The U.S. magazines always publish 0-60 times and use it as the primary comparison figure when judging performance. But as you know the Impreza RS requires a shift to 3rd gear before you get to 60 mph, which slows up the time a little bit. But by how much? You be the judge. Here's how the RS compares to the other cars in SCC's "8 Great" article a few months back in 0-50 times. If you are somebody that relies so heavily on 0-60 times as a comparison, this may be a shock to you. This is going from fastest to slowest.

that's actually pretty damn cool! i always knew the subie had potential to be better than them! damn these wicked short gears!

Since the auto hits 3rd gear right around 60, it may be even quicker than the manual in 0-60 time with a proper launch and manumatic shifting.

Hmmm....

I doubt it. There's too much power lost in an automatic transmission during gear shifts and acceleration.

If you check the 0-30 The Impreza will probably come out on top. The 2.5rs sucks in the 0-60 due to the lack of high end power to the wheels. The Impreza being AWD with tons of torque gets a violent jerk forward while those others will get violent wheel spin an move almost nowhere .... then they start to catch and eventually pass the RS I NEED a turbo.

To end this on a good note, the WRX can drop almost anything off the start (same AWD start applies here as above) then the turbo will allow the WRX to maintain the lead it got off the start. And in a year & 1/2 we get a Turbo version .. but by then for the same price we could get like a A4.

-Reiflex
reiff.freeservers.com ImprezaRacing

[This message has been edited by Reiflex (edited August 10, 2000).]

Agreed. I owned an Integra, and can tell you that there's gobs more torque in the low end, in the Subaru. Sure the stats say the same thing, but first-hand experience is something greater altogether.

The Type-R however....is a car I've not had the pleasure of driving. I almost bought one. Guess I just couldn't see myself in a fly yellow car year-round, though.

-S2-

Yes, the RS is tops on 0-30 but it doesn't have anything to do with AWD when compared to those cars. The RS simply has a lot higher torque than any of the other cars, especially the Hondas. That torque gives it superior low-end accleration making it the fastest to 30 mph of all compacts under $30,000 sold in the U.S. Even with theoretical perfect traction and perfect launch (read: no wheel spin), the RS still beats out the Prelude and ITR on the low end to 30 mph. That awesome 30mph time gives it a good 50 mph time, even though the 30-50 acceleration isn't that good. It takes the greater loss of acceleration the 3rd gear shifts gives for it to have a mediocre 0-60 time. There's really not that much loss in he drivetrain compared to FWD. It's a little bit, but it's not significant. That's a myth perpetuated by the Honda fwd freaks to once again make you believe that your more powerful machine is inferior.

Yea, I wouldn't dare buy a yellow car. But now, that black Integra Type R I saw at the dealer the other day looked mighty nice. At least the car did. The $25,600 sticker did not.

Well, I wouldn't say that it's a myth perpetuated by Honda speed freaks. One of the biggest and baddest cars in the import scene is the Eclipse GSX. Lots of ppl have messed with those for years.

Logically, it just makes sense that with the drivetrain propelling 2 axles, resistance increases so the powerloss in the driveline increases as well. So along with the standard front axle, you have the rear drive shaft and that connects to the rear LSD. That equates to 2 coefficients of drag that must be overcome before the tires can move an inch. But the benefit of that along with the rear LSD is near zero wheelspin upon launches. I'd say it's a pretty decent trade-off myself (but then again, I'm a pretty crappy launcher and I sit there and spin my wheels off the line ). But then again, FWD inline-4 need to be punished at high RPM to achieve the torque the Subaru makes at lower RPMs.

The efficiency of the drivelines do matter though. Recall the issue of SCC with the MR2-Spyder vs. the Miata. The MR2-Spyder dynoed higher at the wheels due to an efficient driveline (124 HP) and the Miata (113 HP) because of the tranversely mounted engine.

I would say the myths most prevalent in the import racing crowd would be the HP/L thing and the HP/LB. There are lots of heavy cars that are fast and vice versa.

will
Y2K Silver Celica GT-S 6-Speed
wants to get a Scooby soon!

That's why they have 1/4 times!

That takes care of any discrepancies that may arise from things like, "oh, but my car has to be in third gear at that speed while the other ones are still in second!!"

We can slice and dice all the performance numbers in anywhich way we want, but it really won't make a difference.

OK, a car gets to 50 mph in a certain time. So what!!??
That does not garantee that a slower 0-50 time will not be a head of you by half a car length already!

What they should test for is TIME TO DISTANCE!!
That will truely give you what matters, namely, which car is ahead of the other after a certain time or at the end of a time interval.

Interesting though...

ASNG

[This message has been edited by ASNG (edited August 10, 2000).]

Because to the chagrin of all the people that hate me around here, 99% of my racing is done on the street at speeds rarely exceeding 50 mph. That 0-30 time is extremely important if you want to be the first one out of the gate from a light. 1/4 mile time is useless.

I think the 0-50 speed range is good for comparing one subaru to another because it does away with the need and variables associated with shifting to 3rd. At the same time it's unfair to cars with longer or shorter gearing. If you've got 205/50's or smaller dia. tires on your 99+ RS it may no longer pull 50 in 2nd. I have a 98 GT and a 99 RS, same gearing different red lines and the 6500 rpm GT on 205/55's will just hit 50 before the rev limiter starts kicking in. (measured w/Vericom drag computer)
It will actually get to 55 in 2nd but it's bumping the limiter hard.

I think a better test would be a time to a distance of say as little as 60' to at most 500'. Can't remember what some of the other "standard" distances are but I think maybe 100' and 330'. Got to dig out the old drag computer again and see. I think 500' and maybe 100' gets times posted by the automotive press.

Found the drag computer manual, some data from my GT runs and some R&T, C&D and MT's. R&T looks like the only one that gives 100' and 500' times and none are doing 330' times, one of the standard drag interval measurements. Judging by my GT data 100' is just into 2nd and 330' looks like the shift point from 2nd to 3rd, so it may be best to go against all the norms and do something like 250' or if speed intervals are your thing say 25-45mph. This would be a good representation of pulling out of a 2nd gear turn and then pulling to near redline in 2nd on 205/50's and could be compared to other cars published 20-40 or 30-50 times. Of course, we could choose some odd numbers like 28-48.

[This message has been edited by Richard A. (edited August 12, 2000).]