Driver72 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 I know many who have owned WRX's have made the upgrade to get an LGT and they all say the LGT is faster, but has anybody with either car done a "run" against the other car? Just for shiites and giggles, and for no other reason than scientific results and curiousity, I'd love to know what the outcome of a couple rolling runs would be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Angus Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='Driver72']I know many who have owned WRX's have made the upgrade to get an LGT and they all say the LGT is faster, but has anybody with either car done a "run" against the other car? Just for shiites and giggles, and for no other reason than scientific results and curiousity, I'd love to know what the outcome of a couple rolling runs would be?[/QUOTE] i did a couple weeks ago, with an '05. it stayed with me until the latter half of being in 3rd. after that, i started pulling away. shortly after, i eased off, as i didnt want to get excessive in how fast i was going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver72 Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 Wait, your post is not very clear at all. Do YOU have a stock 05 LGT and you did a rolling run against a stock WRX in which you pulled away midway through 3rd gear? At what point/speed/gear did you guys start the run? Do you know for sure he was stock or was it just some guy on the road? I'd be willing to meet up with someone in the LA area (preferably in the San Fernando or Santa Clarita Valley) who has a stock WRX manual and do a couple "runs" on a deserted street somewhere and see how the cars match up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Angus Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='Driver72']Wait, your post is not very clear at all. Do YOU have a stock 05 LGT and you did a rolling run against a stock WRX in which you pulled away midway through 3rd gear? At what point/speed/gear did you guys start the run? Do you know for sure he was stock or was it just some guy on the road? I'd be willing to meet up with someone in the LA area (preferably in the San Fernando or Santa Clarita Valley) who has a stock WRX manual and do a couple "runs" on a deserted street somewhere and see how the cars match up.[/QUOTE] stock vs stock, from a standstill. from the looks of it, he looked stock. if he was stage 2, then he would've at least kept up with me, and or even beat me. 1st and 2nd gear he was staying with me. 3rd is when i began pulling away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Our cars don't make usable boost (and therefore, power) until 3rd gear. The first two gears are too short and the turbo is too small to make boost at high rpms. I expect to see awesome timeslips once people start upgrading turbos. The combinaion of having full boost in 1st & 2nd and being able to hold useful boost to redline will take huge chunks off 1/4 mile times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver72 Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='Colonel Angus']stock vs stock, from a standstill. from the looks of it, he looked stock. if he was stage 2, then he would've at least kept up with me, and or even beat me. 1st and 2nd gear he was staying with me. 3rd is when i began pulling away.[/QUOTE] that would seem right since most tests of the WRX have it running to 60 in about the same time as the LGT. And at the track, I think most get about the same 1.9 second 60 foot times. But, as stated, our 3rd gear and above are our strongest gears and that's when the 2.0 T in the WRX is starting to fade. Again, this is evident by the LGT's higher trap speeds in the 1/4 mile. I'd still love to do 1st gear 10+ roll 2nd gear 30+ roll 3rd gear 50+ roll 5th gear 70+ roll with a stock WRX but I have a feeling the outcome would be just as you said. The first and second gear rolls, it would stay about with me until I hit third. The third and fifth gear rolls, I'd start pulling away from the WRX right away. John M, all we really need is an ECU reflash to bring boost up a bit in 1st and 2nd gear. Yeah our turbos are small, but that keeps lag down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquidiq Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='Driver72'] John M, all we really need is an ECU reflash to bring boost up a bit in 1st and 2nd gear. Yeah our turbos are small, but that keeps lag down.[/QUOTE] Agreed. I don't have a boost guage, but I'm going to assume that we aren't even hitting the full 13.5psi in 1st and 2nd. Once the reflashes come out with 16+psi in all gears, we will walk WRXs like doggies. hahaha And keep up with STi's :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenonk Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 The WRX doesnt stand much of a chance from 3rd gear out.. but I would like to say that the WRX doesnt have a problem hitting the higher speeds running from 120 to 140 mph.. the gearing on each car is different as well as weight. Overall, the GT has 0.5 litres to work with so the car will have a less of an effort push out the torque to pull away from 3k to 5k.. after 5k, the car's torque starts to drop like a rock whereas the WRX (depending on which model of the ECU you have) still keeps the torque flater at the end to redline. Keefe Keefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtguy Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='liquidiq']Agreed. I don't have a boost guage, but I'm going to assume that we aren't even hitting the full 13.5psi in 1st and 2nd. Once the reflashes