WRX vs. Roush?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 2, 2005 | 01:41 PM
  #76  
1WRX2NV's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,962
From: watching you get smaller...in my rear-view
Car Info: 02 STi
Originally Posted by case1
according to 5.0 mag and others, gt's will run a low 14 et. Yes the stage 1 and 2 are basically body and suspension mods, except the stage 2 has exhaust and intake i think. Maybe the stage 2 could run a high 13 with John Force driving it but most likely still a low 14. The stage 3 is the only contender, supercharged with about 360hp i think, of course you can make a stock gt run low 13's or high 12's with just drag suspension, slicks, and very few mods.

I love the fact that our WRX's run with mustangs stock for stock, although not any more with the '05 gt's (300hp)

and we have 4 bangers and they have V8's

-freddie
Old Sep 6, 2005 | 08:11 AM
  #77  
RAAZ227's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 172
From: Nations Capitol
Car Info: 07 UGM STI
a friend of mine just ran a 14.1(consistant) in a 2002 GT with intake, header & exhaust. He said there were other GT's there with the same mods running 13.9.
Old Sep 6, 2005 | 07:26 PM
  #78  
blue blurr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,312
From: Why the **** is
Car Info: this required information?
Saleen > roush
Old Sep 7, 2005 | 12:40 PM
  #79  
Zoeb2s's Avatar
I <3 White Girls
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 26,491
From: Danville, CA
Car Info: E92 M3, E70, F32, E21
Originally Posted by blue blurr
Saleen > roush
**** > *.mustang
Old Sep 7, 2005 | 01:27 PM
  #80  
gdogg's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,783
From: rightBehindYou, HI
Car Info: 1973 Huevo Ranchero
kenny brown>saleen/roush



aloha from the summit of *-^-Mauna Kea-^-*
Old Sep 7, 2005 | 04:17 PM
  #81  
blue blurr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,312
From: Why the **** is
Car Info: this required information?
Ntia
Old Sep 20, 2005 | 08:39 AM
  #82  
VIBEELEVEN's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,120
From: Napa, Ca.
Car Info: 03 WRX
oops...wrong thread
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 10:07 PM
  #83  
thunder_sti's Avatar
Troll
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,526
From: ***10 SEC CLUB*** 10.8@128mph w/clutch issues
Car Info: 04 STI--- 435awhp@Pump Gas **520awhp @ C16 Vp
any clips, of father and son...racing...lol
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 05:10 AM
  #84  
mw1029h's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 279
Car Info: 04 STi blk cloaked team blew member
All I know is after owning a Mustang and 2 Subies, a Superchanged Mustang will spank a stock wrx in the 1320 for 3 reasons, 1st hp, 2nd the Mustang is easier to launch, 3rd torque which makes it easier to launch. The Sti is more the match.
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 08:31 AM
  #85  
truWRXtacy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 195
From: Colorado
Car Info: 2005 WRX
actaully if u read in the i think its the brag forum, they got stock sti dipping into 12.9. but yes car n driver rates the sti at 13.3 which is incorrect. because they rate wrx at 14.5 which alot of ppl have ran 14.0 stock. All depends on the driver, Personally i've raced about 4 muscle cars, and havnt lost to a single one yet, mustanags camero's etc.. and i'm only at Vishnu Stage Sub Zero. Cost me 680 bucks including shipping. so that guy who said WRX are more costly to mod? ur wrong. i'd like to see any other car trapping 1 second faster with 680 bucks.
Old Oct 8, 2005 | 09:29 PM
  #86  
2002 WRX 4 SALE's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 77
From: Newtown, CT
Car Info: 2002 WRX
Originally Posted by truWRXtacy
actaully if u read in the i think its the brag forum, they got stock sti dipping into 12.9. but yes car n driver rates the sti at 13.3 which is incorrect. because they rate wrx at 14.5 which alot of ppl have ran 14.0 stock. All depends on the driver, Personally i've raced about 4 muscle cars, and havnt lost to a single one yet, mustanags camero's etc.. and i'm only at Vishnu Stage Sub Zero. Cost me 680 bucks including shipping. so that guy who said WRX are more costly to mod? ur wrong. i'd like to see any other car trapping 1 second faster with 680 bucks.
not a chance in hell your wrx will run a 13.2 for $680...you guys are nuts...

no stock wrx is gonna take a stock 96+ cobra and you're not gonna beat one with just exhaust especially.

