Took a "Blobeye" Impreza STI PPP out today
- Thread starter MikeHiow
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Somebody needs to buy a 106 1.1 Aztec.
Are you saying you only enjoy driving when you are right on the limit of grip and traction?
This is very true the MR is a very focused EVO, but its not harsh, just very firm.
But he complained about turbo lag in the Scooby and well if he had the same complaint in the MR I'd be amazed as it uses the turbo with lighter blades and hits a peak torque of 363lb/ft at just 3200rpm and the turbo keeps pulling right upto 7500rpm redline.
Now compared to lesser stock EVO's and Scoobs where peak torques come in at 4500rpm and the pull seems to die off around 5500-6000rpm I was merely saying take the MR 360 because if he feels that is laggy then he is clearly smoking crack, lol.
Then there is always the standard FQ-360 if one finds the MR to firm.
But the MR FQ-360 is extremely fast, 30-70mph acceleration is approx 3.5s, my X FQ-360 which is heavier manages it in 3.9s.
The only problem with older EVO's is running cost, but when it comes to a devastating A-B weapon the EVO's are definetely that and no Focus ST will even get close tuned or not on any bit of road that has a corner in the mix and even in a straight line the Focus would need 350-400 horses and any ST running that level of power will just be a dog to drive.
Fox, Well I clearly said it wasn't as black and white as that, but you also seem to have missed the first paragraph of that post.
Soldato
I agree with Mike, what a slow car.
Man of Honour
Did you have the Scoob at the limit? Even if it was understeering around roundabouts it still wasn't there, believe me. The rear stepping out is a bit closer, but it will still recover quite happily if the driver does nothing, so it's still not at the limit. If you slid it into a ditch, then maybe you were there.
M
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 5,951
Problem with the Subaru and Mitsu Evo is they're Japanese cars built for the Playstation brigade . Fast point A to B yes but not so involving or challenging to drive fast.
Best performance car from the Japanese is probably the S2000 but needs another 100bhp, but they have the right idea (normally aspirated high revving engine where power/torque rises with revs and both peak quite high up the rev range). And of course RWD.
Also get what you paid for, the Scoobs are reasonably cheap performance cars, hence are compromised
. Fast point A to B yes but not so involving or challenging to drive fast.Best performance car from the Japanese is probably the S2000 but needs another 100bhp, but they have the right idea (normally aspirated high revving engine where power/torque rises with revs and both peak quite high up the rev range). And of course RWD.
Also get what you paid for, the Scoobs are reasonably cheap performance cars, hence are compromised
Last edited:
Problem with the Subaru and Mitsu Evo is they're Japanese cars built for the Playstation brigade
Best performance car from the Japanese is probably the S2000 but needs another 100bhp, but they have the right idea (normally aspirated high revving engine where power/torque rises with revs and both peak quite high up the rev range). And of course RWD.
Also get what you paid for, the Scoobs are reasonably cheap performance cars.
Spoken like a true Gran Turismo hero.
Associate
Not all Evo's...I thought we'd already had this discussion? lol.
All the 4,5,6's peak at 3k RPM. And the 360 lb/ft at 3.2k RPM peak torque of the 9 FQ-360 is down to extra boost and the MIVEC head...the turbo has little to do with it. Stick an 80 series on an earlier Evo and it will not spool any quicker.
Having driven both and having had my ST for around two years (including getting the Mountune kit fitted recently) I can tell you that there is a world of difference between them.
The Impreza will outrun an ST on a twisty B road all day long. Ok its interior looks like something out of the 80's (even with the added silver touches) and it probably lacks a bit of steering feel (again subjective depending upon the driver) but you can't get away from the sheer grip that it generates and how easy it is to make rapid progress.
Torque wise, according to Google, there isn't much in it between a tuned ST and the Impreza you drove. However, I've got no doubt that the ST will feel quicker in gear due to its torque curve and that 5 pot engine poping and banging away. That's probably what got you thinking in the first place that the Impreza felt slower through the gears.
Didn't happen to notice what tyres were on the front?
