Subaru STI vs. RX7 vs. Lightning

That is the slowest FD in the world!

Honestly...a properly prepared and single turbo FD would spank the bejesus out of both those cars!

(PS: This does NOT belong in car comparo...I goes to Car video section)

VERY disappointing to watch. that RX-7 should killed both cars...musta ben a non-turbo RX-7

i agree, very disappointing

I dis aggree my self... I'm a Die hard Subaru fan. I"ve owned once myself. It was a 92 legacy sport, with turbo. I would smoke anything. But a new Impreza STI with 300 horse to all 4 wheels should and will take anything!.

You guys really are giving the STI no credit at all.

STI won't take a 03 Cobra

never under estimate a STI

How heavy is the STi and the RX-7?

People give the Subaru WRX STI no props. The 2004 STi with 300hp i know for a fact is faster stock than a twin turbo Supra, turboed RX7's, NSX, Evo whatever, Skyline, BMW M3, and is as fast as a 2003 Ford Mustang Cobra. STi 0-60 is 4.4 seconds. a fact. G-tech pro doesnt lie! Proven many times.

A Mustang wont beat nor lose to the 2004 STi. The y are the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile. It's all about the reaction time and shifts.

I dont know what the Viper is talking about, the Corvette C5 is faster. What now. And it cost less. As mush money you buy a viper for, take that money and suup up a STi and itl kill the Hennesy Viper. I say that from experience. Seen it, done it.

I dont spit what i cant back-up. One

3150lbs and 300hp is STi. 2694 lbs and 255hp is RX7.

yall aint got nothing on my 10 second blown corrado.

Yeah, real smart first post...

subaru would dominate

ya so i dont care

A Mustang wont beat nor lose to the 2004 STi. The y are the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile. It's all about the reaction time and shifts.
What kinda Mustang? Year? Model? And I assume we're talking stock vs stock

Ehh, A mach 1 mustang can keep even with a WRX STi, a Cobra.. That would just blow it away..With a good driver.

Ehh, A mach 1 mustang can keep even with a WRX STi, a Cobra.. That would just blow it away..With a good driver.
Both are running almost the same numbers 300HP and 300ft-lbs of torque (the STi and the 2003 Mach1) The AWD of the Sti can give it a better off the line start, but greater power train loss. But the STi is lighter so I'd say it's a drivers race

People give the Subaru WRX STI no props. The 2004 STi with 300hp i know for a fact is faster stock than a twin turbo Supra, turboed RX7's, NSX, Evo whatever, Skyline, BMW M3, and is as fast as a 2003 Ford Mustang Cobra. STi 0-60 is 4.4 seconds. a fact. G-tech pro doesnt lie! Proven many times.

Now your giving the STi too much credit. The fastest 1/4 I have seen an 04 STi did was around 12.9. That is the average time of a Honda NSX (JDM) model. Skyline GT-Rs are also known for its great 1/4 times. On Best MOTORing, most of the time NSX and GT-Rs run 12.8-12.9s on the average. The STi and Evolution are also capable of those times. Actually the 22B ran a 12.6, but that was with high winds.

Anyways, It depends on the driver and the condition. On the track they all about the same. Usually the NSX is the fastest out of those four, with the Skyline coming in a close 2nd.

I have seen a NSX- S Zero in Best MOTORing Roaring Vtec doing a 12.4 in the 0-400m.

I have also seen a GT-R R34 doing a 12.4 on cold windy winter day. I have proof of both videos but the R34 one is on a CD I burn and you can go pick up at your local Best Buy the Best MOTORing Roaring VTEC.

The STi on the average would do 13.2-13.4, will professional or skilled driver it is capable of high 12s- to low 13s.

As for the mustang comparo, it has been done before by a magazine. It was a domestic magazine if I remember, they said that the STi did as good as the Mustang Cobra in the performance field. Of course, both has its up and down, the acceleration and launch off goes to the STi and the top speed and roll on goes to the Cobra. Lets compare them by Car-stats.com

Actually Mach 1 Mustang would get rip up on the 1/4. Lets compare....

