Me and the WRX

Keep an eye on this:

http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=161623

Sometimes I feel like I'm talking out of my ass, since I really don't know too much about Subaru's...just driving and general car facts. So, I solicited the help of some rabid Sube owners. If at some point, somebody proves that I am talking out of my patootie, I will apologize.

heres what i posted on i-club:

"actually, i wasnt claiming i can beat type r's on a regular basis. i was claiming that, on a short track (1000ft) i HAVE beaten a type r before. skill of the type r driver is unknown.

and my claim to a 14 second quarter is based on the conversion formula for 1000ft to 1/4 mile times. i have suspicion on the accuracy of this conversion, cuz my impreza lacks top end power making it slower through the last 320 ft than the type of cars (hot rods) this formula was originally designed for. BUT i seriously doubt i would get less than a 15.5, due to my ability to smoke stock civic si's and sentra se-r v-spec's without any problem, and both of those cars have published times of 15.7"

I have a 300+ lb weight difference over him.

And no, your car doesn't have a rear lsd. It has a center lsd like all subarus do. The 00-01 RS had a rear LSD and now the 02 WRX does. Your wagon does not. If you don't believe me, go to www.subaru.com and find tech specs on your car vs. a WRX. It will list the WRX as having a rear LSD, and it won't say yours has one. MAYBE THEY HIDE 'TEH MAD S3CR3TS!!!!' from us. :rolleyes:

Also, to the homeboy who was saying that I dont have that much of a difference over him..

MUFFLER vs full catback system (one of the best, might i add)
WEAPON R (aka shucks brand) intake :D with no vents or scoops vs AEM with a K&N filter and hood scoop and vents opened. This has been proven to lower AMBIENT temperatures inside the engine bay by ~8 degrees celsius.

Pulleys now weigh 1 lb 11 oz. vs stock 5 3/4 lb.

According to Grassroots Magazine, each pound of mass taken off the crankshaft is worth approximately 2.7hp at the flywheel. Not added HP, just freed up HP.

Anyways, what we have here is another victim of insecurity, probably because he drives a wagon. :p

so with all these improvements, you got a whole what 10 hp and 10tq on the wagon, and 300lbs, meaning maybe .3-.4 in the 1/4 on him. You ran a 14.9 on your first and only run, which I doubt anyone gets their best run on the first run, and you are telling him he is low 16's. Repeat after me "I am sofa king we Todd did!"


Ohh yeah, I don't call 10 hp much of a differenc unless you car weighs 1000lbs. or something.

I didn't say on my first run.. what the hell are you talking about?

I have run NUMEROUS 15.1's and .2's with same mods on test 'n tune days at the track.

You are a 'tard. Learn to read.

AND lets see. what 2.7x4=10.8

+

FULL CATBACK EXHAUST VS. MUFFLER
SIGNIFICANT GAIN DIFFERENCES
You get MAYBE 1 HP if you strap a muffler on your car. The RS Muffler is a well flowing muffler to begin with. Somehow I doubt this muffler is making 20 HP to account for 300+ lbs.

His intake is JUNK. Weapon-R makes crap.
This is disputable, but in my opinion Weapon-R is like APC.

I have a much superior intake, hood scoop and vents, lighter car, catback exhaust, and pullies. He has a junk intake that sucks in ONLY hot air from the engine compartment, and is essentially a noisemaker. Also he has what looks to be an 80 dollar muffler with a shitty weld job.

This is a total waste of my time. These forums are.. gH3Y!!

Sorry...I misunderstood your "I ran it ONCE!" I see what you were saying now, but I still think it is retarded that you think your muffler exhaust or whatever you wanna call it on your car gives you any signifigant power gains considering it it an N/A four cylinder. I could imagine if it was turboed and giving you some hp, but not on your car. His muffler and your "cat-back" exhaust probably aren't to far off from eachother, because basically they don't get very far as it is, and as for your performance intake, I hope the extra $100 or so dollars you spent was worth the 1 hp at the flywheel. Honestly, I see no major modification difference between his and your car, so his #'s should be relatively close. BTW with all the "far superior" equipment you have on your car, why didn't you just buy a turbo and make a real difference. On my old Z, every 3lbs of boost made 50hp at the wheels. that is more hp than all the N/A bolt ons you can buy for that car will make

your intake, essentially a big hollow tube, is that much better than my intake, essentially a big hollow tube? and no my intake doesnt suck air from the engine compartment, well it does for everyday driving, but at the track i open my passenger side foglight cover, which leads to a pvc tube going through the fenderwell to the end of the filter, i have on occasion taken the filter off completely (at the track mind u not on the dusty streets) and let the ram air feed directly into the intake tube.

and do u really think your hood vents make a difference? man i can drive for an hour and open my hood and the manifold isnt hot enough to evaporate water. our engines dont run hot enough to make a significant difference with hood scoops or not. BUT just to be on the safe side at the track i "pop" my hood but dont unlatch it, making my entire hood a hood scoop, much bigger than any scoop u have.

