Help me understand why Subarus are so slow on a road course

[Boostin1657615274]

How many people here have actually driven VIR? From firsthand experience, to those of you saying it favors cars with power... my respons is "well sort of." But I have seen some mini coopers tear that track up. It's not a track that gives AWD any advantage, that's for sure.

[TRS]

lbs per bhp is not the complete picture. You can have gobs of power but you'll have to do more work on the chassis and drivetrain to overcome mass.

...which is why I mentioned momentum ( p = m • v ) more than once and pointed out how the Boxster looks somewhat weak based on lbs per hp but it's almost at the top of the list of quickest lap times due to its light weight (minimized need to control momentum). Also explains the performance of Mini Coopers observed by Boostin: high weight to hp ratio but low gross weight.

[Penguin]

On an unrelated note I found myself drawn to the Ford dealership nearest me last night, looking at a black on black Mustang GT with a 6 speed, and 3.55 rear end. I think I might be getting the itch.

[Tracer-X]

Speaking of that, what ever happened to the guy who was going to test drive one and film it?

[fishbone]

He bought it but won't admit it

[fredraud]

I agree with fishbone awhile back sawing Subaru has fallen behind, ESP compared to ford.

1: interior technology

I recently drove a fusion with the sync nice feature. Subaru just started with iPod integration.

Auto dimming mirrors

 

2: engines

 

Seen the new f150?? Or thier line of engines..the ecoboost is promising. I see no direct injection in Subaru..

 

My2 cents

Mike

[Merc6]

I thought the diesel was direct inject...o wait North America won't see it . N/M

[fredraud]

I thought the diesel was direct inject...o wait North America won't see it . N/M

 

Direct injection gasoline, and direct injection diesel are 2 different animals. Vw has had tdi since mid 90

 

Did I mention that the ecoboost series also has independently variable cams? Ejs only have one.

Even before that hondas had thier b18 series with thier variable valve timing long before subarus avs.

 

" my vtec just kicked in yo!"

[Sydtron]

On an unrelated note I found myself drawn to the Ford dealership nearest me last night, looking at a black on black Mustang GT with a 6 speed, and 3.55 rear end. I think I might be getting the itch.

 

Only problem is you'd still be driving a Mustang.

[Penguin]

Why would that be a problem? If it is fun to drive, and I can afford it who cares what it is?

 

I don't give a shit if it can't go anywhere in the snow. I own a 4X4 truck with snow service A/T tires on it and 400lbs of rock salt in the bed for snow.

 

I don't care if it doesn't have 4 doors or a real back seat. I don't don't have kids, and if I do need to ferry around 4 adults or kids in the future well the same 4X4 truck has 4 doors too.

 

I don't care if it has a meager trunk, oh wait it has 13 some odd cubic feet of trunk space. Plenty for my use, since I own a truck for really bulky items.

 

I don't care if it gets crappy fuel economy..... oh dammit with the 6 speed manual the Mustang GT with a 412hp V8 gets better mileage than your ugly, crappy 2010 LGT does. That's kind of pathetic for Subaru isn't it? I also have the wife's little Scion to run around in if I really want to save gas.

 

I don't really care that it has a Ford badge on it. I'm not into cars for snob appeal, which is funny to have brought up by someone driving a Subaru considering the public perception of Subaru being cars for old people, lesbians, and that crappy actor who was in Crocodile Dundee.

 

I don't care that driving an American Muscle car is associated with having a mullet, drinking copious amounts of cheap beer, living in a trailer park, and carrying a switchblade in my sock. In fact I find the stereotype kind of amusing.

[nemo]

[fishbone]

Ford had 2 chances to win us over and has screwed us every time. Ain't getting a third chance. Only way I'd get one if it was EU-spec.

[CTATV]

Not gonna see snow and ice. That would be more in our favor. I was gonna say never seen a mag do it but they did with evo/sti stock and winters installed.

 

 

wow, that video/test basically yielded no results of any kind for anything. they said the evo ran loose then said it slid nice in gravel mode. "we're on the snow course lets run it in gravel mode instead of snow mode" :lol:

[fishbone]

Because snow mode was supposebly worse? Are we contesting the STi is more well mannered?

[Sydtron]

I don't care if it gets crappy fuel economy..... oh dammit with the 6 speed manual the Mustang GT with a 412hp V8 gets better mileage than your ugly, crappy 2010 LGT does. That's kind of pathetic for Subaru isn't it? I also have the wife's little Scion to run around in if I really want to save gas.

