When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It's not about keeping up, in your case it seems to be about growing up.
I remember being a whipper snapper and choosing a car based solely on it's 0-60 time, seems you are still at that stage in life.
100-200kmh times.... the number nobody posts because it's embarassing. Do try & "keep up" Oh wait......
Do you have anything useful to say on the OP topic as i have put plenty up before getting dragged off topic by Butthurt Fanboys who can't see beyond their Scoop...
Big Turbo 2.0's are shockingly bad on the road & too slow & lacking in responce to interest me especially the ones built on a low budget....
I see your cars broken after how much $£€ been spent on it only shows how poorly designed these engines are when even after the sinks been flung at them they still fill their pants. EJ doing what it does best.......
Last edited by SmurfyBhoy; 11 December 2020 at 11:19 AM.
Probably be a bit cagey posting 100-200kmh since you are committing a pretty serious traffic offence at that point.
Getting back to the OP's point.
Larger turbo especially on a 2.0 is a recipe for frustration, i did try that myself on blob eye long time back, took it off and went back to nice responsive VF35.
On a built 2.35 though, larger turbo works a charm and that should go for 2.5 also and i would expect Impreza's configured this way would post quite decent 100-200 times.
Probably be a bit cagey posting 100-200kmh since you are committing a pretty serious traffic offence at that point.
Getting back to the OP's point.
Larger turbo especially on a 2.0 is a recipe for frustration, i did try that myself on blob eye long time back, took it off and went back to nice responsive VF35.
On a built 2.35 though, larger turbo works a charm and that should go for 2.5 also and i would expect Impreza's configured this way would post quite decent 100-200 times.
Any car worth posting about can do a 100-200kmh on a quarter mile. But certainly not on a VF, So no reason you cant post a time & say it was done there... I'm also sure if you dump 20k+ into one you may get a few runs close to my 140i times before it end up broken like yours.....
Even at 500bhp with almost 50bhp more than my 140i it's 2 secs off the pace and 3 secs of an equivalent RS3.....& look at the spec lololol
Last edited by SmurfyBhoy; 11 December 2020 at 11:31 AM.
Any car worth posting about can do a 100-200kmh on a quarter mile. But certainly not on a VF, So no reason you cant post a time & say it was done there... I'm also sure if you dump 20k+ into one you may get a few runs close to my 140i times before it end up broken like yours.....
Maybe I'll give it a go when the car is back, as previously advised though I'm not interested in such timings and have never tried to measure any times in any car I've ever owned, there will always be someone faster.
I can see now why you are not on BMW forums because the big boys will have tuned M5's etc and smoking your ****. You are happier here where you think you can lord it over us.
Maybe I'll give it a go when the car is back, as previously advised though I'm not interested in such timings and have never tried to measure any times in any car I've ever owned, there will always be someone faster.
I can see now why you are not on BMW forums because the big boys will have tuned M5's etc and smoking your ****. You are happier here where you think you can lord it over us.
That's it now, not going to bite again.
The 140i cost pretty much the same as the Final Edition Sti & they were on market at same time....
Yep a tuned M5 would destroy the 40i it's not even a proper "M" car , but a 3k turbo upgrade would see to that 80k car even when mapped..... what does a turbo upgrade do to an Sti ? Allow it to barely keep up with a stock Rs3 but get pumped of one with software, while ruining the entire driving experiance which so many folk laud about.... then eventually be broken like yours & still only make 300ftlbs at 3k rpm.... sounds great....
Given that all the newer 2.0l turbo hatches (VAG models for example) seem to run north of 380bhp on stock turbos, is there any reason why these turbos could not be used on Imprezas, with suitably modified exhaust housing? They must be far cheaper than a lot of the quoted aftermarket turbos, given the huge amount of cars (Golf Rs for example) in circulation?
Thank you for confirming that you really are as stupid as I first thought.
Whatever ridiculous theory in your head you want to make up about straight-line performance being a true measure of the cars overall ability is laughable. Take ALL of the cars attributes and put it to test by measuring everything as a package ie. engine, transmission, handling and braking etc. This is done on a circuit, not a drag strip. The overall package proves for what car is ultimately 'faster' or 'quicker' or whatever you want to call it. You are merely measuring straight-line speed and basing all of your assumptions on that. We dont live our day to day lives at a drag strip. We live in the UK, surrounded by B-roads which funnily enough have bumps, twists and turns, especially up here in Scotland and that is more comparible to a track than a drag strip. If it was as easy as being the fastest in a straight-line, manufacturers wouldn't spend millions on design and development of chassis', gearboxes, brake systems, electronic and mechanical driver aids, handling and suspension in a bid to be the better performing and faster car of its class if thats what they are chasing.
