February 2011 Car & Driver: STi vs. Genesis vs. WRX vs Evo vs Mustang V6, etc, etc

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Just got the digital copy of February's Car & Driver digitally- gotta love Zinio on the iPad!

Anyway they had an interesting article pitting several cars against each other, in different price classes, at Virginia International Raceway. I was shocked at some of the results. The WRX was the slowest in the entire lot with a lap time of 3:16.5. Surprisingly the Genesis bested it with a 3:13.8! Even more surprising is the Ford Mustang V6 (with an electronic governor of 114mph) beat both of them with a 3:12.5. The explained the Mustang V6 had the needle pinned at 114mph down most of the back-stretch and still came out on top vs. the two other cars!

The biggest shocker is that the Mustang V6 even beat the new 2011 STi's time (3:13.8)! They went on to explain that the WRX was actually quicker down the front straight (123.4mph vs the STi's 122). They attributed the STi's 2.7 second overall lap lead over the WRX to it's tighter chassis and fad-free brakes.

I'm a bit disappointed to hear the new STi is still getting beat by the Evo at the track (which posted a 3:10.6), yet alone a Ford Mustang GT with a time that trounced the STi at 3:08.6. I heard most of the changes they made to the new STi were in chassis/handling department. Apparently it still exhibits traditional awd excessive understeer. I'm still amazed the Genesis coupe matched the STi's 3:13.8. Hyundai has come a long way apparently- and that's coming from someone who's owned two previous Tiburons in the late 90's.

Finally, I don't want to hear about how the Subies "may not be as fast in a straight line as the american muscle cars but try to take them into a turn" or "see what happens at the track", as both the V8 and V6 Mustangs beat the WRX and STi...on the track no less. Don't take this the wrong way I'm not trashing imports or Subarus. I'm in fact, a previous 2005 STi owner, and a huge fan of them. Just disappointed to see them getting beat, and tired of people going on about how it would be different off the drag strip on an actual road course.

[Scapegoat]

sweet, so my 2010 gt can handle stock subbies.

really interesting to hear that the stock v6 mustang is a capable vehicle and can contend with other cars on their circuit!

granted... the 2011 GT is gunning for the M3, so i suppose it isn't a surprise that this solid rear ended "pony car" is a track demon.

[jpalamar]

Ford did a good thing with the 2011 Mustang. I bet the reason why they limited the top speed of the V6 is for more economic tires. I'm sure with the power it has it would have no problem with 140+

[Scapegoat]

I'm sure with the power it has it would have no problem with 140+

definitely not a problem. the 05-09 gt's were rated at 300bhp, the new v6 is rated at 305bhp and probably rev's higher. and i can attest to the 3v 4.6 in a heavier 2010 being capable of 140 as i've had it up to 135 and it still wanted to go

[Rally Sport]

The new wrx and sti are good, like always, but everyone else is getting better.

[TWills215]

I started getting use to it after a evo v. sti track meet..... results were not to my liking :/

[marshallpre1]

The new stangs keep impressing me.

[Got Insulin?]

I like that the Gen is giving the traditional track monsters a run for their money in it's stock form. Hopefully this will stimulate them to keep making better and better versions of it, and force the other guys to take a look in the mirror.

[Scapegoat]

The new stangs keep impressing me.

the new stangs keep damning me for my lack of patience. :lol:

[ndubz]

Just got the digital copy of February's Car & Driver digitally- gotta love Zinio on the iPad!

Anyway they had an interesting article pitting several cars against each other, in different price classes, at Virginia International Raceway. I was shocked at some of the results. The WRX was the slowest in the entire lot with a lap time of 3:16.5. Surprisingly the Genesis bested it with a 3:13.8! Even more surprising is the Ford Mustang V6 (with an electronic governor of 114mph) beat both of them with a 3:12.5. The explained the Mustang V6 had the needle pinned at 114mph down most of the back-stretch and still came out on top vs. the two other cars!

The biggest shocker is that the Mustang V6 even beat the new 2011 STi's time (3:13.8)! They went on to explain that the WRX was actually quicker down the front straight (123.4mph vs the STi's 122). They attributed the STi's 2.7 second overall lap lead over the WRX to it's tighter chassis and fad-free brakes.

I'm a bit disappointed to hear the new STi is still getting beat by the Evo at the track (which posted a 3:10.6), yet alone a Ford Mustang GT with a time that trounced the STi at 3:08.6. I heard most of the changes they made to the new STi were in chassis/handling department. Apparently it still exhibits traditional awd excessive understeer. I'm still amazed the Genesis coupe matched the STi's 3:13.8. Hyundai has come a long way apparently- and that's coming from someone who's owned two previous Tiburons in the late 90's.

Finally, I don't want to hear about how the Subies "may not be as fast in a straight line as the american muscle cars but try to take them into a turn" or "see what happens at the track", as both the V8 and V6 Mustangs beat the WRX and STi...on the track no less. Don't take this the wrong way I'm not trashing imports or Subarus. I'm in fact, a previous 2005 STi owner, and a huge fan of them. Just disappointed to see them getting beat, and tired of people going on about how it would be different off the drag strip on an actual road course.

I agree, I think subaru really hasn't gotten the GR chassis quite right yet. Im glad the sedan sti is back but it doesnt seem theyve actually nailed it yet. The evos torque vectoring is really something special, and overall at this point its just more technical than the subies are. so on the track, they will be inferior.

But as overall street cars, its hard to beat the subies. Theyre mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, and versatility from the awd make them hard to equal as an overall package for the average person.

None of the said competitors are on par with the subarus in all of the mentioned areas. Mustangs are far less practical and are not as versitile, genesis coupes are less practical, not as versitile, and not as solidly built. And the Evo, while being the closest match up.....lacks reliability and build quality compared to the STi.

Were talking stock here, all of these cars have solid performance as is, and all can be modded to the owners liking. But the other aspects of these cars are not so easily changed.

So all in all, my point is that on the track subies do get beat by many competitors. But on the street (where 99% of owners use them) they are superior in the overall package they offer to all of their competitors.

Track performance can be changed, other aspects cannot

The sales speak for themselves

[vdcoff]

I agree, I think subaru really hasn't gotten the GR chassis quite right yet. Im glad the sedan sti is back but it doesnt seem theyve actually nailed it yet. The evos torque vectoring is really something special, and overall at this point its just more technical than the subies are. so on the track, they will be inferior.

But as overall street cars, its hard to beat the subies. Theyre mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, and versatility from the awd make them hard to equal as an overall package for the average person.

None of the said competitors are on par with the subarus in all of the mentioned areas. Mustangs are far less practical and are not as versitile, genesis coupes are less practical, not as versitile, and not as solidly built. And the Evo, while being the closest match up.....lacks reliability and build quality compared to the STi.

Were talking stock here, all of these cars have solid performance as is, and all can be modded to the owners liking. But the other aspects of these cars are not so easily changed.

So all in all, my point is that on the track subies do get beat by many competitors. But on the street (where 99% of owners use them) they are superior in the overall package they offer to all of their competitors.

Track performance can be changed, other aspects cannot

The sales speak for themselves

what he said

[92awdtsi]

not to be rude but, how is a 100% stock evo not reliable?

[jjm4life]

TST subie fanbois man your keyboards....:roll:

[Scapegoat]

I agree, I think subaru really hasn't gotten the GR chassis quite right yet. Im glad the sedan sti is back but it doesnt seem theyve actually nailed it yet. The evos torque vectoring is really something special, and overall at this point its just more technical than the subies are. so on the track, they will be inferior.

But as overall street cars, its hard to beat the subies. Theyre mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, and versatility from the awd make them hard to equal as an overall package for the average person.

None of the said competitors are on par with the subarus in all of the mentioned areas. Mustangs are far less practical and are not as versitile, genesis coupes are less practical, not as versitile, and not as solidly built. And the Evo, while being the closest match up.....lacks reliability and build quality compared to the STi.

Were talking stock here, all of these cars have solid performance as is, and all can be modded to the owners liking. But the other aspects of these cars are not so easily changed.

So all in all, my point is that on the track subies do get beat by many competitors. But on the street (where 99% of owners use them) they are superior in the overall package they offer to all of their competitors.

Track performance can be changed, other aspects cannot

The sales speak for themselves

not sure what you're talking about.

the mustang offer more trunk space than the sedan impreza, so it is more practical in that regard. not to mention the v6 mustang will easily outsell the impreza sti or wrx.

the mustang is definitely more practical with a near 50/50 weight distribution, more trunk space, more power, better MPG, lower octane rating. not to mention it is cheaper than the base wrx and faster than the base 33k sti.

i don't have time to look up all the stats and compare them... but those are what i found just now.

about the only thing that the sti and wrx are better at than the mustang is driving in the snow. but considering we've seen higher HP corvettes hauling christmas trees down the road i'd say it'll do just fine with the right tires and driver.

in regards to all of the vehicles in this comparison, the V6 mustang trumps them all. It's a fantastic buy at the starting price of 23k and some change.

it's cool... i hate to admit that the 2011 mustang v6 is a badass little pony car in the same standing as my 2010 gt that i spent 10k more on last year. but at least the new gt's can start to move into the muscle car arena, despite still carrying a pony car sized motor.

[vdcoff]

just lock the thread now lol

[92awdtsi]

LOL @ all the subbie owners getting pissed because the new STI got its ass handed to it by a v6 mustang > LOL

[Scapegoat]

LOL @ all the subbie owners getting pissed because the new STI got is ass handed to it by a v6 mustang > LOL

i have something to put in my sig finally... thank you

[92awdtsi]

i have something to put in my sig finally... thank you

i fixed a spelling error, so now its sig worthy :banana:

[Scapegoat]

OP, any link to the article?

[i_ride_fieroGT]

I'm proud to see that american manufactur's are getting there a^^es in gear about there flagship cars. sadley it has tpo be ford thats on top of it all right now but still nice to see.

[PrideNas]

Only an individual can define the term practicality.

If you have a family with a child the Evo is more practical. 2 Doors vs 4 doors automatically goes in favor of the evo.
If you only have one vehicle and live in NJ and it snows, the Evo is MORE practical than a mustang or any rwd car.

The definition of practical cant be generic in this case.

I can argue the same point in favor of the mustang as well, but I am sure you guys understand what I am saying.

[Subie_sleeper]

LOL @ all the subbie owners getting pissed because the new STI got its ass handed to it by a v6 mustang > LOL

I might have had the figures wrong here.........

V6 Mustang was - 3:12.5
STi was - 3:13.8

1.3 seconds is a solid win.. Getting its ass handed to it, ...... not so much.

I'm not bashing the Mustang.

It is kind of funny how Subie bashers are popping up though. :lol:

Subies have a devoted following for a reason, just like all the other groups.

So....... Lets throw winter tires on all the cars and hit that track with some ice & snow :mrgreen:

Keep the tow straps in Lancer & both Imprezas.... the wrong wheel drive cars are gonna need them :finga:

(Flamesuit ON) :lol:

Please take this post with a grain of salt too ........

[92awdtsi]

So....... Lets throw winter tires on all the cars and hit that track with some ice & snow :mrgreen:

Keep the tow straps in Lancer & both Imprezas.... the wrong wheel drive cars are gonna need them :finga:

(Flamesuit ON) :lol:

Please take this post with a grain of salt too ........

You wont need your flamesuit......BUT I would like to say..... With the $10,000+ you'll be saving by buying the v6 mustang, you can spend the rest on a used evo 8 with snow tires and then its all up to the drivers on who wins.

[DaveSTi]

1.3 seconds a lap is HUGE, Rob.

[Scapegoat]

So....... Lets throw winter tires on all the cars and hit that track with some ice & snow :mrgreen:

everyone is going to be in the wall :lol: snow tires are great for going, but when it comes to break, downshift and turn we're all hitting gravel

[boostjunky]

I beg to differ. My winter tires stop signicantly well. With almost no lock and slide. Accelerating still gives wheelspin but with control.


I also would like to know how a stock Evo is unpractical or unreliable. It has beaten the Subies since 1992 and always will. Sorry fanbois. It is what it is. Not that 2nd place is a bad place to be. It provides motivation to achieve 1st.

The new 6 cyl Stang is a great car. I've been saying that fir a while. It is the one to buy over the GT IMO. With the money saved power adders can be fitted to easily best the GT with loot left over.

The Genesis is also a great car. Hyundai has become a serious force to be reckoned with. Is it so hard to believe that they can build a quality product. The Japanese manufacturers have been looking over their shoulders for some time now. It worries them.

It is no different than in the late 80's when the American companies became complacent and their problems started. How many staunch Caddy owners traded up for an LS Lexus in 1990? At first they were like "Lexus Shmexus" then when they saw their numbers drop they said ****, when did these guys start making good cars. Then soon after, the Golden Age of the big dog Japanese 6 cyl turbo powerhouses and exciting turbo 4's appeared.

That is what the Koreans are doing now. Making exciting cars. The Genesis has been doing very well. In both coupe and sedan configurations with all three engine choices.

Their new Sonata turbo may lack a M/T but it will run nonstop to 155mph before hitting fuel cut. Same goes for the slighty slower, heavier Kia Optima. The Eqqus is also now here and will only do better with time.

Things change in the automotive sometimes better, sometimes worse, and sometimes thing get downright confusing...like the new Jetta. Holy Wtf POS batman. 11 sec 0-60 FTL. And it looks likeva briefcase. But that's another topic for another day.
Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[05Accent]

i love my Evo!

[Rally Sport]

All the subie owners on here make me smile, lol.

[ambitiousCK]

Subarus suck

[ndubz]

1.3 seconds a lap is HUGE, Rob.

Depends on the track, englishtown road course....yea. Nordscliefe.....not at all

[ndubz]

not sure what you're talking about.

the mustang offer more trunk space than the sedan impreza, so it is more practical in that regard. not to mention the v6 mustang will easily outsell the impreza sti or wrx.

the mustang is definitely more practical with a near 50/50 weight distribution, more trunk space, more power, better MPG, lower octane rating. not to mention it is cheaper than the base wrx and faster than the base 33k sti.

i don't have time to look up all the stats and compare them... but those are what i found just now.

about the only thing that the sti and wrx are better at than the mustang is driving in the snow. but considering we've seen higher HP corvettes hauling christmas trees down the road i'd say it'll do just fine with the right tires and driver.

in regards to all of the vehicles in this comparison, the V6 mustang trumps them all. It's a fantastic buy at the starting price of 23k and some change.

it's cool... i hate to admit that the 2011 mustang v6 is a badass little pony car in the same standing as my 2010 gt that i spent 10k more on last year. but at least the new gt's can start to move into the muscle car arena, despite still carrying a pony car sized motor.

The new mustang is a great car in all trims. But lemme put it to u this way, if u have alot of friends, then the whole 2 door thing doesnt work nearly as well as the 4 door thing does.

Also, this is all a lap time comparison, something that is basically irrelevant to the average consumer, even of these cars.

Subies dont do as well on the track because their power band is all in the mid range for good street response. On the track ur up in the high revs the whole time. The mistangs N/A v6 is in its prime in such as situation.

Its really all opinion, and u have a good arguement. but imo as an overall package, nothing beats the Subies because while they may get beat in some areas by other cars, they still are quite respectable and they offer things the cars that can beat them in one area dont in other areas.

Case and point: the mustang may be a little quicker around a track, fine.....but its not like the subies are slow either.....and they offer abilities in bad weather the mustang cannot......and u can bring 4 of ur friends comfortably for everything...... So overall, the subaru is the superior automobile. :supz:

Cuz remember, a car is TRANSPORTATION, performance is a bonus. You can easily add performance too with all kinds of parts. You cant easily alter the frame of a 2 door coupe to make it a sedan......and even if u could if u didnt have millions of dollars to spend on it then u did not get the chassis right like a car from the factory would be. The Subarus have ALL of the transportation needs covered, and then offer great performance on top of that.

[boostjunky]

But still, the Evolution is the better car. Again, sorry.

Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[mckpat03]

This thread is bringing the lolz. Thank you.

Also, the back seat of a Mustang really is neither THAT inconvenient nor uncomfortable... especially in the S197's. Is it really THAT big of a deal to have to wait 5 extra seconds to let someone hop in the back? Heck, even in my fox its not that bad back there.

[marshallpre1]

I'm more impressed that the ISF dropped its time from 3:14 two years ago to 3:05. 9 second difference!

[92awdtsi]

yea the subbie will always be in 2nd place to the evo.... it just will.. It has been for years and will continue to keep 2nd place company... or in this case it'll stay right behind the v6 mustang HAHAHAHAHA

[jpalamar]

V6 Mustang was - 3:12.5
STi was - 3:13.8

1.3 seconds is a solid win.. Getting its ass handed to it, ...... not so much.

So....... Lets throw winter tires on all the cars and hit that track with some ice & snow :mrgreen:

Worring about how a preformance cars drives in the snow is a worthless comparison. I def agree that such a small time different isn't having their ass handed to them, but imagine how much different it would be if the Mustang didn't have such a low top speed limit.

Case and point: the mustang may be a little quicker around a track, fine.....but its not like the subies are slow either.....and they offer abilities in bad weather the mustang cannot......and u can bring 4 of ur friends comfortably for everything...... So overall, the subaru is the superior automobile. :supz:

Cuz remember, a car is TRANSPORTATION, performance is a bonus. You can easily add performance too with all kinds of parts. You cant easily alter the frame of a 2 door coupe to make it a sedan......and even if u could if u didnt have millions of dollars to spend on it then u did not get the chassis right like a car from the factory would be. The Subarus have ALL of the transportation needs covered, and then offer great performance on top of that.

