warnoldscu Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 I noticed that in the most recent Road and Track (comp. vs. the Acura) the 0-60 time is like 5.6, which is nice to boast, but does anyone know if this is correct? I've seen 5.9 in a Subaru dealership and 6.1 some other random place... I noticed that they were driving a Limited GT in the mag, but that's no faster than the regular GT, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crapy Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 well. it should be under 6 seconds.... but can u tell me how does it matter u? i mean 0~60 time varies on different condition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbagger Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 0-60 is a difficult time to measure. differences in weather, road surface, tire condition, will vary the times. Also the method used will change the time. Also notice when C&D does a long term. Sometime the car is faster, sometimes slower. AWD gives a more predictable launch, and eliminates low-traction acceleration. That's why the times are lower than the HP numbers would suggest. I tend to figure that if two cars are within a half-second of each other, then they are practically the same. The only time \I compare directly, is when there is a comparison. Aka, the Legacy is that much faster than the other cars in the test. The comparison ensures same conditions for each car. just my $.02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KayGT Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 The GT ltd is actually slower than the GT base because of the added weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanoswrx Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 [quote name='KayGT']The GT ltd is actually slower than the GT base because of the added weight.[/quote] Yeah, maybe like .05 or at the most .1 seconds slower, its not that much heavier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 [quote name='kanoswrx'][quote name='KayGT']The GT ltd is actually slower than the GT base because of the added weight.[/quote] Yeah, maybe like .05 or at the most .1 seconds slower, its not that much heavier[/quote] True, I remember people ragging on the WRX wagon because it was 80 pounds heavier than the sedan. I never lost to a sedan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Yawn.............. :| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 [quote name='kanoswrx'][quote name='KayGT']The GT ltd is actually slower than the GT base because of the added weight.[/quote] Yeah, maybe like .05 or at the most .1 seconds slower, its not that much heavier[/quote] GT (5MT) - 3300lbs GT LTD (5MT) - 3365 Conclusion: teh srt-4 is fastAr!!!!1111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awdG35killer Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 haha, irrelevance > j00!!1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 [quote name='iamEJ25']haha, irrelevance > j00!!1![/quote] It's not irrelevant, they way almos the same and the fact is the SRT-4 is fastAr so we shouldn't even be comparing. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 [quote name='Drift Monkey'][quote name='iamEJ25']haha, irrelevance > j00!!1![/quote] It's not irrelevant, they way almos the same and the fact is the SRT-4 is fastAr so we shouldn't even be comparing. :P[/quote] SRT=Sexual Reorientation Therapy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBE555 Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 :lol: Nice Jedi. If I could count all of the wagon versus sedan, which is fastar threads I've seen on numerous forums, I'd probably be rich. The number is only as good of a driver and how far one is willing to push their toy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 [quote name='jedimaster'][quote name='Drift Monkey'][quote name='iamEJ25']haha, irrelevance > j00!!1![/quote] It's not irrelevant, they way almos the same and the fact is the SRT-4 is fastAr so we shouldn't even be comparing. :P[/quote] SRT=Sexual Reorientation Therapy?[/quote] 4 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firedawgs Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 [quote name='jedimaster'][quote name='kanoswrx'][quote name='KayGT']The GT ltd is actually slower than the GT base because of the added weight.[/quote] Yeah, maybe like .05 or at the most .1 seconds slower, its not that much heavier[/quote] True, I remember people ragging on the WRX wagon because it was 80 pounds heavier than the sedan. I never lost to a sedan.[/quote] Exactly; because of you want to get technical then you have to add the weight of your fat A$$. If you were 400lbs and I was 110lbs than...... Well you get my point. Updated my vBGarage: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.