Originally posted by ImprezedAgain
300+ lbs

u realize WHY my car is so much heavier dont u? the new gen impreza's chassis is over 250% stiffer than the old. a stiffer chassis makes for a more solid, direct launch.

Originally posted by ImprezedAgain
80 dollar muffler

youre right it is, i wasnt gonna waste my money on a full catback when i could buy a cheapass muffler and have catback piping redone to custom size specification for another $20, how much did u pay?

Originally posted by ImprezedAgain
This is a total waste of my time. These forums are.. gH3Y!!

im glad u feel that way.. that means u can stop posting and let this damn thread finally die

Man.

This is a quote from the link I posted above to the Sube forums, its from somebody named horatio102:

Looking at the Subaru 1/4 mile registry, it shows that there is 1 normally aspirated 2.5 RS under the 15 second barrier. And that's an RS with a close-ratio gearbox and a couple hundred pounds lighter.

As always, YMMV, but I think you're probably looking at mid-to-high 15 second 1/4 mile.

I think that a Subaru would have an advantage on shorter tracks because you'll be in the meat of the power band on a short track whereas a longer track you might find yourself wound out. Plus the AWD launch helps.

I could be totally wrong though.

and another one, from Josico:

what horatio102 is correct... the track differences will play a big part in how ours car perform... we have power right away just like you stated and as the track gets longer our power band is limited... also from what i have heard... we avg @ 15.x s near the 16s....

Dude. Your fellow Sube owners are checking you. You definitely want this thread to close with what you posted above, because you want it to end with your word, making you look like you're right.

GET OVER IT. YOUR CAR IS NOT AS FAST AS YOU ASSUME/WISH IT IS.

If you really feel that confident about your speed, travel the extra miles and go to a real track. That's the only way you'll EVER shut you're doubters up.

cybercrx00: I understand where you are coming from. You were flamed greatly in the old PH for that post where you listed your kills, which included some LS1s. Understand that most of the flames in that post were from some stupid domestic owners that are no longer here.

Both of you think about this: The TegR and the GS-R are separated (power-to-weight wise) by only 25HP and 200lbs, but are almost a second apart in performance.

That last post, ldelaysionl, about your frame giving you better launches was a last grasp at justifying what you've been posting(assuming) this whole time, now that I've brought people over that know what they're talking about.

dude u have already shown me to be RIGHT. way back when u posted the 2.5rs timeslip. when i was 1.4 seconds faster than him when i was doing 77.9 (which is an average speed like stated before, actual speed would have been definately over 78mph, probably around 78.5-78.6) and he was doing 80mph (an ACTUAL 80 mph not averaged like my speed, as they were testing his 0-80 acceleration NOT his e/t like mine.) if u think im gonna lose 1.4 seconds trying to gain that extra 1.5 mph u are stupid, plain and simple. AT THE MOST ill lose the .4, putting me down to only 1 second faster than the rs, making my timeslip a 15.4. i really dont have to give any more evidence, as u yourself have shot yourself in the foot with that one.

THEN in the quote u JUST posted, not one but TWO sources BACKED WHAT I AM SAYING UP, not "checked me". one said AVERAGE 15.x, nearing 16. like he said AVERAGE. meaning some slower, some faster. and the other PROBABLY mid to high 15's. wouldnt that correlate well with the 15.4? since he is saying PROBABLY which means he isnt sure exactly, could be slower, could be faster.

what are u talking about acting like youve got me in check with all of this stuff? youre posting evidence thats contradicts yourself and backs up what i have been saying without even realizing it.

the reason i want this post to end is because it has become very pointless. it is obvious that u are gonna stand by your guns no matter what, even when all the evidence in the world has been pulled against u. i am tired of trying to get u to open up your mind and understand that it is possible that u can be wrong for once.

it all comes down to, like i said before, u CANT prove me wrong, and i CANT prove u wrong. if u think i am trying to get the last word in, then go ahead and get the last word yourself, but after u are done doing that then just let this thread die.

Originally posted by ldelaysionl
even when all the evidence in the world has been pulled against u.

This is just back-asswards. The only evidence you've pulled is out of...well, you get the picture.