2 door VS 4 door is a weak arguement. Yes, it takes a little more effort to get in and out, but you act like the rear seats of the WRX are amazing. I sat in the back of my buddies WRX and it was tighter then the back seats of my GTO. This also has nothing to do with preformance as thats what the article was based on. The WRX didn't win, you can't argue that.

AWD VS FWD VS RWD is again built for different reasons... with the majority of the population living in non year-round snow covered areas, saying the WRX is better because it drives in the snow only effects a small part of the population. It wouldn't even use it as an argueing fact.

[92awdtsi]

Worring about how a preformance cars drives in the snow is a worthless comparison. I def agree that such a small time different isn't having their ass handed to them, but imagine how much different it would be if the Mustang didn't have such a low top speed limit.

yea they said the mustang was bangin off speed limiter for a few seconds on the one straight away

[boostjunky]

Yes I too would love to see the times without the speed limiter.

Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[boostjunky]

Worring about how a preformance cars drives in the snow is a worthless comparison.

Tell that to the old school rally and ice racers from Scandinavian countries. Not to mention the old head Japanese drifters who would go as fast as possible in any weather.

And they did it all in rwd with low tech tires to boot.
Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[Bdub215]

Subarus suck

Can I haz yours then?? Lol

[ASIAN JUL]

EVO :inlove: that is all.

[Khellen]

LOL @ all the subbie owners getting pissed because the new STI got its ass handed to it by a v6 mustang > LOL

You're trying way too hard to troll.

I'm a die hard Subaru fan but honestly I'm happy for Ford. It's about time an American company started making the progress they've made recently. 5 years ago most of their cars were ugly and boring...now their styling and performance is on par or better then most brands. Not just with their flagship car.

Also, after riding in Nick's 2011 WRX I couldent care less how much faster a v6 mustang or whatever else is...it's a nice car. Unless you bought the car with the intention of tracking it from the get go...does it really even matter? If so...why? For bragging rights? I guess I'm getting old.

With that said...an STi should be able to beat up on a V6 mustang and it is indeed sad to see Subaru's flagship not keeping up with the competiton. Subaru has needed to overhaul the impreza for sometime now. Guess we'll have to see what they do in the future.

[DownforceTom]

They're all cars I'd be happy to own/drive. I just happen to be a suby guy.

[WolfsFang]

They're all cars I'd be happy to own/drive. I just happen to be a suby guy.Ill be happy to own all but the V6 mustang. If it was the V8 then ill be happy.

[DownforceTom]

Ill be happy to own all but the V6 mustang. If it was the V8 then ill be happy.

Did you read the article? The v6 is a totally competent performance car now. It's not like it used to be once upon a time where you got made fun of for not having the GT.

[ambitiousCK]

Can I haz yours then?? Lol

sure lol

[Scapegoat]

Did you read the article? The v6 is a totally competent performance car now. It's not like it used to be once upon a time where you got made fun of for not having the GT.

i still wouldnt buy a v6 mustang

[92awdtsi]

You're trying way too hard to troll.



not at all, since the ken block videos, there has been an explosion of subaru fans/owners that think they are better than everyone... And its funny how subaru's top model is getting beat by a v6 mustang with a speed limiter. If you want a performance awd turbo car, go with an evo. period.

[Fujito]

I wanted to see the Evo's times so I googled this, and this is what I found :lol:

http://njstangers.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4269

Unless the OP is this guy, he just copied and pasted it word for word :lol:

[Fujito]

Oh, I see it in the first post now. I think everyone already knew that the Evo X has superior handling. That was established in 2008.

[92awdtsi]

Oh, I see it in the first post now. I think everyone already knew that the Evo X has superior handling. That was established in 2008.

that was established in 2003......

[Fujito]

Evo X.... I can... be... dramatic... too...

[WolfsFang]

Did you read the article? The v6 is a totally competent performance car now. It's not like it used to be once upon a time where you got made fun of for not having the GT.Tell that to the kid that owns a flat black 2011 V6 Stang at my school.

[92awdtsi]

Evo X.... I can... be... dramatic... too...

i'm terribly sorry it will never happen again your magesty.:prayer:

[Khellen]

not at all, since the ken block videos, there has been an explosion of subaru fans/owners that think they are better than everyone... And its funny how subaru's top model is getting beat by a v6 mustang with a speed limiter. If you want a performance awd turbo car, go with an evo. period.

You do realize you sound exactly like the demographic you're describing right?

Just because you got into evos after watching 2 fast 2 furious dosent make you any better then the Ken Block nut swingers.

[mckpat03]

Did you read the article? The v6 is a totally competent performance car now. It's not like it used to be once upon a time where you got made fun of for not having the GT.

I don't have a GT and its never been a problem?

i still wouldnt buy a v6 mustang

This. Just isn't the same.

[92awdtsi]

Just because you got into evos after watching 2 fast 2 furious dosent make you any better then the Ken Block nut swingers.

Actually I never really "got into evos" Yes, I defiantly like them but I was just establishing that they are and always have been better than wrxs/sti's in every way except price, since they came out.

[Chris B.]

OP, any link to the article?

If it wasn't posted yet

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/lightning_lap_2011-feature

[Chris B.]

I might have had the figures wrong here.........

V6 Mustang was - 3:12.5
STi was - 3:13.8

1.3 seconds is a solid win.. Getting its ass handed to it, ...... not so much.


Read the whole article. The V6 mustang was bouncing off the 114 MPH speed limiter for 15 seconds of every lap. Instead of accelerating for those 15 seconds, it was stuck at a lower speed.

It amazed me that the performance pack car with the same tires as the GT Brembo package car had such a low speed limiter. With a raised speed limiter, the car should be several seconds per lap faster. Ford did recently have a contest to name a new V6 track/performance package. Maybe that one will have brembos and no speed limiter.



I'm not bashing the Mustang.

It is kind of funny how Subie bashers are popping up though. :lol:

Subies have a devoted following for a reason, just like all the other groups.

So....... Lets throw winter tires on all the cars and hit that track with some ice & snow :mrgreen:

Keep the tow straps in Lancer & both Imprezas.... the wrong wheel drive cars are gonna need them :finga:

(Flamesuit ON) :lol:

Please take this post with a grain of salt too ........


I've driven RWD cars through quite a few winters around the northeast U.S. I work a job with odd hours and I spend time on call where I have to go into work in the middle of the night when the roads aren't plowed. Yet, I haven't had an issue making it into work with a RWD car and snow tires. I also go up to the unmaintained and unplowed access roads by Bake Oven Knob in the winter and the only cars at the top of the mountain are my Mustang and a bunch AWD cars and 4WD trucks. I haven't had a situation where I need an AWD or 4WD vehicle. I only had one winter accident in a RWD car and it was a situation where AWD wouldn't have helped. It was more of driver error. The way I look at it is I can't give up the handling and power and fuel economy of my car to have an AWD car that I might find useful a couple days or nights a year.

I did consider a WRX for my daily driver several times and I think I even had you as my salesman once back in 2008. I just don't see a reason to get an AWD vehicle at this point.

[Chris B.]

The sales speak for themselves


Exactly! That's why the Mustang has been outsellign the WRX and Evo for years in the U.S. market. :lol:

[nuTinmuch]

No 370Z? :c

Not surprised though, I doubt Nissan gave them one to use considering what happened last year.

edit: What you should really take away from this article is that suddenly there is a -lot- of competition in the affordable sports car market. Things are just going to be getting better for everyone.

[Khellen]

Actually I never really "got into evos" Yes, I defiantly like them but I was just establishing that they are and always have been better than wrxs/sti's in every way except price, since they came out.

Yea, you're not a fanboy. :roll:

Have you ever even owned/ridden in an evo and an STi? They are both great cars but arguing that one has always been better in every concievable way is just plain stupid.

[boostjunky]

not at all, since the ken block videos, ...

His newest is with a Ford. Lol

Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[92awdtsi]

Yea, you're not a fanboy. :roll:

Have you ever even owned/ridden in an evo and an STi? They are both great cars but arguing that one has always been better in every concievable way is just plain stupid.

Although I cant afford either one I've been in/driven both, My buddy had a 05 STi that made 340ish whp. Great car dont get me wrong. And now he has a 06 EVO se 300ish whp. I honestly like the evo better. The power in the subbie comes on sooner ( more displacement ) but the evo just seemed to ride/drive nicer. The power was a little more on/off but I felt more confident in it. Especially going into/out corners, then on straights it just felt like it pulled harder (even though it had less power) . Don't get me wrong, if someone offered me an STi and the only condition was I could never own an evo I'd totally do it. Idk, thats just my .02 take it for what it is.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

I wanted to see the Evo's times so I googled this, and this is what I found :lol:

http://njstangers.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4269

Unless the OP is this guy, he just copied and pasted it word for word :lol:

That's plagiarism. :(

[R22B]

Lol at all the Subie fans getting butt hurt after reading this.

I love Subaru's as much as the next guy. To be honest, its really the only thing I'd buy other than a Ford (I currently own two Subaru's, two Fords, and a bastardized Mazda). The fact is that Subaru has long ignored the STi with the exception of making it uglier each year (IMO obviously) and adding electronics to it. The Impreza WRX STi launched back in 92(?) with 240~hp. It has only received 65hp in nearly 20 years time - that's pathetic and completely lazy on Subaru's part. Hell, even 10 years ago it was one hell of a performance car.

I'll even admit that the Evolution is a better performance car. I've never ridden in one so I can't comment on quality or anything like that - but you can fart in an Evo and make great power. There's also a reason why its a four time WRC manufacturer winner as well. Evolutions are great cars and if I had the money and had to choose between a brand new Evolution or a brand new Impreza WRX STi -- I'd reluctantly choose the Evolution. Dave has own both STi and Evolution - perhaps he could comment on performance differences (FYI - he favors the Evolution more).

The new Mustangs are outstanding IMO. I'd even rock the v6. Only hardcore fanboys wouldn't get the v6 because they would be afraid of what people thought of them in their 'econo stang', regardless of its performance. Its great to see Ford stepping up their game -- that's what happens when domestic brands battle each other (Camaro/Mustang battle!)

My final thoughts about Subaru is this: they are a great package at an affordable price. They are good in all sections but masters in none. They could be killer, but Subaru feels the need to be bland these days. I'll give them one thing, they are really pushing the brand in rally here in the U.S. Ford is getting there as well with the Fiesta Trophy Cup in 2011!

Regardless, they are all awesome performance cars and I'm really not shocked to see Subaru getting further and further towards the bottom.

[ndubz]

Honestly I thought about all this today, and the real problem here is that subaru has ****ed up the Sti since it was brought here. When it came here it was far more hardcore. With each new version, subaru has made it softer and more forgiving. (Case and point, theyve been adding understeer ever since 04, cuz the 04 was "too much of a handful at the limit".....ITS A ****ING RALLY CAR, IT SHOULD BE) They have dulled the car out. Back in 04, stis had the same performance level that ud get from an M3 or a 911 carrera.....now those cars have moved on and the subaru has not and has thus moved downward.

The evo has always been meant to be a sharp handling car, and has retained that. The subaru used to be similar but as i said, over time has gotten worse.

Honestly the fact that the WRX was faster in speed than the sti here tells me that they only difference between them is the tranny and the shock towers....thats it. Which is absolutely ****ing stupid. The WRX is amazing, and is what it should be, but I maintain as I have since 08 that the STI has been ****ed up royally.

While I still stand by what i say about the Subarus being the best overall packages for a street car. I have to say that subaru really has been ****ing retarded with the GR STIs.....theyre absolutely awful. The current Sti is what the wrx should be. and the Sti should be a sharper more focused performance car for the more serious enthusiasts. Not a car to be watered down like that.

My 04 still is as good as the STi ever was in this country, when it was basically just the same thing as the JDM Spec C version. ever since then theyve been watered down in some way shape or form. If i was buying one of the new ones, id have the Evo no doubt.

[JERRYM1997]

I dont care what people say about it being a v6 but I would love to have that v6 Mustang.

[Supraru]

Exactly! That's why the Mustang has been outsellign the WRX and Evo for years in the U.S. market. :lol:

A true sign of intelligence is comparing sales of Ford (mega huge car company) to Subaru (a very small company). :roll:

[Supraru]

Honestly I thought about all this today, and the real problem here is that subaru has ****ed up the Sti since it was brought here. When it came here it was far more hardcore. With each new version, subaru has made it softer and more forgiving. (Case and point, theyve been adding understeer ever since 04, cuz the 04 was "too much of a handful at the limit".....ITS A ****ING RALLY CAR, IT SHOULD BE) They have dulled the car out. Back in 04, stis had the same performance level that ud get from an M3 or a 911 carrera.....now those cars have moved on and the subaru has not and has thus moved downward.

The evo has always been meant to be a sharp handling car, and has retained that. The subaru used to be similar but as i said, over time has gotten worse.

Honestly the fact that the WRX was faster in speed than the sti here tells me that they only difference between them is the tranny and the shock towers....thats it. Which is absolutely ****ing stupid. The WRX is amazing, and is what it should be, but I maintain as I have since 08 that the STI has been ****ed up royally.

While I still stand by what i say about the Subarus being the best overall packages for a street car. I have to say that subaru really has been ****ing retarded with the GR STIs.....theyre absolutely awful. The current Sti is what the wrx should be. and the Sti should be a sharper more focused performance car for the more serious enthusiasts. Not a car to be watered down like that.

My 04 still is as good as the STi ever was in this country, when it was basically just the same thing as the JDM Spec C version. ever since then theyve been watered down in some way shape or form. If i was buying one of the new ones, id have the Evo no doubt.

You give subaru owners a bad name. The 04 sti isn't the same thing as the spec c. The spec c is a far superior track car then a usdm sti. From the 2.0l twinscroll turbo to the suspension and weight. They are two totally different animals. And since they went with the different wheel offset the whole driveline has been different. The only thing they share is the body and engine. Obviously there is a different turbo but working from the hubs to the axles, spring rates, trans, rear, is a different car. I see what you're trying to get at but it isn't that close.

The only thing I agree with you about is subaru needs to step up the sti to more power and refine the stock suspension.

[Supraru]

As far as this article goes I never really put much stock into the bigger named magazine articles. Seems there is usually a bigger interest in some companies in many comparisons they do. I'm not saying that the sti should win like a fanboy. The new mustangs are no joke. I'd like to see an actual independent comparison but I'm guessing that will never happen.

[upperguy]

As far as this article goes I never really put much stock into the bigger named magazine articles. Seems there is usually a bigger interest in some companies in many comparisons they do. I'm not saying that the sti should win like a fanboy. The new mustangs are no joke. I'd like to see an actual independent comparison but I'm guessing that will never happen.

So you're going the conspiracy theory route?

[Chris B.]

No 370Z? :c


They don't retest cars if there haven't been signifigant changes. They tested the 370Z Nizmo last year


Not surprised though, I doubt Nissan gave them one to use considering what happened last year.


Its not C&D's fault that nissan put brake pads that overheat very very quickly on their top performing 370Z.

[Chris B.]

A true sign of intelligence is comparing sales of Ford (mega huge car company) to Subaru (a very small company). :roll:

I'm not comparing sales of the two companies overall. I'm comparing two individual cars. Even if you include the base Impreza and WRX models, the Impreza, WRX, and WRX STI still don't outsell the Mustang models. If the Imprza and WRX were a superior car, appealed to a wider range of people, or was a better value for the money, they would outsell the Mustang models. Not including specality and tuner models, Ford has sold an average of 120,000 Mustangs a year int he U.S. since 2005. The previous generation Mustang sold an average of over 180,000 per year in the U.S.

[Supraru]

I'm not comparing sales of the two companies overall. I'm comparing two individual cars. Even if you include the base Impreza and WRX models, the Impreza, WRX, and WRX STI still don't outsell the Mustang models. If the Imprza and WRX were a superior car, appealed to a wider range of people, or was a better value for the money, they would outsell the Mustang models. Not including specality and tuner models, Ford has sold an average of 120,000 Mustangs a year int he U.S. since 2005. The previous generation Mustang sold an average of over 180,000 per year in the U.S.

You are still making the same comparison. You are comparing one company that has the resources to pump out that many mustangs. Maybe for some reason you don't realize how small of a company Subaru is. I doubt they sell 120k cars a year. As I stared comparing the amount produced and sold is just stupid since one company is huge. If you're still having trouble understanding picture Subaru as a mom and pop store and ford is walmart.

[Chris B.]

My basic thoughts on this year's article....

I wish the V6 Mustang didn't have a speed limiter so we could see how close it is to the Mustang GT in lap times. Mustangs have been able to take corners well since the 2005 model year, but it seems that not many people have noticed until now.

It seems that Subaru hasn't done much to increase the WRX STI's overall performance over the years in the U.S. market and the rest of the U.S. market has caught up to and passed it as a performance car. The much cheaper Hyundai runs the same lap time as the STI and also the V6 secretaries car beats it while bouncing off the speed limiter for 15 seconds per lap. Its time for Subaru to wake up. It makes me so glad I didn't buy a new STI a few years ago.

