Notices
ScoobyNet General General Subaru Discussion

MY05 WRX STI PPP vs MY06 WRX STI PPP

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01 February 2007, 07:55 PM
  #1  
jubhi
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
jubhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default MY05 WRX STI PPP vs MY06 WRX STI PPP

Guys,

I have the former, a MY05 WRX STI PPP. I believe the performance figures are and correct me if I'm wrong:

Bhp: 305
0-60: 4.6secs
Top Speed: 158mph

What are the performance figures of the MY06 WRX STI PPP? I spoke to the dealer where I bought mine from and he said it was 4.8secs on the 06 WRX STI PPP. I know it is only 0.2 secs but I would have thought the new one with the 2.5 lump would have been faster?

Having said that, when I checked the standard figures of the STIs without PPP both 05 and 06, the 05 was 5 secs flat and the 06 was 5.2 secs to 60.

This is surprising, so am I right in saying that the 06 Hawkeye STI is not as fast as the Blobeye STI model? With or without PPP respectively?

Would this be down to the increased weight because of the 2.5lump?

Thanks

Jas.
Old 01 February 2007, 08:03 PM
  #2  
Martin2005
Scooby Regular
 
Martin2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jubhi
Guys,

I have the former, a MY05 WRX STI PPP. I believe the performance figures are and correct me if I'm wrong:

Bhp: 305
0-60: 4.6secs
Top Speed: 158mph

What are the performance figures of the MY06 WRX STI PPP? I spoke to the dealer where I bought mine from and he said it was 4.8secs on the 06 WRX STI PPP. I know it is only 0.2 secs but I would have thought the new one with the 2.5 lump would have been faster?

Having said that, when I checked the standard figures of the STIs without PPP both 05 and 06, the 05 was 5 secs flat and the 06 was 5.2 secs to 60.

This is surprising, so am I right in saying that the 06 Hawkeye STI is not as fast as the Blobeye STI model? With or without PPP respectively?

Would this be down to the increased weight because of the 2.5lump?

Thanks

Jas.
Why isnt that fast enough

Anyway its the in-gear speeds that matter, (0-60 is fairly meaningless), and on that count the 06 car should be quicker
Old 01 February 2007, 08:07 PM
  #3  
ScoobyWeb
Scooby Regular
 
ScoobyWeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Sheffield
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The 06 cars are 5.2 0-62mph, 0-60 is the same at 5 secs.
Old 01 February 2007, 08:10 PM
  #4  
darren...
Scooby Regular
 
darren...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there but mainly here...
Posts: 6,738
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I've driven the 2.5 Sti PPP - what the figures don't show is the increased flexibility through the rev range. When you think about it how often do you launch your MY05 at it's hardest. My opinion was that on everyday driving, including nice country roads, the MY06 will be quicker...
Old 01 February 2007, 08:11 PM
  #5  
Chelspeed
Scooby Regular
 
Chelspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

2.5 litre has bigger holes through the engine (for the pistons to go in) so should be lighter not heavier. Maybe.

Also think it's 305ps (equivalent to 301bhp) rather than 305bhp but I'd be surprised if that makes much odds.

To be honest I think all 0-60 figures are fiddled by the manufacturers, if they felt a bit more honest in 06 than in 05 maybe they fiddled it a bit less? How often do the magazines get even close to the figures quoted by the manufacturers.
Old 01 February 2007, 10:09 PM
  #6  
jubhi
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
jubhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Ok but why have some people referred to the 2.5 lump in the past as a lazy engine on this forum?

Also which would be faster in a drag race, going through the gears?

Any experiences/videos/write ups on a direct comparison etc........?
Old 01 February 2007, 10:15 PM
  #7  
marmski
Scooby Regular
 
marmski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think the fact that the Japanese have stuck to the 2.0litre in their 'Performance' Models like the Spec C / RA etc.. speaks more volume than any of our opinions.

I believe the reason for the 2.5 in the UK models was due to stricter EU emmission laws.

Dont the rally teams still use the 2.0 aswell?

Last edited by marmski; 01 February 2007 at 10:16 PM. Reason: tell me what u want.. what u really really want.
Old 01 February 2007, 10:21 PM
  #8  
Tone Loc
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Tone Loc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by marmski

Dont the rally teams still use the 2.0 aswell?
Only because the regulations say they must not exceed 2.0 litres.... i think if they had free choice a 2.0 would not be chosen. Much in the same way that all the very high powered imprezas are 2.35 or 2.5 litres. They ain't no replacement for displacement

Tony.
Old 02 February 2007, 09:19 AM
  #9  
MikeWood
Scooby Regular
 
MikeWood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Solihull
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The reason the time to 60mph is slower is that the 2.5 has a lower rev limit and doesn't reach 60mph in second gear so you've got an extra gearchange in there.

Mike
Old 02 February 2007, 10:44 AM
  #10  
jubhi
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
jubhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MikeWood
The reason the time to 60mph is slower is that the 2.5 has a lower rev limit and doesn't reach 60mph in second gear so you've got an extra gearchange in there.

Mike
That explains it then. Thanks for that Mike.
Old 02 February 2007, 10:45 AM
  #11  
jubhi
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
jubhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MikeWood
The reason the time to 60mph is slower is that the 2.5 has a lower rev limit and doesn't reach 60mph in second gear so you've got an extra gearchange in there.

Mike
That explains it then. Thanks for that Mike.
Old 02 February 2007, 02:40 PM
  #12  
jayltee1
Scooby Regular
 
jayltee1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Reading
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Quote: Only because the regulations say they must not exceed 2.0 litres.... i think if they had free choice a 2.0 would not be chosen. Much in the same way that all the very high powered imprezas are 2.35 or 2.5 litres. They ain't no replacement for displacement

There is - Turbos and superchargers!
Old 02 February 2007, 02:55 PM
  #13  
Tone Loc
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Tone Loc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

LOL... would you rather have a big turbo on a small engine or big turbo on a large capacity engine. I know what i'd take.

Tony.
Old 02 February 2007, 03:05 PM
  #14  
jayltee1
Scooby Regular
 
jayltee1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Reading
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'd like an 8litre V12 with 14 turbos just for the hell of it, but I doubt it would go much quicker than a 2.0 turbo due to the weight (based on Evo FQ400 0-60 in 3.2 or something). Actually a Veyron is all I want....best start doing the groundwork with the accountant (Mrs)
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
33
29 August 2017 07:18 PM
infomotive
ScoobyNet General
22
19 November 2015 01:24 PM
Dan-
Drivetrain
0
14 September 2015 10:13 AM
scottydouk
General Technical
2
10 September 2015 11:10 PM



Quick Reply: MY05 WRX STI PPP vs MY06 WRX STI PPP



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:05 PM.