Subaru did a real PR job the us bound wrx but are the numbers real I think not! I couldnt get my car to do 14s in the quarter it was imposible. Here are my time slips:
15.77 @ 89
15.63 @ 88
15.44 @ 89
15.88 @ 89
15.70 @ 89
15.40 @ 90
15.55 @ 87
15.39 @ 89
1200 miles on the car fully stock ran it with the spare in the trunk to boot on a half tank of gas. I did run it at 300 feet above sea level though at LACR. Now you guys can say maybe I can not drive possible but a fellow i Club member and wrx owner was thier with a modified ride exhaust gready front mounted intercooler and few other tricks and lets just say I didnt see him get any were near what subaru says this car is capable of......................any one care to comment?

Was your emergency brakes up? ;)

Ok I'll be the first...

You can't drive? ;)

Honestly... the 1/4 mile is very dependant on how rough you are on the car... even the smallest things make the biggest differences in how the car performs.

Like explain how you were launching the car... did you slip or drop the clutch... what were you using as shift points? These are all very important factors when 1/4 mile'n.

The numbers that SOA gave us are real... however that's with many many runs and I'm sure a professional driver that knew exactly where and when to shift.

And if you are using an auto... (I really hope not) none of this applies and your numbers will not match up with SOAs. It's a slushbox...

-Nick

5 spd sedan tried to launch at 3500 rpm 4500 rpm and 5500 rpm riding the cluch and also tried to dumping the clutch at 4000 rpm but the car launched better when riding the clutch and I have had a few a cars in my day and no this was not my first visit to the track but it was my first time running a allwheel drive car. Like I said a friend of mine was running a modifed 2002 wrx also and he could not get it near 14.4 as advertised.

At what altitude were you?

It is either driver or something wrong with your car. I ran a 14.3 with mine in 90 degree heat.

Rev between 4k-5k. Slip slightly, then dump the clutch while flooring the gas. DO NOT DUMP WITHOUT SLIPPING THE CLUTCH. If you do that, you can say bye bye tranny if you keep it up. It's the initial shock load on the driveline that will kill it if you just dump it. When you slip it a little before dumping it, you get everything moving and the shock isn't there.

Oh, shift around 6500rpm if your totally stock and shift quickly.

Good luck next time.

Later,

Dale

BTW, was everyone having problems? If so, maybe the track had something wrong with the timing equipment.

The track is 300 feet above sea level out in the desert here in California its a hard track to run at But I expected alot more from the car also heard a wierd bumping noise while shifting from 1 to secound and 2 to third the stock shifter really felt sloppy though I think my first mod will be a harder bushing I will take the car to carlsbad next week that track is sea level and see what it can do....

Wow, with times like that my 2.5RS could beat you! :D

Only having 1200 miles on the car might be your bottleneck. In my experience Subaru motors don't really feel "alive" until about 2500-3000 miles, even thought the break in is only 1000 miles. Plus other factors like the gas your running, the temperature, the humidity, etc can all have an effect on your times.

my bet is driver. I ripped off a 15.724@85 in my RS with just a 2.5" catback.

What were your 60' times? Mine was 2.101 on that run, and I know with a better launch, I could dip into the mid 15s. You prolly slipped the clutch TOO much. From what I hear, rev it up to atleast 5.5k, slip enough to move the car, then drop it.

15.77 @ 89 - 60'@2.459
15.63 @ 88 - 60'@2.358
15.44 @ 89 - 60'@2.218
15.88 @ 89 - 60'@2.591
15.70 @ 89 - 60'@2.433
15.40 @ 90 - 60'@2.333
15.55 @ 87 - 60'@2.305
15.39 @ 89 - 60'@2.157

well there's half your problem right there...
high 60' times = bad :(

There's your problem. You should be able to bring those times down into the 14's with a better launch. I would bet your shift points were off also.

Later,

Dale

I thought that track was more like 3000 feet above sea level, which is why all the Cali guys like to come to Joliet (sea level) and set world records at every Battle of the Imports that is held there.

Adam

No wonder, you need a good 1.9 60' time. You need to practice the launch more.