 

ouch, baby, ouch. Sorry I struck a nerve. Also if you think it gets better mileage, more power to you.

 

Still, for me, no matter how fast a Mustang is it's in the same boat as BMWs. It's a stigma I don't want to be associated with, no matter how sweet I look in shotgunning a Schlitz.

 

Plus, again, real world the Mustang is lightyears slower than it is on the track. Test drive one and check out the axle tramp and ask yourself how much you want to risk having fun on the road when the rear of the car reminds you constantly of it being a live axle. They're just magazine number jerk off cars for people who can't afford them, because the second you can you hop in one and realize how utterly worthless it is on the street.

[Penguin]

ouch, baby, ouch. Sorry I struck a nerve. Also if you think it gets better mileage, more power to you.

 

Still, for me, no matter how fast a Mustang is it's in the same boat as BMWs. It's a stigma I don't want to be associated with, no matter how sweet I look in shotgunning a Schlitz.

 

Plus, again, real world the Mustang is lightyears slower than it is on the track. Test drive one and check out the axle tramp and ask yourself how much you want to risk having fun on the road when the rear of the car reminds you constantly of it being a live axle. They're just magazine number jerk off cars for people who can't afford them, because the second you can you hop in one and realize how utterly worthless it is on the street.

 

:lol:

 

So not one iota of proof on your part for the ill handling claims, you've never driven a 2011 GT but you are willing to write it off completely due to a preconceived notion?

 

You sir are a confirmed Subaru Fan-Boi, and an insecure one at that given your concern for public perception about what you drive. Are you really such a shallow little lady-boy that you worry about what some stranger thinks about you because of what you drive? Trust me when I tell you they don't really care, and if they do their opinion is not worth considering because they are just as shallow and stupid as you seem to be. I guess you probably obsess over what kind of clothes you wear and what your hair style looks like to impress strangers that don't care as well? What a painful existence, like being perpetually stuck in adolescence seeking the approval of peers. I'm sure glad my balls dropped allowing me to not care so much about that kind of hollow vapid bullshit anymore.

 

I also love the "real world" caveat you throw in there, like maybe a test track is some sort of fairy tale land where the results obtained are not in any way relevant. I guess this is how you sleep at night when a Subaru bombs a test and ends up sucking ass. You just keep telling yourself that in the real world it isn't true, and that all the other cars you don't like will some how be hobbled by some perceived deficiency "in the real world". So basically, much like a child, you cling to denial in the vain hope that if you convince yourself it is true that it will in reality be how you would like it to turn out. That is kind of sad and pathetic, but that is the metal state of the hard core dedicated excuse making brand loyalist Fan-Boi.

 

As for the fuel mileage, it's not me that believes the Mustang GT with a 6 speed gets better mileage than your 2010 LGT. The EPA does, you know the ones that conduct the testing procedure for all those things called automobiles to establish fuel economy ratings? Let me guess, they are living in a fairy tale land where the results are not real because the results of their testing don't confirm what you would like the results to be?

[Sydtron]

I have driven one. Live axles are find for the drag strip or a well maintained track, but for the street axle tramp kind of makes them terrible.

 

Sorry you're so stuck up on people who defend Subarus that you were lead to believe I am defending it -- just saying the reality of a Mustang is much different than a review of one.

[Penguin]

At one time I had a 1994 Z28, I am familiar with live rear axle handling characteristics. They can be made to handle, albeit with some downside on less than perfect pavement. However, the setup is not some sort of deathtrap and as noted by pretty much every comparison test (including those conducted on public roads with less than perfect pavement) the new Mustang is more than capable of putting power down, stopping, and holding an intended line around corners quite well on the street thank you.

[Spoonwacker]

I also love the "real world" caveat you throw in there, like maybe a test track is some sort of fairy tale land where the results obtained are not in any way relevant. I guess this is how you sleep at night when a Subaru bombs a test and ends up sucking ass. You just keep telling yourself that in the real world it isn't true, and that all the other cars you don't like will some how be hobbled by some perceived deficiency "in the real world". So basically, much like a child, you cling to denial in the vain hope that if you convince yourself it is true that it will in reality be how you would like it to turn out. That is kind of sad and pathetic, but that is the metal state of the hard core dedicated excuse making brand loyalist Fan-Boi.

