Type r/p1 vs jdm sti/spec c
06 March 2012, 10:33 PM
#121
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
This is a great thread and makes a change to the usual garbage that turns into a 10 page slagging match, But then again theres still another 6 pages to go so it could all go very wrong yet 
Out of interest was there ever an official time set by subaru in a classic, Type R, P1 etc, Around the nurburgring
Out of interest was there ever an official time set by subaru in a classic, Type R, P1 etc, Around the nurburgring
All the cars tested were from a standing start
07 March 2012, 06:08 AM
#123
Yes, not the P1 but the Japanese STI models were virtually all tested at the ring, think the info is on the STI website, its quite scary that there is like 30 seconds between the first classic they tested and the 2003 Spec C
All the cars tested were from a standing start
All the cars tested were from a standing start
07 March 2012, 07:59 AM
#124
Yes, not the P1 but the Japanese STI models were virtually all tested at the ring, think the info is on the STI website, its quite scary that there is like 30 seconds between the first classic they tested and the 2003 Spec C
All the cars tested were from a standing start
All the cars tested were from a standing start
Last edited by The Pink Ninja; 07 March 2012 at 08:00 AM.
07 March 2012, 11:48 AM
#125
Scooby Regular
Popcorn recommended.
The complete story.
http://www.subaru-global.com/special...nge/index.html
Spec C videos
http://www.type-ra.co.uk/vB/showthread.php?t=11021
GC8 videos
http://www.type-ra.co.uk/vB/showthread.php?t=11022
07 March 2012, 01:59 PM
#126
I have only managed to find a few references of a STI Version III 4-door laptime, cant seem to find any official lap times for the classic type r or type-ra?
7:59.41 154.69 km/h - Subaru Impreza WRX STi spec.C "prototype" (2004)
8:10.75 151.27 km/h - Subaru Impreza WRX STi Version III sedan (1996)
Both times can be checked here http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?fID=0&gID=3&tID=10073&viewThread=y
To be honest i have owned both cars, the STI 5 Type R, from new and my Spec C from 2 years old. Cost wise they were about the same, although you will have to factor in that the yen was a bit more expensive in 2006 then it was in 2000, so maybe the you could say that although a spec C is more expensive to buy now, at the time a Type R would have been just as expensive had the exchange rates been the same.
I have also had both cars in very similar state of tune so maybe can comment from first hand experience rather then people trying to compare both cars in different states of tune, which in all honesty, means nothing.
So just before i sold my type r, it was running a full decat, uprated disc and pads all round, ap clutch, blitz panel filter and lightened fly wheel. I also used to buy Octane booster, because at the time a remap would have meant at least a £1400 outlay for a new ecu (Link ECU, who remembers them!!
) and couldn't justify it at the time.
So the car was running just a bit over 300bhp and 286 lb/ft, although im sure with a remap (or replacement ecu) it would have probably made about 310bhp and 295-300 lb/ft.
Before I purchased my Spec C, i looked long and hard around before deciding to get one, having also seen a Spec C type RA and a couple of JDM's. (sorry but UK models just dont do it for me)
So settled on what i have now, and before i got it to the stage i had it at now. It had a Simtek ecu and a de-cat full miltek, i then added the ACT clutch and lightened flywheel and uprated disc and pads all round.
with all that the car was running about 350bhp ish and 370lb/ft.
What i do remember the first time i drove my spec C, was the response that the twin scroll setup offered, i used remember that in my type r if you were in the wrong gear there wasnt much happening under about 3500rpm.
You could argue that i was lazy when driving it normally, but then the short gears didnt really help the matter, (4k rpm at 80mph in 5th gear) so that probably why i would keep it in a higher gear. Mind you the Spec C has pretty short gears, but they are just a bit more easier to live with at motorway speeds. Overall it was the spec C that was a bit quicker but then it did have more power, but at 1200kg (shipping bill of laden weight of car) it did give away about 150kgs. So they should of been a bit more evenly matched power to weight wise, roughly 250bhp/ton for the Type R and 259bhp/ton for the spec C.
The braking on the other hand was a world apart, the brembos offer a lot more confidence, then the old subaru 4 pot ever did, even with the uprated disc and pads. Also instantly i could tell difference in the steering feel from the clasic to the newage, also the newage feels more planted at higher speed, although it was a bit scary with the RE070's, but once i replaced them to verdesteins things improved alot. The handling overall was much more confidence inspiring at higher speeds, then the type r ever was.
