I am sick of hearing Performance/Handling
#1
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick of hearing Performance/Handling
It is not so much that I am sick of hearing about Performance and Handling but rather I wanted more information.
I read Road/Kills allot and always hear some WRX or other chime in about how fast the WRX is or how it out performs everything in 'handling'. Well, I did allot of research on the web and results tend to vary a bit. Even with Motortrend where I got allot of info the same vehicle could vary slightly in the next report. I beleive this is due to external factors beyond the car itself: driver, weather, altitude, etc.
This is what I formulated:
2001 WS6 TA
0 to 60 5.0 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 107
skidpad .84g (another said .88g)
60 to 0 121 feet
600ft 66 mph
2004 GTO
0 to 60 5.3 sec
1/4 13.6 @ 105
skidpad .80g
60 to 0 120 feet
600ft 63.5 mph
2003 Cobra SVT
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 109
skidpad .85g
60 to 0 121 feet
600ft 64.1 mph
2003 C5 Corvette (sorry someone else can do the Z06)
0 to 60 4.7 sec
1/4 13 @ 110
skidpad .88g
60 to 0 115 feet
600ft 66.4 mph
2004 WRX STi
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.2 @ 105
skidpad .9g
60 to 0 111 feet
600ft 69.1 mph
2003 EVO VIII
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 105
skidpad ???
60 to 0 106 feet
600ft 71.4 mph
*2002 Porsche GT2
0 to 60 3.8 sec
1/4 12.1 @ 120
skidpad ???
60 to 0 107 feet
600ft 68.3 mph
For those that want to call BS I will include many of the links I used. Or better yet. Call BS and provide your link to back it up. I welcome it
I read Road/Kills allot and always hear some WRX or other chime in about how fast the WRX is or how it out performs everything in 'handling'. Well, I did allot of research on the web and results tend to vary a bit. Even with Motortrend where I got allot of info the same vehicle could vary slightly in the next report. I beleive this is due to external factors beyond the car itself: driver, weather, altitude, etc.
This is what I formulated:
2001 WS6 TA
0 to 60 5.0 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 107
skidpad .84g (another said .88g)
60 to 0 121 feet
600ft 66 mph
2004 GTO
0 to 60 5.3 sec
1/4 13.6 @ 105
skidpad .80g
60 to 0 120 feet
600ft 63.5 mph
2003 Cobra SVT
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 109
skidpad .85g
60 to 0 121 feet
600ft 64.1 mph
2003 C5 Corvette (sorry someone else can do the Z06)
0 to 60 4.7 sec
1/4 13 @ 110
skidpad .88g
60 to 0 115 feet
600ft 66.4 mph
2004 WRX STi
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.2 @ 105
skidpad .9g
60 to 0 111 feet
600ft 69.1 mph
2003 EVO VIII
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 105
skidpad ???
60 to 0 106 feet
600ft 71.4 mph
*2002 Porsche GT2
0 to 60 3.8 sec
1/4 12.1 @ 120
skidpad ???
60 to 0 107 feet
600ft 68.3 mph
For those that want to call BS I will include many of the links I used. Or better yet. Call BS and provide your link to back it up. I welcome it
#2
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LINKS:
link vette and cobra
link wrx and evo
link GTO
link to porsche
evo viii link
multiple links for wrx and other
ws6/ss link
ws6/ta link
ws6 link
few more to come. time for some zzzzz's
link vette and cobra
link wrx and evo
link GTO
link to porsche
evo viii link
multiple links for wrx and other
ws6/ss link
ws6/ta link
ws6 link
few more to come. time for some zzzzz's
Last edited by ActionJack; 05-22-2004 at 11:18 PM.
#3
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To anyone who thinks that an STI (or EVO...GOD I hate the EVO) is a better car than any of the LS1's I offer this 3-step remedy:
1 - Drive an STI (or...ugh...EVO)
2 - Then drive ANY LS1
3 - Then tell me with a straight face you would actually buy an STI or EVO over the LS1.
I'd bet money you can't.
I haven't driven the EVO (it's a mitsubishi...on that fact alone, in my mind, it's a write-off), but I very recently drove an STI...I think it's very over-hyped. Yeah it's damn fast, but it feels exactly like it is - an overpowed sedan. Just can't match the feel of a finely tuned sports car.
I need no links or proof to convince me of what my instincts told me from the beginning.
1 - Drive an STI (or...ugh...EVO)
2 - Then drive ANY LS1
3 - Then tell me with a straight face you would actually buy an STI or EVO over the LS1.
I'd bet money you can't.
I haven't driven the EVO (it's a mitsubishi...on that fact alone, in my mind, it's a write-off), but I very recently drove an STI...I think it's very over-hyped. Yeah it's damn fast, but it feels exactly like it is - an overpowed sedan. Just can't match the feel of a finely tuned sports car.
