Look to see how WRX compares to real world cars
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

This is a discussion on Look to see how WRX compares to real world cars within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; I work with a lot of car guys and we routinely organize group drag racing events. Below is a list ...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    14

    Look to see how WRX compares to real world cars

    I work with a lot of car guys and we routinely organize group drag racing events. Below is a list showing how my 03 WRX stacks up against everyone else. My WRX is nearly stock with only a gutted first cat in downpipe, shortram intake, and manual boost controller set to 14-15psi. I have some suspension mods, but I don't think they make a difference in this context. Some of the cars on the list are stock and some are modded. Some drivers / cars have a lot of runs while some went out and turned in only one bad run. These are all real world results where sometimes you get a good launch or not and sometimes maybe something is not quite right with the car or maybe its running the best it ever has. This is a great comparison between a wide variety of cars (22) total. I hope you enjoy and I welcome comments. I know a lot about most of these cars so just ask and I can probably explain them in more detail.

    1) 95 viper 13.225@110.01 (stock)
    2) 90 300zxTT 13.285@106.03 (also mine,drag radials)
    3) 02 Corvette 13.478@106.81 (stock)
    4) 02 TransAm 13.536@106.18 (cat back)
    5) 94 Camaro 13.751@101.83 (also mine,drag radials)
    6) 05 GTO 13.800@104.37 (ECU flash)
    7) 03 WRX 13.976@94.75
    8) 65 Mopar 14.112@95.93 (389ci/slicks)
    9) 04 S2000 14.184@99.66 (intake/exhaust)
    10)350Z 14.269@106.66 (supercharged)
    11)03 accord V6 14.738@95.98 (stock)
    12)200sx 14.764@99.12 (SR20det @ 13psi)
    13)Sky redline 14.810@93.7 (stock)
    14)04 Tiburon 14.814@93.74 (intake/exh/headers/tune)
    15)87 Grand National 14.861@90.77 (stock)
    16)02 S2000 15.009@93.12 (slipping clutch)
    17)Lincoln MkVIII 15.67@91 (stock)
    18)Mini Cooper S 15.84@88.64 (stock)
    19)00 GMC Z71 16.646@81.89 (stock)
    20)07 PT Cr. GT 15.937@85.09 (stock)
    21)89 XR4Ti 16.764@82.33 (stock)
    22)65 Mustang 20.073@67.83 (inline 6)

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Harmony, PA
    Posts
    54
    I like that.

  4. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    7
    Geez.... I beat every car on the list
    G8 GXP...12.9 @ 110 (FIR Phx... da = 1600)

  5. #4
    Administrator RayfieldsWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Old Folks Home
    Posts
    47,004
    I Support ClubWRX
    Very telling to see how the trap speeds of some of the cars that were "slower" than the WRX were actually substantially higher. Take the "perfect dragstrip AWD launch" out of the equation and the stock V6 Accord starts to look pretty good.

    Hardly the whole story, of course. Take the same list of cars to a winding, tight road course, and watch that Mini Cooper jump many places up in both time and "fun to drive" scores..
    --Ray
    Grandfather of the Bugeye Mafia
    2013 Subaru BRZ Limited
    2002 Subaru WRX Bugeyebrid Wagon

  6. #5
    zax
    zax is offline
    \_(ツ)_/ zax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Neverland Ranch, Maryland
    Posts
    13,169
    I Support ClubWRX I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by RayfieldsWRX View Post
    Very telling to see how the trap speeds of some of the cars that were "slower" than the WRX were actually substantially higher. Take the "perfect dragstrip AWD launch" out of the equation and the stock V6 Accord starts to look pretty good.

    Hardly the whole story, of course. Take the same list of cars to a winding, tight road course, and watch that Mini Cooper jump many places up in both time and "fun to drive" scores..
    You know, I wonder how much quicker the trap speed (for a stock 2003 wrx) would be if it had the JDM 4.44 f/d w/ shorter 4th and 5th ratios. I firmly believe that the 4th and 5th gears were (more or less) designed for economy over performance. But hey, I'd rather not be pushing 4000 RPM at 60 mph in 5th gear!

    I question the 1/4 mile performance of the supercharged 350z listed considering a stock 350z runs a 13.4 @ 104mph. Maybe the supercharger generates too much torque down low for a good launch without the tires breaking loose. Still, that car should run well under 13 seconds with a good driver and some meaty tires...
    Last edited by zax; 09-10-2010 at 08:08 AM.
    2015 CWP WRX STi ... But how did I get roped back into an EJ motor?!
    Zax's utterly unimaginably stock 2015 STi build thread
    Zax's Shaggin' Wagon Build Thread Now tuned for 99% pure Unicorn Jizz!

