SUBE555 Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 I'm with many of the others here, call me a little biased because I already have one on order (site unseen other than an OB XT at the Chicago Show) and I know from everything I've seen and heard, it will be a wonderful machine. I'll agree, it should be a nice upgrade in ability from the CL. The GT is a touring and handling car (some have compared it closest to BMW) and it should be quick in the 400m dash with potential of high 13's. It's just not truly designed for that outright. BTW, don't get an AEM intake for Subaru forced induction engines, in most cases, they don't like them one bit and tend to spit and sputter. AEM makes some great products, just not that great for Subaru. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Zevil Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='acuraPwr']Wow lots of haters out there. I got my figure from [url]http://www.prestage.com/Car+Math/ET+and+Horsepower+Calculators/Calculate+ET+and+MPH+using+HP+and+Weight+/default.aspx[/url]. I took 250 and subtracted 17% for drive loss. 17% is standard for fwd, 22% is standard for rwd and I have no clue about awd so I used 17% (probably more) for drive loss. I should have specified I have a 2002 CLS 260hp 232 ft-lbs, with only an aem cold air intake. I didn't buy it for speed, as I put over 117k miles on it in 2.5 yrs. That's why i'm selling, just time for something new. The cl is not an accord, not even close. You're comparing Toyota's to Lexus and Nissan to Infinity, Honda to Acura is not the same. I would really like to have the S4 but with my traveling it's just not practical or economical right now. The legacy is a very nice looking car, but I refuse to purchase anything that is slower than what I currently drive. If the numbers from C&D come out that say it's 13.8 im sold, and i'll have one in a month. Like I said, i'm new to Subaru and no one really knows the answer to parasitic loss with awd. I would like to see some numbers. I hope I didn't offend anyone.[/quote] Didn't mean to hate.. wasn't the point at all. The figures that I found were when I was at work so I didn't have a lot of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady_bunch Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='acuraPwr']I got my figure from [url]http://www.prestage.com/Car+Math/ET+and+Horsepower+Calculators/Calculate+ET+and+MPH+using+HP+and+Weight+/default.aspx[/url].[/quote] [quote name='prestage website']However, this formula tends to be pretty close (+/- 5%) for cars that are setup for drag racing.[/quote] At the risk of revealing my ignorance about such matters... here goes: I thought torque has a greater impact on your acceleration times 0-60 and quarter mile than HP and that HP impacted your upper end. Shouldn't torque be factored into that equation to be more accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apexjapan Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 Before this issue gets too contentious, all bear in mind that different strokes for different folks. As much as I love my leggy twinscroll, I'd hate if it was the only choice out there (at least it would be a great choice, but...). Now, onto the comparisons. The SRT-4 is f4ster than all ( :twisted: ), yet nobody brings that up as a viable competitor to the Legacy GT. Why's that? Because it's always about the actual driving experience. Magazine racing is just that, magazine racing. We actually are all quite different when we actually put up some cash. Now, if you cannot tell the difference between the Honda and the Subaru when you test drive them, then buy whichever suits your budget best. OTOH, I wager a test drive of both back-to-back will be different enough that even the fluffiest-headed soccer mom will know what is best for her. To be honest, the last thing you want to buy a car for is magazine numbers. There have been quite a few cars that I have driven that had some amazing magazine numbers, and were a complete and utter let-down in person. YMMV, of course, but a good quarter-mile time doesn't really make up for dodgy interiors, squeaky dashes, flexible bodies, torque-steer, huge amounts of wind noise, uncomfortable rides and whatnot. And, IMHO, a nav system has never made a car feel better or worse to drive. ;) Cheers, Paul Hansen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Freak Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote]acuraPwr wrote: I got my figure from [url]http://www.prestage.com/Car+Math/ET+and+Horsepower+Calculators/Calculate+ET+and+MPH+using+HP+and+Weight+/default.aspx[/url]. [/quote] I would be wary of using this site. First, note it only claims to be accurate to +/-5% for cars that are configured for drag racing not regular street cars. Second, if we take a WRX with no driver (3085 lbs - Edmunds.com) and assume losses of 17% we have our best-case scenario with the most wheel hp and the lightest vehicle. The above site predicts a 14.79 sec 1/4 mile while C&D get 14.1. That's already at the 5% margin without correcting for the driver’s weight or using a more realistic loss factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='goneskiian'][quote name='gtguy']If I were shopping in the S4 range, fiscally, that's another $15K over the Legacy GT for a very fast car.[/quote] Kevin - I think you need to double check the pricing on that S4. If you were to get a new one you're looking at more like $20k more than the Legacy. All that for the wonderful German reliability. :lol: Remember I said I'd be comparing my new GT to a buddy of mine who bought a 2004 S4 Avant a month or so ago. Well...his S4 is already sucking down the oil. He's got to put a quart or so in every couple weeks now. I know the Audi dealership will take care of it for him for now, but what about a few years from now? Will he have to replace this $55K automobile because he can't afford to maintain it? We'll see. -Ian[/quote] Audi covers everything, all maintience for 4 years/48,000 miles - they even replace windshield wipers as needed - all free of charge. After your warrenty is up, well forget about it, try $85 oil changes, $1000+ for a timing belt (which seem to be needed to be changed somewhere between 50K-60K miles on TT's), scheduled maintiance is close to or over the $1000 mark after warrenty runs out. Everything is super expensive after your warrenty runs out. I been reseaching the Audi TT 3.2 for over a year now, and with my job I am in now, had the heart breaking realization that it is just too much $$$ for me, and if I do go for it - after the cost of my bills, insurance, and car payments - I'll have almost nothing else money wise to live off of. So here I am researching the Legacy GT Limited - same hp, more torque - similar lux features - hopefully the test drive will make me forget all about the