Which is faster the WRX STI or the Lancer Evo SE? Does it matter when the cheaper Mustang GT beats both of them and makes M3 drivers nervous? :lol:

The CTS-V really moves. However, in that price range, I'd rather have the boxster spyder if I don't have to use it as my daily driver.

I want to see a 911 GT2's lap times next time.

I've seen video of a 100% stock 2011 GT500 run a sub 3 minute lap time at the same VIR grand course. Maybe it was in cooler weather or a better driver?

I'd still take a RWD car over a AWD car for a track day car. Its nice to see more and more choices becomming available over the years.

If I was int he market for a new daily driver, it probably would be a 2011 Mustang GT with the Brembo brake package. Of course, my daily driver has seen a couple thousand miles on road courses this past year and I prefer a car with 4 seats over 2, so my requirements may be different than other people's requirements.

[Supraru]

So you're going the conspiracy theory route?

Not at all. I stated the mustang is pretty nasty. But in reading this magazine and others for a very long time you come to realize each is biased in thier own way. This isn't just muscle vs import favorites. You start to notice trends after a while which was why I stopped reading them a long time ago. I prefer independent type reviews.

[Chris B.]

You are still making the same comparison. You are comparing one company that has the resources to pump out that many mustangs. Maybe for some reason you don't realize how small of a company Subaru is. I doubt they sell 120k cars a year. As I stared comparing the amount produced and sold is just stupid since one company is huge. If you're still having trouble understanding picture Subaru as a mom and pop store and ford is walmart.

I'm comparing two individual cars, nto two companies. If there was a greater demand for the various Impreza models, Subaru could do what is necessary to make more of them. The simple fact is the demand isn't high enough(for various reasons) for Subaru to make more of them to come anywhere near the sales of the Mustang. In the past 20 years, other smaller car companies have done what is necessary to increase production on some models when demand increases if there is a much greater demand for their cars than their current production can make in a year. If the demand and market was there to sell 120,000+ cars per year, Subaru would increase their production to make that many. The simple fact is that the demand isn't there. If Subaru made 120,000+ Imprezas, WRX's,a nd WRX STI's per year, there would be at least 60,000+ left over after the new model year cars started showing up.

[DaveSTi]

Depends on the track, englishtown road course....yea. Nordscliefe.....not at all

was this test done at the Nurburbring? No, it was done at VIR. I know guys who've raced VIR. Its a big power track and a fast track.

So aside from the strawman argument of the 12 mile Green Hell, 1.3 seconds A LAP is a BIG difference.


As far as the article goes and this thread is going (not well) here's my $3.50:

Evo vs. STi: Arguing about snow performance or daily driving in a thread about track times is gay and stupid. Stupid gay. (I still like you Rob)

Ford vs. Subaru: Mustangs alone sell 200k+ units a year. That's Subaru's entire product portfolio sales volume. Yup, one model of car from Ford outsells everything Subaru makes combined every year.

This article's track times:

1). Remove the V6 limiter.
2). A GT should be faster than the Evo, it has over 100bhp more...don't discount that.
3). The WRX is the GR to buy if you must buy that tumor of a car.
4). The STi should be discontinued. No one in their right mind should pay the premium for a slower car.
5). The Genesis is nice for the money, but I'd rather buy the Mustang.

Feel free to argue away, you're wrong. :D

Ahh, I love the internets haha

[mckpat03]

Only hardcore fanboys wouldn't get the v6 because they would be afraid of what people thought of them in their 'econo stang',


You may or may not be right... but really?

It's not really being afraid of being made fun of. Plenty of respected members of the Mustang boards have sixxers. Its the fact that part of owning a Mustang is having a V8. The typical V8 characteristics as well as that distinct Mustang V8 sound is part of the experience. Would you really settle for the sound of a V6 Mustang when you could have a UPR O/R X-pipe and Borla Stingers on a Cobra or a cammed Mustang of some sort?

I may regret asking this, but would some of you really be completely okay with having a non-turbo Subaru or Mitsu knowing you could have a STi or Evo??

[DaveSTi]

You may or may not be right... but really?

It's not really being afraid of being made fun of. Plenty of respected members of the Mustang boards have sixxers. Its the fact that part of owning a Mustang is having a V8. The typical V8 characteristics as well as that distinct Mustang V8 sound is part of the experience. Would you really settle for the sound of a V6 Mustang when you could have a UPR O/R X-pipe and Borla Stingers on a Cobra or a cammed Mustang of some sort?

I may regret asking this, but would some of you really be completely okay with having a non-turbo Subaru or Mitsu knowing you could have a STi or Evo??

I owned a V6 Mustang. I always wanted the V8 but couldn't afford it in college. When I got some money, I got an STi so I wouldn't have a higher model to want.

Despite the new V6 being awesome, you do gotta buy the V8 if you're getting a Stang. Its what makes the car what it is.

Look at the old SVO. Kickass car but didn't sell much because people wanted the V8 experience.

[sean3]

Evo>sti, what else is new?

I suppose a quick car coming out of Korea is new!

[Fujito]

I may regret asking this, but would some of you really be completely okay with having a non-turbo Subaru or Mitsu knowing you could have a STi or Evo??
You will regret it.

MONEY is the #1 decision factor in purchasing a car no matter what anyone says. Ideally a Nissan GT-R is everything I want, but I cannot realistically afford it (unless I want to live with my mommy for another 5 years), nor do I want to pay that kind of insurance and maintenance.

Edit: wait, I might not be reading this question right. I'll be back in 2011.

[nuTinmuch]

They don't retest cars if there haven't been signifigant changes. They tested the 370Z Nizmo last year



Its not C&D's fault that nissan put brake pads that overheat very very quickly on their top performing 370Z.

The Nismo really isn't the top performing 370Z, as strange as that sounds. It is actually slightly worse than the 370Z w/ sports package.

That's a different can of worms, though.

I think I'll leave this thread to the Evo vs. STi guys. :p

(For the record, I think both have gotten ridiculous in price/performance when you consider what you can get + not having to sacrifice 'luxury'

...I'd still buy an Evo, though.)

edit: also looking over the track times, holy **** is the Cobalt SS/TC fast. You can pick one of those up seriously cheap right now, too.

[Supraru]

I'm comparing two individual cars, nto two companies. If there was a greater demand for the various Impreza models, Subaru could do what is necessary to make more of them. The simple fact is the demand isn't high enough(for various reasons) for Subaru to make more of them to come anywhere near the sales of the Mustang. In the past 20 years, other smaller car companies have done what is necessary to increase production on some models when demand increases if there is a much greater demand for their cars than their current production can make in a year. If the demand and market was there to sell 120,000+ cars per year, Subaru would increase their production to make that many. The simple fact is that the demand isn't there. If Subaru made 120,000+ Imprezas, WRX's,a nd WRX STI's per year, there would be at least 60,000+ left over after the new model year cars started showing up.

Are you mental? Is your name tatu? Cause i swear your living on fantasy island. What part of Subaru is a small company don't you understand? They are incapable of producing 120k impreza wrx's. And I double checked my numbers, Subaru sold 210k units in 09', they were hoping to sell 240k this year. It doesn't matter the demand of the car, they can't produce that many or even have a market for it.

I'll give you some advice, never open your own business because you have horrible business sense.

[Scapegoat]

You are still making the same comparison. You are comparing one company that has the resources to pump out that many mustangs. Maybe for some reason you don't realize how small of a company Subaru is. I doubt they sell 120k cars a year. As I stared comparing the amount produced and sold is just stupid since one company is huge. If you're still having trouble understanding picture Subaru as a mom and pop store and ford is walmart.



Are you mental? Is your name tatu? Cause i swear your living on fantasy island. What part of Subaru is a small company don't you understand? They are incapable of producing 120k impreza wrx's. And I double checked my numbers, Subaru sold 210k units in 09', they were hoping to sell 240k this year. It doesn't matter the demand of the car, they can't produce that many or even have a market for it.

I'll give you some advice, never open your own business because you have horrible business sense.

you're mental dude, relax.

The reason ford is capable of producing as many mustangs as it does is because there is demand there. where there is demand, there is money. If the demand on the impreza was as high, then they'd be able to produce that many b/c they'd be selling that many.

regardless of that. Ndubz brought sales up... Chris is correct in spitting out sales facts when ndubz is attempting to make it sound like the subaru sales. i'm sure any way you slice the math, reducing ford's production and sales number by a percentage to be within the range of subaru then the mustang sales would still, percentage wise, be higher.

mustang out sells a ton of vehicles across the country. not merely because ford is capable of producing the vehicles. but because the demand for them has been huge for 40+ years.

it's ok to compare sales last year between companies. thats how you know you can compete financially.

the mustang has an image, it sells itself... subaru needs to work on the impreza. the base model is relegated to old people, the wrx is generally punk kids and the sti needs a little push in the right direction.

hopefully subaru reads this and goes WTF! and fixes the sti

[mcperson2k]

I'll give you some advice, never open your own business because you have horrible business sense.

:mrgreen::rofl::cyberguy::banana::rotfl::screwy::-p

[nuTinmuch]

hopefully subaru reads this and goes WTF! and fixes the sti

Japanese companies don't work like that, unfortunately.

[Subie_sleeper]

Read the whole article. The V6 mustang was bouncing off the 114 MPH speed limiter for 15 seconds of every lap. Instead of accelerating for those 15 seconds, it was stuck at a lower speed.

It amazed me that the performance pack car with the same tires as the GT Brembo package car had such a low speed limiter. With a raised speed limiter, the car should be several seconds per lap faster. Ford did recently have a contest to name a new V6 track/performance package. Maybe that one will have brembos and no speed limiter.




I've driven RWD cars through quite a few winters around the northeast U.S. I work a job with odd hours and I spend time on call where I have to go into work in the middle of the night when the roads aren't plowed. Yet, I haven't had an issue making it into work with a RWD car and snow tires. I also go up to the unmaintained and unplowed access roads by Bake Oven Knob in the winter and the only cars at the top of the mountain are my Mustang and a bunch AWD cars and 4WD trucks. I haven't had a situation where I need an AWD or 4WD vehicle. I only had one winter accident in a RWD car and it was a situation where AWD wouldn't have helped. It was more of driver error. The way I look at it is I can't give up the handling and power and fuel economy of my car to have an AWD car that I might find useful a couple days or nights a year.

I did consider a WRX for my daily driver several times and I think I even had you as my salesman once back in 2008. I just don't see a reason to get an AWD vehicle at this point.

Sorry man. I agree that RWD >AWD at the track, but a RWD or FWD car with the same tires, ANY tread type will NEVER be able to out perform an AWD in poor underfoot conditions.
Your Mustang does well in snow with winter tires, I'll buy that. ANY AWD passenger vehicle with the same ground clearance will perform better in identical conditions & KEEP performing when a front or rear driver stops moving & spins tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[laser92dsm]

They are both great cars but arguing that one has always been better in every concievable way is just plain stupid.

I agree with this, I have not owned either an sti or an evo but I have owned dsm's so naturally for me I love the evo and now I own a wrx so subaru's have grown on me.

Side note: I hate ford, but now I have to give credit where credit is due they came out of the box and created a great mustang.

[Supraru]

you're mental dude, relax.

The reason ford is capable of producing as many mustangs as it does is because there is demand there. where there is demand, there is money. If the demand on the impreza was as high, then they'd be able to produce that many b/c they'd be selling that many.

regardless of that. Ndubz brought sales up... Chris is correct in spitting out sales facts when ndubz is attempting to make it sound like the subaru sales. i'm sure any way you slice the math, reducing ford's production and sales number by a percentage to be within the range of subaru then the mustang sales would still, percentage wise, be higher.

mustang out sells a ton of vehicles across the country. not merely because ford is capable of producing the vehicles. but because the demand for them has been huge for 40+ years.

it's ok to compare sales last year between companies. thats how you know you can compete financially.

the mustang has an image, it sells itself... subaru needs to work on the impreza. the base model is relegated to old people, the wrx is generally punk kids and the sti needs a little push in the right direction.

hopefully subaru reads this and goes WTF! and fixes the sti

I'm not here to argue which car is better or which one out sells what. I think I made that pretty clear. I just think it's funny that people are comparing sales to one giant company to a very small company hence why I made my comment. You can't compare that aspect. Ford pumps out volume. Subaru makes what they can make. Hell for the last year every month they have been setting thier own sales records beating thier old bests from 15 percent to 30 percent. Two totally dirrerent styles and size companies. I also stated ndubz gives Subaru owners a bad name. Lol

[Supraru]

Sorry man. I agree that RWD >AWD at the track, but a RWD or FWD car with the same tires, ANY tread type will NEVER be able to out perform an AWD in poor underfoot conditions.
Your Mustang does well in snow with winter tires, I'll buy that. ANY AWD passenger vehicle with the same ground clearance will perform better in identical conditions & KEEP performing when a front or rear driver stops moving & spins tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is funny when someone who has rwd states they can make it where they need to in the snow.....so can us awd guys, but we can still comfortably drive the speed limit and beyond. You just gotta be smart and leave time to brake.

[jjm4life]

i love how this has gone from a track related thread, to the subaru fanbois arguing their superiority in categories from poor weather performance practicality to number of doors.
this isnt even a evo vs sti thing anymore. its truly sad. yes the sti is a very capable car in many ways. but this time, it got spanked in 1 test by a rental car bouncing off its speed limiter.
the impreza platform is not the chariot of the gods. get over it. other cars outperform your wet dreammobile for less money

troll please close this thread before it gets uglier.

[jjm4life]

and the snow argument is BS. i drove a ****ing lotus with an open rear differential through a new england winter.

[R22B]

Why can't we have intelligent threads on TST? This thread is just pathetic now.

Anyways, I guess you're right about the whole V8 experience thing. To most of the population, why bother getting a muscle car if its just a v6. I thought the same thing until the new Mustangs came out. I'm easy to please, I just want 300hp out of a car and I'm satisfied with it. But to answer your question, if Subaru put out an NA motor that pushed 300hp... I'd much rather have that than a turbo. Turbo's give you room to grow, but I'd rather have the simplicity of NA. Those are just my thoughts though.

I can't believe I'm a Subaru owner and I'm not standing up for Subaru (am I the only one in this thread?). You basically have a turd with wheels now. Everyone else is pushing to become better and stronger and the only thing Subaru does is add weight to an already heavy car. Everyone is acting like Subaru are the best cars out there. They aren't. They are good cars (and awesome cars for bad weather), but they are far from the best. The new Mustangs are better. The new Evolutions are better. Subaru dropped the ball with the new STi. They created an awesome car and then stopped producing it further. Don't be angry at C&D, don't be angry at everyone posting in this thread - be angry with Subaru for failing.

[mcperson2k]

I'm still laughing over Subaru being a "small" company based off their sales. I can assure you that if Subaru wanted to, they could produce twice the amount of cars they are now, but what good is it for them to have cars they cant sell sit and depreciate.

[sean3]

It is funny when someone who has rwd states they can make it where they need to in the snow.....so can us awd guys, but we can still comfortably drive the speed limit and beyond. You just gotta be smart and leave time to brake.

How does AWD make driving over the speed limit safer in poor weather? It doesn't make you stop or turn better, nor does it prevent hydroplaning.

[psymos]

mustang is an awesome car, but they are def a "me too" car. thats my main reasoning for not buying one to be honest. (that and id rather a camaro tbh)

also the whole evo/sti thing is getting out of hand. both cars are great! Stock wise the evo will always win, better turbo, engine design, etc.

IMO put this in dirt (what the sti was actually inspired for) and i think you may see different results ; ) Subaru really dropped the ball from 08+ (imo)


p.s. didnt ford need a government bailout?

[sean3]

mustang is an awesome car, but they are def a "me too" car. thats my main reasoning for not buying one to be honest. (that and id rather a camaro tbh)

also the whole evo/sti thing is getting out of hand. both cars are great! Stock wise the evo will always win, better turbo, engine design, etc.

IMO put this in dirt (what the sti was actually inspired for) and i think you may see different results ; ) Subaru really dropped the ball from 08+ (imo)


p.s. didnt ford need a government bailout?

Come on... The STi has "me too!" written all over it as well.

And Ford is the only American auto maker that didn't need bailout monies.

[R22B]

Come on... The STi has "me too!" written all over it as well.

And Ford is the only American auto maker that didn't need bailout monies.

http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money

[psymos]

Come on... The STi has "me too!" written all over it as well.

And Ford is the only American auto maker that didn't need bailout monies.


ahh, thanks, yea i really couldnt remember.

come on, in one day how many sti's (edit: or evo's for that matter) do you see? and how many mustangs do you see?

sorry, but it was even stated that the mustang alone outsold all of subaru's made so how could it even be possible for the sti to be a "me too" car? ; )

[Scapegoat]

ahh, thanks, yea i really couldnt remember.

come on, in one day how many sti's (edit: or evo's for that matter) do you see? and how many mustangs do you see?

sorry, but it was even stated that the mustang alone outsold all of subaru's made so how could it even be possible for the sti to be a "me too" car? ; )

i see a lot more M3's than i do newer mustangs haha

[92awdtsi]

how is the wrx/sti a "me too" car?..... i bet you the number of wrx/sti owners on this website doubles the number of mustang owners

[nuTinmuch]

http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money

You beat me to it. :(

Also I will say that the 2011 (2010 technically?) Mustang is the best looking one by far. While I see a billion Mustangs daily, I've only seen 2 - 3 5.0s so far.

Plus, who cares if a lot of people drive what you drive?