Car-Stats.com Report for 2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1
Obtained from MT December, 2002
0-60: 5.3 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.8
1/4 Speed: 103

Car-Stats.com Report for 2003 Ford Mustang Cobra
Obtained from C&D June, 2002
0-60: 4.5 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 12.9
1/4 Speed: 111

Car-Stats.com Report for 2001 Ford Mustang Cobra
Obtained from C&D July, 2001
0-60: 4.8 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.5
1/4 Speed: 105

Car-Stats.com Report for 2004 Subaru WRX Sti
Obtained from MT June, 2003
0-60: 4.9 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.2
1/4 Speed: 105


Those are the time. Im sure it can also be improved. No the Cobra will not blow the STi away. That time on the Cobra is amazing though, I give credit where credit is due. But the STi has 90hp less.

I've seen Mach 1 time slip's and they ran a even 13...

Wow, thats impressive. Then its as quick as a Cobra? Dont make any sense at all. I have heard that they run mid to high 13s. They are compared to 350z and S2000's arent they. From most of the magazines I have read and look through a 13.0 is not even close to what they ran. Are you sure it was stock?

Yes, a very good driver in a Mach 1 is capable of a low 13.

Well most places I read give the Mach1 mid to low 13's. Now in some domestic magz (usually the ones where the drivers are used and know every part of the Mustang) can run low 13's. But where I get my resources, it's a drivers race between the STi and the Mach1...2 great cars, but STi is still more affordable and cheaper on innurance :icon16:

True, I havent heard those times for the Mach 1s. Cobras run 12.9-13.1s, if the Mach 1s run low 13s, then why buy a Cobra? Mach 1s are cheaper too, so I dont know why anybody would buy a Cobra over a Mach 1. If there time is about the same.

Pure stock:
The Mach 1 is only good for 13.6-13.9@102. I mean it''s only got 305 HP and weighs 3450. Forget the Mach 1 in this discussion. It's a joke. The 2005 regular GT will be much better that the Mach 1.


The 2003-2004 Cobra flat out totally smokes a Mach 1, Cobras have 390 HP fer cripes sakes, they run a traction hindered 13.0-13.3 @109+

Now...The STI runs 13.1-13.4@104 the AWD gives it an advantage of about .3 over a similar setup with say only RWD and the MPH reveal the actual HP of each car. Now remember an insane 5500+ RPM launch is needed to light the STI's turbo for those times, not the hot setup for drivetrain longevity IMO.

So in the 1/4 it's very close with the STI/Cobra... STI having superior traction and Cobra brute HP.

Now...out on the open highway a Cobra will smoke an STI BAD! First the STI's AWD not only is no help to it anymore, but it's actually a hinderance, the drivetrain HP losses are terrible at highway speeds for AWD.

What the Cobra really lacks is a chassis, the 20+ year old design make it handle like a wet noodle compared to the rigid chassis STI.

2006 or 2007 will reveal a new Cobra that will probably be a killer car, there's no Cobra for 2005 due to the total redesign of the Mustang.

I've seen Mach 1 time slip's and they ran a even 13...
NEVER. Not pure stock. That's BS. Do the math, 305 HP, 3450 pounds, RWD, no way can one EVER run a 13 flat stock. Totally impossible.

Cobras can do better that 13s stock. I have seen a stock one do 12.6s so I have no doubt it could destory a STi. The highway no chance for STi. Most of what 10.5sec92AWDTALON said.

NEVER. Not pure stock. That's BS. Do the math, 305 HP, 3450 pounds, RWD, no way can one EVER run a 13 flat stock. Totally impossible.Go look around the internet before you spit out :bs: .

Here.. I'll do it for you

http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicles/173_0306_mach/

Mach 1 VS Cobra

Read: We've heard about other Mach 1s dipping into the 13.20s with more experienced Driver's

Oh wait.. That just can't happen. It must be a lie..

