TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

I have a 2003 Spec C limited (same spec as the red one shown on that Litchfield link)

Tony

andythejock01wrx

So 1310kg?

Seems to me that peeps reackon if an M3 and a Scoob have the same power to weight, the M3 will come out on top - possibly due to tranmission losses or the apparent advantage of higher pubic capacity?

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

1375kg according to the V5C
Power losses due to transmission are not as high as you think, probably quite similar as the Spec C is DCCD and has an open diff.

Tony

BBB3

iTrader: (7)

He followed to the next set of lights and i just looked over and he didnt even look at me...

andythejock01wrx

That suggests that the M3's advantage over 90mph comes from it's bigger cc engine. (as opposed to getting the same power to weight from asmaller turbo charged engine).

dnc

Gearing also plays a big role here for the M3. E46 will do over 100 in 3rd and geared for about 200 mph in 6th (though would never get there). Also I believe the aerodynamics are better.

The in-gear figures for the spec c are absolutely incredible. I got an e46 M3 in the summer, and did consider a spec c. Despite those amazing figures I don't regret my choice, the M3 is an awesome all-rounder.

May return one day though..............or even a classic RA STi

Andy with 301 bhp blob wrx, you will edge a 0-60 (in the wet you will anihilate it), but above that I think the M3 will pull away from you. I had a 340 bhp blob STi and certainly above 60 the M3 really does 'feel' quicker and up to 60 didn't feel obviousy slower.............I was quite surprised.

Edit to add: Although compared to FI cars the M3 has relatively low peak torque, 80% of peak is available from 1800-8000 rpm - twin-scroll territory for the range.

mit

iTrader: (10)

I'd love to drive a spec c, i hear so much about them being very good. How would they compare to a 345bhp/330ft/lb 1100kg RA? I know my car's quick, but not been in any other impreza other than my old uk classic to really compare.

dnc

I would expect yours to be significantly quicker 0-60 and 0-100, yours is still at least 250 kg lighter than a newage spec c. This assumes you do not have a super-laggy turbo.

Think the often neglected thing with the spec c is its handling characteristics, it's not just about outright performance. I suspect the spec c will have you in the twisties

Edit - I'd love to try a drive in yours!

mit

iTrader: (10)

Well if your ever in Luton, give me a shout! I have done the arbs and various other suspension mods( see garage for spec), but i do feel the classics are always playing catch up to the later cars in the handling stakes.

andythejock01wrx

Cheers dnc.

Odd that the blob with similar power to the M3 and more torque was slower.

Next car will be a remapped Hawk Sti with Milltek etc, so I'd imagine it would match an M3. Not that it really matters I suppose. Petrolheads eh?!

dnc

Cheers mit! Having looked at your spec, maybe the spec c wouldn't have you in twisties . I know fek all about suspension tbh, think the other advantage of the new age is less body flex. Don't really know what that means on the road.

Car looks v nice BTW (love the lack of spoiler and VERY tidy for a 1995 motor)....................would be very tempted by one of these. What's it like to live with? Daily driver?

dnc

Gearing I think tbh. Blob STi only scrapes to 60 in 2nd.........power tailing off. M3 does close to 70. Same to 100, need 2 more changes in the STi, just the one in the M3. Plus the good spread of torque in the M3. My STi did not get a higher torque figure until 3000 rpm. Also at top end the M3 has a higher torque multiplier at 8000 rpm, so torque at wheels is good.

The Hawk STi will be a very good car, enjoy! Plenty of torque available, but I think the BHP worm is turning

Also it only feels quicker, have no figures to back it up (tho' Autocar tested it at 4.8 and 11.5 to 60 and 100 respectively). Guess my blob would have been similar but the M3 comes alive above 90 and I'm sure it would leave my scoob behind after 100.

andythejock01wrx

Must confess I find it difficult to get to grips with how torque effects performance.

If you have one car with 350bhp and 300ft/lb of torque (I can only work in old money!) and another with 350bhp and 400ft/lb, all other things being equal, how will the two cars differ to drive? I guess the the second will have better performance at low revs (and will be great at pulling caravans!) ?

Paulo P

iTrader: (42)

Without a doubt in the real world in Impreza is faster due to the road conditions but on the autobahn (which we don't have ) the M3 is the winner. I own a classic Impreza STI and an E46 M3 and the STI is for fun and the M3 is a luxurious daily driver with loads of poke should I ever need it, for fun I take the Impreza to be honest.

To be honest I rarely boot the M3 because it's a nice car to cruise in

fastboyslim

iTrader: (2)

Think of it this way, BHP makes a car faster, Torque make a car accelerate faster.

In very simple terms.

dnc

From a thread in Other Marques. Very well put IMO........

although torque is often talked about, it is often very misunderstood, (usually by diesel drivers) afterall, what is the point in knowing what the peak torque of an engine is and at what rpm unless you know what the torque curve looks like.

in theory and for example, the S2000 has a very flat torque curve, and relatively low at 153ft/lbs, and that sounds ****.

But it is around 150ft/lbs from 3500rpm up to 8500rpm, this doesn't mean that the acceleration will be flat, because the torque is multiplied by the rpm, so as the revs rise, the acceleration rate increases too. it would accelerate like an upward curve, even beyond it's peak torque.

Compared to a high powered diesel car, the 335d, peak around 400ft/lbs at 2000rpm, and gradually dips to 300ft/lbs at about 4500rpm. when in fact, it is not a decrease, but an increase, otherwise the acceleration would feel like it is dying off, (it also will accelerate like an upward curve)even though it's peak is 400ft/lbs at 2000rpm, 300 ft/lbs at 4500rpm is significantly more (work done)....if a variable ratio gearbox were fitted, the optimal rate of acceleration would be at a constant 4500rpm, not the expected 2000rpm.

similarly, for the S2000, using a CVT gearbox, it's optimal acceleration would be at 8500rpm at around 145ft/lbs, not it's peak of 153 at 7000rpm. The differnce between the two ENGINES in a 'work done'/acceleration test (hypothetically speaking and disregarding weight difference etc) would not be that great.

