pabs

To settle an arguement with a colleague at work who has read too many editions of EVO magazine - please give your thoughts on which you think would be faster on a)road and b)track of the two above models

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

Type r in both situations. By quite some margin.

Andy M3

I would have to agree - The Type-R is likely to be quicker with the right driver

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

So what which did you and your mate think were quicker??

ScuuBdoo

type R me thinks

andy.downes

iTrader: (1)

type-r will kill it. Am I right in thinking the RB5 is basically a limited edition standard turbo?

pabs

Very happy to say I won that arguement!! I had my money on the type-r as I own a sti type-ra which is very similar...thanks for your replies

GC8

Even if the RB5 had a similar output (which'd be difficult on its standard TD04) then the manic gearing in the STI Type-R would still make it noticably quicker. If they were both hypothetically new MY99 cars then the Type-R would see it off both into and around the corners too; never mind out of them.

Simon

andythejock01wrx

RB5 had 215bhp standard or 240bhp on the WR version.

Supposed to handle very well.

Would the quick shift box on the RB5 make it much quicker ?

andythejock01wrx

What was the year and bhp of the STi V5 Type R ?

GC8

1999 and probably about 300PS on the right fuel, but good for 280 on Shell SUL. The JDM cars have taughter suspension (better roads you see?) and STIs have improved dampers again.

Simon

AC-scoobie

Yeah but which had the better spoiler ?

ScuuBdoo

STI type R has 276BHP as standard

GC8

No it doesnt: youve learnt something today havent you?

rhybeck

v6 sti type r spoiler will take some beating m8

nothing wrong with the rb5 its a nice motor but type r is so much more capable car that is why its a type r

andythejock01wrx

Ok, seems like the Sti Type R would win.

Would the standard RB5's quick shift box make it quicker than a standard sccob of the same year ?

ScuuBdoo

you mean it doesnt have 276BHP?

GC8

Andy, the 'quickshift' is only really a short throw linkage. You trade ease for shorter throw / icreased speed. You can buy something similar on t'eBay now for about £30.


Simon

GC8

I do; the WRXs that were rated at 280PS (276BHP) will produce about 260BHP-265BHP on Shell SUL. Its accepted that later STI-Type-Rs are good for about 300PS on Japanese Premium Unleaded (irrespective of the 'gentlemans agreement'), which should still be good for 280BHP when running (remapped hopefully) on UK fuel.


Simon

ScuuBdoo

Im looking at the japanese STI type R brouchure and it says 280PS. So surely thats based on their 100RON fuel.

GC8

Yes; no japanese car will state that it produces over 280PS in the 1990s.

Stev

Andy

I reckon the quickshift does not make that much difference, but the handling is slightly better than an unmodded classic ( in my experience anyway). My RB5 is a bit quicker than than my previous scoob through the bends. Out of the box an STI V5 type R would see off an RB5 easily, but I still think there is something special about the RB5 (in my unbiased opinion).

Beastie

iTrader: (2)

But the RB5 WR Sport and the type RA had the same amount of torque i.e. 260lb/ft.

GC8

A 47D Type-RA has a standard WRX engine in it though. The WRX Type-RA was the cheapest car in the WRX range.....

DannyBoy007

iTrader: (7)

Type R is by far the better car.

But the top speed might be interesting. Unless the Type R has the longer 5th fitted.

I'd say the Type R would be squicker to 70-100ish but then I'm sure the uk car would make some of the ground up with the longer gearing. In fact I know this is true, having played with many a modded type R. but then again mine isn't standard

Stev

quicker yes, but better is a matter of opinion. As far as driving in the UK is concerned I don't think I could live with the STI5 and IMHO the RB5 is a better car for every day use on UK roads. That is just my opinion of course and to be fair to the STI5 it is only because the state of our roads is a joke.

ESH

But the original question wasn't about living with the car everyday it was which was the faster car. Type R all the way and I'm not just saying that because I own one. As far as standard Subarus go though I'd have loved to have owned an RB5

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

They are related questions to some extent.

As I commented on a thread the other day:

My std UK Scooby was a lot nicer to live with everyday than my mates Evo 6, mainly because of the much better ride over potholed UK roads.

Now, obviously his was the faster car!

HOWEVER

In a back to back comparison over a favourite B road (and having swapped cars) we both agreed that my car was quicker in that environment. It's suitability for our roads paid dividends (sp?). The Evo bucked and crashed over the road and one had to slow down for fear of being bounced off the tarmac. Scooby just glided over the rough stuff.

To the poster who queried Simon's assertion that the Sti has 280 based on the brouchure. My Uk brouchure says the turbo has a 0-60 time of 6.8 seconds.

Yeah right, with flat tyres maybe!!

The 90s saw a gentlemans agreement between the manufacturers and the japanses government that meant that no cars would be produced with over 280bhp.

Subaru adhered to that agreement...........................on paper!

Ns04

StudentScooby

Would my RB5 running 276/281 be an equal match to a standard type r!?

GC8

Thanks for that.

Simon