TT. - Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acuraPwr Posted June 8, 2004 Author Share Posted June 8, 2004 Yes that site predicts 14.79 for a stock WRX which is closer to reality than the C&D 14.1. I can't ever recall a stock wrx doing less than 14.4 and that driver was seasoned. We all know that C&D gets their numbers from driving the car like they stole it, which is the point at the track but even good drivers that I know can't achieve those numbers. If C&D says the leg will do 13.8 than i'll add .5 and that's what I expect to do. Apexjapan - yes the srt-4 is faster than all but its still a neon, cheap plastic and the resale value is well.. most likely not going to be good. I'm in the same market as you all here. I want a nice looking, decent gas guzzling, great handling vehicle that is NOT FWD, and with a few mods will reach mid 13's for my daily driver. My wife wants the S4 but I told her to wait until next week when my dealer gets the gt sedan in stock. They have me down for a drive, and i'll drag her along to see what she thinks. It's my choice altimetly but when you're married it's hard to put your foot down without a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombatCQB Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='acuraPwr']Yes that site predicts 14.79 for a stock WRX which is closer to reality than the C&D 14.1. I can't ever recall a stock wrx doing less than 14.4 and that driver was seasoned. We all know that C&D gets their numbers from driving the car like they stole it, which is the point at the track but even good drivers that I know can't achieve those numbers. If C&D says the leg will do 13.8 than i'll add .5 and that's what I expect to do. Apexjapan - yes the srt-4 is faster than all but its still a neon, cheap plastic and the resale value is well.. most likely not going to be good. I'm in the same market as you all here. I want a nice looking, decent gas guzzling, great handling vehicle that is NOT FWD, and with a few mods will reach mid 13's for my daily driver. My wife wants the S4 but I told her to wait until next week when my dealer gets the gt sedan in stock. They have me down for a drive, and i'll drag her along to see what she thinks. It's my choice altimetly but when you're married it's hard to put your foot down without a fight.[/quote]I've always been impressed by the S4, but I'll never get one not because of cost or performance. It's an image issue. I just don't see myself in one and the name/image draws too much (not always positive) attention from others. People just have preconceptions about certain cars. If my girlfriend wanted an S4 for performance, I'll be real happy that she finally understands the need for speed but tell her there is more to be had for less in other cars. If she wanted an S4 for the name, I'll have to remind her of what other lux goods she can buy with the money she'll dump to keep the S4 nameplate. Currently she likes the mini, so I think I'm still happy about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Zevil Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 So you would be considering a used S4 or a new GT sedan right acura? The reason that I ask is because of how much more spendy the S4 is. I didn't know if you would be able to afford the S4 because I know there are quite a few of us, myself include ;) that wouldn't be able to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Freak Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='acuraPwr']Yes that site predicts 14.79 for a stock WRX which is closer to reality than the C&D 14.1. I can't ever recall a stock wrx doing less than 14.4 and that driver was seasoned. We all know that C&D gets their numbers from driving the car like they stole it, which is the point at the track but even good drivers that I know can't achieve those numbers. If C&D says the leg will do 13.8 than i'll add .5 and that's what I expect to do. [/quote] The equation they are using is a gross approximation nonetheless. It is making assumptions about the torque at which the wheels break free which differs drastically between AWD and FWD or even RWD. I also ran the numbers for a BMW 330xi. Motor Trend got 14.4 second while this site predicts 15.5 seconds with the same conservative assumptions I made before. Maybe if I get time and if there is enough interest I will put together a post explaining all the physics and equations that go in to acceleration times. Anyway, as has been said before the S4 is a different class of car. An A4 3.0 Quattro, 330xi, or even a R32 is probably a fairer comparison to the Legacy. I simply cannot find another new car with 250 hp or greater and AWD for at this price range. Of course you could talk about a STI or Evolution but they are not as refined and are more one sided cars. For those reasons the Legacy does impress me. However, if you want S4 performance and can afford it I would go for it. It's a great car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 Funny, according to that equations, the FXT does the 1/4 in 14.44@94.37mph. :lol: Using that formula to speculate a car's speed is ludacris. You need to do what Paul said and drive the car for youself. Why all the obsession over 1/4 mile times anyway? I could really care less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBY Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 [quote name='Dr. Zevil']So you would be considering a used S4[/quote] Be warned the cost to replace the Turbo's is around $6k and they are a known reliability problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7stars Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 AWD helps reduce 1/4m times by as much as 1 second because of 60ft times in the 1.8 range where as FWD cars are around 2.2-2.4. The traction loss from FWD also prevents you from being in a good power band to start off since you have to launch lightly, feather the clutch, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteVTEC Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 14.9?? what the heck...even the [b]AUTO[/b] GT should be able to do better than that, LOL. Those cheesy horsepower vs ET calculators are NOT accurate. What about powerband? What about torque? What about GEARING, and how well it matches said powerband? What about traction issues? FWD vs RWD vs AWD? It doesn't account for any of that. They'll get you in the general ballpark, but that's about it. Anyhow, I already did a bunch of calculations using CarTest2000 software which is [b]MUCH[/b] more elaborate, complex, and accurate than something like that. I think the autos will be doing mid/high-14's, and that the manuals should be able to do low-14's, or maybe even break into the high-13's. Posted a thread about it here awhile back... [url]http://www.legacysti.com/viewtopic.php?t=561[/url] Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.