 

Dammit. I agree with most of what you've said in this thread, but the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that test track results are, in fact, not relevant for most people's "real-world" driving. Your average track is going to be much better maintained than your average driving road. The track will usually have runoff and sand traps instead of trees, railings, and buildings, so you can drive closer to the limit with less danger to live, limb, and sheetmetal. So the driving style isn't the same. The mag says that VIR mimicks the kind of driving roads they like, saying that the test should give an idea how the cars would handle those roads. "Spirited" drives are fun, but, at least around here, they happen on roads that have little in the way of straights, or if there are long straights, we're usually not pushing hard because that's where there are also driveways and cross streets (yeah, we're pussies :lol:loud). Real roads have a lot more variables, too - the test track won't tell you how the car reacts when, mid-corner, you need to change your line because there's a pedestrian, cyclist, or deer where you were about to put your car.

 

The most useful application of test-track data is to tell you how the car will work...at a track. But then the tire issue comes up, because if you're planning on even semi-regularly tracking your car, chances are you are going to have dedicated track tires...making a test using OEM tires less useful. And if you're not regularly attending trackdays, the lap time doesn't matter a bit, because the biggest thing slowing you down is going the be the meat in the seat.

 

I'm not ashamed to admit that a 2011 Mustang with a decent driver will beat my pants off at the track, but I won't be trading my car for one any time soon.

[Penguin]

Oh I'm not implying that test track numbers directly translate to absolute on road performance. However a car that is easy to drive on the track and inspires confidence will also likely do the same on the road.

 

Put another way if the performance potential of a vehicle is user friendly mere mortals are more likely to be able to use that performance on the street. From all that I have read the new Mustang does pretty well on that front with some testers going so far as to say the car is actually easy to push hard on back roads. One review (Popular Mechanics) stated the rear axle is just planted even on bad pavement.

 

I just find it funny how people get hung up on live axles, even when it is proven that they can be made to handle quite well. Kind of like the same individuals become indignant at the thought of a pushrod V8 eating their lunch. Just because it is unsophisticated tech doesn't mean it can't be very effective.

[Spoonwacker]

Yep, good points. Though I did read that the V6 is supposedly better for back-roads shenanigans, due having less weight up front...

[Penguin]

I'd believe that. I would gladly trade off a little bit of an edge at steering transitions for that wailing V8 soundtrack and the extra thrust on more open roads like we have in my part of the country. Lots of long sweepers, with short straits, added with big hills, not a lot of tight decreasing radius stuff though.

[ehsnils]

Some people actually like the rear axle behavior. And if you don't you can always build a watt link.

 

And maybe Penguin is more like Steve McQueen than we thought?

[Power6]

Well this conversation took a turn for the better. Good discussion here.

 

Those hating on the Mustang don't really appreciate how much effort Ford put into improving the chassis dynamics of the latest Mustang. I've only driven a penalty-box rental version, but it feels pretty damn good.

 

Oh I'm not implying that test track numbers directly translate to absolute on road performance. However a car that is easy to drive on the track and inspires confidence will also likely do the same on the road.

 

This is one area where the Subaru probably does have an advantage. Understeer and AWD are pretty reassuring on the street. I have a feeling pushing a 5.0 on a wet backroad might take a little more nerve.

 

It does signal the end of an era though, when the STI and Evo hit the American streets in 03/04 the performance was beyond anything in the price range. The AWD and four doors was just a practical bonus. Never mind that one rode like and ox-cart and the other had no radio.

 

But the Subaru still has AWD, 4 doors, hatchback/wagon configuartions and other practical advantages, while the Mustang has never been much of a family car. Penguin your "I have a sweet pickup truck blahblahblah" argument is pretty useless in this discussion, I don't think anyone is out to debate whether you should buy a Mustang or not, if you like it have at it. Your specific situation does not negate that a Mustang happens to be less practical as an all around car than any Subaru. That doesn't matter for everyone, but still a valid point, whether Penguin has a pickup truck or not. Too bad Subaru doesn't make an all out impractical RWD car so we could see how they could compete...maybe someday that will come...

 

I just find it funny how people get hung up on live axles, even when it is proven that they can be made to handle quite well. Kind of like the same individuals become indignant at the thought of a pushrod V8 eating their lunch. Just because it is unsophisticated tech doesn't mean it can't be very effective.

 

Funny you mention this, as Ford has seen fit to throw 4 cams and 32 valves at their 5.0 ;-) Pushrod argument is old though, it has packaging benefits but higher valvetrain mass limiting revs, nothing much about that has changed in decades.