just put 4.10s in the mach 1 and he should be waiving goodbye to your STI if he can drive. and especially from a roll. they run between 13.1-13.5 depending on the driver. with bolt-ons consistent 12.7 range.

cobras and ls1s pull like crazy at higher speeds. these people you claim to beat must be terrible drivers. if any of those had modifications they would beat the wrx mod for mod and the sti depending what's done. sti isnt slow but its only got the advantage from the stop. bolt-on cobra's and mach 1s will take them from a roll pretty easy unless the sti is modded.

i love how im the only one on here who has owned both cars and my opinions are completely different than all of yours...
Old Oct 10, 2005 | 10:20 AM
  #87  
RAAZ227's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 172
From: Nations Capitol
Car Info: 07 UGM STI
Originally Posted by 2002 WRX 4 SALE
not a chance in hell your wrx will run a 13.2 for $680...you guys are nuts...

no stock wrx is gonna take a stock 96+ cobra and you're not gonna beat one with just exhaust especially.

just put 4.10s in the mach 1 and he should be waiving goodbye to your STI if he can drive. and especially from a roll. they run between 13.1-13.5 depending on the driver. with bolt-ons consistent 12.7 range.

cobras and ls1s pull like crazy at higher speeds. these people you claim to beat must be terrible drivers. if any of those had modifications they would beat the wrx mod for mod and the sti depending what's done. sti isnt slow but its only got the advantage from the stop. bolt-on cobra's and mach 1s will take them from a roll pretty easy unless the sti is modded.

i love how im the only one on here who has owned both cars and my opinions are completely different than all of yours...

when I was stock I hung with a 96 Cobra off the line. We only took it up to 60mph. So...I don't know exactly what the top end out come would be.
Old Oct 10, 2005 | 11:14 AM
  #88  
case1's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 691
From: Bad Cop = No Donut
Car Info: 2005 WRX
Originally Posted by 2002 WRX 4 SALE

i love how im the only one on here who has owned both cars and my opinions are completely different than all of yours...
Actually I've owned both, a '93 notchback (that's the trunker for all the wrx guys who don't know) with a fully built motor and lots of Maximum motorsports goodies, and a 2001 GT with a fully built n/a motor, of course a mustang or cobra or camaro will roll over a wrx, they shine in the 1/4 mile.

A wrx responds very well to mods, but to a limit, maybe 350 whp max (<--- hardly daily driver) but a mustang or other v8 domestic can easily jump from 250whp to 350-365whp with just a supercharger and supporting mods in the package, but add a lightened pulley to that combo and 450whp is attainable, but the only difference is that to buy a "respectable" supercharger for a mustang will cost at least $3 grand just to get your foot in the door and then another $1k for install, where as you can buy a new turbo/injectors/fuel pump and have it installed on a wrx for $2k total. apples and oranges.


But take a muscle car and put it in an auto x comp. or take it to the canyons and they will get left behind (that's why I bought my wrx).....imo road courses and canyons are more fun, takes alot more skill, and overall definitely more challenging than drag racing.

I love both forms of racing, I have respect for muscle cars (i've owned a few and ridden in many more), I love drag racing, so for all the guys out there who want to hate on red knecks, muscle cars, or drag racing......just have respect for all forms of motorsports and all cars in general.
Old Oct 10, 2005 | 11:57 AM
  #89  
2002 WRX 4 SALE's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 77
From: Newtown, CT
Car Info: 2002 WRX
Originally Posted by RAAZ227
when I was stock I hung with a 96 Cobra off the line. We only took it up to 60mph. So...I don't know exactly what the top end out come would be.

yea me too. then we shifted into 3rd lol. i got leftttttt. and from a roll i was just embarrassed. i have it on video. my friends taping are just laughin at me.
def was a sign to get another cobra.




and the post after.. i know the wrx is a more practical car. it handle insane. but not to the point that is necessary for on the street driving. my cobra handles as good as it needs to for what it does. 13'' rotors, cobra brakes... it's not as sloppy as you guys would think.

a wrx was actually tailing me on a back road and i still would smoke him. yea i will have to slow down for a turn coming up but by the time he catches up i downshift and im gone before he can even read my plates. wrx is just not the car for me.

turbos are not that cheap. i'm lucky mine was under warranty and it broke. it was going to be over $2000 just to replace the stock one + labor.
Old Oct 10, 2005 | 12:08 PM
  #90  
case1's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 691
From: Bad Cop = No Donut
Car Info: 2005 WRX
^^^$1200 for a vf34/pinks/walbro and $2k installed in a package deal, bud.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:29 AM.