wrx and gsx

[qr25sentra]

im dieing to see both these cars run.. it will happen if my friend gets a gsx (2nd gen of course) now i was wondering this...

ok basically the stats are the same, but i was thinkin why does the wrx run nearly a sec faster in the 1/4 than the gsx if the wrx only has 17 more hp.. infact i think the eclipse is lighter than the wrx..
the mag times for the gsx i believe is a 15.2 and the subaru is 14.5

now obviously when they do these tests on awd cars they dont rag them out..ive heard of plenty of wrx owners run 14 flat stock. now even tho i dont think i have seen a time slip for a stock gsx im sure with the right driver they can be possibly in the mid 14s.

ive talked to my friend cuz i couldnt figure it out.. why wasnt the gsx atleast rated in the high 14s.. he tells me this "have u ever drove one?" i said "no, have u?" he said "yea, and they have no power until 4 grand"

so thats basically the difference, the power below the curve.. subaru has it, and the eclipse doesn't. but i bet if someone drives it right it can run a really nice time. way lower than a 15. but when they did these tests they probably launched them at 3 thousand rpms or maybe a lil higher.. and the eclipse just barely moved and the wrx shot out like a rocket.

if u can find any dynos, post them. i would really like to see the difference.

[Ace$nyper]

bench racers should be mircowaved

[qr25sentra]

this has nothin to do with bench racing..im just sayin how both cars are simliar and rated nearly a sec different.

[Ace$nyper]

then take it to car campro

[qr25sentra]

no wonder why u have over 6 thousand posts..

[DragonofBC]

I think you are right about power under the curve. I know on my GSX, I got a solid amount of power through the mid range, but the stock turbo has serious issues holding boost past 5.5k RPMS or so. If the WRX is able to maintain the power, then is will definitely take a GSX. Keep in mind the GSX has its 210 hp at something like 5.5-6k RPMs. Past that, the turbo is useless.

I also believe you about power on the low side. I don't get a decent launch at anything lower than about 4.5k RPMs. Even then the stock clutch makes it a tricky deal. I had mine replaced recently and it still doesn't have much bury-you-in-your-seat grip. The fastest I've heard run on a stock clutch with a stock turbo is a 13.7. I bought a clutch from Advanced Discount Auto Parts when my original one went bad and it was supposed to be a "near OEM" one. I had it in for a little while and the difference when launching the car was night and day. I was jerking my neck back all the time when I'd let the clutch out too quickly at 3k. I unfortunately had to go back to stock after that one started slipping after 800 miles (it was defective, not me). The stock clutch has such wide "grab zone" its tough to really nail a good launch.

They are all factors. I know if I started seriously upgrading, my car would be a force to be reckoned with but a stock GSX is not impressive.

[CamaroSSBoy346]

^ @ qr25 sentra

[qr25sentra]

so u ran a 13.7? what kind of work did u have done? just a few bolt ons? that sounds pretty sweet i bet u had to rag ur clutch out on that run didnt u? would u have got a gs-t instead?

i would love to race one from a roll, right in my powerband.

[DragonofBC]

Oh no, certainly not me. One of the guys on the Eclipse/Talon/Laser forum posted that time. Not sure he ever posted a time slip but some of the experienced DSMers seemed ok with his claim. I will try to search for the thread for you but I think he had intake, 3" turboback exhaust and an mbc. Don't quote me on that.

I have never tested my car at a track. I'm putting some goodies in during August and I might take it then.

[DragonofBC]

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...highlight=13.7

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by qr25sentra

no wonder why u have over 6 thousand posts..

Wow yea, I'm sorry, I'm not a highschool drop out whos handing out katsup for a living.

Post count is the nearly as sad and desprate nooblet defence as, join dates.
BTW if you notice i've been here YEARS longer then you. So yea makes sence I have more posts.

I also happen as many know to run AF in the backround at work all the time and I'm allowed to at my job(s). So yea sorry I finish my work fast and have free time to kill in the office.

You can't even manage a simple forum correctly, so before you try to come back I invented glue and have a P.H.D. from Yale don't bother because we know you're lying.

[UnderEstimate Me]

DSMs are really restricted in stock form. Once you get a high flowing exaust, get all the supporting mods, replace that t25 turbo and turn up the boost you get massive power gains.

[mason_RsX]

WRX still has turbo lag, but the awd would give it a big advantage on the launch, and its got planty of hp and torque along the powerband...I think you have to have a poor driver in the WRX to lose

PS I KNOW turbo lag...very very well

[DragonofBC]

Originally Posted by UnderEstimate Me

DSMs are really restricted in stock form. Once you get a high flowing exaust, get all the supporting mods, replace that t25 turbo and turn up the boost you get massive power gains.

Its a fun "get to learn cars" car. Big gains can be seen from mere bolt-ons and there is some room for some heavy duty tuning too. I want to get more into it, but resources are limited now. Eventually though...

I agree with you mason. I got spanked to hell and back by an STi and I had a modded (at least I/E) get beside me and take off (I didn't race but he wanted to) and he was clearly much faster. Stock vs. Stock, its a drivers race with more room for error on the side of the WRX.

If anyone has a WRX and lives near Boston or Orlando, we can test it out and post some actual results...

[90redgt]

All i know about this stuff is... AWD<RWD