When I got mine it was fitted with Goodyear Excellence (not sure why Ford went through this phase). They never inspired confidence and would give up rather to quickly on hard cornering. I ended up getting some Asymmetrics instead and it completely transformed the car, ended up with a lot more front end feel and much better cornering ability.
The Impreza will outrun an ST on a twisty B road all day long. Ok its interior looks like something out of the 80's (even with the added silver touches) and it probably lacks a bit of steering feel (again subjective depending upon the driver) but you can't get away from the sheer grip that it generates and how easy it is to make rapid progress.
Torque wise, according to Google, there isn't much in it between a tuned ST and the Impreza you drove. However, I've got no doubt that the ST will feel quicker in gear due to its torque curve and that 5 pot engine poping and banging away
. That's probably what got you thinking in the first place that the Impreza felt slower through the gears.Didn't happen to notice what tyres were on the front?
When I got mine it was fitted with Goodyear Excellence (not sure why Ford went through this phase). They never inspired confidence and would give up rather to quickly on hard cornering. I ended up getting some Asymmetrics instead and it completely transformed the car, ended up with a lot more front end feel and much better cornering ability.
Caporegime
This does not surprise me tbh,hardly comparable, but its my lasting impression of the Sierra 4x4 Cosworth compared to its 2WD brother!
The former was actually a lot quicker point to point, the latter felt much faster and was a real handful, especially in the wet.
4x4 does take a bit from the experience I guess.....
Happy days....
Last edited:
I must have really low standards as I've not got a problem with the interior on my WRX. Seems alright to me, and have had lots of drive time in more 'prestige' cabins.
Seats, steering wheel and gear knob (although still Subaru it's a Momo accessory rather than standard) are all nice to feel/comfy
Seats, steering wheel and gear knob (although still Subaru it's a Momo accessory rather than standard) are all nice to feel/comfy
Associate
Well, after reading this thread today I challenged my friend to a dual with both mentioned cars, on Forza 3 of course.
*all driving aids off, manual but not with clutch*
Tuned the ST up to 275bhp to match the claim by OP, and was forced to use the newer none bug eye impreza as the bug eye isn't in the game in standard or PPP spec but it was only slightly more powerfull so it had to do.
We tried 3 different tracks, Silverstone, Mugello, Nurburgring. On every track no matter who drove it the Subaru was the quicker car. It was also much better in the corners, with much more stability than the ST had. There wasn't as much between them on the straight bits but then whats so exciting about racing in straight lines? Silverstone for example I was almost 7 seconds a lap faster in the Impreza than the ST, consistantly.
I know that this test could be in no way a true reflection on either car in the real world, but it's gotta be not a million miles off as a lot of work did go into producing the game.
I know its all a moot point as the point the op was trying to make was that the Impreza just didnt feel as fast as the ST and for him he's right. I've driven several cars that have really underwhelmed me until i've looked at the speedo and been surprised (Audi TT prime example)
I'd love to own both cars at some point, but my sensible side says it'd be an ST long before it'd be an STi.
We have and my point which I made there was.
A standard EVO makes peak torque at 3000-3500rpm but only 250-275lb/ft of it.
FQ models make their peak torque at 4400rpm of 300-340lb/ft depending on model.
Only the FQ-360 makes peak torque at 3200rpm and a whole 363lb/ft of it too, plus due to extra boost they pull harder too redline.
Now in regards to tuning lesser models, am really not sure what the score is, I did drive an 8 tuned to 360 horses but it was awful, really needed revving hard and I drove this within 1hr of driving an 9 MR FQ-360 and the 9 was just 10x better in power delivery. The 8 was just a mental frenzy from 5000rpm, it basically had a very poor usable power band.
If its possible to tune say a 9 FQ-300 to 360 and beyond levels then great, but how come other FQ models in the 9 series don't hit peak torque until 4400rpm?
Are you for real? Whilst we all know the STI is going to be faster on track, are you really using a computer game to test it and then reporting back to a motoring forum with the results?
Man of Honour
I'm guessing from this bit:
that it wasn't entirely serious. It does however, agree with what pretty much everyone has been saying...
M