    Zach | Moderator -- Mid-Atlantic States, Tech & Modifying & General Repairs
    Rollin' with the Bugeye Mafia #302 | N.E.R.D. Subject Zero
    Facebook me here

    Your Mid-A local board: http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/mid-atlantic-states/

  7. #6
    Registered User jd92677's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    2,136
    On top of the 350z, there are a couple that might have to do with driver experience... Viper 13.2, S2000 14.1, 05 GTO 13.8. These seem like fairly slow times compared to what professional drivers have done with these cars. Good list overall and a good comparison but I think a lot of these numbers are based more on driver than car. Just my opinion

  8. #7
    Registered User rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    95
    the viper definetly should be better than that in the 1/4 mile.

  9. #8
    Administrator TheJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bro do you even live in the Dirty South
    Posts
    17,992
    I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    the viper definetly should be better than that in the 1/4 mile.
    Not sure you noticed the model year. How many stock production cars do you know had better quarter mile times in 1995?

    I believe currently they will be sub 12 second stock.
    -The J
    New Members, CLICK & BOOKMARK these links:


    "Driving most supercars is like trying to manhandle a cow up a back staircase. . . This is like smearing honey into Keira Knightly" -JC

  10. #9
    Registered User rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    95
    yes, missed the year and yeah they would be in there at sub 12.

  11. #10
    zax
    zax is offline
    \_(ツ)_/ zax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Neverland Ranch, Maryland
    Posts
    13,169
    I Support ClubWRX I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    the viper definetly should be better than that in the 1/4 mile.
    Yeah you'd be surprised:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Viper

    Wikipedia (not always accurate) has a MY95 Viper at 13.1 @ 112mph.

    I bet slicks would put it well into the 12s.
    2015 CWP WRX STi ... But how did I get roped back into an EJ motor?!
    Zax's utterly unimaginably stock 2015 STi build thread
    Zax's Shaggin' Wagon Build Thread Now tuned for 99% pure Unicorn Jizz!

    Zach | Moderator -- Mid-Atlantic States, Tech & Modifying & General Repairs
    Rollin' with the Bugeye Mafia #302 | N.E.R.D. Subject Zero
    Facebook me here

    Your Mid-A local board: http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/mid-atlantic-states/

  12. #11
    Registered User rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    95
    yeah J made a good point. I should have looked at the year. Car's have changed a lot since then. My 95 mustang for example came stock with 215 hp in 5.0. The new 5.0 is pruducing somethine like 406 hp and is only a couple of tenths of second slower then the shelby gt 500. It scares me to think what cars will be like in the future.

  13. #12
    Admiral Ackbar the 1st mycologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Late Devonian
    Posts
    13,226
    I Support ClubWRX
    Great thread, thanks OP
    "From a little spark may burst a mighty flame." - Dante
    "The stitch is lost unless the thread is knotted." - Italian proverb

  14. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    14

    some were very traction limited (videos)

    The Viper, 350Z SC, and the GTO are all very traction limited in the first couple hundred feet. The tiburon, accord, and 200sx had traction problems out of the fwd cars.

    Here is a video of my camaro racing the viper, you can see the difference traction and power make.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEJrwsz2JNI

    The viper would definitely be in the 12s with race tires. The 350Z and GTO would go low 13s in my opinion.

    Speaking about how much cars have changed over the last 20 years makes me pretty proud of having my old 300zx at #2 on the list.

    Definitely a lot is driver error. In my experience I've found it pretty easy to see 1/2 second variance between runs especially when you have a limited number of runs as most of these drivers had. That's one of the things I like about the list as it shows in the real world sometimes the underdog can win......03 WRX beats 350Z SC.....who would of thought it.

  15. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    32
    Speaking about how much cars have changed over the last 20 years makes me pretty proud of having my old 300zx at #2 on the list.
    My first car was a 90 300zx - loved that car. Picked it up for 11k w/ 40000 on the od back in 98. I love my WRX but I miss that trans.... My brother also had a 90 2+2 and a 91 TT for a while. Great cars, though a bit heavy - Z32 still my fav Z model, way to keep em alive at the track! BTW what are your mods on the Z? Assuming fairly stockish?

  16. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    14

    Not quite stock, more videos

    My Z is what most would consider a stage III. Intake, downpipes, testpipes, catback, plus aftermarket ECU running ~13psi. Stock turbos with 140000+ miles. Mines relatively light for a Z32 at 3330lbs at the track, no spare and running on fumes.
    Based on my trap speed and weight I estimate I'm making about 340hp at the crank, 40 more than stock. Usually the mods I have would be worth more than 40hp, but the car is 20 years old with 140000+ miles on it so I'm pretty happy with it.

    If you want to see the Z in action this vid shows my best run from my opponents view, the PT cruiser GT on the list. My 106.03 trap speed was from a different run.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdA2Yc1i80Q

    Here is one of the Z versus the GTO on the list. Drag radials make the difference.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujjBGty_CB4

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •