MY03 WRX evo review
07 February 2003, 09:33 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the MY03 WRX has been well received in evo, this month. Narrowly pipped at the post of a group test by the R32.
Strangely, evo quote 0-100 time as being 15.7 while the MY01/02 is around 18.something. This is a significant improvement for a small power increase.
Someone else (think it was salsa-king) also said that to drive the MY03 seemed quicker. Can it be that much more responsive for what seems on paper so little change?
Strangely, evo quote 0-100 time as being 15.7 while the MY01/02 is around 18.something. This is a significant improvement for a small power increase.
Someone else (think it was salsa-king) also said that to drive the MY03 seemed quicker. Can it be that much more responsive for what seems on paper so little change?
07 February 2003, 10:14 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 2,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know there have been a few suspension changes, and they have apparently moved the mounting points, but I don't know how much that would change things.
All I do know is that the bump steer type mods they've done to the STi's bushes and geometry makes it amazing to drive.
That low end pickup also seems to have improved over the bugeyes I tested, so I should think probably helps matters.
Josh
All I do know is that the bump steer type mods they've done to the STi's bushes and geometry makes it amazing to drive.
That low end pickup also seems to have improved over the bugeyes I tested, so I should think probably helps matters.
Josh
07 February 2003, 10:16 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 25,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
open to be proved wrong here, but I thought the STi 8 had different suspension, ala the umm, what's the burnt orange special called (SC201?). Am sure they did change something on the suspension, so that would effect things.
TBH - the bug eye grew on me, and thus I like it, but must say I reall do like the blob eye. The Prodrive style bumber on the STi 7, did look a bit tacky to me, dunno why, but the one on the STi 8, I love it!
If only I could have one *sniff*
TBH - the bug eye grew on me, and thus I like it, but must say I reall do like the blob eye. The Prodrive style bumber on the STi 7, did look a bit tacky to me, dunno why, but the one on the STi 8, I love it!
If only I could have one *sniff*
07 February 2003, 10:19 AM
#5
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 8,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That Evo 2003MY is Very slow 
if the figures are to be believed. The standard STI 0-100 was 13.7, PPP'd 12.2. I'd have expected the EVO to be around the PPP'd STI mark.
I think a lot of it is the placebo effect. 6 more Bhp will not translate into a huge difference in the times, both round track and in a straight line. Maybe the new 03 test models were run in, on better tyres than the 01 test models were?
if the figures are to be believed. The standard STI 0-100 was 13.7, PPP'd 12.2. I'd have expected the EVO to be around the PPP'd STI mark.I think a lot of it is the placebo effect. 6 more Bhp will not translate into a huge difference in the times, both round track and in a straight line. Maybe the new 03 test models were run in, on better tyres than the 01 test models were?
07 February 2003, 10:23 AM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Josh L,
I've had a look at Evo's test figures for MY01 and MY03 ... actually it suggests the opposite .. MY01 off-boost low revs sets better 20-40, 30-50 in gear times wheareas the MY03 hauls harder on boost
Kinda weird, what I don't think helps is that Evo seem to do 1 review/test of a car and then that's it. The 0-100 of 18.3 in Evo came from 1 test, it is then held as gospel for the life of the car .... surely given another car/day/weather the results would have been different. Most other mags seem to suggest a mid 16's is on for the MY01.
Interestingly enough Evo this week times the Sti8 PPP 0-100 as 14.2 (slower than an RB5 WR) ..
Personally given a standard model I'd say the MY99 would be quickest followed by the MY03 and then the MY01. Real world driving there is probably not a lot in all of them.
Doofus.
I've had a look at Evo's test figures for MY01 and MY03 ... actually it suggests the opposite .. MY01 off-boost low revs sets better 20-40, 30-50 in gear times wheareas the MY03 hauls harder on boost
Kinda weird, what I don't think helps is that Evo seem to do 1 review/test of a car and then that's it. The 0-100 of 18.3 in Evo came from 1 test, it is then held as gospel for the life of the car .... surely given another car/day/weather the results would have been different. Most other mags seem to suggest a mid 16's is on for the MY01.
Interestingly enough Evo this week times the Sti8 PPP 0-100 as 14.2 (slower than an RB5 WR) ..
Personally given a standard model I'd say the MY99 would be quickest followed by the MY03 and then the MY01. Real world driving there is probably not a lot in all of them.
Doofus.
07 February 2003, 10:29 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 2,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doofus,
I find that very surprising.
Although I've never driven a WRX, the STi7s that I drove were really quite slugish at low revs, and felt leashed at high revs. Something that was only cured by the PPP. However, the '8' feels far more eager at low revs.
But I suppose just because it feels better doesn't necessarily make it faster.
Josh
I find that very surprising.
Although I've never driven a WRX, the STi7s that I drove were really quite slugish at low revs, and felt leashed at high revs. Something that was only cured by the PPP. However, the '8' feels far more eager at low revs.
But I suppose just because it feels better doesn't necessarily make it faster.
Josh
Trending Topics
07 February 2003, 10:30 AM
#8
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 8,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That 14.2 is curious as the stated time for the PPP'd STI 7 is 12.2. Prodrive said that the 12.2 was'nt thrashing the car, or pushing it either. Maybe the Evo mag test driver had an off day..
My PPP'd STI 7 would walk all over my old PPP'd MY00(same power etc as an RB5)
My PPP'd STI 7 would walk all over my old PPP'd MY00(same power etc as an RB5)
07 February 2003, 10:41 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What disturbs me the most about these figures (for the WRX) is that according to evo the standard MY03 is almost a full second quicker to 100 than a PPP'd MY01/02. Owning a PPP'd MY02 and having driven it standard and then modified, I find this unlikely as there is quite a difference.
