Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday May 11, 2021
Home Forums Images WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.







* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. 
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2021, 08:07 PM   #76
Straight6
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 419593
Join Date: Apr 2015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwf137 View Post
This thread went full derp.

Explorer ST:
0-60: 5.3s
60-0: 114 ft
lateral accel: 0.85g

wrx:
0-60: 5.6s
60-0: 110 ft
lateral accel: 0.92g

So, better turning. No brainer. But really, how many people are driving around and pulling 0.92g's out of their wrx on the streets? And lets not forget the difference in tires. Honestly, driven at max, the explorer st will probably outrun an average wrx driver.

y'all are nuts to discount vehicles like this just because of their size. You seem to forget that while added weight does hurt in "feel", that added weight gives additional grip because available friction is based on how much something weighs...

Oh I can play this game too,

2016 Golf R
0-60 5.2 seconds

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...l-test-review/
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Straight6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 04-16-2021, 08:16 PM   #77
Straight6
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 419593
Join Date: Apr 2015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP Chestnut View Post
The driving dynamics of every generation wrx of sti has been total **** compared to a proper sports car. The camber curve is terrible. The weight distribution is terrible. The engine is 100% in front of the axle line. It's a ridiculous platform and it's much more compromised than a car with a properly designed platform but a three inch higher COG.

This is an incredibly stupid hill you chose to die on but that's your choice.

They are still superior to FWD based VW products. Speaking from first hand experience.
Straight6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 08:24 PM   #78
DougNuts
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 192568
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Georgetown, KY
Vehicle:
2015 Outback 3.6R
'18 F150, '21 RAV4 XSE

Default

I wonder what the take rate on the ST is, because it seems like most of the new Explorers I see around here are the ST trim.
DougNuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 09:54 PM   #79
n2oiroc
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 141952
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: milwaukee'ish
Vehicle:
20 Audi S4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwf137 View Post
This thread went full derp.

Explorer ST:
0-60: 5.3s
60-0: 114 ft
lateral accel: 0.85g

wrx:
0-60: 5.6s
60-0: 110 ft
lateral accel: 0.92g

So, better turning. No brainer. But really, how many people are driving around and pulling 0.92g's out of their wrx on the streets? And lets not forget the difference in tires. Honestly, driven at max, the explorer st will probably outrun an average wrx driver.

y'all are nuts to discount vehicles like this just because of their size. You seem to forget that while added weight does hurt in "feel", that added weight gives additional grip because available friction is based on how much something weighs...
i discount it because it's a ford explorer and the SQ5 and X3 m40i exist.
n2oiroc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2021, 01:16 PM   #80
godfather2112
Papi Chulo
Moderator
 
Member#: 53794
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Boner kill city
Vehicle:
... 2017 BMW M2
2017 F-150

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by n2oiroc View Post
i discount it because it's a ford explorer and the SQ5 and X3 m40i exist.
Ford Explorer ST has 3 row seating. While sure, on a pure performance basis I too would take the X3 M40i but for some, 3 rows / extra cargo area might be wanted / necessary.


Just for the hell of it, I went and built an Explorer ST and X3 M40i. Pricing on the St came to $57.4k, the X3 M40i came to $60.5k. Not a big difference in pricing so call it close to the same. I'd be willing to bet you could pick up a Ford ST for $7k off if you shop around or wait for sales / incentives. The X3 M40i seem to sell really well so not sure on what discounting you could get but i've seen some get 7-10% off MSRP.


I could reasonably see myself owning a Ford Explorer ST as the cargo area is large enough to hold all my medical equipment where as the X30 M40i would not cut it. That said, I still prefer the utility of my truck.

I think the Explorer ST has some appeal to certain families over the X3 M40i for those that might have several kids who play sports, throwing all the equipment in the back and being able to pick up another kid or two for practice and games. Having the extra cabin space for throwing whatever in the back is nice and does come in handy more than most might think.

That said, if the extra cargo space was not needed, I would X3 M40i all day. I would bet that the X3 M40i does have a worse deprecation factor than the ST though, could be wrong.
godfather2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2021, 02:36 PM   #81
WaxyAgenda
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 523722
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Saginaw, MI
Vehicle:
2021 Sti
CWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by godfather2112 View Post
Ford Explorer ST has 3 row seating. While sure, on a pure performance basis I too would take the X3 M40i but for some, 3 rows / extra cargo area might be wanted / necessary.


