Car and Driver Comparo is out
#452
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Thats funny, I spent 6 months researching potential DD's for my wants and needs before I bought the RA. This gives me the right to say so, unlike you, that to ME and many others who enjoy it, that it IS the best daily driver. Get bent Amby. Who are you to say what is the best mister gloater oooooh Im a lamerator.
I mean MODERATOR
I mean MODERATOR
#453
Evolving Member
Trubo and I can't be the only ones I assure you that like it for a DD. Amby you should actually try an RA some day, you might actually like it!!! But guess if that were to happen you'd have to go to the wrx site and raz everyone on how much better it is than a wrx. Now that would be fun no???
#454
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Trubo and I can't be the only ones I assure you that like it for a DD. Amby you should actually try an RA some day, you might actually like it!!! But guess if that were to happen you'd have to go to the wrx site and raz everyone on how much better it is than a wrx. Now that would be fun no???
#455
Evolving Member
back to topic
Car and Diver comparo....... I prefer the RA for a DD over the WRX due to the fact that I wanted a paddleshift trans instead of a stick as I do alot of stop and go city driving and wanted something new. I don't like front wheel drive cars so the other in the comparo didn't interest me. I wanted awd and I had two choices for that price point, so I chose the RA.
#456
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Fine discuss away. why would someone post a pic of a troll for you though? I'm not the only one having a hard time swallowing your comments. Please be Moderator like then (suggesting of higher regard than joe poster) and show us (not speculating) why what ever car is this or that and not craming your views of it down our throats.
back to topic
Car and Diver comparo....... I prefer the RA for a DD over the WRX due to the fact that I wanted a paddleshift trans instead of a stick as I do alot of stop and go city driving and wanted something new. I don't like front wheel drive cars so the other in the comparo didn't interest me. I wanted awd and I had two choices for that price point, so I chose the RA.
back to topic
Car and Diver comparo....... I prefer the RA for a DD over the WRX due to the fact that I wanted a paddleshift trans instead of a stick as I do alot of stop and go city driving and wanted something new. I don't like front wheel drive cars so the other in the comparo didn't interest me. I wanted awd and I had two choices for that price point, so I chose the RA.
#457
Evolving Member
I tell you what, you and I are not actually that far apart. If you come through Kelowna Or I come through Calgary I would be glad to swap cars with you, if you agree for a fun test and discover session, in all seriousness. This could be a good learning expirience not only for you and me but many other readers on this form. Then you could honestly say you comments on the car first hand. What you think?
#458
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
That could work although being realistic by the time one of us is in the other city/town, your car is likely to be modified and mine will be even more modified than it is now. Eventually I'll find a way to drive a stock Ralliart, maybe in the summer (no point testing it during the winter).
#459
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Inbetween Miami and Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 2,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
? I have posted numerous fact-based arguments that you and others have chosen to ignore. Obvious ones, the fact that somehow, on the dyno people have decided to use, the Ralliart posts numbers barely under it's crank HP rating and within spitting distance of the Evo. Of course this was blown over. Funny how people want to say their opinions but when someone says a conflicting view, it's all of the sudden a problem. Moderators have opinions too.
#460
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The failed engines don't make the WRX inferior performance-wise but reliability/quality-wise definitely inferior. Something else to ponder is that the WRX engines that aren't failing. How are we to know they will last and take the abuse of modding? Maybe they are ticking time bombs that could fail at 20K miles or 50K miles without warning? Only time will tell but to me that's just too much risk IMO to buy a car that is quicker only from a drag launch (5-60 mph times are identical).
#461
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Cybertron
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The WRX does not 'crush' the R/A in those numbers.
It's almost even.
Using Road and Tracks November numbers, it's real close.
0-50mph
SS: 4.4
Ms3: 4.3
R/A: 4.0
WRX: 4.0
0-60:
SS: 5.4
Ms3: 5.7
R/A: 5.4
WRX: 5.1
It's almost even.
Using Road and Tracks November numbers, it's real close.