However, I could be wrong and If I am I might as well chop in the bugeye and get the quicker MY03.
Confused
However, I could be wrong and If I am I might as well chop in the bugeye and get the quicker MY03.
Confused
07 February 2003, 11:05 AM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm not too fussed about all the figures .. it's just a bit of fun.
However I'd seriously doubt that an MY03 would be quicker than a MY02 PPP'd.
Very similar weight, PPP'd car much more power/torque .. same gear ratio's unless anybody knows any different. Different tyres though maybe gets the MY03 off the line a bit quicker but I doubt the new front can knock almost 3 seconds off a 0-100 time.
I'd put my money on the MY02 PPP being quicker.
Doofus.
However I'd seriously doubt that an MY03 would be quicker than a MY02 PPP'd.
Very similar weight, PPP'd car much more power/torque .. same gear ratio's unless anybody knows any different. Different tyres though maybe gets the MY03 off the line a bit quicker but I doubt the new front can knock almost 3 seconds off a 0-100 time.
I'd put my money on the MY02 PPP being quicker.
Doofus.
07 February 2003, 11:51 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have the gear ratio's changed at all on the MY03 - I wonder if they have been able to keep them spaced closer together and keep the boost up for a 0-100 run.
On my MY02 WRX with PPP it seems to be good in 1st and 2nd but you hit a little bit of a wall from 2nd to 3rd (and I have a quickshift fitted and I wouldn't class myself as slow with gear changes). Seems to drop a little bit below optimum rev's and doesn't launch again like it might.
On my MY02 WRX with PPP it seems to be good in 1st and 2nd but you hit a little bit of a wall from 2nd to 3rd (and I have a quickshift fitted and I wouldn't class myself as slow with gear changes). Seems to drop a little bit below optimum rev's and doesn't launch again like it might.
07 February 2003, 01:44 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed that the WRX was running on Michelin Pilot sports, as was the Audi, Focus and Golf. The Alfa was running on Bridgestones 
Is the Pilot now the tyre of choice. Maybe that explains some of the differences between the MY01 and MY03
Is the Pilot now the tyre of choice. Maybe that explains some of the differences between the MY01 and MY03
07 February 2003, 02:13 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, its very strange. The STi figures seem like those for the standard STi. Is it me or do all RS loving magazine's find some way to screw over the Impreza and have to resort to bullsh*t to do it.
Did man really land on the moon?
Who shot president Kennedy?
Why do mag's screw the Impreza?
I might be over reacting but why post figures that are so inaccurate? Or at least I bloody hope they are!
Did man really land on the moon?
Who shot president Kennedy?
Why do mag's screw the Impreza?
I might be over reacting but why post figures that are so inaccurate? Or at least I bloody hope they are!
07 February 2003, 02:15 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 8,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've driven a MY'03 WRX recently, and it is noticably quicker on the road than the '01/'02 variant. The power delivery is smoother, and the handling is improved too. I don't know the exact details of what they have done, but whatever it is, it feels very good.
The PPP should be interesting for the WRX too, as this is going to be significantly different to previous MY versions bhp/torque wise according to some rumours.
If you are looking to upgrade your classic, go test drive the '03, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!
The PPP should be interesting for the WRX too, as this is going to be significantly different to previous MY versions bhp/torque wise according to some rumours.
If you are looking to upgrade your classic, go test drive the '03, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!
07 February 2003, 02:18 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If you are looking to upgrade your classic, go test drive the '03, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!" - Dr Evil
..and bugeye owners have another reason to be depressed!
..and bugeye owners have another reason to be depressed!
07 February 2003, 02:31 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 8,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
D-STi - not really, the '01/'02 was an improvement over the classic in some ways too, the '03 is evolution further and has resolved the power to weight issues.
07 February 2003, 04:43 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hehe, I think your right. I only flicked through that article and totally missed the WRX one That's what you get for browsing through it at WHSmith :P I just went and bought it so apologies to EVO mag, but Autocar and Auto Express are still taking back handers from Ford :P
But if EVO mag were totally pro Subaru they would be called IMPREZA magazine :P
That's what you get for browsing through it at WHSmith :P I just went and bought it so apologies to EVO mag, but Autocar and Auto Express are still taking back handers from Ford :PBut if EVO mag were totally pro Subaru they would be called IMPREZA magazine :P
07 February 2003, 09:10 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I quote
"stepping from the WRX to the R32 is very odd, You expect the Subaru to show the Golf to have nose heavy lumpen handling. You expect it to deliver the killer blow with more performance and more cross country pace - the golf feels instantly more responsive. It turns in quickly with barely a hint of understeer"
Yeah Baby
or how about on track for such a NOSE heavy car
"The most satisfying car here" "Corners sure footed and confident like the original Quattro - brilliant bite on the entry, mild slip angles, and maximum drive"
Jonathan
"stepping from the WRX to the R32 is very odd, You expect the Subaru to show the Golf to have nose heavy lumpen handling. You expect it to deliver the killer blow with more performance and more cross country pace - the golf feels instantly more responsive. It turns in quickly with barely a hint of understeer"
Yeah Baby
or how about on track for such a NOSE heavy car
"The most satisfying car here" "Corners sure footed and confident like the original Quattro - brilliant bite on the entry, mild slip angles, and maximum drive"
Jonathan
08 February 2003, 03:10 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You need to compare the Golf to an STi with PPP, not a standard WRX.
The reviewer still said he preferred the WRX as a pure drivers car, its the poncy interior that swung the balance. Golf is £4K more too.....
Saint
The reviewer still said he preferred the WRX as a pure drivers car, its the poncy interior that swung the balance. Golf is £4K more too.....
Saint