Your quote about the GT3 RS is completely misleading, thats literally a purpose built track car offered to the public, its entirely built around being fast and capable car on track, not just in a straight line.
I dont think anyone is disagreeing with modern cars being more technologically advanced and thus being better in certain areas, but, your measure of whats faster is completely skewed and seems to be suited to fit your own narrative and personal needs which clearly are just straight-line focused. So for you to try and **** talk on why people shouldn't own a Subaru by throwing straight line figures around is hillarious. I genuinely feel sorry for you if all this time you just like driving fast in a straight line on A-roads and hanging around at Crail with the rest of the knuckle draggers, sounds like a wasted STI to me.
Maybe if you grew a set of ***** and put some good tyres on the Blob you had and not Trash1R's or Failsports and took the car to Knockhill when it had a VF35 you may well realise and understand that there is a way to measure fun, especially with these old affordable Subarus and it doesn't require you to fit a big turbo and chase more power either.
Problem is, people like you can't accept being wrong and this thread will continue to go round in circles until you get the last word in.
Exactly why I stopped posting. Toys and pram springs to mind.
Given that all the newer 2.0l turbo hatches (VAG models for example) seem to run north of 380bhp on stock turbos, is there any reason why these turbos could not be used on Imprezas, with suitably modified exhaust housing? They must be far cheaper than a lot of the quoted aftermarket turbos, given the huge amount of cars (Golf Rs for example) in circulation?
Now thats thinking outside the box.
It would take a bit of fabrication but should be possible.
It would also open up the entire VAG hybrid turbo catalouge as a possibility.
But i think the reason the modern stuff performs so well down low is it High Pressure Direct Injection coupled with a pretty high compression ratio. The B58 in 140i runs an 11:1 Comp which is mental for a turbo engine and the same as the old NA K20 which i found hard to believe when 1st read it. I think the EJ is around 8:1 & i am not sure how far that can be pushed as they love to knock.
No matter how much boost you feed an EJ it's just not gona perform well at low RPM (below 3k rpm) as its well outside its efficiency zone.
Last edited by SmurfyBhoy; 11 December 2020 at 12:11 PM.
The only one from what I can see who is getting laughed at is you. As for my posts they where basic EXAMPLES. Now as above signing off before you throw more toys out of the pram. Your going to be very lonely on here soon,
Good luck
The only one from what I can see who is getting laughed at is you. As for my posts they where basic EXAMPLES. Now as above signing off before you throw more toys out of the pram. Your going to be very lonely on here soon,
Good luck
I see your still posting even after saying you had stopped.
Yea sign off before you say more stupid things like the wheel won't fit inside the housing.... then argue the fact when not just myself pointed out you were wrong....
Have you anything useful to say on the topic of Turbo upgrades...... anything at all ?
Given that all the newer 2.0l turbo hatches (VAG models for example) seem to run north of 380bhp on stock turbos, is there any reason why these turbos could not be used on Imprezas, with suitably modified exhaust housing? They must be far cheaper than a lot of the quoted aftermarket turbos, given the huge amount of cars (Golf Rs for example) in circulation?
I don't think it's just a matter of the turbo itself, sadly. I suspect there's lots of differences in how the engine flows, for example: long intake runner lengths past the throttle body, probably less efficient cams + variable valve timing (both exhaust and inlet side), worse exhaust manifold etc etc. I'm not an engineer, but the newer stuff just "looks" better packaged IMO.
On the other hand, if the impreza is enjoyed for what it is, namely a 90s/noughties saloon with bags of character, I don't think it really matters if it's objectively "worse" by todays standards. It's not a new car, and to me that's part of the appeal.
Would I want to swap mine for an M2/M3, RS3 or a C63 etc? Yes, until I see the price difference and the lack of manual gearbox (I know it's slower with a manual gearbox, but I enjoy mine)
🤣🤣 just summarising the post , as that’s what it boils down too , be in a car that in effect drives you or actually drive a car, like a subaru , most modern fast cars are a take of the subaru set up any way
i’ve driven lots of fast cars extremely fast legally . and i still know which ones i want or like , a subaru , irrelevant to any one else’s negative comments
Any car worth posting about can do a 100-200kmh on a quarter mile. But certainly not on a VF, So no reason you cant post a time & say it was done there... I'm also sure if you dump 20k+ into one you may get a few runs close to my 140i times before it end up broken like yours.....
