amorgan93 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 comparing these 2 videos on youtube the automatic outback is about a second and a half faster than the manual outback and the guy with the manual launches at high rpm. Auto: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC_djtqMwhc]YouTube - Subaru Outback 2.5 0-60-80[/ame] 0:03-0:12.5 Manual [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxoPDCC85I0&feature=related]YouTube - 0-60 in 98 Subaru Legacy Outback[/ame] 0:03-0:14 Maybe the autos arent too bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98LGTLover Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 You have to take into account modifications.. I've seen those Outback 0-60's and I'm pretty sure both had some mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybaluga32 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 I've always hated my automatic, until recently I found out it's not as bad as I thought. You still gain speed while it's shifting at WOT and it doesn't jerk either.. That's pretty cool! I'd still rather have a manual though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zues Marine Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 The first difference between the 4EAT and 5MT is the AWD system. 5MT models use a permanent 50/50 split between the front and rear wheels, whereas models equipped with the automatic make use of the technically superior VTD system (mentioned above). The second difference is the gearing. The 4EAT uses 4 gears to make use of its power, where 5MT models make use of 5 gears. From a stop: The 4EAT (stock) is much different performance-wise than the 5MT. Models equipped with the 5MT are able to achieve their pavement-rippling sub-six second 0-60 and low 14 second ¼ mile times thanks to its ability to launch at 4000+ RPM. Models equipped with the 4EAT must use the brake-torque technique (I also take no responsibility for potential damage caused to your car using this technique), however, stock 4EATs using this method can only launch at a maximum 3200 RPM, leading to a 0-60 time in the low 7 second range and a ¼ mile in the mid-to-high 15 second range. From a roll: Judging from the very few 4EAT vs 5MT races that I have studied, a 5MT will have about a 2 car lead on a similarly equipped 4EAT in a race from 40 MPH to 100 MPH. Please note that in the few documented races known, the 4EAT begins to trail after it shifts to 3rd gear, leading me to believe that the 4EAT’s major weakness are it’s gear ratios. Stock 5MT models dyno at around 170 WHP where 4EAT models dyno at around 150 WHP. From my research, I have noticed about a 20-25 WHP difference between similarly equipped 4EAT and 5MT’s due to the extra driveline loss through the torque converter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC5.2 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 No stock second gen Outback is doing a 0-60 in sub 6 seconds, nor is it going to make 170whp. [URL="http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/proper-flip-key-interesti-159894.html"]Flip Key Development Thread[/URL] "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." - E. Hubbard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zues Marine Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 ya...that was from nabisco so i'm thinkin its was for imprezas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC5.2 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 No N/A 2.5L will make 170whp. [URL="http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/proper-flip-key-interesti-159894.html"]Flip Key Development Thread[/URL] "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." - E. Hubbard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baddog Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Maybe that was a WRX? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zues Marine Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 No N/A 2.5L will make 170whp. numbers aside that was geared more towards tranny differences... see what i did there...'geared' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC5.2 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 numbers aside that was geared more towards tranny differences... see what i did there...'geared' Seems irrelevant. As power levels increase, the difference in output between a 4EAT and 5MT increase as well. In the N/A cars, the 5MT's and 4EAT's output much closer to the same amount. That said, I don't think the 5MT is slower than the 4EAT. You don't take into consideration mileage or state of tune. If the 5MT car has a slipping clutch, has 300k, hasn't had new plugs in 100k, and is running whatever cheap transmission fluid the shop put in some unknown time before, it's definitely going to be slower than a pristine example. The same is true both ways. [URL="http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/proper-flip-key-interesti-159894.html"]Flip Key Development Thread[/URL] "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." - E. Hubbard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnumber19 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Everything else even, the 5MT would out accelerate the 4EAT simply due to gearing. Now make that a 5EAT and it may be different, extra drive train loss may be made up by much less time between gears, it'd be interesting to see. As a side question, anyone know the weight difference between the auto and manuals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stang70Fastback Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I dunno what y'all are talking about. My 4EAT Outback will just about out-nose a Veyron in the 1/4 mile, but the Veyron does pull ahead after that (probably due to the extra 12 cylinders I guess...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amorgan93 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 I dunno what y'all are talking about. My 4EAT Outback will just about out-nose a Veyron in the 1/4 mile, but the Veyron does pull ahead after that (probably due to the extra 12 cylinders I guess...) thats cause your spoiler isnt big enough. see the veyron has a big spoiler. it adds 200hp. you need to add a big spoiler and the exhaust HAS to be big enough that you can at least stick your head in the end, otherwise your motor isnt getting proper air flow. Also if you take your hood off it makes air circulate better around your motor and so you get another 300hp. And see autozone sells racing seat covers. They dont say "racing" for nothing. Once you add these its the same as adding a turbo to your car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnumber19 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I dunno what y'all are talking about. My 4EAT Outback will just about out-nose a Veyron in the 1/4 mile, but the Veyron does pull ahead after that (probably due to the extra 12 cylinders I guess...) Saw the McClaren F1 mile drag on Top Gear, sounds like your in a similar boat. It helps you have a pretty big weight advantage on the Veyron! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subikid90 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I have driven both a MT and AT, the AT is sluggish compared to the MT. Its like the AT has vtec kicking in at 4k yo lol -Subikid90 1997 Legacy GT 5spd & EJ251 w/EJ25D heads ~10.5CR 1998 Legacy GT Limited waiting for EJ22T hybrid swap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLegacy99 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 ........my 5MT LGT is worlds and I mean worlds faster than my 4EAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baddog Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Would all of this have to do with less rotating mass inside of the MT over the AT? I would think the AT has more internals and overall it takes more oil doesn't it? Rotating mass is huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amorgan93 Posted February 1, 2011 Author Share Posted February 1, 2011 Would all of this have to do with less rotating mass inside of the MT over the AT? I would think the AT has more internals and overall it takes more oil doesn't it? Rotating mass is huge. yea more rotating mass, and the transmission itself weighs a lot more. Plus the weight of 10 quarts of ATF. Much more complex than a manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.