q plate

rare sti · Regular ride

q plate

rare sti · Regular ride

no one knows of this coosie then?

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Nah mate, don't know it, sorry

Supra Power · Slightly used

M3's are known for good handling, the problem always lies with driver skill. Moving to softly sprung 4 wheel drive Imprezas don't solve that problem.

rare sti · Regular ride

hello schumacker something has now changed since owning a 4x4 scooby spec c i can now **** all over cossies !!! lol i really mean it as i have had plenty of experience in this field and that includes lard arse supras! and before you start boring me with straight line figures i have taken on a field of cars around bruntingthorpe from a lotus elise "r" to a farrari 355 and chewed em up and spat em out , one thing you have to understand when in a rear wheel drive car tracktion aint that good in the wet and i can honestly say that Qplate cossie hammered me that night.

they call me gilett around these parts it comes from my driving

Supra Power · Slightly used

quote:
Originally posted by: rare sti
"hello schumacker something has now changed since owning a 4x4 scooby spec c i can now **** all over cossies !!! lol i really mean it as i have had plenty of experience in this field and that includes lard arse supras! and before you start boring me with straight line figures i have taken on a field of cars around bruntingthorpe from a lotus elise "r" to a farrari 355 and chewed em up and spat em out , one thing you have to understand when in a rear wheel drive car tracktion aint that good in the wet and i can honestly say that Qplate cossie hammered me that night.

they call me gilett around these parts it comes from my driving"

There are M3's driven well around wet tracks and have beaten Imprezas in the process. 4WD is only quicker to people who lack driving talent.

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Originally posted by: Supra Power
" 4WD is only quicker to people who lack driving talent. "

I'm not saying a word.........lol

Supra Power · Slightly used

quote:
Originally posted by: gurnE
""

Here's another point. The best 4WD systems are usually RWD until something drastic happens.

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Hey, I'm not arguing with ya

I'm well known for ****ing off 4x4 owners with my 'rants'..........lol

-- Edited by gurnE at 17:46, 2004-12-01

rare sti · Regular ride

does that include gay escorts?

As for talent you may have a point with the rwd thing but what i am saying is that night a heavily modded escort cossie done me since i have had a spec c i have hammered a escort cossie. tooshay!

look shoemaccer look at evo mag and check out the lap times of these crap 4x4 spec c times there only as quick as a 996 turbo........ slow lol

do your research a spec c is a cracking track car i would be lapping you in 5-6 laps if i was taking it easy.

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Yes, that does include gay escorts........lol

And I've played with 2 x 996 turbos

Neither one could keep up

3dr_Mark · Slightly used

I can tell you the Mr gurnE is well known for slating 4X4 owners, in a pub or on the road

And quit right too, it just slows you down!

the only reason i would have 4WD is if the misses had to drive my car at any time.....lol

rare sti · Regular ride

what do you drive that can blow away a 996 turbo?

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

A 400bhp Sierra........lol

This was on the road, one was an a road where I just glued myself to his bumper, the other time was a local ring road so I had the room to pass

Supercar baiting is my favourite hobby

-- Edited by gurnE at 20:12, 2004-12-01

rare sti · Regular ride

well fair play mate!!!! your car must be very light??? 996 turbo 450 bhp + cant be bad.

my car is 335bhp and weighs 1100kg 4.2 and 165 + top end

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Mines circa 400bhp, 1250kgs (lighter after I've stripped her out this winter )

0-60 Hmm, not been timed, I like my suspension nice and hard so I doubt its much less than 5 secs.

Once I get traction tho

Not once been bothered by any scoob, skyline, porsche, TVR or either of the Ferrari 355's I've whipped

Not sayin my car is all conquering, just saying that until now, not been beaten

rare sti · Regular ride

fair enough you aint been to hamms hall near birmingham then?? there a couple of skylines clocking up the 190 mark theres a few tasty moters get up there.

i can say i have beaten once by a escort cossie and i ave also shown the door to escort cossie so.... ????????? i cared at the time but hey... theres always a faster car somewhere(out side bristol) lol.

so far undefeated in my scoob though!

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

Anyway, who told you the spec c was 1100kgs..........lol

1320kg is more accurate

rare sti · Regular ride

yes your right i was under the impression its 1150kg will have to confirm as mine hasnt the air con sound proofing etc.. as the gl spec c so its the lightest model going.

Madmile · Regular ride

I thought the spec c was 1320-1330kgs. And with roughly 20-25% trans loss u can see why your car would lack speed in the straight line dept.