I don't see a whole lot of 370s, but if I suddenly did I honestly wouldn't care.

[boostjunky]

Please delete.

[boostjunky]

and the snow argument is BS. i drove a ****ing lotus with an open rear differential through a new england winter.

Ftw. I was thinking of your last winter experience through this thread . Lol quoted for truth

Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk


Sent from my Garminfone using Tapatalk

[psymos]

how is the wrx/sti a "me too" car?..... i bet you the number of wrx/sti owners on this website doubles the number of mustang owners

im a bit confused by this?? :bigeek:


Plus, who cares if a lot of people drive what you drive?
care.

i guess i do :wink::banana:

[ndubz]

mustangs are the Me too cars. they're good, but GL if u wanna see my sti with a V6 Mustang.........no gratuitous understeer here.

[Supraru]

I'm still laughing over Subaru being a "small" company based off their sales. I can assure you that if Subaru wanted to, they could produce twice the amount of cars they are now, but what good is it for them to have cars they cant sell sit and depreciate.

You too should not start your own business ever.

[Supraru]

Come on... The STi has "me too!" written all over it as well.

And Ford is the only American auto maker that didn't need bailout monies.

Proven by the sales number you mustang heads posted up which is just ridiculous in comparison to just the among of total subarus's sold a year should be able to help you reverse your statement. Doesn't seem like you thought that one out very well.

[Supraru]

And Ford is the only American auto maker that didn't need bailout monies.

http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money

Haha, for such a mustang guy I guess you didn't know this already. Instead you make the comment to make ford sound so much more cooler. I can do that too. Subaru was the only company posting a profit during that really bad section of our "hard economical times". I think there was another company that barely cleared being under too. See I can do it too.

[Scapegoat]

we get it, we're sorry. you can't compare anything to subaru or the sti, or have any type of conversation regarding thus

http://smiliesftw.com/x/jerkbowdown.gif

[Fujito]

wtf is a "me too" car?

[Scapegoat]

wtf is a "me too" car?

"you have a wrx? me too!"

[Fujito]

Haha some of you care too much about what other people think.

[WolfsFang]

"you have a wrx? me too!"Lol, looks i learned something new for the day.

[sean3]

Haha, for such a mustang guy I guess you didn't know this already. Instead you make the comment to make ford sound so much more cooler. I can do that too. Subaru was the only company posting a profit during that really bad section of our "hard economical times". I think there was another company that barely cleared being under too. See I can do it too.

Never seen that before, just remembered hearing they never took bailout money. And since when was I "such a mustang guy"? Just because I own one doesn't mean I'm a diehard Ford nutcase like all the Subaru owners in this thread.

[mcperson2k]

You too should not start your own business ever.

Coming from the guy who thinks Subaru only sells that many units because that's all they can physically produce... :roll: Last I checked there isn't a waiting list to buy a Subaru.

[Supraru]

we get it, we're sorry. you can't compare anything to subaru or the sti, or have any type of conversation regarding thus

http://smiliesftw.com/x/jerkbowdown.gif

Don't know why you're getting defensive. You're one of the more down to earth people here. People just make some rediculous statements is in "yeah if they wanted to make more they could." or something like "if they wanted to make 150k wrx/sti's a year they could." I mean come one man, those are some pretty dumb statements for people to say. If that's the case hell we should just tell the government to print more money and that will take care all of our problems. I mean they can print all day and night if they want why not just print money off so we have more? :lol:

[Supraru]

Coming from the guy who thinks Subaru only sells that many units because that's all they can physically produce... :roll: Last I checked there isn't a waiting list to buy a Subaru.

Totally, you're right. You know what? I'm sure Subaru's manufacturing plants are just as big as fords and I'm sure they have the same kind of man power. :roll: What actual point are you trying to make? From your super smart comments you sound like you're saying that Subaru should easily be able to produce as many cars as they want. That should be the case for any manufacturer really. If you're selling cars just hit the number button to 150k and boom you're a big producer. Damn really you should be in a smart business magazine. You should get paid for these brilliant ideas.

[mcperson2k]

If that's the case hell we should just tell the government to print more money and that will take care all of our problems.

:rotfl: I could care less about Evo's or Sti's but I cant get over this guy telling people how a business works.

[Supraru]

Never seen that before, just remembered hearing they never took bailout money. And since when was I "such a mustang guy"? Just because I own one doesn't mean I'm a diehard Ford nutcase like all the Subaru owners in this thread.

If you like to go off spouting off information to make it seem like they are super cool you should at least know the facts first. You're like the mustang ndubz in this thread. :lol:

[Supraru]

:rotfl: I could care less about Evo's or Sti's but I cant get over this guy telling people how a business works.

Yeah just as simple as making more. You still haven't proved anything. I by far am not a business man, but apparently you are. **** if you wanna make more money just make more plain and simple.

[upperguy]

Totally, you're right. You know what? I'm sure Subaru's manufacturing plants are just as big as fords and I'm sure they have the same kind of man power. :roll: What actual point are you trying to make? From your super smart comments you sound like you're saying that Subaru should easily be able to produce as many cars as they want. That should be the case for any manufacturer really. If you're selling cars just hit the number button to 150k and boom you're a big producer. Damn really you should be in a smart business magazine. You should get paid for these brilliant ideas.

I think the issue is that you seem to think they are saying that Subaru can just crank up the numbers if they wanted to. They are actually saying that if there were sufficient demand for the STI and so on, that Subaru would raise production to meet said demand. Because they made X amount and still have new old stock sitting in dealer lots, it would be silly to make even more.

Whereas Ford has a much higher demand for the mustang, they produce more.

You should also stop making statements like you've been making in this thread, you just come off as a jackass.

[mcperson2k]

Totally, you're right. You know what? I'm sure Subaru's manufacturing plants are just as big as fords and I'm sure they have the same kind of man power. :roll: What actual point are you trying to make? From your super smart comments you sound like you're saying that Subaru should easily be able to produce as many cars as they want. That should be the case for any manufacturer really. If you're selling cars just hit the number button to 150k and boom you're a big producer. Damn really you should be in a smart business magazine. You should get paid for these brilliant ideas.

My point is that over the last 3 pages, you have been defending Subaru by claiming they are a small company... Subaru is NOT a small company... Your calling them small based off of how many units they sell each year vs other brands. Your also saying that they are really successful compared to other brands, because though they are small, they are producing more cars every year, and breaking their own sales records. Subaru HAS the capital to build as many cars as ford, but they would lose everything in the process because there is no demand for their vehicles.

[Supraru]

My point is that over the last 3 pages, you have been defending Subaru by claiming they are a small company... Subaru is NOT a small company... Your calling them small based off of how many units they sell each year. Your also saying that they are really successful compared to other brands, because though they are small, they are producing more cars every year, and breaking their own records. Subaru HAS the capital to build as many cars as ford, but they would lose everything in the process because there is no demand for their vehicles.

proof please. I'd like to know where you came up with this info that subaru isn't a small company compared to others like Gm, Ford, Toyota, and Honda. Here I'll do it for you. They are the 23rd largest auto manufactured and get beat by some well known companies like Bejing motors, tata, dongfeng motor, faw, and cherry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry

Is it me or wouldn't ones size of a company dictate what they sell? Makes no sense to me that someone would consider a company "big" when they produce a half a million cars a year. To us sure that seems big, but when Toyota manufactures over 7 million it doesn't seem that big now does it. Oh yeah and Ford produced over 4 million cars last year. Crank up those numbers Subaru!!!!!!!

Now please explain to me how a company goes from making 500k cars to over 4 million. It's just that simple right?

[Supraru]

I think the issue is that you seem to think they are saying that Subaru can just crank up the numbers if they wanted to. They are actually saying that if there were sufficient demand for the STI and so on, that Subaru would raise production to meet said demand. Because they made X amount and still have new old stock sitting in dealer lots, it would be silly to make even more.

Whereas Ford has a much higher demand for the mustang, they produce more.

You should also stop making statements like you've been making in this thread, you just come off as a jackass.

For starters I don't care what anyone thinks of me on here. I'm the one making sense here. I don't think a small company can just up their production 4 million cars.

[psymos]

Haha some of you care too much about what other people think.

i dont care what other people think, i care what i think actually ; /

Just because I own one doesn't mean I'm a diehard Ford nutcase like all the Subaru owners in this thread.

generalize much? i dont see how i am a "diehard" subaru fan? :bigeek:



Subaru HAS the capital to build as many cars as ford, but they would lose everything in the process because there is NO demand for their vehicles.

i wouldnt say there is no demand. is the demand less than mustangs? of course!

but no demand....? really??

[Supraru]

generalize much? i dont see how i am a "diehard" subaru fan? :bigeek:

He generalizes because he has zero facts to support his statements. I on the other hand proved my point to him with numbers. :lol:

[Scapegoat]

For starters I don't care what anyone thinks of me on here. I'm the one making sense here. I don't think a small company can just up their production 4 million cars.

but they could, if the demand was there. they'd be foolish not to produce 4 million cars if 4 million people wanted to buy them.

do they have the funds to do so? no, of course not. but if they could prove the demand for 4 million cars was there, they'd have lenders ready and willing to hop on board to make.

no one is arguing that subaru has the money sitting in the bank to build these cars, they don't. we're saying that if the desire of 4 million consumers were to purchase a subaru impreza of ANY type, the company would find a way to get it done.

i don't even know why we're talking about this any more... it's simple supply and demand, simple economics. The consumers demand, the producer supplies. demand goes up, supply goes up.

right now, the demand of subaru's is not as high as ford.

**** it, i don't even know what the point of all this was now.

except that the 2011 v6 mustang tromps the 10k more STI on the track and on the street in both SALES and performance

[upperguy]

proof please. I'd like to know where you came up with this info that subaru isn't a small company compared to others like Gm, Ford, Toyota, and Honda. Here I'll do it for you. They are the 23rd largest auto manufactured and get beat by some well known companies like Bejing motors, tata, dongfeng motor, faw, and cherry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry

Is it me or wouldn't ones size of a company dictate what they sell? Makes no sense to me that someone would consider a company "big" when they produce a half a million cars a year. To us sure that seems big, but when Toyota manufactures over 7 million it doesn't seem that big now does it. Oh yeah and Ford produced over 4 million cars last year. Crank up those numbers Subaru!!!!!!!

Now please explain to me how a company goes from making 500k cars to over 4 million. It's just that simple right?

For starters I don't care what anyone thinks of me on here. I'm the one making sense here. I don't think a small company can just up their production 4 million cars.

oh my god stop typing and read for a second:

DEMAND causes production. No demand means lower production levels. Ford makes more cars because people prefer them 8:1 over Subarus. Your beloved car got trashed by a car originally produced to appease secretaries.

So in closing. Arguing with you is like yelling at a brick wall. Get a clue what you're talking about, kthxbai

[nuTinmuch]

this thread is so serious

[92awdtsi]

except that the 2011 v6 mustang tromps the 10k more STI on the track and on the street in both SALES and performance


you forgot to add that it tromps the 10k more STI on the track while its bouncing off speed limiter for a few seconds :mrgreen:

[Scapegoat]

you forgot to add that it tromps the 10k more STI on the track while its bouncing off speed limiter for a few seconds :mrgreen:

oh yes, how could i forget that!

[ndubz]

we get it, we're sorry. you can't compare anything to subaru or the sti, or have any type of conversation regarding thus

http://smiliesftw.com/x/jerkbowdown.gif

It is comparable. And quite evidently, the new V6 mustang is quite a car, to the point where the stang is superior on the track to the current STi.....so in that area yes the mustang wins.

the reasoning for this is both because the mustang is much improved and because the STi has gotten progressively worse as far as performance is concerned.

Good for ford, bad for subaru.

My point in arguing at first was to just defend the subarus using the "their better overall cars" argument, which i stand by.

But it is plain and clear that subaru has really ****ed up here, both in that the base model mustang is competing with it, and by how bad it gets spanked by the evo on the track. (the STI EVO rivalry used to be alot closer, but since the GR STI and the EVO X came out, its absolutely been the Evo all the way)

[psymos]

you forgot to add that it tromps the 10k more STI on the track while its bouncing off speed limiter for a few seconds :mrgreen:

again, a few seconds = tromping?

[Scapegoat]

in racing, a second is a lot of time.

[psymos]

in racing, a second is a lot of time.

i would agree if it were 1/4 mile. although, on a road course, its not a substantial amount.

[jpalamar]

but they could, if the demand was there. they'd be foolish not to produce 4 million cars if 4 million people wanted to buy them.

do they have the funds to do so? no, of course not. but if they could prove the demand for 4 million cars was there, they'd have lenders ready and willing to hop on board to make.

no one is arguing that subaru has the money sitting in the bank to build these cars, they don't. we're saying that if the desire of 4 million consumers were to purchase a subaru impreza of ANY type, the company would find a way to get it done.

i don't even know why we're talking about this any more... it's simple supply and demand, simple economics. The consumers demand, the producer supplies. demand goes up, supply goes up.

right now, the demand of subaru's is not as high as ford.

**** it, i don't even know what the point of all this was now.

except that the 2011 v6 mustang tromps the 10k more STI on the track and on the street in both SALES and performance

We have a winner.

[92awdtsi]

i would agree if it were 1/4 mile. although, on a road course, its not a substantial amount.

2 seconds per lap = 1 minute in a 30 lap race... You don't think 1 min. is a lot of time?

[Scapegoat]

i would agree if it were 1/4 mile. although, on a road course, its not a substantial amount.

a win is a win. a second is huge in any sort of motorsport. a second isn't a photo finish by any standard. a second at 100mph is 146 feet. that is many car lengths. that's almost 10 mustangs (at a little over 15.5ft each)

1 second/lap is huge in autosports. as mentioned... that distance gets larger and larger.

that little v6 mustang is gaining 10 of itself on the sti, each lap. in a real race... the sti is thoroughly trounced. beaten, like a red headed step child. after 30 laps, that's a nearly 300 mustang length lead. which at 15.65ft long equates to a whopping four thousand six hundred and ninety five feet.

granted, we're taking liberties with assuming the average speed of all vehicles will be 100mph on the track per lap in order to formulate an argument. I hope supraru is ok with this. :o

[psymos]

2 seconds per lap = 1 minute in a 30 lap race... You don't think 1 min. is a lot of time?

1 minute in a 30 lap race is alot of time, but this isnt a 30 lap race now is it?

a win is a win. a second is huge in any sort of motorsport. a second isn't a photo finish by any standard. a second at 100mph is 146 feet. that is many car lengths. that's almost 10 mustangs (at a little over 15.5ft each)

1 second/lap is huge in autosports. as mentioned... that distance gets larger and larger.

that little v6 mustang is gaining 10 of itself on the sti, each lap. in a real race... the sti is thoroughly trounced. beaten, like a red headed step child. after 30 laps, that's a nearly 300 mustang length lead. which at 15.65ft long equates to a whopping four thousand six hundred and ninety five feet.

granted, we're taking liberties with assuming the average speed of all vehicles will be 100mph on the track per lap in order to formulate an argument. I hope supraru is ok with this. :o

i agree a win is a win. and as i said before, the v6 mustang (and the new gt's) are def a big jump for ford.

i guess we are now debating the definition of "tromping"

where i may consider it as a 30 second difference (in a 3 minute race), you might consider it a few seconds.

either way though, as you said winning is winning.

i like either car, just chose the sti for the upgradability, looks, sound, awd, and it being 4 doors.

[Scapegoat]

1 second is a tromping. whether one lap or 30.

no one in a racing outfit is going to say... "well... it was only 1 second slower per lap... that's nothing"

it's not just an arbitrary number that only holds meaning on one track on one day during one lap. hopefully subaru makes more sense out of these numbers than you guys.

it's not good when their top of the line flagship sports car comes in one second behind a measly flagship entry level "sports car". granted... the v6 is no longer a measly entry level sports car. the damned thing is way over performing what it should be for all the "me too" grannies and 16 year old kids that are going to be getting into them.

[psymos]

1 second is a tromping. whether one lap or 30.

no one in a racing outfit is going to say... "well... it was only 1 second slower per lap... that's nothing"

it's not just an arbitrary number that only holds meaning on one track on one day during one lap. hopefully subaru makes more sense out of these numbers than you guys.

it's not good when their top of the line flagship sports car comes in one second behind a measly flagship entry level "sports car". granted... the v6 is no longer a measly entry level sports car. the damned thing is way over performing what it should be for all the "me too" grannies and 16 year old kids that are going to be getting into them.

it looks like we will have to agree to disagree on the "tromping" aspect.

props to ford though.:)

[92awdtsi]

where i may consider it as a 30 second difference (in a 3 minute race), you might consider it a few seconds.



a 30 second difference in a 3 minute race is embarrassing to say the least. In 30 seconds, you could slow your car to a stop, take off your harness, open your door, take your helmet off and take a drink of water... Then your opponent crosses the finish line, but your right. 30 seconds really isn't that big of a deal.

[Chris B.]

p.s. didnt ford need a government bailout?


Ford motor company didn't need a bailout. Ford motor credit, along with many other auto manufacturer's lending divisions and many other banks did need finacial assistance.

Take a look at the article mentioned before.
http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money

From the article:
"While Chrysler and General Motors had to go to Congress to beg for cash in 2008, every other automaker's finance arm was having trouble as well."

and...
"Typically, once they lend money to a buyer, they sell the loan, get the cash upfront, then pump the proceeds back into the business. They also take out short-term loans called commercial paper that keeps the day-to-day business afloat. The crash cut the circuit, raising the chances the automakers couldn't make loans to buyers and keep selling new vehicles."

