04 WRX vs Mustang GT? - Page 3
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 68

This is a discussion on 04 WRX vs Mustang GT? within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; they must have fixed that crap @$$ trac. control that the 05 got because it would really limit them. i ...

  1. #31
    Registered User turbo_bxr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    hamilton,oh
    Posts
    2
    they must have fixed that crap @$$ trac. control that the 05 got because it would really limit them. i went against a stg.1 roush and a basic GT and got them both with CB at edgewater. though the guy in the roush was sitting in his car reading specs on it so he knew what it was. i ran a 14.62 against the 05 that got around a 14.9 he ran the MPH just not the claimed ET.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,087
    Quote Originally Posted by RayfieldsWRX
    Meh, it's quick, but they made it too heavy for my tastes. I suppose I might change my mind if I drove one, but many of the write-ups about it have said that it's a handful in the corners.
    i 100% agree with this statement. that thing is way too heavy for its class, and it seems like you will not have that much confidence in the corners. A C6, non-Z06 Vette, will annihilate it for similar money.


    sorry for going OT, but these days, i would still pick one over a base Corvette. i make lots of road trips these days, and the GT500 IMO would make an awesome GT. it was praised for its ride quality, comfortable seats, and you can pass anyone you want, any time. not bad, i just wish it didn't cost a pretty penny.

    back on topic: save the dragstrip for the V8's. muscle is back with a vengeance, and by 2008, i think the pony cars will re-claim the throne as the straight line monsters. you have to think of the WRX as an extremely capable sports sedan, and you have to think of the Mustang, as, well, a pony car. and we all know what pony cars do best.
    Last edited by Ange}Boy; 06-29-2006 at 05:36 AM.
    embattled, we prevail...only victory exhaled.

  4. #33
    Administrator RayfieldsWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Old Folks Home
    Posts
    46,880
    I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by AngelBoy
    sorry for going OT, but these days, i would still pick one over a base Corvette. i make lots of road trips these days, and the GT500 IMO would make an awesome GT. it was praised for its ride quality, comfortable seats, and you can pass anyone you want, any time. not bad, i just wish it didn't cost a pretty penny.
    The other thing that comes to mind as a plus for the GT500 in its class is a back seat. The trunk of a vette might get uncomfortable for the kids after a few hours.
    --Ray
    Grandfather of the Bugeye Mafia
    2013 Subaru BRZ Limited
    2002 Subaru WRX Bugeyebrid Wagon

  5. #34
    Registered User blarg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calmer than you are
    Posts
    10,366
    Quote Originally Posted by turbo_bxr
    they must have fixed that crap @$$ trac. control that the 05 got because it would really limit them. i went against a stg.1 roush and a basic GT and got them both with CB at edgewater. though the guy in the roush was sitting in his car reading specs on it so he knew what it was. i ran a 14.62 against the 05 that got around a 14.9 he ran the MPH just not the claimed ET.
    you can turn it off...maybe he doesn't know how?

    trac. control will help you hook up better, but if you want to run the numbers Ford claims, you can't rely on the computer to do it for you....you have to learn to launch it yourself. Basically, trac. control applies the brakes and pulls power when your wheels start to spin...sure that's "extra" power you're not using anyway, but you lose some momentum...better to just learn to lauch right.
    ScoobyDMC #009 - making dirty jokes since before you were making dirty diapers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blarg
    go f*** yourself

  6. #35
    Registered User MengHang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by DTR rex
    94-98 Mustang GT 5spd = very low 15's @ 91/92mph. A stock wrx will take these easily.

    Same gen, but Cobra = high 13's @ 100mph. A stock wrx will lose to these. If you go stage2 (tbe and cobb ap) you can beat them from a dig, and run close from a roll.

    99-04 Mustang GT 5spd = low 14's @ 99mph. A stock wrx will get edged out from a dig, and beaten from a roll. With stage2 you will easily win from a dig and beat them from a roll.

    05/06 Mustang GT = mid-high 13's @ 100mph. A stock wrx will get taken pretty easily from both dig and roll. Stage2 will be close from both a dig and a roll.

    Do not forget that stangs take really well to mods though. You basic intake, header, x/h pipe, ecu and catback will get the 94-98 GT in the mid-lower 14's @ 96, and will get the same gen cobra's into the 12's, will get the 99-04 GT's into the lower 13's and new mustang's into the 12's.

    The wrx is not a drag car and does not easily compete with many of the V8's. The stangs are easier to compete with, but do not expect to be regularly beating LS1's (Z28, SS, WS6, etc...) unless you plan to go pretty heavy with mods.