330bhp / 1320 x 1000=250bhp/ton

But take away the trans loss 330bhp -'s 20% at best maybe even 25% but we will say 20% just for arguments sake will result in 200bhp/ton @ the wheels.

Now take a 2wd cossie with say 380bhp -'s say 15% trans loss and divide by 1250kgs='s 258bhp/ton @ the wheels.

Or in my spec slaying case 306bhp @ the wheels / by 1119kgs ='s 273bhp/ton @ the wheels.

U may go around corners well but if u wanna play with the 360's and Gt3's and Tvr's u need another 100bhp.

rare sti · Regular ride

i do... without that 100 bhp tvrs dont come close in the bends they shy right off your right about the figures but the reality is my spec c concours most in day to day situations/track.

I will never say my car is a straight line car cause it aint but round a track i would challenge any cossie

Madmile · Regular ride

Dont get me wrong were all missing one thing or another. Get yourself another 150bhp and u can rule back roads and straight line stuff. I dont know what it would take to get another 150bhp of a spec c prob a turbo swap and other bits and bobs. But with 200bhp/ton @ the wheels a 280-300bhp 2wd cossie is gonna give u a beating in the straights or be very even. And thats a very low state of tune for a cossie especially in the company u have on this site (cossie wise).

rare sti · Regular ride

lol still aint bothered. to get another 100 bhp a front mounted intercooler bigger turbo nos i aint sure of ??? can i?

gurnE · Administrator Supreme

quote:
Originally posted by: rare sti
"lol still aint bothered. to get another 100 bhp a front mounted intercooler bigger turbo nos i aint sure of ??? can i?"

Yea, that really is a dumb ass place to mount an intercooler!

What were Subaru (and Nissan) thinking!

There we go! One huge intercooler, right at the fron, where it belongs!!

Supra Power · Slightly used

I already said that M3's can handle well even in wet conditions, its just you need good driving skills. Just like all RWD cars do.

The spec C is quick ...................... for an Impreza. It's barely any quicker than a 286 HP M3. The 321 HP EVO model will match it in any speed range.

Having 4 wheel drive and having less power at the wheels gives you the illusion that the car is more stable than the M3.

By the way, the spec C is 1360 Kg. Not 1100 KG.

-- Edited by Supra Power at 22:58, 2004-12-01

rare sti · Regular ride

lol again , depends on which spec c?

clutching at straws lardy, having owend m3 3ltr with shrik camms de-cat re-map 340 bhp m3 in a sraight line my spec c is still much faster and thats in a sraight line.

just because you drive a rwd car does not qualify you to sludge out quotes like as good in the wet??? sorry pal your wrong.

As for the weight thing i am out a bit genuine mistake but i know what my car and me can do and that is take on certainly any supra around a track and most cossies.

Madmile · Regular ride

Evo magazine have the spec c as 1380kgs and 335bhp @ 7000rpm and 280lbs ft @ 3750rpm 247bhp/ton . And the mr340 evo @ 1400kgs and 345bhp @ 6750rpm and 320lbs ft @ 5000rpm 250bhp/ton. Pretty even in a straight line i would guess. On paper there's a about 1.2 secs diff between a m3 e36 Evo and a spec c to 100mph and it in the spec c's favour. But the m3 take 5.4 secs to 60mph. The spec c is 4.3 secs. The spec c's 60-100 is 6.8secs, the e36 evo 60-100 is 7.4 secs. The M3 is closing the gap from 60+ its taken .5 of a second off the spec and i reckon once the speeds went above 100mph 2wd and the spec's c aerodynamics ofa brick would see the m3 coming out on top.

Supra Power · Slightly used

quote:
Originally posted by: rare sti
"lol again , depends on which spec c?
clutching at straws lardy, having owend m3 3ltr with shrik camms de-cat re-map 340 bhp m3 in a sraight line my spec c is still much faster and thats in a sraight line.
just because you drive a rwd car does not qualify you to sludge out quotes like as good in the wet??? sorry pal your wrong.

As for the weight thing i am out a bit genuine mistake but i know what my car and me can do and that is take on certainly any supra around a track and most cossies."

I never said RWD was good in the rain because I own a RWD car. I simply said that RWD M3s have outperformed AWD cars on the track in wet conditions.

You should stop dwindling under the illusion of turbo boosting up = quicker car. Don't be fooled by the differences in power delivery between a N/A and turbo car.