Like everyone states, the 60' times are what's killing you.

Great 60' times are the saving grace of an AWD car with 227 hp running 14's. The DSM guys always equated a tenth off your 60' will usually be ATLEAST 2 tenths off your total quarter mile time. If you get a 1.8 60' time, you can knock about a full 1/2 second off your total time.

I know people don't like to admit to their driver skills being to blame, but it really is the difference. In my modded 90 Laser (~275-300HP), the best I could ever run was a 14 flat @ 102+mph. The higher mph showed I was making some power, but my 60' times were always around 2.4 (too much power thru 2 wheels + a crappy driver = super crappy 60' times). If I had AWD and could have gotten sub 2 second 60' times, the car was easily good enough for low to flat 13s.

I don't think SoA and all the magazines are lieing. You will have to flog the car hard to get the times in stock form. And that's exactly what they do.

Kev
www.forcefed4.com

Think about this. You are 1 second away from your desired time. 1 second is really short and if you add all the little things up that could effect miliseconds, and are soo easy to screw up at, than it will be simple for you to understand how that happened.;)

PS-Where did you see SOA advertise 1/4 mile times? I've only seen magazines doing that.

Here's another hint... don't redline the car.. the stock power curve drops off after 6500 RPMs. No need to rev the car to the limit.. make sure your shifts stay inside the powerband. This is an error that a lot of people make. Stay with the power and work on your launch.. don't blame the car... yet.. :D

I havent given up on the car yet I bought the wrx becuase its a great all around performer but I was a bit disapointed and my driving probly dose suck but I will make an attemp to improve......will post my new 1/4 mile slips next week

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but palmdale(LACR) is 3000!! ft not 300. trust me your car will run MUCH faster in pomona

How much do you weight?

What RPM do bring your engine up to before launch?

Just wondering!


CRAZY KEN

Based on some graphs of the power curve in each gear, on a stock 5 speed you want to shift in this pattern:

1-2: Redline
2-3: 6500
3-4: 6500
4-5: 6400

The power curves from 1st and 2nd gear do not meet so shifting at redline is best.

good luck and i think if you just worked on launching for a while your times would improve. Plus you are running stock, and the test cars provided to magazines and such all had the sti exhaust and the 17in rims. Keep that in mind when comparing to thier times, 1\2 second off is not bad. Break down and buy a k&n or itg and that initself will help you out a little with the extra o2 to the engine. by the way SOA has never and will never post times for any car. No manufaturer will give you times, only a top speed if it is limited. This is for insurance reasons, as they can be held resposible for any claim they make, while the magazines can state that they did this time, not that the car will do that. notice the articles all state how they got this time, not that the car got that time.

You were dragging at 1200 miles, so maybe you have just come out of your break-in period? If so, and you took it easy on the car for the first 1000 miles, then the ECU may need to re-learn how you operate the car, i.e. reset the ECU and drive her hard, or drive her harder but give it time to learn. Maybe. I dunno.

Actually skyhigh420, most of the car magazines were running stock cars and the standard RE92s in their tests, certainly the major rags R&T, C&D and Motor Trend did. R&T - who managed 0-60 in 5.7 seconds - used stock tires and did comment that handling would improve with upgraded tires.

Furthermore, it is my understanding that cars with 17" and bigger wheels will actually run slower in the straight away than cars with 16" wheels - check out this thread:
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=36572&referrerid=6518

Finally Suabaru did advertise 0-60 times for the WRX - initially they were advertising 6.4 seconds, which was later replaced by 5.8 seconds based on the Car and Driver test.

Sorry to nit pick.

SEV - I would not worry too much about your times - although there are quite a few WRX owners who have managed mid 14s and lower with mostly stock cars - I think most owners, including myself, without much track experience would be coming up with times similar to yours.

SEV check out this old thread:

http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=38795&referrerid=6518

Never 1/4 mile times though.;)

http://members.home.net/noslo5pt0/wrxtimeslip.jpg

Bone stock 5-speed sedan, 1300 miles, full weight (and I weigh 250lbs), no iced intercooler, 70 degree weather, my 1st time ever to the strip with this car.