Now you are claiming 15.4? Which one is it? 14's or 15's?

Check this...I never showed you right...your high hopes did.

This is quoted from you from the first page:

Originally posted by ldelaysionl


where the hell did u hear that??? the non turbo impreza is as fast as an itr (yes i have raced one, no make that 2) dont go by the published times for imprezas theyre way faster.

Page 2:
Originally posted by ldelaysionl


man have u read any of my posts in this thread? i swear i could hit a 13 in a STOCK wrx. hell i could prob hit a 14.6 in my impreza and its not a wrx. ive already hit 14.9s in it and that was whit a passenger. plus that was a long time ago, im faster now. and yes its prettly much stock i dont see an intake and a universal muffler helping my times very much.

and how are awd cars slow compared to fwd? i dont see many civics or integras smoking porsche turbos, skylines, or lamborghini diablos do u?

i though the fastest fwd in the world was running 8s. sorry guy but there are STREET LEGAL awds running that.

oh and a new impreza only weighs 3000 lbs, at least thats what mine weighs and its a wagon, the sedan is 80 lbs lighter.

/\ Again, which one is it? 14's or 15's? Are you still assuming that you could probably run mid 14's?

Page 3:
Originally posted by ldelaysionl


did u not just read my post above??? i just said my car gets 14s in the 1/4 mile so why are u telling me i get 15.7? i would get a 15.5 if i missed a shift, i couldnt get so slow as to hit a 15.7 if i tried.

and did u not also read the part where is said it is a 1000FT TRACK!!! a 1/4 mile is 1320ft so just in case u didnt know a 1000ft is shorter than 1320ft. do i need to do the math for u? just in case u cant figure it out on your own i will tell u its 320 ft shorter. observe:

1320-1000=320
that means:
1320ft-1000ft=320ft

so if an itr is only 2 tenths quicker than me through THE FULL QUARTER MILE, and thats on a near-perfect run for it, WHY CANT U UNDERSTAND I CAN TAKE IT THROUGH A SHORTER TRACK???

why dont u quit quoting everything youve read about and GO OUT AND ACTUALLY TRY SOME OF THIS SHIT! i am telling u what happened in the REAL WORLD, not in some fantasyland where cars ALWAYS run their best possible times.

/\ There you go with the 14's again. Why don't you post those "mathematical conversions" at that link I gave you at the Sube site? I'm sure they'll support you WHOLEHEARTEDLY:rolleyes:.

I can post more examples of your raving if you need/force me to.

Ok, i'm sorry. I really didn't want to post here again, but wagonboy's stupidity is really pissing me off.

Weapon-R FILTERS are shit. I'm sorry. "Filter on a stick" - Yes, all shortram intakes are styled the same. A filter on a pipe. Your filter sucks. K&N products are faaaaar superior.

I am well aware of the increase of rigidity in the new chassis. However, 250% more stiffness is not making your not-a-hotrod wagon beat ITRs.
I have suspension mods, as well as what I listed I also have Whiteline strut tower bar and adjustable sway bar. I think that does a pretty decent job in increasing rigidity.

I hope you know your exhaust fabricators - most use crush bends in creating exhaust piping, as opposed to mandrel bends that most nice exhausts use. I bet that mine looks and sounds a hell of a lot better than yours. I like how yours looks like its dangling out from under the car.... :rolleyes:

REALLY SMART to pop your hood when doing Q/M runs. God, what a retard. It must give you alot less drag coeffecient to do that too, huh, i'm sure I'd want the entire area of my hood causing more drag. And theres the added bonus of when the hood flys up and you lose control because you can't see! Or better yet, it flies up and crashes through your windshield.

You need to grow up, and EDUCATE yourself. Your car weighs more, has less power, and losses through the driveline than an ITR. You cannot SMOKE, BEAT, or HANG with an ITR. Simple as that. Not matter how good your launch is. hahahahah.

Stop being so insecure. I know you drive a wagon, but just because you doesn't mean you need to claim you smoke ITRs and GSRs and other faster cars all day long.

Originally posted by ImprezedOnceMore
Ok, i'm sorry. I really didn't want to post here again, but wagonboy's stupidity is really pissing me off.

Weapon-R FILTERS are shit. I'm sorry. "Filter on a stick" - Yes, all shortram intakes are styled the same. A filter on a pipe. Your filter sucks. K&N products are faaaaar superior.

I am well aware of the increase of rigidity in the new chassis. However, 250% more stiffness is not making your not-a-hotrod wagon beat ITRs.
I have suspension mods, as well as what I listed I also have Whiteline strut tower bar and adjustable sway bar. I think that does a pretty decent job in increasing rigidity.