0-50mph
SS: 4.4
Ms3: 4.3
R/A: 4.0
WRX: 4.0
0-60:
SS: 5.4
Ms3: 5.7
R/A: 5.4
WRX: 5.1
#462
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please read what was written. I said the WRX CRUSHES the RA from 30-50. WRX 10.8 Ra 15.3. I ALSO said that the RA is pretty good from 5-30MPH. As evidenced by your numbers. Please post the zero to 100 numbers from the Road and Track. ALSO, C&D uses HIGHLY accurate GPS equiptment to get their numbers, so I think they are very solid figures. You can argue driver skill if you want, but I would say that would only hurt the WRX since it is more variable than the auto/manumatic
Last edited by dboz; Nov 30, 2008 at 08:29 AM.
#463
Evolved Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fredericton, NB, Canada
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please read what was written. I said the WRX CRUSHES the RA from 30-50. WRX 10.8 Ra 15.3. I ALSO said that the RA is pretty good from 5-30MPH. As evidenced by your numbers. Please post the zero to 100 numbers from the Road and Track. ALSO, C&D uses HIGHLY accurate GPS equiptment to get their numbers, so I think they are very solid figures. You can argue driver skill if you want, but I would say that would only hurt the WRX since it is more variable than the auto/manumatic
#464
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS is not highly accurate for this sort of timing... I know that's not technically what you said -- technically you meant highly accurate for a GPS system, whatever that may mean -- but it's highly misleading to call any GPS system "highly accurate" for measuring speeds over tenths of seconds.
Distance measurements obtained by integrating the speed over a set course show excellent accuracy - typically a few centimetres over distances of many tens or even hundreds of meters. The accuracy of the distance measurement from a 100mph brake test to a full stop is typically in the range of 2-3cm.
GPS has over-achieved its original goals in almost every way - including its reliability, the life expectancies of the satellites, and its accuracy. Because of this, most GPS timing and frequency equipment manufacturers ignore the ICD-GPS-200 so they can specify their equipment at better than the +/- 100 nanosecond level of UTC accuracy.
http://www.dynoplus.co.uk/dynostar.shtml
http://edageek.com/2008/09/11/oem-vehicle-testing/
Although GPS is well known for navigation, tracking, and mapping, it's also used to disseminate precise time, time intervals, and frequency. Time is a powerful commodity, and exact time is even better. Knowing that a group of timed events is perfectly synchronized is often very important. There are three fundamental ways we use time. As a universal marker, time tells us when things happened or when they will. As a way to synchronize people, events, even other types of signals, time helps keep the world on schedule. GPS satellites carry highly accurate atomic clocks. And in order for the system to work, our GPS receivers here on the ground synchronize themselves to these clocks. That means that every GPS receiver is, in essence, an atomic accuracy clock.
Last edited by dboz; Nov 30, 2008 at 09:07 AM.
#465
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Cybertron
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please read what was written. I said the WRX CRUSHES the RA from 30-50. WRX 10.8 Ra 15.3. I ALSO said that the RA is pretty good from 5-30MPH. As evidenced by your numbers. Please post the zero to 100 numbers from the Road and Track. ALSO, C&D uses HIGHLY accurate GPS equiptment to get their numbers, so I think they are very solid figures. You can argue driver skill if you want, but I would say that would only hurt the WRX since it is more variable than the auto/manumatic
Same chart that i got DBA readings for the cabin noise.
And i am not going to compare which magazine has more accurate tools.
I don't care what anyone says.
That is just BS if someone is going to argue that point.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...risonchart.pdf
from 30 to 50 mph
1.8 to 4.0 seconds - for WRX
1.9 to 4.0 secondes - for R/A
According to these numbers, how is the WRX crushing the R/A in 30-50mph?
The R/A and WRX is neck and neck in this chart from 0-60 all around.
whether you measuring from 10-60, 20-60, 30-60.
These debates are getting real ****.
I have completely lost the whole point of this debate.
What are you guys trying to prove now?
Either way, i think I am done, here.
I already contacted TTP about the Zchip, their reply will determine my next move.