Here.. I'll do it for you

http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicles/173_0306_mach/

Mach 1 VS Cobra

Read: We've heard about other Mach 1s dipping into the 13.20s with more experienced Driver's

Oh wait.. That just can't happen. It must be a lie..

Hey sk8ter_in_ny did you say you saw a video of a stock Mach 1s running 13.0s flat or did you hear that its possible to do 13.0s.

First off, Thanks for giving me that link. I now have no doubt that Mach 1 can run good on the 1/4. But to tell you seriously, the STi is slightly faster than the Mach 1.

The HP is about the same.. .the Mach 1 having 5 hp more.

Heres what I think. The STi is faster than the Mach 1 given equal drivers. STi with normal driver is around 13.2-13.4s at the 1/4. While the Mach 1 with average driver might be slightly higher. The guy doing the review might have more skill then an average driver would have. So lets say the Mach 1 is around 13.5-13.8s. As you can see there alittle differce in the numbers.

Lets say a STi with professional drivers. Most of the STi runs I seen with real professional race car driver are around 12.8-13.0, and as the magazine or article say they have heard that professional have ran 13.2s so given the fact that you have seen a Mach 1 running 13.0 flat then lets say 13.0-13.20s.

The STi has 300hp and 300 ft lb of torque and AWD (having a better advantage at the start). The Mach 1 has 305hp and 320 lb-ft and RWD. Therefore I think in the 1/4 most of the time STi is faster.

On highway the Mach 1 and STi should be pretty much even.

No, I saw a Mach 1 run a 13.0 at my local drag strip.

The link was more for that talon guy, considering he said a low 13 was impossible from a Mach 1. So I just had to show him he need's to read before he say's stuff.

No, I saw a Mach 1 run a 13.0 at my local drag strip.

The link was more for that talon guy, considering he said a low 13 was impossible from a Mach 1. So I just had to show him he need's to read before he say's stuff. Do the math, I don't care what any link says, I've not seen one at the local track yet that was stock run faster than 13.6.

If a pure stock 305 HP Mach 1 is a 13.0 car then the Cobra is a 12.2 and the STI is a 12.5 and we all know that ain't true. Numbers don't lie, 305 HP, 3450 pounds RWD = 13.6-13.8. FACT!

I mean, just think about it, the Cobra is the same, exact car with 85 more HP visa a stock added supercharger, do you really think a pure stock 305 HP Mach 1 is going to run close to that? 85 more HP is worth about .6 or so in the 1/4 mile on a Mustang, hence the 13.1 cobra times, and the 13.8 Mach 1 times.

Anyone that told you his 13.0 Mach 1 is pure stock sold you a bill of goods.

Even if his 13.0 wasnt stock, what about that 13.2 in the link.. Oh wait, you don't believe that's stock..

Go to the mustang forum on here, Ask them if a Mach 1 can hit low 13's stock. And see what they say to you.

But nothing can get through to you, After all. You know everything.

You seem to like to ignore facts and rely on other folks claims, give me one good factual reason how a 305 HP RWD 3450 pound car on street tires that is pure stock can run a 13.0? That time defies the laws of math, that weight car with RWD needs a minimum of 365 HP to hit 13.0 and that motor from the factory without a supercharger like the Cobra has is simply not setup to deliver 365 HP.

http://www.mach1registry.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=19291

Gee.. Stock car.. check the time slip, AND Dyno chart..

For every "Stock" 13.1 you have I can find a 13.5+ stock.
http://www.highperformancepontiac.com/features/0407pon_gtotest/
Pontiac mag which is good for wringing out fast times best was a 13.47.

Also note, the new 2005 Mustang GT which is a better motor than the Mach 1, has 300 HP and is rated by Ford for a 13.8-13.9 1/4 mile.

MY god, I just saw the guys screen name that ran this super 13.1 you linked to, it's none other than "1/4 mile newbie" LOL! You think 1/4 mile newbie is setting records with his Mach1?