Its just the handling of a newage and its braking capability that make it a faster car, being a spec C with its lighter weight and stiffer chassis (maybe?) make it even better.
Just so that this doesnt sound like that im making the spec C sound far superior, which in many ways it certainly is a better car, but can say hand on heart i had much more fun in my Type R more of the time.
Although now with the extra mods i have done to my spec C, thats a different ball game altogether
Just my 2pence worth and IMHO
Mel
7:59.41 154.69 km/h - Subaru Impreza WRX STi spec.C "prototype" (2004)
8:10.75 151.27 km/h - Subaru Impreza WRX STi Version III sedan (1996)
Both times can be checked here http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?fID=0&gID=3&tID=10073&viewThread=y
To be honest i have owned both cars, the STI 5 Type R, from new and my Spec C from 2 years old. Cost wise they were about the same, although you will have to factor in that the yen was a bit more expensive in 2006 then it was in 2000, so maybe the you could say that although a spec C is more expensive to buy now, at the time a Type R would have been just as expensive had the exchange rates been the same.
I have also had both cars in very similar state of tune so maybe can comment from first hand experience rather then people trying to compare both cars in different states of tune, which in all honesty, means nothing.
So just before i sold my type r, it was running a full decat, uprated disc and pads all round, ap clutch, blitz panel filter and lightened fly wheel. I also used to buy Octane booster, because at the time a remap would have meant at least a £1400 outlay for a new ecu (Link ECU, who remembers them!!
) and couldn't justify it at the time.So the car was running just a bit over 300bhp and 286 lb/ft, although im sure with a remap (or replacement ecu) it would have probably made about 310bhp and 295-300 lb/ft.
Before I purchased my Spec C, i looked long and hard around before deciding to get one, having also seen a Spec C type RA and a couple of JDM's. (sorry but UK models just dont do it for me)
So settled on what i have now, and before i got it to the stage i had it at now. It had a Simtek ecu and a de-cat full miltek, i then added the ACT clutch and lightened flywheel and uprated disc and pads all round.
with all that the car was running about 350bhp ish and 370lb/ft.
What i do remember the first time i drove my spec C, was the response that the twin scroll setup offered, i used remember that in my type r if you were in the wrong gear there wasnt much happening under about 3500rpm.
You could argue that i was lazy when driving it normally, but then the short gears didnt really help the matter, (4k rpm at 80mph in 5th gear
) so that probably why i would keep it in a higher gear. Mind you the Spec C has pretty short gears, but they are just a bit more easier to live with at motorway speeds. Overall it was the spec C that was a bit quicker but then it did have more power, but at 1200kg (shipping bill of laden weight of car) it did give away about 150kgs. So they should of been a bit more evenly matched power to weight wise, roughly 250bhp/ton for the Type R and 259bhp/ton for the spec C.The braking on the other hand was a world apart, the brembos offer a lot more confidence, then the old subaru 4 pot ever did, even with the uprated disc and pads. Also instantly i could tell difference in the steering feel from the clasic to the newage, also the newage feels more planted at higher speed, although it was a bit scary with the RE070's, but once i replaced them to verdesteins things improved alot. The handling overall was much more confidence inspiring at higher speeds, then the type r ever was.
Its just the handling of a newage and its braking capability that make it a faster car, being a spec C with its lighter weight and stiffer chassis (maybe?) make it even better.
Just so that this doesnt sound like that im making the spec C sound far superior, which in many ways it certainly is a better car, but can say hand on heart i had much more fun in my Type R more of the time.
Although now with the extra mods i have done to my spec C, thats a different ball game altogether
Just my 2pence worth and IMHO
Mel
07 March 2012, 04:23 PM
#129
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (100)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 13,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think everyone is right, we all think our cars are the best and they are to us.
All Impreza's are created equal, but some Impreza's are more equal than others.
All Impreza's are created equal, but some Impreza's are more equal than others.
07 March 2012, 10:26 PM
#136
You Tube linky below - riviting stuff.
One of the best Scooby ring vid's I 've seen
'WRX Type RA STI Ver 3 Nurburgring attack by Takayuki Kino****a - 8:10:75 lap!!'
.
One of the best Scooby ring vid's I 've seen
'WRX Type RA STI Ver 3 Nurburgring attack by Takayuki Kino****a - 8:10:75 lap!!'
.
Last edited by bonesetter; 07 March 2012 at 10:31 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