Just for the hell of it, I went and built an Explorer ST and X3 M40i. Pricing on the St came to $57.4k, the X3 M40i came to $60.5k. Not a big difference in pricing so call it close to the same. I'd be willing to bet you could pick up a Ford ST for $7k off if you shop around or wait for sales / incentives. The X3 M40i seem to sell really well so not sure on what discounting you could get but i've seen some get 7-10% off MSRP.


I could reasonably see myself owning a Ford Explorer ST as the cargo area is large enough to hold all my medical equipment where as the X30 M40i would not cut it. That said, I still prefer the utility of my truck.

I think the Explorer ST has some appeal to certain families over the X3 M40i for those that might have several kids who play sports, throwing all the equipment in the back and being able to pick up another kid or two for practice and games. Having the extra cabin space for throwing whatever in the back is nice and does come in handy more than most might think.

That said, if the extra cargo space was not needed, I would X3 M40i all day. I would bet that the X3 M40i does have a worse deprecation factor than the ST though, could be wrong.
The sticker on ours was $56k and I paid $47k @ 0%.
WaxyAgenda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2021, 05:03 PM   #82
godfather2112
Papi Chulo
Moderator
 
Member#: 53794
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Boner kill city
Vehicle:
... 2017 BMW M2
2017 F-150

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxyAgenda View Post
The sticker on ours was $56k and I paid $47k @ 0%.
Nice score. Thatís one hell of a deal and I certainly couldnít pass that up.
godfather2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2021, 09:36 AM   #83
legacy_etu
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 35985
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: RI
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxyAgenda View Post
The sticker on ours was $56k and I paid $47k @ 0%.
How has it been for you? I know the rollout was .....not the best. Wondering if they have things under control now.
legacy_etu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2021, 02:31 PM   #84
WaxyAgenda
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 523722
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Saginaw, MI
Vehicle:
2021 Sti
CWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by godfather2112 View Post
Nice score. That's one hell of a deal and I certainly couldn't pass that up.
My exact thought. I had almost $10k in my 18' raptor, so I made the deal and ordered an Sti a few months later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by legacy_etu View Post
How has it been for you? I know the rollout was .....not the best. Wondering if they have things under control now.
It's been great. She just 7k miles with it. My only complaint is with Ford's MyPass app, or whatever it's called. She'd lock her keys in it at work (without setting up the keyless entry on door). They had some technical issues a couple months ago, thus resulting in her being locked out for a few hours. These ST's are impressive. Plenty of power in stock format, great brakes, and they handle well, aside from some slight oversteer.
WaxyAgenda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2021, 05:06 PM   #85
godfather2112
Papi Chulo
Moderator
 
Member#: 53794
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Boner kill city
Vehicle:
... 2017 BMW M2
2017 F-150

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxyAgenda View Post
My exact thought. I had almost $10k in my 18' raptor, so I made the deal and ordered an Sti a few months later.



It's been great. She just 7k miles with it. My only complaint is with Ford's MyPass app, or whatever it's called. She'd lock her keys in it at work (without setting up the keyless entry on door). They had some technical issues a couple months ago, thus resulting in her being locked out for a few hours. These ST's are impressive. Plenty of power in stock format, great brakes, and they handle well, aside from some slight oversteer.
You know you want to slap a stage 1 tune on it.
godfather2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2021, 11:20 AM   #86
dwf137
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 161333
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Seattle
Vehicle:
18 Highlander
Yami XSR

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
That weight comment and grip is very misleading. Frictional force does equal Ff = normal force times some
Coefficient of friction. However the extra mass laterally will easily overpower the tires as that frictional force also adds heat which ultimately reduces your friction factor


Getting friction force high is good for traction but adding weight to get it is a misnomer.
There is a lot going on with tires once you get close to max friction force. Static physics gets thrown out the window. But you're right, we all know that racers ice their tires before every race...
dwf137 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2021, 01:58 PM   #87
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: www.testdrivemylife.com
Vehicle:
2020 JEEP / Ascent
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwf137 View Post
There is a lot going on with tires once you get close to max friction force. Static physics gets thrown out the window. But you're right, we all know that racers ice their tires before every race...
LOL.. you know I knew you may push back on that. All tires have an optimum heat range, get over that though and Ff goes to practically zero.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2021 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2019, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.