[BoostedEX]

Providing that both drivers are equally skilled. The WRX will get a good 1.5 car jump but half way through 2nd gear the STOCK LS1 will then drive by and blow the doors off a STOCK WRX. More like a good run up to 60MPH.




I believe that the original question was a stock STI not WRX.

 

[dangrass]

WRX's vs. Corvettes

It just so happens that I own one of each, so one could probably consider my inputs to be relatively unbiased. First of all, they're both great cars.

As to speed, the Corvette (a 2001 Coupe) has considerably more power and a much broader powerband. In addition it has really good aerodynamics. The result is that the performance envelope is much wider than the Subaru. While the Subaru has much better traction, it doesn't have nearly the lateral acceletation and it is only in the hunt acceleration-wise at speeds of less than 80 or so.

In reading all these posts one gets the impression that even a modded WRX is in the same league as a Vette, when it really isn't. Yes, it's possible to get a WRX down a quarter mile in under 13 seconds, while a stock C5 will do the same in about 13.4 secs, but it's no contest after that.

Racing is more than quarter mile performance. I've run against numerous WRX's in various states of tune at the local road course and it's really no contest. They understeer too much, brakes fade, and they are only competitive powerwise only at low speeds.

Having said all this I will say that I much prefer driving my WRX around town than the Vette. It's much less affected by lousy roads, is plenty fast below 80, had good visibility, really nice control responses, stays cool, and gets better mileage around town.....worse on the freeway.

So, the cars have really dirrerent purposes. The WRX is a far better real-world performance car than the Vette, while the Vette is really very fast....like being able to accelerate well at 150 MPH.

As to the differences between Z06's and Coupes, it's not enormous. There's about a second between them up to 100 MPH and the Coupes actually run faster at the very top. Lateral acceleration differences between the two are largely due to tires and camber settiings, which are easily changed. Running at the (road) track it's almost always driver ability that determines the outcome.

Bottom line, if performance is measured by quarter mile times, a heavily modified WRX and a stock Vette aren't much different. If performance is measured by what you can use on a real road at speeds of <100 MPH, then the WRX is probably the better car. If performance is measured by what one can do in the middle of Nevada, then the Vette has it.

They're both great cars....I only with my WRX would get as good a gas mileage as the Vette on the open road.

 

[Daytona]

How about WRX's vs. Supersport Bikes?

So, since we have definitavely solved the quandry of WRX vs. Corvette, how about the next question of WRX vs. a supersport bike like a Honda CBR 954 or a Suzuki GSXR 1000? I guess comparing an STi to these bikes would make more sense, maybe once Pace has his up to 500 hp he can tell us about the upper limits of 4-wheeled sanity?

 

[dangrass]

As it turns out I happen to be a motorcyclist as well, with the current ride being a Triumph Sprint ST...a slowpoke by bike standards, but still capable of a low 11 sec quarter mile at ~120. A GSX or Hayabusa are capable of 9 second quarters at >140 MPH.....way fast. Bikes are hideously fast in acceleration due to awesome power/weight ratios, but have simply horrible aerodynamics. The result of all this is that when comparing a fast bike to a Corvette, the bikes are faster up to something like 150, but as the speed builds the importance of aerodymics becomes increasingly relevant. I would guess that my Sprint is faster than the Vette up to 120, after that the Vette has it. Even though the Sprint is 2 secs faster through the quarter, the Vette will outrun it by ~30 MPH on top.

 

[dangrass]

Did some quick calculations....

A stock Suzuki Hayabusa has about 165 hp at the wheel and weighs about 750 lbs with rider, resulting in a power to weight ratio of 4.55 lbs/hp. By comparison a stock STi would have a p/w ratio of about 15 lbs/hp (3,400 lbs/220 hp at the wheels). A 500 hp WRX would have a p/w ratio of about 8. As you can see, it would take a whole lot of power to overcome the bike's weight advantage. Aerodynamics are another story. Even with a WRX's Cd of .33, a bike is still pathetic with something like a .5 Cd (and that's for something like a Hayabusa, which has really good aerodynamics for a bike). I suspect your average Harley has a Cd of something more like .75...but they do make a lot of noise!