Even at 500bhp with almost 50bhp more than my 140i it's 2 secs off the pace and 3 secs of an equivalent RS3.....& look at the spec lololol
The problem with that time is he started in 3rd gear and has two shifts to 200. I tried that first with my Type R as well and got just over 10s, when I started in 4th I got down to 9.38s instead. It's pointless to start in 3rd unless you have the longer hawkeye gearing. I'm sure that's a mid 8s car otherwise. If the boost response isn't too bad that is.
The problem with that time is he started in 3rd gear and has two shifts to 200. I tried that first with my Type R as well and got just over 10s, when I started in 4th I got down to 9.38s instead. It's pointless to start in 3rd unless you have the longer hawkeye gearing. I'm sure that's a mid 8s car otherwise. If the boost response isn't too bad that is.
Very true. Even some brake boosting in 4th could help improve it. Theres a great clip of a mega high powered GC8 doin it in 5s but only used 4th gear and raised his rev limit. But that car is a serious build.
Don't get me wrong one of fastest times i've seen was AFP i think his was 2 something. I am not sayin Subaru's CANT run the times. Just saying the cost involved to get them theres is mental. Then the reliability goes out the window.
But even to get 7s in a full weight newage would take some going.
🤣🤣 just summarising the post , as that’s what it boils down too , be in a car that in effect drives you or actually drive a car, like a subaru , most modern fast cars are a take of the subaru set up any way
i’ve driven lots of fast cars extremely fast legally . and i still know which ones i want or like , a subaru , irrelevant to any one else’s negative comments
A stock Sti is boring as hell. Can i ask what cars you are actually talking about tho that don't compare to a Sti ? You need to actually give examples. For all i know your talking about a DSG Polo Gti....
What modern car has permanent 4wd, a flat 4 & a manual box that are a take of the Subaru setup ?
A bit off topic but so is this thread anyway. I like this Swedish build, new tech in an old E30 ix (yes I know there are faster cars, but they have far more power)
A bit off topic but so is this thread anyway. I like this Swedish build, new tech in an old E30 ix (yes I know there are faster cars, but they have far more power) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6huo8hBbXDs
My 04 jdm legacy is very responsive below 3k.
td04 and twinscroll and lower jap gearing if that counts towards responsiveness.
runs out of puff quick but great turbo always there feel.
I'm getting my jdm hatch soon with twinscroll vf49.
What can I expect response wise compared to legacy.
In my head I'm thinking jdm subarus are going to be better response and spool up etc as there only a small island so there cars have to perform that way?
jdm hatch will have low geared 6 speed as well.
is this a factor?
And yes I've had many German autos over the years but keep coming back to subaru.
On a 2litre car I think it’s best to use a billet vf
some of the Facebook boys are getting 415 hp using these turbos and none of the horrendous lag associated with sc42 and like wise
I wouldnt embarass myself takin my sti to crail nowadays when most the schoolkids run 10's in their S3's etc...no "affordable" sti would compete... the 40i ruined most Subaru's i've seen there and it only had software flung at it...
My Westfield would toast most Sti's that go to Knockhill tbh as well, nvm crap stock ones on a VF that would be lucky to get away from an EP3 civic..did you not see how AFP gave up on his Time Attack car and now has a "proper" track car..... not a 4 door tin can of compromises
Engine - yea the EJ is absolutly pathetic tbh laggy as hell an inefficient needs thousands flung at it to be anything near decent.
Gearbox - yea the 6 speed is strong but lets not kid ourselves that it's gona win anything still a dinosaur.
Handling - dont make me laugh if you wanted a car to handle you should have bought an Evo not some understeering disaster with a scoop.
Brakes - Even worse. Brembos from 20 years ago outperformed again by most embarassing...
Ooo but it's fun.....
An RS3 on any wet scottish B-road would pump most Subaru's there's literally not a situation it would be better.
There is a way to measure fun, really. Whats the SI units for fun you absolute moron.....10 smiles ?
The whole faster quicker thing is just basic English which you would understand if you had gone to school......
The only thing it has going for it...afforadability...like a Renault Clio..... if thats its Trumph card you can keep it.
Oh btw it had ****ty T1r's when i bought it & it ran better times on the "Failsports" than it did on Michlen SS's....the car would be lucky to last 10 laps of KH so it never went..
You wouldn't embarrass yourself? You are doing a pretty good job of that right now.