I need no links or proof to convince me of what my instincts told me from the beginning.
#4
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
don't dog on the sti and the evo so bad, they are great cars to drive, but they are based off of a different format than a f-body. I do like my camaro more, but for an all around car my wrx was a better daily driver. The reason why I sold it was that the tranny was crap in it, and after it breaking 3 times in 9 months I was told no more warranty on the tranny so byebye subie, hello LS1.
#5
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blakbird24
Yeah it's damn fast, but it feels exactly like it is - an overpowed sedan. Just can't match the feel of a finely tuned sports car.
#7
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ActionJack
2003 C5 Corvette (sorry someone else can do the Z06)
0 to 60 4.7 sec
1/4 13 @ 110
skidpad .88g
60 to 0 115 feet
600ft 66.4 mph
2003 EVO VIII
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 105
skidpad ???
60 to 0 106 feet
600ft 71.4 mph
*2002 Porsche GT2
0 to 60 3.8 sec
1/4 12.1 @ 120
skidpad ???
60 to 0 107 feet
600ft 68.3 mph
For those that want to call BS I will include many of the links I used. Or better yet. Call BS and provide your link to back it up. I welcome it
0 to 60 4.7 sec
1/4 13 @ 110
skidpad .88g
60 to 0 115 feet
600ft 66.4 mph
2003 EVO VIII
0 to 60 4.9 sec
1/4 13.1 @ 105
skidpad ???
60 to 0 106 feet
600ft 71.4 mph
*2002 Porsche GT2
0 to 60 3.8 sec
1/4 12.1 @ 120
skidpad ???
60 to 0 107 feet
600ft 68.3 mph
For those that want to call BS I will include many of the links I used. Or better yet. Call BS and provide your link to back it up. I welcome it
Come on... Ok.. f-body's and vette's are crap. But do you seriosly really believe that EVO would beat GT2 in BRAKING and by 3MPH (!!!) in a SLALOM??
That just shows that magazines are being paid to produce results car makers would like you to believe. Pure marketing & deceptive advertisement. In this particular case it's pretty simple - Mitsubishi would like a certain group of people to believe that EVO is in the same class as some high-end porsches....
Trending Topics
#8
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to see you drive an Fbody through a wet road course, and then the WRX through the same course.
You don't think the f-body was intended to go down the drag strip?
I'm not defending any argument about better handling or a skidpad performance. But I'd pay you some bones if you could make a stock fbody run through that course faster than the stock WRX. Have you ever taken a RWD truck on ice/snow?
And I seriously hope those numbers AREN'T right, since the GT-2 is pretty much a supercar, from what I understand.
You don't think the f-body was intended to go down the drag strip?
I'm not defending any argument about better handling or a skidpad performance. But I'd pay you some bones if you could make a stock fbody run through that course faster than the stock WRX. Have you ever taken a RWD truck on ice/snow?
And I seriously hope those numbers AREN'T right, since the GT-2 is pretty much a supercar, from what I understand.
#10
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas (Bush/Tollway)
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what nobody ever put into consideratoin here is looks. if a van ran a 12.8 stopped in 115 feet and pulled .9 gs would you buy it. f no
oh yeh and if my car was supposed to run a 13.1 stock what is wrong with me. i call bs on that and that only.
oh yeh and if my car was supposed to run a 13.1 stock what is wrong with me. i call bs on that and that only.
Last edited by dubs6; 05-23-2004 at 11:59 PM.
#11
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by apathy
I would like to see you drive an Fbody through a wet road course, and then the WRX through the same course.
Besides who cares how a car performs in the rain? Anyone who drives like that in the rain deserves whatever painful end they find. My T/A has seen rain twice in it's life, and I *** my best to keep that number where it's at.
Originally Posted by apathy
I'm not defending any argument about better handling or a skidpad performance. But I'd pay you some bones if you could make a stock fbody run through that course faster than the stock WRX. Have you ever taken a RWD truck on ice/snow?
#13
TECH Resident
iTrader: (165)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NNJ
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he was so sick of hearing it that he had make others hear these terrible words rather than forget about it and make people argue about it....v8s alwasy gunna **** on the 4 bangers no matter what done deal
#19
TECH Addict
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fat Chance Hotel
Posts: 2,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's one thing that's always been universal and that is...Porche's brakes are the best factory brakes in the industry. I have a jar full of old fillings to prove it.
#20
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: katy, tx
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If anyone thinks a WRX can out handle a Z06, they are smoking crack! A z06 is capable of over 1.0 latteral G thru corners. And we know it will crush a WRX in a straight line as well.