Anyone who reckons a car that does 0-60 in under 6 seconds isnt fast is either an idiot or has only owned Ferraris etc...
And of course, we all know that compared to the hot hatches above, we'd ave in the twisties !
Couple of other points to mention - from Autocar :
30-70 for the classic is 6.6s for the early models, and 5.6 for the facelift.
Top speed 137mph for early, 144mph for facelift.
Anyone who reckons a car that does 0-60 in under 6 seconds isnt fast is either an idiot or has only owned Ferraris etc...
And of course, we all know that compared to the hot hatches above, we'd ave in the twisties !
01 March 2006, 08:54 AM
#12
Originally Posted by disrupta
Anyone know the above figures for a jdm wrx 260 bhp standard classic scooby
Speedo correct with GPS
Very similar figures to my childhood favourite, the Testerossa, so yes, for £3k, they are fast cars
01 March 2006, 10:19 AM
#14
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MikeCardiff
Of course all us classic owners new this all along ;0)
Couple of other points to mention - from Autocar :
30-70 for the classic is 6.6s for the early models, and 5.6 for the facelift.
Top speed 137mph for early, 144mph for facelift.
Anyone who reckons a car that does 0-60 in under 6 seconds isnt fast is either an idiot or has only owned Ferraris etc...
And of course, we all know that compared to the hot hatches above, we'd ave in the twisties !
Couple of other points to mention - from Autocar :
30-70 for the classic is 6.6s for the early models, and 5.6 for the facelift.
Top speed 137mph for early, 144mph for facelift.
Anyone who reckons a car that does 0-60 in under 6 seconds isnt fast is either an idiot or has only owned Ferraris etc...
And of course, we all know that compared to the hot hatches above, we'd ave in the twisties !
It's not just the 0-60 time that is impressive, it's the in-gear acceleration and acceleration over higher speed increments too. Everyone knows that turbocharged Scoobies and Evos are pretty much untouchable from 0-60 owing to big traction advantage, but you wouldn't drive your car like that all the time, unless you wanted to pay out for clutches and gearboxes
You do accelerate through the gears a lot though in everyday driving, and use the cars mid-range power.I do agree though that the only people who can realistically maintain that a Scooby (or Evo) isn't that fast are people who own a supercar, track prepared flyweight (e.g. high powered caterham) or another highly tuned Rice rocket! The rest are talking bollox!
Ns04
01 March 2006, 10:33 AM
#15
I agree with the above turbo Impreza's and Evo's are quick cars out of the box, other cars are closing the gap but there is still a gap.
If I remember correctly the P1 was officially classed as a supercar, I think it was due too its acceleration time in third gear between two set speeds.
If I remember correctly the P1 was officially classed as a supercar, I think it was due too its acceleration time in third gear between two set speeds.
01 March 2006, 10:41 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone stick the figures in for a newage WRX, and the the newage STI?
Then the thread will take off
Then the thread will take off
01 March 2006, 10:47 AM
#18
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jay m A
Can someone stick the figures in for a newage WRX, and the the newage STI?
Then the thread will take off
Then the thread will take off
I think for the new age WRX (blobeye) from EVO mag it's 5.5. 60 15.7 to 100 5.5 30-70, 161bhp per ton and 143 top whack.
Not much point in giving the Sti's figures, since we all know thats faster.
Ta daaaaaaaa
NS04
01 March 2006, 11:01 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bridgend, S Wales
Posts: 2,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Code:
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo New Age WRX Astra VXR BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 221@5600 237@5600 BHP/ton 166 165 177 161 173 Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 221@4000 236@2400 Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 143 152 Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 ? 1393 0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 5.5 6.7 0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 15.7 17.4 60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 ? 10.7
01 March 2006, 11:09 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StiX
Code:
Civic Type R Clio Sport 182 Impreza Turbo New Age WRX Astra VXR BHP@rpm 197@7400 180@6500 215@5600 221@5600 237@5600 BHP/ton 166 165 177 161 173 Torque (lf/foot@rpm) 145@5900 148@5250 214@4000 221@4000 236@2400 Top Speed (mph) 146 139 144 143 152 Weight (kg) 1204 1110 1235 1373 1393 0-60mph 6.8 6.6 5.4 5.5 6.7 0-100mph 16.9 17.5 14.6 15.7 17.4 60-100mph 10.1 10.9 9.2 10.2 10.7
I would have thought the Astra would get to 100 quicker though, considering its 0-60 and PTW
Last edited by Jay m A; 01 March 2006 at 11:12 AM.