I hope you know your exhaust fabricators - most use crush bends in creating exhaust piping, as opposed to mandrel bends that most nice exhausts use. I bet that mine looks and sounds a hell of a lot better than yours. I like how yours looks like its dangling out from under the car.... :rolleyes:

REALLY SMART to pop your hood when doing Q/M runs. God, what a retard. It must give you alot less drag coeffecient to do that too, huh, i'm sure I'd want the entire area of my hood causing more drag. And theres the added bonus of when the hood flys up and you lose control because you can't see! Or better yet, it flies up and crashes through your windshield.

You need to grow up, and EDUCATE yourself. Your car weighs more, has less power, and losses through the driveline than an ITR. You cannot SMOKE, BEAT, or HANG with an ITR. Simple as that. Not matter how good your launch is. hahahahah.

Stop being so insecure. I know you drive a wagon, but just because you doesn't mean you need to claim you smoke ITRs and GSRs and other faster cars all day long.

Actually, I would think that the exhaust doesn't make much of a difference either way. On NA I4s, I'm guessing that the difference between stock exhaust and a catback is at most 6 hp. The difference between a short-ram and a CAI, is at most 2.5 hp. Not much at all. Granted, your exhaust may sound a lot better and look a lot better, but gains are probably quite similar.

they don't listen to me cuz i only have 1 star, so maybe your word is better cuz you got six. pretty soon he's gonna say.....well I have 95 octane so that's 10 hp

carrrnuttt: if u have been reading my posts for a while now i have been saying that, while the formula says i run 14's, i guess 15's. its even on this very page. yes my car IS as fast as an itr, i know this for a fact. not through the full 1/4 mile, no way, but it IS as fast as an itr through the 1000ft. my other claims to 14's were based on conversion formula. once this dicussion started getting more into depth, my replies also started getting more into depth, thats why u are only getting "i run 14's" on the FIRST and SECOND page, then once it gets more into depth u get "the conversion formula says i run 14's, but i think its more along low-mid 15's" at the beginning i didnt think this was gonna turn out into the long and retarded ordeal that it has, so i kept my replies short and simple. i NEVER said that i have actually run a 14 in my car on a 1/4 mile track.

"imprezed" guy:yes my filter does suck... which is why i just got done saying that sometimes i remove it at the dragstrip. no matter how wonderful your k&n filter is, it is still MORE restrictive than no filter at all. when it comes down to it we both have these dumb little tubes in our motors, but mine has LESS restriction when i get serious at the strip, and i also paid LESS. get over it. not to mention how much of an amazing technological breakthrough k&n must have discovered for their filter to make a noticable difference to a 160hp n/a 2.5 liter after being whittled down through all 4 wheels. your filter might give u 2 hp to the wheels advantage over mine. that is WHEN i have my filter on the tube. and i am also aware that my chassis rigidity is got giving me any noticable advantage. but neither is your damn superwhite light bulbs (ahemriceahem) that u keep listing. yes i specifically asked the muffler shop to mandrel bend my pipes. and u were bragging about your "functional vents" well woohoo dont u thinnk that increases your drag coefficient? in my opinion on a track as short and slow as a 1000ft track drag comes into such little play that it is worth it to have the extra fresh airflow over my intake.

I hate to say it, Idelaysionl, but carrrnut might be right. He kills with that "Quote" button.
Dude, I don't know. Because you can be an idiot and still pull low 15 time slips in an Integra Type R, but with a N/A, all wheel drive car, it's kind of hard to pull low 15 slips.
I dont know though. Bottom line, you're going to have to scan some time slips to prove to everyone here that you can actually take an Integra Type R.... Because Type R doesn't cost 25,000$ for nothing.

have u guys checked his thread in i-club recently?
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showth...threadid=161623

Originally posted in i-club by STEALTHBMBR
I ran a 15.88@86mph with only an intake.

Originally posted in i-club by Blindeye_03
The track was pretty dirty from the "real race cars" tread marks up and down the lanes, but as of now I have a 2.25" crush bent midpipe with apexi glasspack, an underdrive pulley and a ganzflow intake. I ran a best time of 15.5 @ 86mph and a 60' of 2.05. I still dont know how to launch it that great...I think I might have gotten some bad gas, cuz my car felt REALLY slow that day at the track.

Originally posted in i-club by SureGrip
I ran a 15.61 (best of the day) with a 2.09 60 ft time. I have a Ganzflow intake and a Stromung muffler. I launched at about 4000 rpm and let the clutch out "quick".