    I love how you laid it out flat and simple. Can you and someone else lay it out flat and simple for WRX vs Camero's or WRX vs Trans Ams?
    Meng Hang

    Ogura Corporation (US Headquarters) Chesterfield Township, MI
    Network System Administrator, IT Supervisor
    Black WRX 2002, ...with 18G with Stock IC.

  7. #36
    Registered User Micah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ocean Grove, NJ
    Posts
    4,142
    Quote Originally Posted by MengHang
    I love how you laid it out flat and simple. Can you and someone else lay it out flat and simple for WRX vs Camero's or WRX vs Trans Ams?
    Kinda missing part of the equation here.

    Finding a stock Camaro, Mustang, or WRX for that matter is the exception not the rule when people are willing to race you. Most people will have at least an exhaust, and most likely a SRI or CAI. Engines being the overly complicated air-pumps that they are, breathing mods can make a significant change to both peak power and also the usability and width of the power band.

    Your WRX is going to do best off the line, and up to 60-70mph. Though if you are racing against a modded v8, torque @ 40mph will likely hang with, if not start pulling on you.

    Oh, and I'm sure you'll be doing this racing at the track only.

    Oh, and just so you know what types of stuff is being done, my friends shop is currently putting together a custom kit for a dealership on a 2006 Mustang GT - twin t28's ("Disco Potato's) with a piggyback. The car is in boost the second you touch the gas.

    Enjoy your AWD beast for what it is. Embarrass those people in the rain and snow and around corners.
    Torch Red 2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 46k mi.
    Black 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX 6-speed 94k mi. my mod list
    10/08/2006 - 14.089@103.01 (5-speed with well worn clutch, no launch)
    "Six stars gleaming, five speeds breaking, four tires chirping, three differentials working, two liters screaming, one turbo boosting... it's what makes a Subaru all-wheel-drive, all we'll drive."
    for Bugeye owners my BOV thread Service Manuals

  8. #37
    Administrator RayfieldsWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Old Folks Home
    Posts
    46,880
    I Support ClubWRX
    There's really nothing "flat or simple" about racing; especially where cars that are so different are being contrasted. Ambient conditions make a heck of a difference on a turbocharged car, driver skill is HUGE, tires/tire pressures are in there, etc.

    Who cares? My car is hella fun to drive; I make mods that improve that, and enjoy the process.
    --Ray
    Grandfather of the Bugeye Mafia
    2013 Subaru BRZ Limited
    2002 Subaru WRX Bugeyebrid Wagon

  9. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,087
    Quote Originally Posted by Micah
    Oh, and I'm sure you'll be doing this racing at the track only.
    good point, that actually plays a huge factor.

    i'd be hard pressed to find a car whose torque peak occurs after its horsepower peak.

    so out on the streets, when there are cars in front of you, and you're seeing a maximum 4000rpm's, torque rules the day.

    on the track, you have all the space and time in the world to rev your engine to the moon, and you can actually unleash your horses.

    a perfect example is the Honda S2000. 153lb-ft of torque at a stratospheric 7K rpm isn't gonna break any street racing records, but it can be stupendously fast on the track.

    Quote Originally Posted by RayfieldsWRX
    Who cares? .
    exactly.
    Last edited by AngelBoy; 06-29-2006 at 11:11 AM.
    embattled, we prevail...only victory exhaled.

  10. #39
    Registered User DTR rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Chi-town, IL
    Posts
    27,076
    Quote Originally Posted by blarg
    So are Porsches Ferarris and Vipers.


    You have got to be kidding me.

    Look at every article made thus far about the GT500 and you will see complaints about the suspension and handling capabilities. I encourage you to find similarly critical articles about a Porsche.

    The fact that you are even trying to compare these cars is ridiculous and laughable at best.
    Just call me Clark Kent
    ---------------------------------------
    Offical Body Guard for the Bugeye Mafia.

  11. #40
    Registered User blarg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calmer than you are
    Posts
    10,366
    Quote Originally Posted by DTR rex


    You have got to be kidding me.

    Look at every article made thus far about the GT500 and you will see complaints about the suspension and handling capabilities. I encourage you to find similarly critical articles about a Porsche.