Basically, the economy took a dump and the usual process didn't work.

Also,
"According to the Fed, the commercial paper loans have been paid in full..."

I still see nothing how this has to do with race track lap times, so why was it brought up?

[Chris B.]

I think I made that pretty clear. I just think it's funny that people are comparing sales to one giant company to a very small company hence why I made my comment. You can't compare that aspect. Ford pumps out volume. Subaru makes what they can make.


You are really failing to grasp basic economic concepts here. Take some basic college economics 101 class and go back and read your comments after you finish the class.


Hell for the last year every month they have been setting thier own sales records beating thier old bests from 15 percent to 30 percent. Two totally dirrerent styles and size companies. I also stated ndubz gives Subaru owners a bad name. Lol


That's great for Subaru! Way to go!


Are you mental? Is your name tatu? Cause i swear your living on fantasy island. What part of Subaru is a small company don't you understand? They are incapable of producing 120k impreza wrx's.


You are now failing at both economics and reading comprehension. You don't understand basic supply and demand. If Subaru made cars that appealed to more people, they would sell more cars and need to increase their production. However there isn't a DEMAND there to increase their SUPPLY of cars available for sale.


And I double checked my numbers, Subaru sold 210k units in 09', they were hoping to sell 240k this year. It doesn't matter the demand of the car, they can't produce that many or even have a market for it.


If demand for Subaru cars signifigantly increased, they could signifigantly increase their production. No body said they could do it overnight. The basic laws of supply and demand are at work here and you obviously are failing to grasp that.


I'll give you some advice, never open your own business because you have horrible business sense.


Thsi coming form someone that can't understand basic supply and demand? Next, you will be advising me on neurosurgery and particle physics. :lol:


I think the issue is that you seem to think they are saying that Subaru can just crank up the numbers if they wanted to. They are actually saying that if there were sufficient demand for the STI and so on, that Subaru would raise production to meet said demand. Because they made X amount and still have new old stock sitting in dealer lots, it would be silly to make even more.

Whereas Ford has a much higher demand for the mustang, they produce more.

You should also stop making statements like you've been making in this thread, you just come off as a jackass.

Someone here gets it! Supraru, you can learn quite a bit from this guy.

[Chris B.]

again, a few seconds = tromping?

On the front straight of VIR at the speeds that cars achieve there, a few seconds comes out to be football fields of space between the cars.

3:12.5 - V6 Mustang bouncing off the rev limiter for 15 seconds per lap
3:13.8 - 2011 WRX STI

1.3 seconds at the main striaght speeds is at least 225 feet. Without the V6 riding the speed limiter for 15 seconds per lap(Which would be the straight between the oak tree and the bitch and the front straight) that would probably be much alrger because the STI hits 122 MPH and the Mustang is limited to 114 MPH for those straights.

[psymos]

I still see nothing how this has to do with race track lap times, so why was it brought up?

someone mentioned how good ford did on this particular vehicle, yet i heard (or thought i hear) they needed a bailout. thats what it has to do with it.


On the front straight of VIR at the speeds that cars achieve there, a few seconds comes out to be football fields of space between the cars.

3:12.5 - V6 Mustang bouncing off the rev limiter for 15 seconds per lap
3:13.8 - 2011 WRX STI

1.3 seconds at the main striaght speeds is at least 225 feet. Without the V6 riding the speed limiter for 15 seconds per lap(Which would be the straight between the oak tree and the bitch and the front straight) that would probably be much alrger because the STI hits 122 MPH and the Mustang is limited to 114 MPH for those straights.

ya know, its funny we keep bringing up the same thing over and over. i said good job to ford, yes ford won, did ford up their game for the new mustangs? yes, etc. etc. but in the end subaru is def rally inspired (longer suspension travel, all that crap). now in reality very very few STi/wrx owners dont buy their car for dirt racing/rallying, although, as i said before, if we threw this race in dirt, i believe the results would be a bit different.

you also have to keep in mind, how many years the mustang have been produced, and how many years have STi/WRX's been produced. i believe ford has some advantages learning how to change/alter the mustang for better performance/suspension. i know it shouldnt be an excuse to subaru at all (as i do also agree ((as i stated before)) that subaru def dropped the ball)

[Chris B.]

Subies dont do as well on the track because their power band is all in the mid range for good street response. On the track ur up in the high revs the whole time. The mistangs N/A v6 is in its prime in such as situation.


The 3.7 V6 Mustang makes at least 80% of its peak torque between 2000 RPM and 6500+ RPM. Its got plenty of power for "good street response" as you called it. In addition to that, it has plenty of power up high. You can have engines that make good power everywhere naturally aspirated or forced induction.

[Chris B.]

someone mentioned how good ford did on this particular vehicle, yet i heard (or thought i hear) they needed a bailout. thats what it has to do with it.


I just get annoyed how far off track many posts got here. What do motor vehicle maufacturers lending divisions' financial status have to do with lap times? Its not relevant, so why was bailout money even brought up in the first place? Why nto start a thread about financials tatus of companies related to their cars' lap times? :lol:


ya know, its funny we keep bringing up the same thing over and over. i said good job to ford, yes ford won, did ford up their game for the new mustangs? yes, etc. etc. but in the end subaru is def rally inspired (longer suspension travel, all that crap). now in reality very very few STi/wrx owners dont buy their car for dirt racing/rallying, although, as i said before, if we threw this race in dirt, i believe the results would be a bit different.


Maybe, but even less people race their cars on dirt than do on paved surfaces.


you also have to keep in mind, how many years the mustang have been produced, and how many years have STi/WRX's been produced. i believe ford has some advantages learning how to change/alter the mustang for better performance/suspension. i know it shouldnt be an excuse to subaru at all (as i do also agree ((as i stated before)) that subaru def dropped the ball)

Ford basically used the same design (with a few tweeks) for the Mustang from 1979 to 2004. Many older Mustang aftermarket parts do say fits 79-04. :lol: Its basically a 1978 Fairmont coupe with a body kit for all of those years.

The current Mustang chassis(S197) was a complete redesing for the 2005 model year. Its not like they had the same chassis for 25+ years that they could tweak and modify every year until they got it right.

I hope that more comparison tests like this do keep the horsepower wars going and also increase the motivation of manufacturers to offer better handling and braking options for affordable prices.

[92awdtsi]

now in reality very very few STi/wrx owners dont buy their car for dirt racing/rallying, although, as i said before, if we threw this race in dirt, i believe the results would be a bit different.



yes the results would be different, but how many sti owners take their car offroad? I'm willing to guess less than 2%.. Why? Because not many people want to spend $30,000 on a car only to destroy it on a rally course.

[Scapegoat]

but in the end subaru is def rally inspired (longer suspension travel, all that crap.

didnt they drop out of the wrc a couple years back and are no longer eligible within the current rules to run?

the car is no longer rally inspired. it's a 4 door family sedan w/ a turbo and a large after market thanks to the rally years that brought it a large fan base. However, those fans mostly purchase used rally inspired sti's and wrx's

it's a great car, i wouldnt mind one to truck around a little baby in when i get older.

[psymos]

I just get annoyed how far off track many posts got here. What do motor vehicle maufacturers lending divisions' financial status have to do with lap times? Its not relevant, so why was bailout money even brought up in the first place? Why nto start a thread about financials tatus of companies related to their cars' lap times? :lol:



Maybe, but even less people race their cars on dirt than do on paved surfaces.



Ford basically used the same design (with a few tweeks) for the Mustang from 1979 to 2004. Many older Mustang aftermarket parts do say fits 79-04. :lol: Its basically a 1978 Fairmont coupe with a body kit for all of those years.

The current Mustang chassis(S197) was a complete redesing for the 2005 model year. Its not like they had the same chassis for 25+ years that they could tweak and modify every year until they got it right.

I hope that more comparison tests like this do keep the horsepower wars going and also increase the motivation of manufacturers to offer better handling and braking options for affordable prices.

i agree, except i only wish some car manufacturers (especially subaru) would look at these comparisons.

yes the results would be different, but how many sti owners take their car offroad? I'm willing to guess less than 2%.. Why? Because not many people want to spend $30,000 on a car only to destroy it on a rally course.

right, thats exactly what i said ; ) i think even if i was wealthy enough i wouldnt take a $30k car flying through the dirt.

didnt they drop out of the wrc a couple years back and are no longer eligible within the current rules to run?

the car is no longer rally inspired. it's a 4 door family sedan w/ a turbo and a large after market thanks to the rally years that brought it a large fan base. However, those fans mostly purchase used rally inspired sti's and wrx's

it's a great car, i wouldnt mind one to truck around a little baby in when i get older.

i think they dropped out last year (when ken block left, due to them dropping of course) stupid choice by subaru imo, but w/e, i guess they know what they are doing :bigeek:

and tbh no, you dont want to put a baby in there lol. the other weekend, i had me, my fiance, her sister and her (sisters) two babies in my car, and it was pretty squished to say the least. Like i said though, i didnt really by my car for the stock performance/baby carting around. ; ) Although, the legacy gt's do look very appealing for a family car, as do the G8's.

[Supraru]

You are really failing to grasp basic economic concepts here. Take some basic college economics 101 class and go back and read your comments after you finish the class.



That's great for Subaru! Way to go!



You are now failing at both economics and reading comprehension. You don't understand basic supply and demand. If Subaru made cars that appealed to more people, they would sell more cars and need to increase their production. However there isn't a DEMAND there to increase their SUPPLY of cars available for sale.



If demand for Subaru cars signifigantly increased, they could signifigantly increase their production. No body said they could do it overnight. The basic laws of supply and demand are at work here and you obviously are failing to grasp that.



Thsi coming form someone that can't understand basic supply and demand? Next, you will be advising me on neurosurgery and particle physics. :lol:



Someone here gets it! Supraru, you can learn quite a bit from this guy.

It's funny when people lose an argument and try to change it into something that wasn't even being talked about originally. I was never arguing supply and demand. All you keep doing is saying how super cool ford is that they sell 120k mustangs a year and subaru doesn't sell **** for impreza's. My comeback to you is they are a small company. Then you come back stating if they wanted to they could build 120k imprezas if there was a demand. I said no they can't they are a small auto manufacturer. You seem to think they can. I then proved how small they are with actual numbers and that companies that I'm sure not many people have heard of are bigger then subaru. So please when you're trying to sound like Mr. Cool and argue at least stay on topic. Yes I'm sure if there was so much demand for the impreza they would make more but it still doesn't change the fact that they are opening a plant in China since they can't handle the demands anymore in the factories they have since they've been taking off the last few years.

[Supraru]

didnt they drop out of the wrc a couple years back and are no longer eligible within the current rules to run?

the car is no longer rally inspired. it's a 4 door family sedan w/ a turbo and a large after market thanks to the rally years that brought it a large fan base. However, those fans mostly purchase used rally inspired sti's and wrx's

it's a great car, i wouldnt mind one to truck around a little baby in when i get older.

Like most companies during the really bad times they found it not to smart to run an expensive rally team. There were talks of them coming back but now with the new engine regulations (1.6 turbo engine) they don't seem to be coming back anytime soon. They are already dropping the Ej engine and moving on to the fb25 engines for better efficiency and fuel economy and they are working on a turbo diesel that won't be coming here so I'd imagine trying to develop a 1.6t engine just for rally would be pointless for them.

[Scapegoat]

Like most companies during the really bad times they found it not to smart to run an expensive rally team. There were talks of them coming back but now with the new engine regulations (1.6 turbo engine) they don't seem to be coming back anytime soon. They are already dropping the Ej engine and moving on to the fb25 engines for better efficiency and fuel economy and they are working on a turbo diesel that won't be coming here so I'd imagine trying to develop a 1.6t engine just for rally would be pointless for them.

my point exactly. the new impreza's are not rally inspired. which is a shame. what made the car really different has been taken away. it's a family sedan now. fortunately there are enough people that will eventually move on from the rally inspired cars into the newer impreza's as they get older and have families. it's a great car for that. awd, enough power, enough space for a car seat in the back, and still able to hold groceries.

the suspension is now meant for day to day driving, not flying through the air or over dirt rivets. it's not a bad thing per se... it's where subaru is taking the car now that they're out of rally game. it's no wonder the v6 mustang is beating it, ford is focusing on making their flagship car a performance vehicle, even in it's base trim... which is exciting.

subaru's intentions are obviously different. they're producing a family car now, hopefully it appeals to a wider audience and will increase their sales and their foot hold.

the sti is no longer a rally car. i still love my girlfriend's 04 all the same :)

[Supraru]

my point exactly. the new impreza's are not rally inspired. which is a shame. what made the car really different has been taken away. it's a family sedan now. fortunately there are enough people that will eventually move on from the rally inspired cars into the newer impreza's as they get older and have families. it's a great car for that. awd, enough power, enough space for a car seat in the back, and still able to hold groceries.

the suspension is now meant for day to day driving, not flying through the air or over dirt rivets. it's not a bad thing per se... it's where subaru is taking the car now that they're out of rally game. it's no wonder the v6 mustang is beating it, ford is focusing on making their flagship car a performance vehicle, even in it's base trim... which is exciting.

subaru's intentions are obviously different. they're producing a family car now, hopefully it appeals to a wider audience and will increase their sales and their foot hold.

the sti is no longer a rally car. i still love my girlfriend's 04 all the same :)

Sure you could say that since it is not in rally anymore it's not a rally car or inspired by one but I can assure you everything is the same if not better then what they used to produce when they were still "rally inspired". If I've only learned one thing from subaru's over the last 12 or so years is that they are leggo's. Not much has changed on them from the engines to suspension. Hell the new sti's even have spherical bearings in the front control arms. lol.

[upperguy]

my point exactly. the new impreza's are not rally inspired. which is a shame. what made the car really different has been taken away. it's a family sedan now. fortunately there are enough people that will eventually move on from the rally inspired cars into the newer impreza's as they get older and have families. it's a great car for that. awd, enough power, enough space for a car seat in the back, and still able to hold groceries.

the suspension is now meant for day to day driving, not flying through the air or over dirt rivets. it's not a bad thing per se... it's where subaru is taking the car now that they're out of rally game. it's no wonder the v6 mustang is beating it, ford is focusing on making their flagship car a performance vehicle, even in it's base trim... which is exciting.

subaru's intentions are obviously different. they're producing a family car now, hopefully it appeals to a wider audience and will increase their sales and their foot hold.

the sti is no longer a rally car. i still love my girlfriend's 04 all the same :)

You are really failing to grasp basic economic concepts here. Take some basic college economics 101 class and go back and read your comments after you finish the class.

That's great for Subaru! Way to go!

You are now failing at both economics and reading comprehension. You don't understand basic supply and demand. If Subaru made cars that appealed to more people, they would sell more cars and need to increase their production. However there isn't a DEMAND there to increase their SUPPLY of cars available for sale.

If demand for Subaru cars signifigantly increased, they could signifigantly increase their production. No body said they could do it overnight. The basic laws of supply and demand are at work here and you obviously are failing to grasp that.

Thsi coming form someone that can't understand basic supply and demand? Next, you will be advising me on neurosurgery and particle physics. :lol:

Someone here gets it! Supraru, you can learn quite a bit from this guy.

Guys seriously, just stop responding to him. He's worse than a troll because whereas a troll does things intentionally to stir things up, he actually thinks he is making an intelligent argument! I put him in the same group as an old friend of mine that tried to convince me that both motorcycle tires lift off the ground slightly when cornering over 90mph(try to wrap your brain-grapes around that one).

Anyway, carry on.

[jpalamar]

LOL at all the Subaru butthurt in this thread.

[92awdtsi]

someone needs to make one of those cartoon video things where you type stuff and the characters say it. hahahaha

[Supraru]

Guys seriously, just stop responding to him. He's worse than a troll because whereas a troll does things intentionally to stir things up, he actually thinks he is making an intelligent argument! I put him in the same group as an old friend of mine that tried to convince me that both motorcycle tires lift off the ground slightly when cornering over 90mph(try to wrap your brain-grapes around that one).

Anyway, carry on.

Funny because all I have done is made fun of one person who made a stupid comment. I then backed up my comment with real information. If you had any reading comprehension you'd see my point.

Maybe we got off on a bad start. Just what do you think I'm stating here. I will tell you if you are right or wrong. My guess is you're completely wrong in what you think is going on here.

[Supraru]

LOL at all the Subaru butthurt in this thread.

Hope you're not referring to me. :wink:

[nuTinmuch]

The 2011 Mustang is awesome.

Discuss.

[JB'sLGT]

Is your name tatu? Cause i swear your living on fantasy island.

Emiliooooooo!!!

Anyways...

This is why I loathe magazine comparos. It brings out the foolishness.

Is the argument really about 1 or 2 seconds a lap? Just a few quick thoughts...

How many of us on this site leave their performance cars factory stock before they hit the track? Probably none, so why worry about factory vs factory performance?

Cars don't drive themselves. The driver is and always will be the main factor in how fast a car is or isn't. In the real world that most of us weekend warriors live in, outcomes aren't determined by averaging lap times of multiple drivers together as they are in the Lightning Lap.

[92awdtsi]

no this thread is still alive because certain subaru owners can't grasp the fact that subaru's top of the line STI got beat by a v6 mustang banging off the speed limiter for 15 seconds each lap, and still managed to beat it by a second or two.