Of course this is simplifying things, as does not take into account weight, drag etc, but to give it some perspective, my own car, scoob produces 295ft/lbs at 3000rpm, peaks at 321ft/lbs at 3800rpm, down to 295ft/lbs at 5000rpm, down to 235ft/lbs at it's redline. So it's optimum RPM is pretty much anywhere between 4k and it's redline, it would (and does) feel very linear accelerating once on boost (3k-). So although the beemer offers a better peak torque, it's optimal torque is less than my car's optimal torque, and like for like (disregarding drag, using a CVT etc etc blah blah) my little scoob with less peak torque would get more 'work done'/accelerate quicker (although use twice as much fuel)..............see, easy peasy...........

Steve Whitehorn

iTrader: (13)

I sometimes take my car to Germany and put it up against Germanys finest AMG Mercs, M3s, RS Audis, Porkers ect on empty autobahns up to 160mph on a regular basis.

This is where all the talk ends and glossy mag arcticles with statistics mean nothing. What can the cars do it a straight line end of.

This is a striped out classic running somewhere over 450hp but definately below 500 on V power (guestimate is around 465hp with similar torque).

Often I get a RS6 or whatever pull up next to me give me the thumbs up and we go for it.
Through the gears up to 160mph my car has demolished everything it has ever met. (C63 AMG Black put up a good fight)

Once at the high speeds my car is not as happy at holding high revs. After a few miles I pull over and let them come past.

To Summarise
Tuned Subaru - Through the gears is quicker than exotic German stuff.
Exotic German stuff - Once it has caught up is far more comfortable at high speeds.

Thats it end of.

My observations.

The subaru is far more accomplished on the damp twisty UK country roads than anything german. It is the best all round car.

However on really twisty stuff - with 465hp ish and a six speed box it is not quite as quick as say 320hpish and a five speed box due to the way the power is put down. Mainly due to gear ratios of the 6 speed.

Having driven lots of high end German cars on the Autobahn. I am never ceased to be amazed at how they can hold high speeds effortlessly for long periods of time. Great engineering. Hats off to them.

One day I will get a Porche behind me and put my foot down thinking it it is about to become a spec in my rear view mirror like all the rest and I will get my **** handed to me on a plate. It hasnt happened yet....but it will happen.

Going through the gears is good fun. But driving fast in a straight line is boring, give me a damp twisty road any day

banny sti

iTrader: (68)

Dont let scooby tc hear you say that about an RS6

Steve Whitehorn

iTrader: (13)

You never know that **** handing on plate experince, which is coming, may well come from a tuned RS6 lol

Car wont see an Autobahn now untill next May.

andythejock01wrx

Interesting stuff. Seems to be mainly making the point that redline/max ravs have to be taken into account in conjuction with torque.

Still, If you have the same redline, the same weight etc, what's the difference between having another 100bhp or instead having another 100 ft/lbs of torque? The car will accelerate faster with either - but which has more effect on acceleration?

Steve Whitehorn

iTrader: (13)

As a very crude rule of thumb torque means you are quicker getting there. But more Bhp counts more once at the top end speeds. So the amount of torque coupled with the gearing and how light the car is will have more effect on acceleration than HP.

I have seen this at 140mph plus in the scoob regularly. Once you are at those speeds all the accelerative advantage of light weight and torque have been lost and how much bhp counts for more.

Harryr34

iTrader: (9)

Anyone had a play with the latest M3s? I had one tailgating me last year whilst i was cruising along at 40ish, I dropped it into second and went for it, pulled a couple of car lengths on him upto 100mph... My blob was only running 325bhp at the time!

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Yes, and i gave him a shock

Tony

B4D HK

iTrader: (15)

mit

iTrader: (10)

Thanks, it lives in the garage which helps, and only done 67k, 7k i've done in 3 years, really should use it more!
As for everyday driver, their not as bad as you'd think, unless you spend a lot of time on motorways, in which case the low gearing can be a pain (5k rpm at 80).

Mit

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

That is low gearing, even the Spec C has higher gearing (but the torque comes in lower down the rev range), 80 is about 3.5k.

Tony

dnc

Hey guys (and gals?) how refreshing to see a M3 vs Impreza discussion with informed discussion and pretty much no ***** waving. Both great cars IMO .

After becoming used to the AWD system with my previous Imprezas I now truly appreciate how brilliant they are point-to-point in all conditions, even the 'lesser' models. I shall def return 1 day.

graeme jones

I would love an M3 convert they are the nuts I had a 320i convert which had problems at a mere 33k on the clock but I think that was a one off.

zayd

iTrader: (1)

I marvel even after owning a Scoob for nearly 2 years at how good they grip the road.

Just today I effortlessly cruised past a stream of cars on a roundabout in damp conditions.

I miss driving BMW's only for their luxury and solid build quality, but I cannot forgive their lack of driver enjoyment and unreliability.

andythejock01wrx

Agreed dnc.

Top of the list for my next car is a Hawk Sti (then Milltek, remap etc). An e46 is a close second. BM's hold their price better, so if I got one it would be older. My mates think I should go for the M3, although their reasoning seems to be mostly based on the badge (I realise there's much more to them than that!).

How would a an M3 and a remapped (ie lightly modded) Newage STi compare on a track, in the dry?