    The fact that you are even trying to compare these cars is ridiculous and laughable at best.
    I was thinking about OLDER Porches that are notoriously rear-heavy. And I still stand by my point that they are harder to drive than your average sedan. You put that much power into a car, and no matter WHAT kind of suspension you have, you have more than enough rope to hang yourself.

    when you have motor, tranny, and drive wheels all in the same end of the car, that creates some unique problems. I know Porsche has done a lot to mittigate these problems in the last few years, but if you look over the entire history of Porsche, their cars are notoriously hard to handle in corners by unskilled drivers.
    ScoobyDMC #009 - making dirty jokes since before you were making dirty diapers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blarg
    go f*** yourself

  12. #41
    Registered User DTR rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Chi-town, IL
    Posts
    27,076
    Quote Originally Posted by blarg
    I was thinking about OLDER Porches that are notoriously rear-heavy. And I still stand by my point that they are harder to drive than your average sedan. You put that much power into a car, and no matter WHAT kind of suspension you have, you have more than enough rope to hang yourself.

    when you have motor, tranny, and drive wheels all in the same end of the car, that creates some unique problems. I know Porsche has done a lot to mittigate these problems in the last few years, but if you look over the entire history of Porsche, their cars are notoriously hard to handle in corners by unskilled drivers.
    Interesting.

    I do not know much about the older Porsche's, but I can say with certainty that the last 2 generations drove rather well (at least for the 911's) and did not require specific driving skill for them to be driven well in the turns.

    As for having the motor and tranny in the rear they do this for several reasons. See, by having a weight distribution that is irregularly bias to the rear they are able to eliminate driveshaft bulk, create better traction, and largly reduce nose dives under hard breaking. Now normally this would all be at the sacrifice of handling, however one of the things that makes porsche so incredible is that they still retain some of the best cornering cars in the world with that type of setup. In fact, the rear setup allows for better acceleration out of the corners due to higher traction capabilities.

    Even to this point of the debate, I am still unaware of what point you are trying to make. Ray stated he didn't like how heavy they made the GT500 and it hurt the handling capabilities and you used Porsche and other high end car companies as examples of heavier cars with exceptional handling... However, comparing a Ford to a Porsche is just foolish.
    Just call me Clark Kent
    ---------------------------------------
    Offical Body Guard for the Bugeye Mafia.

  13. #42
    Registered User blarg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calmer than you are
    Posts
    10,366
    Quote Originally Posted by DTR rex
    Interesting.

    I do not know much about the older Porsche's, but I can say with certainty that the last 2 generations drove rather well (at least for the 911's) and did not require specific driving skill for them to be driven well in the turns.

    As for having the motor and tranny in the rear they do this for several reasons. See, by having a weight distribution that is irregularly bias to the rear they are able to eliminate driveshaft bulk, create better traction, and largly reduce nose dives under hard breaking. Now normally this would all be at the sacrifice of handling, however one of the things that makes porsche so incredible is that they still retain some of the best cornering cars in the world with that type of setup. In fact, the rear setup allows for better acceleration out of the corners due to higher traction capabilities.

    Even to this point of the debate, I am still unaware of what point you are trying to make. Ray stated he didn't like how heavy they made the GT500 and it hurt the handling capabilities and you used Porsche and other high end car companies as examples of heavier cars with exceptional handling... However, comparing a Ford to a Porsche is just foolish.

    fine, your car can beat up my car.
    ScoobyDMC #009 - making dirty jokes since before you were making dirty diapers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blarg
    go f*** yourself

  14. #43
    Registered User DTR rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Chi-town, IL
    Posts
    27,076
    Quote Originally Posted by blarg
    fine, your car can beat up my car.
    I don't know about that... It is being returned to stock as we speak
    Just call me Clark Kent
    ---------------------------------------
    Offical Body Guard for the Bugeye Mafia.

  15. #44
    Registered User blarg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calmer than you are
    Posts
    10,366
    Quote Originally Posted by DTR rex
    I don't know about that... It is being returned to stock as we speak
    so's mine.
    ScoobyDMC #009 - making dirty jokes since before you were making dirty diapers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blarg
    go f*** yourself

  16. #45
    Administrator RayfieldsWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Old Folks Home
    Posts
    46,880
    I Support ClubWRX
    There's some truth to the notion that older Porsches could be a handful, but you have to go waaay back to the short-wheelbase cars of the '60's to really see it. Any remotely recent 911 (964, 993, 996, 997) is generally regarded as a neutral, easy-to-handle car.





    OMG I want one so badly.
    Last edited by RayfieldsWRX; 06-29-2006 at 06:57 PM.
    --Ray
    Grandfather of the Bugeye Mafia
    2013 Subaru BRZ Limited
    2002 Subaru WRX Bugeyebrid Wagon

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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