 

Just as the live axle argument is old too. There are no huge advancements in technology here, well other than Ford finally using 2 arms and a panhard bar since they sent the fox chassis off to die. That and good damping. I totally buy that they have done good things with the live axle.

 

However there is a reason performance cars tend to have lots of aluminum in their suspension parts, even though the cost is way beyond steel. The Live axle is just one huge iron boat anchor, and it isn't independent. As good as it can be it is a big 'ol compromise.

 

Penguin it is well known that a live axle can handle well, tires are always generally square to the road surface and alignment doesn't change with suspension travel. The problem has always been ride and handling on imperfect surfaces due to non-independence and high unsprung weight. A racetrack can't really bring that out. I don't have enough seat time in the latest Mustang to know how well it does on bumpy roads.

 

Too bad Fords only attempt at IRS was bolting the old TBird suspension in.

 

Yep, good points. Though I did read that the V6 is supposedly better for back-roads shenanigans, due having less weight up front...

 

I would be interested in a 4-banger ECOBoost Mustang! Probably pointless for Ford to do since they have the V8, but would be cool. Rip out the crap seats and steering wheel and put something proper in, would be a winner in my book.

[Penguin]

Well this conversation took a turn for the better. Good discussion here.

 

Those hating on the Mustang don't really appreciate how much effort Ford put into improving the chassis dynamics of the latest Mustang. I've only driven a penalty-box rental version, but it feels pretty damn good.

 

 

 

This is one area where the Subaru probably does have an advantage. Understeer and AWD are pretty reassuring on the street. I have a feeling pushing a 5.0 on a wet backroad might take a little more nerve.

 

It does signal the end of an era though, when the STI and Evo hit the American streets in 03/04 the performance was beyond anything in the price range. The AWD and four doors was just a practical bonus. Never mind that one rode like and ox-cart and the other had no radio.

 

But the Subaru still has AWD, 4 doors, hatchback/wagon configuartions and other practical advantages, while the Mustang has never been much of a family car. Penguin your "I have a sweet pickup truck blahblahblah" argument is pretty useless in this discussion, I don't think anyone is out to debate whether you should buy a Mustang or not, if you like it have at it. Your specific situation does not negate that a Mustang happens to be less practical as an all around car than any Subaru. That doesn't matter for everyone, but still a valid point, whether Penguin has a pickup truck or not. Too bad Subaru doesn't make an all out impractical RWD car so we could see how they could compete...maybe someday that will come...

 

 

 

Funny you mention this, as Ford has seen fit to throw 4 cams and 32 valves at their 5.0 ;-) Pushrod argument is old though, it has packaging benefits but higher valvetrain mass limiting revs, nothing much about that has changed in decades.

 

Just as the live axle argument is old too. There are no huge advancements in technology here, well other than Ford finally using 2 arms and a panhard bar since they sent the fox chassis off to die. That and good damping. I totally buy that they have done good things with the live axle.

 

However there is a reason performance cars tend to have lots of aluminum in their suspension parts, even though the cost is way beyond steel. The Live axle is just one huge iron boat anchor, and it isn't independent. As good as it can be it is a big 'ol compromise.

 

Penguin it is well known that a live axle can handle well, tires are always generally square to the road surface and alignment doesn't change with suspension travel. The problem has always been ride and handling on imperfect surfaces due to non-independence and high unsprung weight. A racetrack can't really bring that out. I don't have enough seat time in the latest Mustang to know how well it does on bumpy roads.

 

Too bad Fords only attempt at IRS was bolting the old TBird suspension in.

 

 

I wouldn't claim the Mustang is more practical than an Imprezza or a Legacy, but some of the other posters in this thread seem incensed at the thought of owning a coupe with a back seat fit only for hauling luggage. Not everyone needs four doors, and not everyone has to have one vehicle.

 

Would I pick a Mustang GT as an only car? No, not after owning that 1994 Z28 as my only car. Not real practical sometimes. I always found it kind of fun to push that car a little on wet roads, but in my misspent youth I kind of enjoyed the challenges of driving sideways and keeping the car under control.

 

Ditto on the crappy attempt at an IRS by Ford, I remember driving a 2002 or 2003 Ford Mustang Cobra convertible that the BMW dealer I worked for took in on trade. It was fun, but the IRS made no difference as far as I could tell, of course with the roof cut off you could feel the whole car squirm around trying to put down all that power. It was really kind of spooky, still fun to drive though in a loud tire smoking, mullet in the breeze, Bud Light pounding, jean shorts wearing kind of way.