[Chris B.]

Supraru, lets go back and look at this from the beginning.


But as overall street cars, its hard to beat the subies. Theyre mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, and versatility from the awd make them hard to equal as an overall package for the average person......

.....The sales speak for themselves

He basically is saying the Subaru is the superior overall car for daily use and the sales of the Subarus 'speak for themselves" to prove it.

To that I replied....
Exactly! That's why the Mustang has been outselling the WRX and Evo for years in the U.S. market. :lol:

If the Subaru was the overall car for daily use with wide appeal to more people with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build," then they would sell many more of them, there woudl be no modeal year leftovers, and they could increase their prices due to high demand and low supply.

Yet you seem to think that the size of a car company has something to do with how appealing its cars are.

A true sign of intelligence is comparing sales of Ford (mega huge car company) to Subaru (a very small company). :roll:

After further explination of supply and demand and economics and business from myself and other peole here, you rpely with...

It's funny when people lose an argument and try to change it into something that wasn't even being talked about originally. I was never arguing supply and demand.


Supply and demand related back to the original comment. You can't seem to comprehend that.


All you keep doing is saying how super cool ford is that they sell 120k mustangs a year and subaru doesn't sell **** for impreza's. My comeback to you is they are a small company. Then you come back stating if they wanted to they could build 120k imprezas if there was a demand.


If there was demand for 120,000+ Imprezas a year, Subaru could find ways to increase production to eventually meet that demand. It wouldn't happen overnight, but it woudl happen. That's how business and economics works.


I said no they can't they are a small auto manufacturer. You seem to think they can. I then proved how small they are with actual numbers and that companies that I'm sure not many people have heard of are bigger then subaru. So please when you're trying to sound like Mr. Cool and argue at least stay on topic.


I'm the one staying on topic. The topic of my orginial reply. If Subarus were the superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..." to the other cars in the comparison, they would outsell the other cars or have a waiting list and the price would increase.


Yes I'm sure if there was so much demand for the impreza they would make more but it still doesn't change the fact that they are opening a plant in China since they can't handle the demands anymore in the factories they have since they've been taking off the last few years.


Actually, you are arguing supply and demand if you think the only reason Subaru can't sell more cars is they are a small company.

You fail to remember some of the somple facts such as of how many left over 2008 WRX STI's were sitting on dealer lots in the northeast and northcentral U.S. in 2009. Almsot ever dealer I went to within 50 miles of where I lived had left over 2008 STI's and were greatly reducing their price to sell them. When I was new car shopping in 2009, a 2009 WRX and a 2008 STI weren't much different in price because of the quantity of leftover 2008 STI's and the markdowns to get them out of the door. One of my friends, who lives near Chicago, bought a 2008 STI in March of 2009 for under $30K before tax and tags. Another bought a 2008 STI in Utah for about $8K off sticker price in 2009. Even in the lands of long cold winters and feet of snow weekly, they couldn't get rid of last year's AWD performance cars at greatly reduced prices. That shows that the car is not a superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..."

The simple fact is if WRX and WRX STI had such a great appeal, there would have been a higher demand for them. Sure Subaru's overall sales have gone up in recent years. Demand has innreased. Their DEMAND is not as high as the DEMAND for the mustang whish is obvious by the sales. If Subaru's DEMAND was so high, there would be waiting lists for all of their cars and they could greatly increase their prices because the SUPPLY was greatly less than the DEMAND. That's the simple fact you are failing to grasp.

Look at Porsche for example. They are a small automobile manufacturer. For many years, their total yearly production was between 3,000 and 7,000 cars of several models in several factories. During times when DEMAND for their cars greatly increased, they did things such as BORROW MONEY to build and upgrade facilities to INCREASE PRODUCTION. When DEMAND DECREASED, then so did their PRODUCTION. There were time periods when the entire year's production for some of their cars was almost sold out before production began because ther was a low SUPPLY and a HIGH DEMAND for those cars.

At this point, I'm not sure if you are intentionally trolling or just have no grasp of the basics of business and economics.

Guys seriously, just stop responding to him. He's worse than a troll because whereas a troll does things intentionally to stir things up, he actually thinks he is making an intelligent argument! I put him in the same group as an old friend of mine that tried to convince me that both motorcycle tires lift off the ground slightly when cornering over 90mph(try to wrap your brain-grapes around that one).

Anyway, carry on.

I'm not sure if he is trolling or he just doesn't get basic concepts such as supply and demand and business.

[Chris B.]

I'm wondering what the weather conditions were for the Lightning lap tets and if they were similar through the years. For example, there is a video of the Mustang GT500 with the optional SVT Performance Package that ran a 2:58.48 with a driver that obviously made a few mistakes and missed a few gears. Was it a much colder day with less heat soak and more power to the supercharged 5.4 V8?

[Chris B.]

One lap times result that impressed me was the new Corvette Z06 with the Z07 package. Look at the cars it beat in lap times:
LAMBORGHINI MURCIÉLAGO LP670-4 SV
FERRARI 430 SCUDERIA
NISSAN GT-R
PORSCHE 911 GT3 RS
DODGE VIPER SRT10
PORSCHE 911 TURBO S
ARIEL ATOM 3
FORD GT
Full list of times here (http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/lightning_lap_2011-feature/sortable_times_3a_complete_lightning_lap_times_200 6_to_2011_page_8)

[Chris B.]

This is why I loathe magazine comparos. It brings out the foolishness.

Is the argument really about 1 or 2 seconds a lap? Just a few quick thoughts...


1 or 2 seconds per lap ends up being quite a few car lengths. For some it may show why their egos were bruised at the last track day when they were giving regular point bys to a "secretary's car" or why their 400+ HP "muscle car" got its ass whupped by something with 100 less horsepower.

It also gives a general idea of where the baseline is for a good driver. I'm sure 99.9% of the people on this forum can't run lap times in their modified cars that the drivers at Car & Driver and run in these cars when stock.


How many of us on this site leave their performance cars factory stock before they hit the track? Probably none, so why worry about factory vs factory performance?


Actually I did a few track days with my car completely stock. 100% stock down to the factory 400 tread wear mud & snow rated all season tires. It allowed me to learn much more about being smooth and driving skill than I could have learned with sticky tires and a modified suspension. I also do see quite a few people at track days with stock(as delivered from the factory) cars or stock except the tires and safety equipment.


Cars don't drive themselves. The driver is and always will be the main factor in how fast a car is or isn't. In the real world that most of us weekend warriors live in, outcomes aren't determined by averaging lap times of multiple drivers together as they are in the Lightning Lap.


Comparison tests, especially when using the same track and same day for many cars are useful for comparison shopping. The $5K-$20K someone can save getting a faster car for less money can be used toward many track days and many sets of tires.

[Chris B.]

The 2011 Mustang is awesome.

Discuss.

If I could get one with the same options as my 2008 along with the Brembo brake package for $1500 more than what my 2008 cost me new I'd buy one even though I think its a bit on the ugly side when comapred to the 2005-2009 models. I'd swap over most of the suspension parts I put on my 2008, add the optional $250 lower front fascia with brake cooling ducts, add the rest of the brake cooling ducting, and install a JLT or Steeda CAI and 91 octane tune and have a perfect(for me) daily driver and track day car.

That's one thing I like about naturally aspirated cars for track days over forced induction cars, they seem to have less overheating issues and are generally more reliable.

Of course, if I didn't need a back seat, I'd get a used C6 Z06.

[Khellen]

My motor is horizontally opposed to this thread.

[marshallpre1]

Supraru, lets go back and look at this from the beginning.



He basically is saying the Subaru is the superior overall car for daily use and the sales of the Subarus 'speak for themselves" to prove it.

To that I replied....


If the Subaru was the overall car for daily use with wide appeal to more people with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build," then they would sell many more of them, there woudl be no modeal year leftovers, and they could increase their prices due to high demand and low supply.

Yet you seem to think that the size of a car company has something to do with how appealing its cars are.



After further explination of supply and demand and economics and business from myself and other peole here, you rpely with...


Supply and demand related back to the original comment. You can't seem to comprehend that.



If there was demand for 120,000+ Imprezas a year, Subaru could find ways to increase production to eventually meet that demand. It wouldn't happen overnight, but it woudl happen. That's how business and economics works.



I'm the one staying on topic. The topic of my orginial reply. If Subarus were the superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..." to the other cars in the comparison, they would outsell the other cars or have a waiting list and the price would increase.



Actually, you are arguing supply and demand if you think the only reason Subaru can't sell more cars is they are a small company.

You fail to remember some of the somple facts such as of how many left over 2008 WRX STI's were sitting on dealer lots in the northeast and northcentral U.S. in 2009. Almsot ever dealer I went to within 50 miles of where I lived had left over 2008 STI's and were greatly reducing their price to sell them. When I was new car shopping in 2009, a 2009 WRX and a 2008 STI weren't much different in price because of the quantity of leftover 2008 STI's and the markdowns to get them out of the door. One of my friends, who lives near Chicago, bought a 2008 STI in March of 2009 for under $30K before tax and tags. Another bought a 2008 STI in Utah for about $8K off sticker price in 2009. Even in the lands of long cold winters and feet of snow weekly, they couldn't get rid of last year's AWD performance cars at greatly reduced prices. That shows that the car is not a superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..."

The simple fact is if WRX and WRX STI had such a great appeal, there would have been a higher demand for them. Sure Subaru's overall sales have gone up in recent years. Demand has innreased. Their DEMAND is not as high as the DEMAND for the mustang whish is obvious by the sales. If Subaru's DEMAND was so high, there would be waiting lists for all of their cars and they could greatly increase their prices because the SUPPLY was greatly less than the DEMAND. That's the simple fact you are failing to grasp.

Look at Porsche for example. They are a small automobile manufacturer. For many years, their total yearly production was between 3,000 and 7,000 cars of several models in several factories. During times when DEMAND for their cars greatly increased, they did things such as BORROW MONEY to build and upgrade facilities to INCREASE PRODUCTION. When DEMAND DECREASED, then so did their PRODUCTION. There were time periods when the entire year's production for some of their cars was almost sold out before production began because ther was a low SUPPLY and a HIGH DEMAND for those cars.

At this point, I'm not sure if you are intentionally trolling or just have no grasp of the basics of business and economics.



I'm not sure if he is trolling or he just doesn't get basic concepts such as supply and demand and business.

I applaud you for doing this, but as you can see, it's pointless to try and reason to some people.

However, let's talk about the other results!

Yes, the Z07 is ridiculous. I want one. Perhaps even more than the GTR. The GTR would be perfect to complement my Supra though! I can always dream...

Did anyone also see how good that Cobalt TC/SS? Talk about handling!

[JB'sLGT]

1 or 2 seconds per lap ends up being quite a few car lengths. For some it may show why their egos were bruised at the last track day when they were giving regular point bys to a "secretary's car" or why their 400+ HP "muscle car" got its ass whupped by something with 100 less horsepower.

1 to 2 seconds at a lengthy track such as VIR is still a drivers race, especially if the venue were shifted to a shorter track. And it's only 1 or 2 car lengths if (big if) the drivers are both able to drive their respective cars to their full potential.

A slight advantage in a one lap time attack race, doesn't necessarily tell the whole story in a multi lap race. I think a more accurate representation would be to do the average time of 5 laps.

It also gives a general idea of where the baseline is for a good driver. I'm sure 99.9% of the people on this forum can't run lap times in their modified cars that the drivers at Car & Driver and run in these cars when stock.

True. I've always wondered about the qualifications of the magazine testers. It's hard to find actual racing experience they may have had.



Actually I did a few track days with my car completely stock. 100% stock down to the factory 400 tread wear mud & snow rated all season tires. It allowed me to learn much more about being smooth and driving skill than I could have learned with sticky tires and a modified suspension. I also do see quite a few people at track days with stock(as delivered from the factory) cars or stock except the tires and safety equipment.

I realize we're comparing bone stock factory cars, but I've always felt that you can't do an accurate performance comparison if you aren't testing on the same tires. Besides the driver, tires are one of the first and the best upgrades you can get for the car's performance. There aren't many people that are interested in tracking their car that leave performance on the table with crap tires (if they can afford it). I'm sure it wasn't long before you upgraded from your all-seasons.



Comparison tests, especially when using the same track and same day for many cars are useful for comparison shopping. The $5K-$20K someone can save getting a faster car for less money can be used toward many track days and many sets of tires.

Its definitely useful for comparison shopping if you put on-track performance at VIR above all else. Otherwise it's just a source for bench racing and stirring up the car forum pot. lol

[killichnakropf]

Nice STI man, I drive a mustang.
The new 5.0?
Nah, the V6.
Oh word?!
Word.

[jjm4life]

is this thread really still open? are subaru fans still trying to justify losing?

this must be nearly as depressing for them as when ken block left moved to ford....

[upperguy]

1 to 2 seconds at a lengthy track such as VIR is still a drivers race, especially if the venue were shifted to a shorter track. And it's only 1 or 2 car lengths if (big if) the drivers are both able to drive their respective cars to their full potential.

I realize we're comparing bone stock factory cars, but I've always felt that you can't do an accurate performance comparison if you aren't testing on the same tires. Besides the driver, tires are one of the first and the best upgrades you can get for the car's performance. There aren't many people that are interested in tracking their car that leave performance on the table with crap tires (if they can afford it). I'm sure it wasn't long before you upgraded from your all-seasons.

Its definitely useful for comparison shopping if you put on-track performance at VIR above all else. Otherwise it's just a source for bench racing and stirring up the car forum pot. lol

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/gallery370/photo_7/3992605-1-eng-US/the_rules_box.jpg

You don't seem to realize how long a full second actually is, it was estimated that a full second difference at speed is 10 car lengths, the 1.3s being 13 car lengths or 185'! That is hardly a small difference, in fact with the average school bus measuring in at 48' long... it was bus lengthS behind! According to the rules, all cars were also fitted with the highest performance, most track friendly brakes/wheels/tires and I can assure you that the STI comes with something a bit stickier.

As far as the track performance at VIR, it's a consistent test that can give you a good comparison as to how the car will corner, brake and accelerate. What kind of comparison would you like to see?
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/lightning_lap_2011-feature/track_map_3a_vir_track_map_and_lightning_lap_2011_ sector_times_page_7 <-trackmap with detailed info

Just please don't say to the grocery store and back in a blizzard, everyone already gave Subaru that one.;)

is this thread really still open? are subaru fans still trying to justify losing?

this must be nearly as depressing for them as when ken block left moved to ford....

:)

[jjm4life]

i got it. maybe ken block moved to ford because he saw the results of this comparison test, and couldnt stand the shame of driving for subaru anymore.. i mean after all subaru did lose a legitimate performance comparison to what was once a car for secretaries and librarians.

[92awdtsi]

i got it. maybe ken block moved to ford because he saw the results of this comparison test, and couldnt stand the shame of driving for subaru anymore.. i mean after all subaru did lose a legitimate performance comparison to what was once a car for secretaries and librarians.

thank you very much, i now have something for my sig.

[jspek]

wow...the snow thing is getting old. my rwd car does just fine in the snow.

well good job ford. nice to see them step up their game.

[JB'sLGT]

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/gallery370/photo_7/3992605-1-eng-US/the_rules_box.jpg

You don't seem to realize how long a full second actually is, it was estimated that a full second difference at speed is 10 car lengths, the 1.3s being 13 car lengths or 185'! That is hardly a small difference, in fact with the average school bus measuring in at 48' long... it was bus lengthS behind! According to the rules, all cars were also fitted with the highest performance, most track friendly brakes/wheels/tires and I can assure you that the STI comes with something a bit stickier.

As far as the track performance at VIR, it's a consistent test that can give you a good comparison as to how the car will corner, brake and accelerate. What kind of comparison would you like to see?
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/lightning_lap_2011-feature/track_map_3a_vir_track_map_and_lightning_lap_2011_ sector_times_page_7 <-trackmap with detailed info

Just please don't say to the grocery store and back in a blizzard, everyone already gave Subaru that one.;)



:)

My argument isn't for the STi/WRX. I couldn't care less that they got beat by a chick car. lol. If anything I hope it lights the fire under FHI's ass to up the ante on the current HP Wars. As of now it appears my LGT is probably the only Subaru I'll ever own. Maybe I should make up an alter-ego without a car in the name to stay neutral.

My only beef is with magazine testing and the way people interpret them into the holy grail of everything automotive. Sure 1.3 seconds can be a lot of time to make up, but if you really know your car you might not have to make up time at all.

[upperguy]

My argument isn't for the STi/WRX. I couldn't care less that they got beat by a chick car. lol. If anything I hope it lights the fire under FHI's ass to up the ante on the current HP Wars. As of now it appears my LGT is probably the only Subaru I'll ever own. Maybe I should make up an alter-ego without a car in the name to stay neutral.

My only beef is with magazine testing and the way people interpret them into the holy grail of everything automotive. Sure 1.3 seconds can be a lot of time to make up, but if you really know your car you might not have to make up time at all.

Gotcha, I hear what you're saying. The thing is though, if you put all the same tires on the cars then you will have people saying that some have an LSD or more aggressive suspension, it's easy to get lost in the details. I actually really respect C&D's testing methods because they max out the test cars with any 'sport' features the manf has available. So larger, fade free brakes and stiffer suspension. It's a slippery slope, so I admire them for at least pursuing the highest factory incarnations of each vehicle.