Launch between 4500-5000rpm slipping the clutch, shift 1-2 at 7000rpm, 2-3 at 6500rpm, run thru the traps in 3rd.

Chris

Finally Suabaru did advertise 0-60 times for the WRX - initially they were advertising 6.4 seconds, which was later replaced by 5.8 seconds based on the Car and Driver test.


Car and Driver ALWAYS posts faster than normal times in their magazine. They've been doing it for years. You can look at any car tested, then check Car and Driver's times. 10 out of 10 times, Car and Driver's times will be faster than other magazines or company claims.


As far as our friend with a nice brand new WRX who's decided to beat it up at the dragstrip...Dude, what are you expecting at LACR? It's in a HOT DRY desert at over 3000 feet of elevation. Don't you know that EVERY car that runs at that track is going to run significantly faster at sea level? If you don't know this, you shouldn't be out dragracing a brand new car. Learn how dragracing works, and all the variances that can throw off your times.

When I first went to the track with my Camaro, I figured I would run about 14 flat. I was so wrong. 15.2 the first time down the 1320. It took practice...finally...nailed it down to a 14.1 @99.87 mph. The difference? Launching, feathering the pedal, shift points.


If you wanna keep dragging...practice makes perfect. You might also try Carlsbad Raceway here in San Diego County. It's a sea level track, and towards sunset, with cooler temps....you can shave a 1/10 or two off your eta.


Good luck.


Skylab™

Perhaps the timers were incorect???

Just a suggestion :p

Originally posted by Skylab



Car and Driver ALWAYS posts faster than normal times in their magazine. They've been doing it for years. You can look at any car tested, then check Car and Driver's times. 10 out of 10 times, Car and Driver's times will be faster than other magazines or company claims.


Skylab™

Actually Skylab, Car and Driver has one of the slowest 0-60 times that I have seen. Road & Track posted 5.7 seconds, Motor Trend 5.6 seconds, Motor Week 5.6 etc.

Just a little FYI...

The 6.4 time that Subaru released was actually 0-100kph. This number was floating around when the WRX was just offically announced for the US market (before pricing and spec's were announced).

You may also notice that there are several PSI #'s floating around from Subaru also. That is because the UK and the US get diferent boost levels. (I think the UK spec WRX gets 118bhp instead of 127).

Finally, according to SCC, the 6.1 0-60mph time release by Subaru include either 180 or 200lbs in additional weight to similate a passanger.

Oh yeah, some magazines correct their #'s for sea level and other factors, some don't.

:(

Originally posted by WRX Sport Driver
Just a little FYI...

The 6.4 time that Subaru released was actually 0-100kph

well, that's roughly 62mph, and i don't think it should take an additional 3/4 sec (avg) to increase the speed another 2mph.

Well, those were the numbers that were released. Considering that those numbers may have include extra weight (passanger weight that I mentioned) and diferent spec cars (the US is actually getting a faster WRX than some other markets) AND the fact that those numbers may have been preliminary numbers before the car completed emissions testing: they would explain some of the confusion in all of the numbers.

As far as I know, the official 0-60 for the US spec WRX is 6.1 seconds and that includes passanger weight. Many of the articles out there on the web were writen on evaluation versions of the car before production started and specs were determined.

Originally posted by YahDude
Not to rain on your parade or anything, but palmdale(LACR) is 3000!! ft not 300
I think this is quite important. I'm not an engine specialist, but I'm guessing that with a turbo (which gets extra power by cramming more air in), the altitude factor is greater than with NA engines (the inefficiency increases at a greater rate as altitude increases/air thins out). Less HP = slower car. Try a dyno at 3000ft and one at sea level and I'm sure you'll see a big difference (10-15HP?).
Oh, and work on the 60'/starts.

I think altitude hurts N/A cars more than turbo'd cars. Ask Larry Ganz, he knows enough about n/a, turbo's, and altitude.

Car and Driver almost always posts much slower times than other mags. They got a 15.2 out of an Integra Type R, which is usually considered a mid 14 second car.