You truly are a complete and utter mong aren't you? You enjoy hanging around with the other clueless muppets who want to stamp on the accelerator pedal at Crail in a bid to ***** wave who has the 'fastest' car on Facebook but in the same light also say Subaru's can't handle and to buy an Evo instead? Are you for real?
You've literally spent your entire time driving your Blob in a straight line with gash tyres and expect us to listen to your drivel? Now you've bought a Westfield to do the same thing at Crail and also now own a FSTI all whilst **** talking EJ engines despite knowing the EJ255 and EJ257 are the least reliable of them all? HAHAHAHAHA
Watch all the old BestMotoring videos where there is hard testing by ex-JGTC drivers comparing the then same aged Evo and Subarus. The Subaru wins near every challenge against the Evo's apart from the older gen stuff (GC8 vs. CP9A). Proving that out the box, the Subaru was the better handling car. It also shows some suprising results against some of the European cars in the handling deparment too, making for an overall FASTER car.
A VF35 car lucky to get away from an EP3? Wait, so now you are saying an EP3, which has less power and a good handling chassis can potentially be faster than something that has more power and may well be newer ie. the VF35 Subaru?
You have literally contradicted yourself on that one. MONG ALERT.
Originally Posted by SmurfyBhoy
I used the final edition because that too was built in last 5 years.....
Compare the JDM Hawk then. Which was clearly lacking or last poster wouldn't need his "big turbo" & coilovers along with countless other mods to his overpriced Hawk from Japan.... then goes on about "affordability"
Do you realise just how many 140i sold in their relativly short lifespan ? I guess thats because they are so terrible....
I have actually posted quite a bit of useful info regarding the OP but then too many butthurt subaru owners appeared to defend their dinosaurs from any critisism. When most folk who have upgraded turbos to above 400bhp have regreted it...
For a start, I bought the Hawk with an LM400 already fitted, funnily enough it was mapped back in 2007/8 (I think) by Litchfield and that turbo and engine have now done around 80k miles on the setup with no failure to the turbo and engine. Which in reality is a true testament to the reliabilty of what is now a 15 year old engine.
The HKS coilovers (not budget BC like you had), I fitted due to knocking from the 14 year old front shock. It was upgraded because it required replacement.
I was able to take advantage of flipping the top mounts to gain more castor. After I played around with the alignment on the car at my old work, I achieved roughly +7 degrees of castor IIRC, which vastly improved the steering feel, overall handling and stability of the car by adding essentially adding more dynamic camber. I dont need more power in order to be quicker if I don't have to slow down for a corner as much as you would.
The standard suspension coupled to decent tyres were actually a really good handling setup on the road. It still probably cost less than the amount of money you likely spent on buying the 140i let alone how many cars you've now had whilst trying to chase after your 'fastest' car ideology.
You literally started **** posting by post #11, comparing a 2015+ modified 140i fitted with a modern 6 cylinder engine, with a full 1 litre larger displacement, modern twinscroll turbo from factory, state of the art ZF auto gearbox and compared it to the OPs Impreza which I assume is probably a newage (haven't looked tbh). Completely different cars and absolutely useless info for the OP in terms of what he was originally asking. You decided to trail this out into an anti-Subaru exercise so we are just responding based on your ill-informed driving experience whilst owning one.
You decided to spend money on making your Blob more powerful, which in reality could have probably just benefitted from a proper set of tyres and arguably a better coilover setup. Now you crying on here like a little bairn spouting how crap they are when you've only ever used it in a straight line and blew both of them up. YAWN.
Sounds to me like you'd bag it at any corner in any car anyway, so get back to fitting those pink Crail pig stickers to your car and telling the young team on Facebook how fast your car is. None of us care after sussing out your mentality and experience with cars being so one-sided and narrow minded. You clearly bought a Subaru for the wrong reasons and it shows...
Last edited by Dreep; 11 December 2020 at 03:14 PM.
You wouldn't embarrass yourself? You are doing a pretty good job of that right now.
You truly are a complete and utter mong aren't you? You enjoy hanging around with the other clueless muppets who want to stamp on the accelerator pedal at Crail in a bid to ***** wave who has the 'fastest' car on Facebook but in the same light also say Subaru's can't handle and to buy an Evo instead? Are you for real?