Sure most people will change out the factory tires, but comparing the way they do at least gives people a legitimate start. That's the most important thing they can do. Less then 99% of car owners will never even consider going to a track, drag strip or otherwise. Of that tiny percent, an even smaller percentage has an honest clue as to real technique, following lines, what an apex is and so on. It also lets us see some really potent cars in action that we might not normally see, or wake us up to cars we normally wouldn't even consider thinking about. Before this article if someone told us they just got a new sports car and followed that statement up with, "it's a V6 mustang" we would probably chuckle and smirk. Same with the cobalt, I heard they handle good but I hadn't factored on it being that fast.

I think that beyond this and the comparison factors, having times around a track or down the strip also give you something to strive towards. If you put tires/intake/tune and exhaust on your car and can't match a good/decent magazine driver's stock time, you know you need to stop spending money on mods and work on your technique. So while I don't think you should base buying a car solely on track times, it brings a lot of useful info to the table

[Khellen]

i mean after all subaru did lose a legitimate performance comparison to what was once a car for secretaries and librarians.

....and now is a 300+hp car. Which shows Ford has really stepped up their performance on their new models and Subaru hasnt. What exactly are you trying to argue with your insanely pointless posts? Are you going to point out that the sky is blue next?

It's a compareo. The STi lost to a v6 mustang. It's not the end of days. Move along people.

[Supraru]

Emiliooooooo!!!

At least someone got it. haha

[Supraru]

Supraru, lets go back and look at this from the beginning.



He basically is saying the Subaru is the superior overall car for daily use and the sales of the Subarus 'speak for themselves" to prove it.

Yes that is what he said. As I stated originally ndubz gives all subaru owners a bad name. He is always stating false information like an 04' sti is a spec c. :lol:


To that I replied....


If the Subaru was the overall car for daily use with wide appeal to more people with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build," then they would sell many more of them, there woudl be no modeal year leftovers, and they could increase their prices due to high demand and low supply.

Yet you seem to think that the size of a car company has something to do with how appealing its cars are.



After further explination of supply and demand and economics and business from myself and other peole here, you rpely with...


Supply and demand related back to the original comment. You can't seem to comprehend that.



If there was demand for 120,000+ Imprezas a year, Subaru could find ways to increase production to eventually meet that demand. It wouldn't happen overnight, but it woudl happen. That's how business and economics works.



I'm the one staying on topic. The topic of my orginial reply. If Subarus were the superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..." to the other cars in the comparison, they would outsell the other cars or have a waiting list and the price would increase.


Don't know where you came up with this. I never debated performance between the sti's or mustangs or even how popular the mustangs are.



Actually, you are arguing supply and demand if you think the only reason Subaru can't sell more cars is they are a small company.

You fail to remember some of the somple facts such as of how many left over 2008 WRX STI's were sitting on dealer lots in the northeast and northcentral U.S. in 2009. Almsot ever dealer I went to within 50 miles of where I lived had left over 2008 STI's and were greatly reducing their price to sell them. When I was new car shopping in 2009, a 2009 WRX and a 2008 STI weren't much different in price because of the quantity of leftover 2008 STI's and the markdowns to get them out of the door. One of my friends, who lives near Chicago, bought a 2008 STI in March of 2009 for under $30K before tax and tags. Another bought a 2008 STI in Utah for about $8K off sticker price in 2009. Even in the lands of long cold winters and feet of snow weekly, they couldn't get rid of last year's AWD performance cars at greatly reduced prices. That shows that the car is not a superior overall car with a "mix of usable performance, practicality, reliability, robust build, etc..."

The simple fact is if WRX and WRX STI had such a great appeal, there would have been a higher demand for them. Sure Subaru's overall sales have gone up in recent years. Demand has innreased. Their DEMAND is not as high as the DEMAND for the mustang whish is obvious by the sales. If Subaru's DEMAND was so high, there would be waiting lists for all of their cars and they could greatly increase their prices because the SUPPLY was greatly less than the DEMAND. That's the simple fact you are failing to grasp.

Look at Porsche for example. They are a small automobile manufacturer. For many years, their total yearly production was between 3,000 and 7,000 cars of several models in several factories. During times when DEMAND for their cars greatly increased, they did things such as BORROW MONEY to build and upgrade facilities to INCREASE PRODUCTION. When DEMAND DECREASED, then so did their PRODUCTION. There were time periods when the entire year's production for some of their cars was almost sold out before production began because ther was a low SUPPLY and a HIGH DEMAND for those cars.

At this point, I'm not sure if you are intentionally trolling or just have no grasp of the basics of business and economics.



I'm not sure if he is trolling or he just doesn't get basic concepts such as supply and demand and business.

I know how supply and demand works. You're still not getting it through your head maybe it's because you drive a mustang. *burn*

My statement is still 100% true, it is retarded to compare the production of an extremely large car company to a very small car company. Is that statement not correct? Seems pretty silly to me. From there you and your mustang nut swingers started to argue with me over how if there was demand subaru could pump out that many impreza's. All I simply argued was that is would not be possible for them and I proved how small the company is and if you don't get that they couldn't pump out that kind of volume of cars for a very very long time then that is on you. You can keep trying to turn it into a supply and demand debate all you want but you've been wasting your typing space since that is not what I was arguing. :roll:

[Fujito]

This thread makes me want to die.

[Supraru]

This thread makes me want to die.

No one is stopping you. :wink:

[jjm4life]

....and now is a 300+hp car. Which shows Ford has really stepped up their performance on their new models and Subaru hasnt. What exactly are you trying to argue with your insanely pointless posts? Are you going to point out that the sky is blue next?

It's a compareo. The STi lost to a v6 mustang. It's not the end of days. Move along people.

sarcasm>you :roll:

[upperguy]

I know how supply and demand works. You're still not getting it through your head maybe it's because you drive a mustang. *burn*

My statement is still 100% true, it is retarded to compare the production of an extremely large car company to a very small car company. Is that statement not correct? Seems pretty silly to me. From there you and your mustang nut swingers started to argue with me over how if there was demand subaru could pump out that many impreza's. All I simply argued was that is would not be possible for them and I proved how small the company is and if you don't get that they couldn't pump out that kind of volume of cars for a very very long time then that is on you. You can keep trying to turn it into a supply and demand debate all you want but you've been wasting your typing space since that is not what I was arguing. :roll:

It's beyond me that you can't understand how production relates to supply and demand. I'm sure your middle and high school teachers were proud of their work when they saw you walk away.

I bet your middle and highschool teachers were proud.

[Supraru]

It's beyond me that you can't understand how production relates to supply and demand. I'm sure your middle and high school teachers were proud of their work when they saw you walk away.

I bet your middle and highschool teachers were proud.

Holy hell you're dumb. Go drive your mini.

[jpalamar]

Holy hell you're dumb. Go drive your mini.

Why are you still arguing. Scoobie got beat by V6 Mustang... which means on that track my GTO stock would get beat too, you don't see me with the whole Jeresy Shores sand in my vagina.

And stop talking about supply/demand and how small Subaru is. If they had as much demand as the Mustang, they would expend and be a bigger company really fast. There is nothing more to say about it.

Get over it.

[Khellen]

sarcasm>you :roll:

I realize you were being sarcastic. Again, what exactly is the point of posting useless **** like that in a thread.....to try and stir people up?

[jjm4life]

I realize you were being sarcastic. Again, what exactly is the point of posting useless **** like that in a thread.....to try and stir people up?

yes..

[upperguy]

Holy hell you're dumb. Go drive your mini.

Just lol.

yes..

What is this world coming to man? We've got high school kids that don't know how to use a ruler, don't know the days of the week and 90% of natural born Americans would fail their own citizenship test. Then this thread came along...or at least the latter half of it.

[StylezTA]

I know how supply and demand works. You're still not getting it through your head maybe it's because you drive a mustang. *burn*

My statement is still 100% true, it is retarded to compare the production of an extremely large car company to a very small car company. Is that statement not correct? Seems pretty silly to me. From there you and your mustang nut swingers started to argue with me over how if there was demand subaru could pump out that many impreza's. All I simply argued was that is would not be possible for them and I proved how small the company is and if you don't get that they couldn't pump out that kind of volume of cars for a very very long time then that is on you. You can keep trying to turn it into a supply and demand debate all you want but you've been wasting your typing space since that is not what I was arguing. :roll:

and u still don't get it. ask yourself WHY subaru is a smaller company then ford. Because subaru DOES NOT HAVE THE DEMAND that ford has. Now, what everyone has been trying to explain to you was if the demand for the said impreza was as big as the mustang, subaru infact WOULD AND COULD meet that demand. Whether it would be making more plants, borrowing money, anything to up production they would.

A great example of this is HYUNDAI.

Hyundai in the 90's was a ****ful car company. VERY SMALL, Kinda like subaru, maybe even smaller! There was little demand for their 50,000 mile throw away cars. in the 2000's hyundai has grown. You know why? Cuz there was a DEMAND for the car cuz the quality improved. Now, hyundai i believe is in the top 5 for car manufacturing size and production and is still growing!

its really quite scary u don't understand this.

Edit: i don't like mustangs (Ford) or subarus FYI.

[jjm4life]

Just lol.



What is this world coming to man? We've got high school kids that don't know how to use a ruler, don't know the days of the week and 90% of natural born Americans would fail their own citizenship test. Then this thread came along...or at least the latter half of it.

youre telling me man. i dont know if i can live in a world where kids cant read and the almighty STi falls to a ford.

2011 is shaping up to be a crazy year. bring on dec 20th 2012 :rock:

[jpalamar]

What is this world coming to man? We've got high school kids that don't know how to use a ruler, don't know the days of the week and 90% of natural born Americans would fail their own citizenship test. Then this thread came along...or at least the latter half of it.

The other 10% are kids of illegal immigrants that are granted citizenship for some reason.

[R22B]

and u still don't get it. ask yourself WHY subaru is a smaller company then ford. Because subaru DOES NOT HAVE THE DEMAND that ford has. Now, what everyone has been trying to explain to you was if the demand for the said impreza was as big as the mustang, subaru infact WOULD AND COULD meet that demand. Whether it would be making more plants, borrowing money, anything to up production they would.

A great example of this is HYUNDAI.

Hyundai in the 90's was a ****ful car company. VERY SMALL, Kinda like subaru, maybe even smaller! There was little demand for their 50,000 mile throw away cars. in the 2000's hyundai has grown. You know why? Cuz there was a DEMAND for the car cuz the quality improved. Now, hyundai i believe is in the top 5 for car manufacturing size and production and is still growing!

its really quite scary u don't understand this.

It's not hard to fathom. I can't imagine why he hasn't grasped the concept. I heard the same thing explained six different ways but he still doesn't get it.

Ferrari produces very few cars a year. Why? Not because they are small, but rather because they are so expensive not many people can afford them. If they had more affordable cars, people would want them more therefor increasing the demand and production.

[RyanG]

I'll be the first to admit that Subaru sucks.. plain and simple. Overweight, low on power and just handle like ****. The batmobile ahem.. sorry "STI" is an absolute joke for 40k. Slow, poor handling and just down right ugly. The WRX isn't too far behind. Subaru has really screwed up over the last 5 years with their models and Im ashamed of it for being an avid Subaru fan. Does that stop me from not wanting to drive/modify the brand?? Absolutely not!

The Evo X is far superior in EVERY aspect when compared to an STI. What would I pick first to own? An STI...maybe Im a glutton for punishment who knows. If I had my choice, I would pick the Genesis to drive. I looove those cars.

[upperguy]

The Evo X is far superior in EVERY aspect when compared to an STI. What would I pick first to own? An STI...maybe Im a glutton for punishment who knows. If I had my choice, I would pick the Genesis to drive. I looove those cars.


The genesis is really gorgeous and I love how the aftermarket has picked up on them too! The race/drift cars that seemed to launch with the production model were really stunning. I just wish the trans felt a little more solid, maybe it was just breaking in still on the one I drove but it seemed a little mushy. Did AMS continue their crazy strip-down and build on the 2.0t they had running for a while? I know they bought one right in the beginning and started stripping it and weighing everything, then I kind of lost interested and haven't been able to find anything since.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/02/rhysmillengenesiscoupe---02_opt.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/02/rhysmillengenesiscoupe---05.jpg

Full of win.

[Supraru]

Why are you still arguing. Scoobie got beat by V6 Mustang... which means on that track my GTO stock would get beat too, you don't see me with the whole Jeresy Shores sand in my vagina.

And stop talking about supply/demand and how small Subaru is. If they had as much demand as the Mustang, they would expend and be a bigger company really fast. There is nothing more to say about it.

Get over it.

Show me where I was arguing that the Sti should have won this comparison. People just love to throw words into peoples mouths.

Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
Supply and demand

Again no one has shown where I talk about supply and demand. Instead I stated it's retarded to compare production numbers between ford and subaru. Then I stated that it's impossible for Subaru to put out anywhere near that amount in just imprezas. I still fail to see how you guys fail to see that. Instead you want to argue supply and demand. Yes if there was demand for it Subaru could produce 150k imprezas after building many factories and getting them operational years and years down the road. They aren't gonna go from 400k cars to 5 million. Hence the retardedness of the coments on supply and demand.

[Supraru]

It's not hard to fathom. I can't imagine why he hasn't grasped the concept. I heard the same thing explained six different ways but he still doesn't get it.

Ferrari produces very few cars a year. Why? Not because they are small, but rather because they are so expensive not many people can afford them. If they had more affordable cars, people would want them more therefor increasing the demand and production.

But ferrari isn't just going to jump production from 4k cars a year to 100k cars a year. It's a very long process.

[Khellen]

yes..

This is why TST can't have nice things.

[92awdtsi]

But ferrari isn't just going to jump production from 4k cars a year to 100k cars a year. It's a very long process.

if 100k people went to a ferrari dealer and said they wanted brand new ferrari's.. Ferrari would up their production to meet the customers... They wouldn't just walk away from selling that many cars

[Scapegoat]

if 100k people went to a ferrari dealer and said they wanted brand new ferrari's.. Ferrari would up their production to meet the customers... They wouldn't just walk away from selling that many cars

eh... ferarri might walk away from sales. as far as i'm aware, they hand build a lot and part of the appeal is the lower production numbers available.

the simple fact of the matter. subaru is capable of upping their production. currently it is not financially responsible to do so because they wouldnt be able to make the sales required to sustain an increased production.

also, a v6 mustang tromped an sti.

[92awdtsi]

ok so maybe ferrari wasn't the greatest example... hyundai however showed that if people wanted to buy their cars, they will make more of them.



and yes the STI did get man handled by a v6 mustang

[Scapegoat]

this used to be the comparison?

http://image.hotrod.com/f/22392296+w750+st0/hrdp_0401_15_z+2004_ford_mustang_cobra+and_subaru_ WRX_STi.jpg

foooor shame subaru... the 2012 sti better be sporting 400bhp, at least.

[psymos]

ok so maybe ferrari wasn't the greatest example... hyundai however showed that if people wanted to buy their cars, they will make more of them.



and yes the STI did get man handled by a v6 mustang

:rotfl: this guy is all about bashing on subaru, it actually humors me :mrgreen:

[jjm4life]

This is why TST can't have nice things.

well played sir, well played.

[Khellen]

foooor shame subaru... the 2012 sti better be sporting 400bhp, at least.

I'd prefer a lighter car with less understeer instead of the same chasis and more power. Maybe a new 2-door version like the GC would be awesome. Especially considering the amount of success that chasis has had in motorsports.

[Subie_sleeper]

I'd prefer a lighter car with less understeer instead of the same chasis and more power. Maybe a new 2-door version like the GC would be awesome. Especially considering the amount of success that chasis has had in motorsports.

^^^^^ THIS !!!! (& 400 BHP :mrgreen:)

[Supraru]

this used to be the comparison?

http://image.hotrod.com/f/22392296+w750+st0/hrdp_0401_15_z+2004_ford_mustang_cobra+and_subaru_ WRX_STi.jpg

foooor shame subaru... the 2012 sti better be sporting 400bhp, at least.

That would be nice, we'll see how the new turbo engine does. I don't see how they can go this long with keeping the same hp year after year.

[DaveSTi]

I'll be the first to admit that Subaru sucks.. plain and simple. Overweight, low on power and just handle like ****. The batmobile ahem.. sorry "STI" is an absolute joke for 40k. Slow, poor handling and just down right ugly. The WRX isn't too far behind. Subaru has really screwed up over the last 5 years with their models and Im ashamed of it for being an avid Subaru fan. Does that stop me from not wanting to drive/modify the brand?? Absolutely not!

The Evo X is far superior in EVERY aspect when compared to an STI. What would I pick first to own? An STI...maybe Im a glutton for punishment who knows. If I had my choice, I would pick the Genesis to drive. I looove those cars.

If you bought an Evo X, it would be too much like "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061735/

[ambitiousCK]

Subaru has to get thier **** together....or it'll always be people....like me...building the cars they really want lol

[RyanG]

Dave you can just call me Sidney :P

[DaveSTi]

Dave you can just call me Sidney :P

:lol:

[92awdtsi]

:rotfl: this guy is all about bashing on subaru, it actually humors me :mrgreen:

no, i do not hate subaru's at all. i just like shoving the fact that a "v6 mustang smoked the brand new sti" in ken block nut swingers faces, like yourself. Yes, I said it, you infact are exactly what subaru wants you to be. A Ken Block nutswinger fan for life. Thinking your crap doesn't stink because you paid $20,000+ to drive a fake rally car.