Who care's.. We are talking about stock Mach 1's running low 13's.. You said it's not possible to run a flat 13. So I showed a link of a guy with a STOCK 13.1 and you still can't take the fact that your wrong and Mach 1's can indeed run a flat 13 with a good enough driver. Give it up, your just like every other noob and you come in here thinking you know everything. I'm not trying to sound like an ass but seriously dude, your arguing with me over something that's BS, I show proof and you still argue it's not true.

BTW: Got any proof your car is running this so called "10.5"?

ummm...I've been racing for over 28 years now sonny boy. My guess is mr. 1/4 mile newbie was looking at the wrong side of the time slip.

Excuse's Excuse's....

Who care's.. We are talking about stock Mach 1's running low 13's.. You said it's not possible to run a flat 13. So I showed a link of a guy with a STOCK 13.1 and you still can't take the fact that your wrong and Mach 1's can indeed run a flat 13 with a good enough driver. Give it up, your just like every other noob and you come in here thinking you know everything. I'm not trying to sound like an ass but seriously dude, your arguing with me over something that's BS, I show proof and you still argue it's not true.

BTW: Got any proof your car is running this so called "10.5"? Good enough driver??? the guy is a self proclaimed 1/4 mile newbie and you call him a good enough driver? Given the fact he's new to racing my guess is he laid down a mid 14 and is embarassed as hell about it so he shows some other time slip.

Proof, yeah, come to Great Lakes Dragway in Union Grove Wisconsin, I've been racing there well over 28 years now...I'LL GIVE YOU PROOF.

I guess they might as well pull the supercharger off the Cobra then because the car is just as fast without one, right? Who needs that extra 85 HP to run 13.0 when you can do it with 305, which I might add his dyno chart proves he ain't making crap for power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not even gonna argue with you anymore, you know everything. Anything I say you switch it around like it's a lie anyway's, So why waste my time trying to get it through your head Mach 1's can run low 13's.

Yeah, and pigs fly.

Hey folks, the conclusion is every one sell your 390 HP supercharged Cobra, because the N/A Mach 1 is almost just as fast with 85 less HP.

NOT!

BTW: Got any proof your car is running this so called "10.5"?



ok, you want proof of my 10.5??? here's a pic of one of my 10.47 runs, note the current forum screen in back so you know this isn't some stock photo I dug up, also note my MPH was low at the end the car got loose and I had to let off or It would've been about a 131 MPH run.
http://my.voyager.net/~wcfields/HPIM089.JPG

Ok, I did a lot of web searching, it seems I'm not the only one arguing Mach 1 times, a handfull of folks swear low 13's but it seems the majority are running 13.4-13.8 with their MPH consistent with those times so it's not a driver issue.

I don't know if Ford made some ringers or what, but it would seem 85% are runnning 13.4-13.8 and less than 15% claim runs 13.4 and below.

That would require an about an additional 45+ HP and I don't see where that could magically come from.

Either these ringers have mods and drag tires or there's some inconsistency with the cars from the factory which I find VERY hard to believe there can be a 45HP difference from Mach 1 to Mach 1.

Considering the brand loyalty BS that a lot of folks pull my guess is these folks have mods.

3 Questions:
1. How many folks buy a Mach 1? Few.

2. Out of that how many take em to the track? Even less.

3. How many are claiming sub 13's? Even FAR less.

The ones going to the track and claiming "stock" sub 13's are in my guess die hard Ford brand loyalists, they'll do anything to promote their brand.

I've seen 3 Mach 1 's at my local track, none run faster than 13.6 and all the drivers seem to know what they are doing, their MPH are consistent with their time which indicates good launch driving skills.

So there may be some folks claiming sub 13's "pure stock" but after looking at all the facts it would seem those times are inconsistent and in serious question.

Ok, here's the full magazine story, Hi perf Pontiac thrashed a Mach 1 with 3 of their best drivers, results, 13.47-13.51@104-105. END OF DEBATE!

http://www.highperformancepontiac.com/features/0407pon_gtotest/

STI rocks! My all time favorite :)