 

[4G63]

Not a F---ing chance!!!

The new Gixxer 1000 was finally made into a real 1000. (The old 1000 was a bored and stroked 750, now its a from-the-ground-up 1000.) The '02 1000 did 9.92 @ 144.96 in the 1/4 mile and made 144.8hp @ 10,250rpm with 73.4ft/lbs @ 8250. It also weighs 439lbs wet. The new Gixxer is thought to make between 150-155 hp at the wheels. The rider at Cycle News said that the '03 was a lot faster than last years model. My point is is that there is not one street-legal car made at an assembly plant in the world that can beat a Gixxer 1000. Not a McLaren F1, not a Ferrari Enzo and definately not an STi. Sure, if given an oval track thats like a mile long, those cars will eventually pass it. But on the street in the real world, that is simply the fastest form of transportation on the ground you can buy.

 

[rayray]

New here..so I figure Id drop in my 2c. Ihave never actually seen a Z06 at the strip. but LS1 cars, both f-body and corvettes, are all over the map as for ET's. The SS camaro that i traded in on my WRX was Stock, except for a flowmaster muffler attached to the SLP exhaust that came w/ the car. At capitol raceway in Maryland, on a good track w/ very good air, ive run 12.90s. At bristol, tn (3500', i believe) on an absolutely horribly hot, humind day (highs 90's, 80%) it ran 13.20's. Conventional wisdom would dictate that a C5 should be a few 10ths quicker due to a 300 odd pound wieght advantage (guessing here). I would have to guess that a C5 would be quicker than the STI. But who knows? Until they line up, its just guess work. And even then somebody, somewhere will have beaten a F1 car on a mountain bike. Ill close with this; even though I feel the wrx to be a vastly superior car than my old SS ( i did trade it in after all), I would not bet money on my wagon beating an LS1, f-body or C5, in a straight line. Conversely, (B.S. conjecture to follow)- if I still owned my SS, id have a go w/ an STI. But Id rather OWN a WRX or an STI than either the SS or the C5...I was never one for travelling down a smooth, straight path...

 

[One Man Army]

Someone needs to find the fastest street legal vehicle to show that there is someone who is the fastest.

Then I will buy it. The buck stops here

hehe.. well fastest street legal car would be a F1 or something in that 1,000,000.00 price range.. buy that!

and where im from there are trailered cars running down Telegraph (main street) racing for money.. Those boys are in the 8's no problem. [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually I read an article, a car beat the f1, and it was something like 1/17th the price. Dont quote me on that though.

 

[Timdog1650]

I was watching an episode of Best Motoring that I d/l'ed off of another thread, and they had a 2004 STi run the quarter mile in 12.9 secs. I'm pretty sure that was JDM, which is suposedly going to have smaller HP numbers, as well as only a 2.0L engine, which is interesting. I think that it was a stock car, so if the STi we're getting has the extra .5L displacement, and we adjust for the horrible American gas we get, it should be about the same time. That's pretty damned amazing for a stock vehicle, and plenty of speed to kill a Corvette, at least for the first 1/8th, every time.

 

[chevyeater]

this is about the silliest thread i have seen here. a corvette and a wrx (sti or otherwise) have about as much in common as apples and hand grenades.

 

[dangrass]

they both go fast...isn't that "something in common"? I'm thinking of selling my C5 because my WRX seems to be a better all around sports car. It's all in your perspective, I guess.

 

[chevyeater]

just to clear up my statement they both go fast but apples and hand grenades are both easy to throw. a corvette is meant to excel at road racing and it does. reigning GTS class champ. a wrx is intended to excel at rallying and it does too. i don't see too many corvettes on the world rally circuit or wrxs in le mans racing.

neither car was designed for drag racing. but to each thier own. just don't think one is better than the other because it can do better at something neither was designed for.

 

[dangrass]

Well stated! Both are really quite good at curvy road blasting though....one of my forms of entertainment. I'm surprised at how close they are....never expected it.