come out with 16+psi in all gears, we will walk WRXs like doggies. hahaha And keep up with STi's :)[/QUOTE] And faster cars will be able to drive around the both of you and walk away. Which will then lead to more power mods. :lol: That's why I don't do them. It's like an arms race. :lol: Keep in mind also, that the STi guy you can keep up with hasn't begun to mod yet. :D Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquidiq Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 [quote name='gtguy'] Keep in mind also, that the STi guy you can keep up with hasn't begun to mod yet. :D Kevin[/QUOTE] Oh yea, I know ;) Luckily we have a good base to start with, like the STi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver72 Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 I just wish the mags would do rolling acceleration runs. Autoweek is the ONLY magazine I know of that actually TESTS cars "passing times" in the proper gear (not top gear like C&D). But my only beef with Autoweek is they only do these passing runs in 20 mph increments (like 50-70 mph). That barely gives a car a chance to stretch it's rolling speed. They should do 30-70 mph starting in 2nd gear, and 50-90 mph starting in 3rd gear, then 70-120 mph in 5th gear for cars capable of doing that. Maybe we should all write MotorTrend or someone asking for rolling acceleration tests from "proper" gears (the gears you'd really be in if looking for maximum acceleration from that speed). MotorTrends recent test of the 05 Corvette and 05 Porsche Carrera S is a perfect example why. Even though the Porsche gets to 60 mph .1 second quicker, they FINALLY pointed out for all the dimwits that think that means the Porsche can accelerate quicker, that from a roll the Corvette walks away from the Porsche at any speed. The Porsche just has the advantage of being able to launch harder. And since 99% of OWNERS of cars will almost NEVER launch their cars as hard as the magazines do, their 0-30 and 0-60 times mean little in the real world. Trap speeds in the 1/4 mile mean more, and is a better indication of real world acceleration potential, but rolling acceleration times in the proper gears would be ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenonk Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 whatever to driving fast around a turn? :p there's no driver skill involved to just hammer the gas :p jk just giving you guys all a hard time about straight line speed. Keefe Keefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 [quote name='Driver72'] John M, all we really need is an ECU reflash to bring boost up a bit in 1st and 2nd gear. Yeah our turbos are small, but that keeps lag down.[/QUOTE] I run a MBC at 17 psi. No ECU mod will give more boost or faster; I still don't have any real power in 1st and 2nd - the boost just falls off so fast. I think the Latin term is [i]turbous too tinyius[/i]. I think Subaru was trying to make a car with almost zero lag so people who'd never owned a turbo wouldn't complain about the power delivery. Those of us who know and appreciate turbos could have benefited from the stock STi turbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 I've only "run" 3 WRXs and haven't "lost" yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanoswrx Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 I have run against a Stage 1 and Stage 2 WRX, the Legacy GT I think falls somewhere in the middle of that. Of course as like stated above a few times, it really depends on what gear your in, and where you are in the power band. But overall, I think its somewhere in the middle of a Stage 1 and Stage 2 WRX. But once you get a chip for the LGT, well its all over for the Stage 2 WRX's then :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver72 Posted November 29, 2004 Author Share Posted November 29, 2004 [quote name='John M']I run a MBC at 17 psi. No ECU mod will give more boost or faster; I still don't have any real power in 1st and 2nd - the boost just falls off so fast. I think the Latin term is [i]turbous too tinyius[/i]. I think Subaru was trying to make a car with almost zero lag so people who'd never owned a turbo wouldn't complain about the power delivery. Those of us who know and appreciate turbos could have benefited from the stock STi turbo.[/QUOTE] Well, if they wanted that, they should of looked into VW's turbo and/or Volvo's turbos. Both spool up MUCH faster than our LGT's and have A LOT less lag. I think VW's reach peak torque at 1800 or 1900 rpm's Volvo's are even better as low as 1500-1600 rpm's And I'm sure they didn't drop in the STI's turbo, because what would they put in a Legacy STI then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 This is the smallest turbo you'd want to run on a 2.5 liter. Anything smaller would be really twitchy from a roll, like maintaining speed. Just a light pressure on the gas would give instant max boost. Who cares about a low torque peak if it isn't that much in the first place? 250 is barely adaquate for my tastes; I'd never want something like 190-220 no matter how soon it hit. These aren't diesels! Besides, with the MBC I have instant spool and plenty o' power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deer Killer Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 [quote name='John M']This is the smallest turbo you'd want to run on a 2.5 liter. Anything smaller would be really twitchy from a roll, like maintaining speed. Just a light pressure on the gas would give instant max boost.[/QUOTE] You only say that because you have an MBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.