You've literally spent your entire time driving your Blob in a straight line with gash tyres and expect us to listen to your drivel? Now you've bought a Westfield to do the same thing at Crail and also now own a FSTI all whilst **** talking EJ engines despite knowing the EJ255 and EJ257 are the least reliable of them all? HAHAHAHAHA
Watch all the old BestMotoring videos where there is hard testing by ex-JGTC drivers comparing the then same aged Evo and Subarus. The Subaru wins near every challenge against the Evo's apart from the older gen stuff (GC8 vs. CP9A). Proving that out the box, the Subaru was the better handling car. It also shows some suprising results against some of the European cars in the handling deparment too, making for an overall FASTER car.
A VF35 car lucky to get away from an EP3? Wait, so now you are saying an EP3, which has less power and a good handling chassis can potentially be faster than something that has more power and may well be newer ie. the VF35 Subaru?
You have literally contradicted yourself on that one. MONG ALERT.
For a start, I bought the Hawk with an LM400 already fitted, funnily enough it was mapped back in 2007/8 (I think) by Litchfield and that turbo and engine have now done around 80k miles on the setup with no failure to the turbo and engine. Which in reality is a true testament to the reliabilty of what is now a 15 year old engine.
The HKS coilovers (not budget BC like you had), I fitted due to knocking from the 14 year old front shock. It was upgraded because it required replacement.
I was able to take advantage of flipping the top mounts to gain more castor. After I played around with the alignment on the car at my old work, I achieved roughly +7 degrees of castor IIRC, which vastly improved the steering feel, overall handling and stability of the car by adding essentially adding more dynamic camber. I dont need more power in order to be quicker if I don't have to slow down for a corner as much as you would.
The standard suspension coupled to decent tyres were actually a really good handling setup on the road. It still probably cost less than the amount of money you likely spent on buying the 140i let alone how many cars you've now had whilst trying to chase after your 'fastest' car ideology.
You literally started **** posting by post #11, comparing a 2015+ modified 140i fitted with a modern 6 cylinder engine, with a full 1 litre larger displacement, modern twinscroll turbo from factory, state of the art ZF auto gearbox and compared it to the OPs Impreza which I assume is probably a newage (haven't looked tbh). Completely different cars and absolutely useless info for the OP in terms of what he was originally asking. You decided to trail this out into an anti-Subaru exercise so we are just responding based on your ill-informed driving experience whilst owning one.
You decided to spend money on making your Blob more powerful, which in reality could have probably just benefitted from a proper set of tyres and arguably a better coilover setup. Now you crying on here like a little bairn spouting how crap they are when you've only ever used it in a straight line and blew both of them up. YAWN.
Sounds to me like you'd bag it at any corner in any car anyway, so get back to fitting those pink Crail pig stickers to your car and telling the young team on Facebook how fast your car is. None of us care after sussing out your mentality and experience with cars being so one-sided and narrow minded. You clearly bought a Subaru for the wrong reasons and it shows...
Wow just so much lies in this it's unbelievable.
1. The blob ran many sets of tyres from T1R's Ns2R, Mich Supersports, AD08's.
2. Westfield is for knockhill & SLS next year....where its setup for.... not crail although is is faster than my mapped Fsti...
3. HKS are still budget coilovers don't kid yourseld... hardly a set of KW's, EXE-TC.... unless you mean they cost more & that makes them better which is true for most things including cars...
4. I also compared the Golf R which is a 2.0 turbo with AWD.... is this not a fair comparison....
5. You have no idea how i used either of my Sti so to say it only ever drove in a straight line is Horse **** and utter nonsense.
6. I bought a Subaru because at the time it was capable of keeping up with mates RS3 (mentioned already if u can read) which it did at the time but would get ruined by a modern RS3 now.
7. Only one of the Sti blew up.... due to running almost 500bhp on a stock engine
8. There has never & will never be a crail pig on any of my cars....
9. I bought my latest Subaru to fit 3 dogs in back & work in winter when the 140i is as useless asthe westfield.....
Couldnt make it to 10 but you got a couple things right i will credit you for.
1 BC's are absolute dross
2 The 2.5 is crap
3 Your JDM Hawk required a hell of a lot of work to get it close to acceptable...and has had about 10k dropped into it to make it what it is now. So i would expect it to be better than a billy basic Sti...
Shame thats about all you got correct after putting all that effort into a reply....
Last edited by SmurfyBhoy; 11 December 2020 at 03:56 PM.
On a 2litre car I think it’s best to use a billet vf
some of the Facebook boys are getting 415 hp using these turbos and none of the horrendous lag associated with sc42 and like wise
Couldn't agree more horrendous is exactly how i would describe it on a 2.0.
11 December 2020 | 10:55 AM