[Supraru]

no, i do not hate subaru's at all. i just like shoving the fact that a "v6 mustang smoked the brand new sti" in ken block nut swingers faces, like yourself. Yes, I said it, you infact are exactly what subaru wants you to be. A Ken Block nutswinger fan for life. Thinking your crap doesn't stink because you paid $20,000+ to drive a fake rally car.

Hmm...wonder how that v6 mustang does against a talon.....oh that's right they don't make it anymore. :lol:

[upperguy]

Hmm...wonder how that v6 mustang does against a talon.....oh that's right they don't make it anymore. :lol:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Cheeseburger.jpg

[psymos]

no, i do not hate subaru's at all. i just like shoving the fact that a "v6 mustang smoked the brand new sti" in ken block nut swingers faces, like yourself. Yes, I said it, you infact are exactly what subaru wants you to be. A Ken Block nutswinger fan for life. Thinking your crap doesn't stink because you paid $20,000+ to drive a fake rally car.

oh yes, cause ken block totally made me want to buy an sti, now im going to buy a ford fiesta because of him now too. sounds like you are jealous. not my fault you cant afford a car over $5000. you drive a talon. enough said.

[Scapegoat]

oh yes, cause ken block totally made me want to buy an sti, now im going to buy a ford fiesta because of him now too. sounds like you are jealous. not my fault you cant afford a car over $5000. you drive a talon. enough said.

lets get serious now... i'm sure he spent over 5k fixing the car time and time again :lol:

i'm glad this thread devolved into personal attacks on both sides.

doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day... the v6 mustang is more capable as a track car than the much higher priced over glorified sedan/hatch that has defined subaru as a rally company for the past... many years.

in one fell swoop, C&D destroyed their reputation... its time for them to do something to get it back. otherwise, we'll just laugh at them like we did dodge for the past 20 years

[Khellen]

in one fell swoop, C&D destroyed their reputation... its time for them to do something to get it back. otherwise, we'll just laugh at them like we did dodge for the past 20 years

That's a bit of an exageration. Besides, the new GR STi's being slow** is only news to you guys. All Subaru guys have known this since they first came out in 2008.

**Not slow per se but slow for a new and improved model that should show some substantial improvement over the previous chasis.

[psymos]

lets get serious now... i'm sure he spent over 5k fixing the car time and time again :lol:

i'm glad this thread devolved into personal attacks on both sides.

doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day... the v6 mustang is more capable as a track car than the much higher priced over glorified sedan/hatch that has defined subaru as a rally company for the past... many years.

in one fell swoop, C&D destroyed their reputation... its time for them to do something to get it back. otherwise, we'll just laugh at them like we did dodge for the past 20 years

No sti>all

<takes of monster energy drink hat>
/sarcasm

Seriously though. I would like to see what the mustang does on the track with some power adders/suspension mods.

[Chris B.]

1 to 2 seconds at a lengthy track such as VIR is still a drivers race, especially if the venue were shifted to a shorter track. And it's only 1 or 2 car lengths if (big if) the drivers are both able to drive their respective cars to their full potential.


Its a lot more than 1 or 2 car lengths. Depending on the speed, its somewhere in the range of 150-300 feet. After a couple laps, the slightly faster car woudl be so far ahead that the slower car wouldn't even be able to see the faster car down the front straight.


A slight advantage in a one lap time attack race, doesn't necessarily tell the whole story in a multi lap race. I think a more accurate representation would be to do the average time of 5 laps.


I don't know of many street cars that could handle 5 laps all out with a professional driver. In the past, I believe it was Larry Webster from car and driver, one fo the drivers or editors said that the brakes on the 100% stock street cars can't handle more than a few laps before they start to fade. This is due to the stock brake pad compounds and stock brake fluid. To do a 5 lap or more comparison, you would need to swap brake pads and brake fluid on many of the cars. Then they are no longer stock. Street brake pads overheat when run hard on the track, they they act like they aren't there. For example, look at the Nizmo 370Z from last year. Its brakes failed very quickly and without warning. I know that Ford use to use the Super Duty(550 degree F dry boiling point) brake fluid on the Mustangs, but I don't know if they do any more. Most stock brake fluid in new cars is 350-425 degree F dry boiling point. A couple aggressive laps with stock pads will boil it over.


True. I've always wondered about the qualifications of the magazine testers. It's hard to find actual racing experience they may have had.


K. C. Colwell has some road course racing experience including some endurance racing. Mark Gillies has quite a bit of road coruse racing experience over the years. Tony Quiroga also has quite a bit of road coruse racing experience over the years. It looks like Dave Vanderwerp has a lot of track experience, but I'm not sure how much racing experience he has.


I realize we're comparing bone stock factory cars, but I've always felt that you can't do an accurate performance comparison if you aren't testing on the same tires. Besides the driver, tires are one of the first and the best upgrades you can get for the car's performance. There aren't many people that are interested in tracking their car that leave performance on the table with crap tires (if they can afford it). I'm sure it wasn't long before you upgraded from your all-seasons.


Considering there isn't a huge lap time difference in many of the stock high performance tires the cars in the test come with stock, their lap times shoudl improve in a similar manner when upgrading to DOT approved R compound tires.

The issue with putting all the cars on DOT approved racing tires or somethign like a RE-11 or AD-08 or Dunlop Direzza is then you'll have people say "The Brand X car runs better times on the RE-11 than the Dunlop Star Spec because the Star Specs overheat faster on that car" Also you'll run intot he issue of not being able to get those tires in somethign similar to the stock size. Testing the cars in the stock condition is the fairest comparison.


Its definitely useful for comparison shopping if you put on-track performance at VIR above all else. Otherwise it's just a source for bench racing and stirring up the car forum pot. lol


The VIR course C&D uses is avery good test for a car's overall performance It tests high and low speed acceleration, high and low speed handling, transitions from side to side and transitions between acceleration and braking. The whole infield patriot course section they use is more liek an Auto cross and is a section where a lower powered car with very good handling can make up time over a higher powered car with less handling capabilities. There are a wide variety of turns and some turns that can allow a car to show how stable it is when steering with the throttle. There are turns that will show weaknesses and faults in various cars and their suspension setup. I've done under 300 miles around VIR last year on both the fUll course and the same grand course that C&D used. It does test a car's cabilities very well and show faults in the car's handling.

My argument isn't for the STi/WRX. I couldn't care less that they got beat by a chick car. lol. If anything I hope it lights the fire under FHI's ass to up the ante on the current HP Wars. As of now it appears my LGT is probably the only Subaru I'll ever own. Maybe I should make up an alter-ego without a car in the name to stay neutral.

My only beef is with magazine testing and the way people interpret them into the holy grail of everything automotive. Sure 1.3 seconds can be a lot of time to make up, but if you really know your car you might not have to make up time at all.

With drivers of equal skill, 1.3 seconds is still quite a bit. You can argue that a better driver in a slower car will beat a less skilled driver in a faster car, but that's not what the article is about.

It would be interesting to see a comparison with pro drivers and less experienced(such as someone who does half a dozen track days a year) lap times in each car. Sort of like some other magazine comparisons in the past where a highly skilled driver was faster in one car and a less skilled driver was faster in another car. The New M3 vs 5.0 Mustang comparison in another magazine is an example of that. The pro driver was faster in one car and the less skilled driver was faster in the other car.

[mckpat03]

No sti>all

<takes of monster energy drink hat>
/sarcasm

Seriously though. I would like to see what the mustang does on the track with some power adders/suspension mods.

Griggs Racing GR40ST vs. C6 Z06 Corvettes at Thunderhill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LuIMB0JXpc)

Griggs equipped S197 with track prepped Z06s.

[92awdtsi]

oh yes, cause ken block totally made me want to buy an sti, now im going to buy a ford fiesta because of him now too. sounds like you are jealous. not my fault you cant afford a car over $5000. you drive a talon. enough said.

i havent owned a talon for close to 2 years. I have a mortgage to pay for. No more toys other than streetbikes for a while.

[Supraru]

lets get serious now... i'm sure he spent over 5k fixing the car time and time again :lol:

i'm glad this thread devolved into personal attacks on both sides.

doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day... the v6 mustang is more capable as a track car than the much higher priced over glorified sedan/hatch that has defined subaru as a rally company for the past... many years.

in one fell swoop, C&D destroyed their reputation... its time for them to do something to get it back. otherwise, we'll just laugh at them like we did dodge for the past 20 years

Easy easy, the 2011 v6 mustang. The 2010's were absolute garbage. Don't make me bust out the comparison where the Sti beat the **** out of the mustang in like 27 out of 32 categories. Lol

[Scapegoat]

Easy easy, the 2011 v6 mustang. The 2010's were absolute garbage. Don't make me bust out the comparison where the Sti beat the **** out of the mustang in like 27 out of 32 categories. Lol

go ahead. at the end of the day, a capable driver in a 2011 v6 mustang is going to out perform the 2011 sti. and be able to carry more groceries, use 89 octane and get better gas mileage.

and yes, the 2011 v6 mustang. i wasn't sure we had to specify that since thats all we've been talking about :)

[R22B]

i havent owned a talon for close to 2 years. I have a mortgage to pay for. No more toys other than streetbikes for a while.

Ugh, I feel your pain man. That combined with school loans sucks :(

[jjm4life]

No sti>all

<takes of monster energy drink hat>
/sarcasm

Seriously though. I would like to see what the mustang does on the track with some power adders/suspension mods.

how about just removing the 114mph speed limiter :lol:

the mustang would have had a ton more speed instead of banging of the rev limiter for 10+seconds

[jpalamar]

how about just removing the 114mph speed limiter :lol:

the mustang would have had a ton more speed instead of banging of the rev limiter for 10+seconds

That was the dumbest thing Ford could of added to a car with a 6 speed transmission. I will never understand that decision.

[Scapegoat]

That was the dumbest thing Ford could of added to a car with a 6 speed transmission. I will never understand that decision.

probably throwing us 2010 gt owners a bone haha

[jjm4life]

well its a simple tune away from destroying a sti on the track.

i take back what i said about closing this thread earlier. this is fun

[jpalamar]

well its a simple tune away from destroying a sti on the track.

i take back what i said about closing this thread earlier. this is fun

I wonder how an 11 GT would go against and STi if they both were stock but had custom tunes....

[Scapegoat]

I wonder how an 11 GT would go against and STi if they both were stock but had custom tunes....

gt would eat it alive i think. already pushing over 400bhp, i don't think the sti could overcome the HP difference w/ a tune. and the weight difference isn't a whoooole lot.

of course, i'm not totally positive if boost could be changed by a tune... and i don't know what all can be done to the sti just by tune along.

i know with the mustang, a CAI and tune do a decent amount to the HP... w/o the CAI... not sure

[Chris B.]

I wonder how an 11 GT would go against and STi if they both were stock but had custom tunes....

I haven't seen many before and after results on an '11 GT with just a tune. Most people do a tune and a cold air intake to replace the stock cold air intake. Horsepower at the wheels usually goes from 370-375ish at the wheels stock to 400-410 at the wheels with an aftermarket CAI and tune. I did see one that was 414 at the wheels with a CAI and a email tune tweeked a little on a dyno.

Ford also has a kit through FRPP for the '11 GT that includes a K&N air filter and a slightly more aggressive tune for 91 octane. It gives a 16 HP and 7 ft-lbs peak(at the wheels) gain in power and a 60 ft-lbs gain in power at 1500 RPM(Due to adjusting the variable camshaft timing). Its also 50 state emissions legal. If they are getting 16 HP from a 91 octane tune, a good aftermarket 93 octane tune should be good for 20 HP at the wheels over stock.

In summary, a '11 GT with a tune will get another 15-20 HP at the wheels. That shoudl bring it up to between 385 to 395 HP at the wheels depending on where the baseline was and how aggressive the tune is.

[Chris B.]

Griggs Racing GR40ST vs. C6 Z06 Corvettes at Thunderhill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LuIMB0JXpc)

Griggs equipped S197 with track prepped Z06s.

A friend of mine has the GR40 suspension in his S197 GT with a supercharger. He is putting down 440-450 HP at the wheels on a conservative pump gas tune. The 911 GT3's can't keep up with him and he runs with the C6 Z06 'vettes. He can fit 315 width race tires on all 4 corners with room to spare.

Of course a full GR-40 suspension is in the neighborhood of $12K+ last time I checked. If I didn't need 4 seats, I might want a used C6 Z06 instead of a S197 with a GR-40 suspension if the overall cost was the same.

[WolfsFang]

Wow Wow Wow whats with the attacks on DSM? Put $1000 into and it will smoke alot of cars on the road.

[marshallpre1]

^ holy crap. A stock '11 GT dynoes 375whp?

[mckpat03]

A friend of mine has the GR40 suspension in his S197 GT with a supercharger. He is putting down 440-450 HP at the wheels on a conservative pump gas tune. The 911 GT3's can't keep up with him and he runs with the C6 Z06 'vettes. He can fit 315 width race tires on all 4 corners with room to spare.

Of course a full GR-40 suspension is in the neighborhood of $12K+ last time I checked. If I didn't need 4 seats, I might want a used C6 Z06 instead of a S197 with a GR-40 suspension if the overall cost was the same.

I know haha. I'm with you man. Someone mentioned an S197 with suspension and that video came right to mind.

^ holy crap. A stock '11 GT dynoes 375whp?

Yup... It's pretty awesome. Obviously theres a little range we're dealing with, but its pretty consistently high.

[92awdtsi]

Wow Wow Wow whats with the attacks on DSM? Put $1000 into and it will smoke alot of cars on the road.

yea my talon was *crap* because $2,000 in mods made it a 12 sec car.. guess fast for cheap is stupid.

[Chris B.]

^ holy crap. A stock '11 GT dynoes 375whp?

Yes 370-375 HP at the wheels when dynoed in 5th gear. The new 6 speed transmission has its 1:1 gear as 5th gear. The people getting lower numbers(360-365 HP) are dynoing it in 4th gear, which is 1.32:1. The previous model years had a 1:1 4th gear and people were dynoing their 2011 GT's in 4th and getting the 360-365 HP results. Typically naturally aspirated engines are dynoed in the gear closest to 1:1 as possible to get accurate and repeatable results. I usually see most forced induction cars being dynoed in 3rd gear to build boost faster.

When I my '08 GT was dynoed in 3rd gear(1.32:1), then in 4th gear(1:1), the 4th gear results were 10 HP at the wheels higher than the 3rd gear results.

[Supraru]

I wonder how an 11 GT would go against and STi if they both were stock but had custom tunes....

Probably about the same as this test and what the gt did. I wanna say the gt did a 2:48 or something. I'll have to see if I can find that list again. Not sure on how much just a tune wakes up the new mustangs. I know I've seen ones with just bolt ons and they are pretty damn nasty. The tune on the sti may possibly net more gains but not enough to over come maybe a couple seconds very tops. I'm actually kind of curious as to what companies threw on what brakes and suspension parts.

[Supraru]

yea my talon was *crap* because $2,000 in mods made it a 12 sec car.. guess fast for cheap is stupid.

2k in mods probably made it what a high 12 second car? Don't forget it still handled like complete garbage. :wink:

[Supraru]

gt would eat it alive i think. already pushing over 400bhp, i don't think the sti could overcome the HP difference w/ a tune. and the weight difference isn't a whoooole lot.

of course, i'm not totally positive if boost could be changed by a tune... and i don't know what all can be done to the sti just by tune along.

i know with the mustang, a CAI and tune do a decent amount to the HP... w/o the CAI... not sure

Yeah I'm pretty sure you can change the boost. Stock though I really don't think it would be more then 1 lb without possibly being dangerous but I have no clue how to tune. I think a tune is good for maybe 15-20whp tops. Probably enough to beat the v6 but not enough to come close to a stock gt.

[92awdtsi]

2k in mods probably made it what a high 12 second car? Don't forget it still handled like complete garbage. :wink:

yea it handled horrible with the gr2/tein combo i had on it... and as far as a tune on a stock sti goes. Possibly gaining 1psi of boost... are you serious? The factory injectors are no where near maxed out. You could easily gain 6-7psi providing you add the fuel and have it run safely like that for the life of the car.

[Supraru]

yea it handled horrible with the gr2/tein combo i had on it... and as far as a tune on a stock sti goes. Possibly gaining 1psi of boost... are you serious? The factory injectors are no where near maxed out. You could easily gain 6-7psi providing you add the fuel and have it run safely like that for the life of the car.

I stated I wasn't a tuner. But 6-7 psi? Are you serious? So you're trying to tell me that a stock sti can handle 21.5 psi safely? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: Cobbs 93 octane maps only runs a peak of 18 psi. Could you push it more? Sure but I highly doubt it would be very efficient or even safe for a decent period of time.

[92awdtsi]

yes i am telling you that a bone stock sti can handle 21.5 psi if you add the appropriate amount of fuel.

[Scapegoat]

can the stock turbo operate at that? efficiently?

i was running 19.5 on my srt-4 and that was pretty much the max of it's efficiency

[92awdtsi]

i know with a evo 8-9 (16g turbo) can efficiently run 24-26psi completely stock. i mean hell, i ran 25psi through my evo 3 16g on my talon and it wasn't out of its efficiency range.