I don't know how much better my times would get, but I'm sure I could pull a better launch

Originally posted in i-club by JC
I firmly believe an RS with an intake and exhaust can run low 15s with a good driver. IIRC, the best time for a stock RS was a 15.1.

I guess the facts speak for themselves.

i believe ldelaysionl. come to australia, u'll get to see the whole subaru line up...they may not pull into the 15s constantly but its no wonder thieves love to steal any subaru vehicle they can get their dirty hands on.

Originally posted by inferno


ldelaysionl, if you look at this posted time, you will notice that this vehicle had a slower 60' time, slower 330, yet had a higher speed at the 1/8 mile mark. Anyone who has driven a 2.5 RS Impreza can testify to its lack of top end power and since you are burdened by that extra 80lbs, you would have a slightly worse problem. With that in mind, your car would run a SLOWER time than the Civic with the above time slip. Projected 1/4 mile times are just that...unless you have a time slip with a full 1/4 mile, don't make claims. That is the end of the discussion. Projected and corrected 1/4 mile times hold no merit.


Oh and NSX, the text that you put down can be interpretted in a few ways. How I interpret it is that they are easily available and cheap....also, you forget that in Japan, there is no number designation for the Integra Si motor(US spec GSR) or the Integra Type R...both are B18C.

o fine whatever i just thought i'd post the opinion of honda

incidently there's a really nice black one parked outside which belongs to a next door neighbour and i don't think the engine is the master piece its the car in its entirety its nimble and quick and handles well so up yours

Originally posted by S2Corolla
I guess the facts speak for themselves.

I suggest that you actually go to the link in the above post and read EVERYTHING, not just the ones he decided to quote.

For example, here is the whole quote(he quoted part of this)from JC:

I firmly believe an RS with an intake and exhaust can run low 15s with a good driver. IIRC, the best time for a stock RS was a 15.1. Anyway, I would think he could get mid 15s. Not easily, not without a lot of abuse to the car, and maybe not consistantly, but ya.

JC

here's the reply from HndaTch627:

15.1 stock???? i like to think of myself as a fairly decent driver and there is NO WAY IN HELL i could shave 9 tenths of a second off a 1320 time just by driving ability. 2 or 3 tenths sure...but not 9!!

Here's JC in return:

Bah, a 15.22, sorry.

JC

I was already ignoring this thread...somebody put it up top again so...

yea me sorry its what inferno said it bothered me totally unrelated to what you lot are talking about

I drive a 2000 ITR and I've beat a WRX. They post fast 1/4 mile times because of their AWD but if you look at their times they do it at around 92-94mph. So while the WRX gets off the line better I take it down the line. As for the STI's, well what can you do, they're just damn fast.

This thread is 2 years old :rolleyes:

I can't believe you guys are arguing over 15 second cars, they are all slow !!! I beat a stock turbo WRX with my sentra with only I/h/e. the ITR are faster than the WRX and they should be running 14.7 the least.

I can't believe you guys are arguing over 15 second cars, they are all slow !!! I beat a stock turbo WRX with my sentra with only I/h/e. the ITR are faster than the WRX and they should be running 14.7 the least.

The WRX is a low 14 second car stock. Neither a stock ITR or a Sentra with IHE is that fast.

the ITR is a mid 14s car and a 2.0 se-r with I/H/E is low 15 to high 14s car ...i have time slips to prove it

come see me runs 12s with this...!
http://www.teamserious.com/forums/index.php?&act=Garage&CODE=14&type=garage&id=15

the ITR is a mid 14s car and a 2.0 se-r with I/H/E is low 15 to high 14s car ...i have time slips to prove it

"mid 14s" and "low 15 to high 14s" are both slower than a WRX.

come see me runs 12s with this...!
http://www.teamserious.com/forums/index.php?&act=Garage&CODE=14&type=garage&id=15

What's your point? That has nothing to do with anything!

And no, I don't think it's possible to "come see you run 12's" with that car... considering that isn't your car...

|delaysion|: I think we've had this argument before, in one of the SRT-4 vs WRX threads.

Just because a car is capable of low 14's, doesn't mean it will do it everytime. If you said what you said in general, then fine...but if it was to say that either the ITR, a bolt-on SE-R, or any other low-15/high-14-second car can't beat a WRX period...that's just not true.

Let's not even mention WRX auto wagons, which are low-15-second cars most of the time...they're WRXs too, you know.

Anyhow, I have to lock this thread anyways, as threads more than three without a reply is not allowed in here.