01 March 2006, 11:18 AM
#21
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jay m A
Filled in the blanks
I would have thought the Astra would get to 100 quicker though, considering its 0-60 and PTW
I would have thought the Astra would get to 100 quicker though, considering its 0-60 and PTW
Anyone got the Hawkeye figures?
NS04
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 01 March 2006 at 11:23 AM.
01 March 2006, 12:00 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 2,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NS04 - the figures I took for the 30-70 were from the back of the Haynes Impreza book - they reckon they were from Autocar 4/2/1998 ?
Not sure if they are manufacturers quoted times, or actual test times from the magazine though as these can often differ quite a bit. Sure I read that the actual 0-60 test time from one of the mags was about half a second quicker for the facelift than what Subaru had quoted.
For the New Age ( again from Autocar 25/10/2000 ) they reckon 0-60 as 5.7s and 30-70 at 5.8s
In any case, all are quick enough to make you go 'Wooooarrrrghhhhh' when you stamp on the pedal. Unlike something I saw on TV a while ago - cant remember what the car was, but it was some woman testing it and saying 'ooh, this is quite nippy' and the bloke going 'yes, 0-60 is under 12 seconds for this model' - 12 SECONDS ???? WTF - I would have got where I was going, stopped and come back home by then !
The other thing to note as well is that the Impreza does these figures with 'just' a 2.0 engine - a lot of cars doing similar times are 2.5 or 3.0 and over, so it makes it even more impressive.
Not sure if they are manufacturers quoted times, or actual test times from the magazine though as these can often differ quite a bit. Sure I read that the actual 0-60 test time from one of the mags was about half a second quicker for the facelift than what Subaru had quoted.
For the New Age ( again from Autocar 25/10/2000 ) they reckon 0-60 as 5.7s and 30-70 at 5.8s
In any case, all are quick enough to make you go 'Wooooarrrrghhhhh' when you stamp on the pedal. Unlike something I saw on TV a while ago - cant remember what the car was, but it was some woman testing it and saying 'ooh, this is quite nippy' and the bloke going 'yes, 0-60 is under 12 seconds for this model' - 12 SECONDS ???? WTF - I would have got where I was going, stopped and come back home by then !
The other thing to note as well is that the Impreza does these figures with 'just' a 2.0 engine - a lot of cars doing similar times are 2.5 or 3.0 and over, so it makes it even more impressive.
01 March 2006, 12:04 PM
#23
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MikeCardiff
The other thing to note as well is that the Impreza does these figures with 'just' a 2.0 engine - a lot of cars doing similar times are 2.5 or 3.0 and over, so it makes it even more impressive.
We should acknowledge that the characterisitcs of a highl strung 2.0 turbo engine are rather different from a bigger capacity NA engine though, it's not always just about how fast a car goes as much as how it goes fast....if you see what I mean! Ns04
01 March 2006, 12:41 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: There is only one God - Elvis!
Posts: 8,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pwhittle
PS, tried a high speed run on a private road, but backed off at 130. Seemed to have a fair bit left, despite the stupid big wing, but it just felt too flimsy at that speed!
I had an indicated 145mph at Bruntinthorpe recentley out of my bog standard Classic MY99, although really quick up to 120-130 really was taking its time after 140mph - would imagine would do a genuine 140-145mph
Last edited by The Chief; 01 March 2006 at 04:47 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
