BRZ vs 2015 WRX STI

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Best from a lap time standpoint? Sure. Most fun to drive? Definitely not. Honestly, I'd take an STi over a 1LE any day. The Camaro feels heavy and a bit non responsive to me, and it doesn't have a usable back seat, and it has huge blind spots. Admittedly, the STi isn't exactly a Lotus either, but at least it has AWD (hooray for ice racing and rallycross!) and a usable back seat. I really do want to love an American muscle car - they look and sound fantastic, and they truly are excellent cars from a pure numbers standpoint, but to me, they're just lacking some in the fun factor when you drive them. I do have some hope for the new Mustang GT though, since the 5.0 engine is wonderful.

(I also really need to drive a new Corvette...)

STI s are still heavy at 3400 lbs ( if the options don't add more to make it close to 3500 lbs) and fun factor is a subjective term since we were talking about track performance I never talked about the functionality, seats etc..

AWD is nice for winter for sure but when it comes to pure, neutral, proper handling RWD still wins with its simplicity and ability to handle more power and torque respectively

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by blackhawkdown

the STi and EVO are great performance cars per the $35k-40k range. It is just that there are a lot of import fanboys who just don't want to admit that domestics are just as good now. Domestics have come a long ways from the 80's, 90's and even into the 2000's. There are a lot of great domestic cars for your $ like the Mustang, Focus ST, Camaro, and others in the same price range as a FRS/BRZ and even better in the STi range.

I just think there are to many JDM fanboys here are just being bias, and this is coming from a JDM fanboy.

Until the domestics bring the weight of their offerings down by 300-700lbs (depends on model) I will continue to not even consider them. Never in my life will I understand how a mid-sized coupe has to weight 3600-4000 lbs (or 3200 for a FF hot hatch).

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by glamcem

STI s are still heavy at 3400 lbs ( if the options don't add more to make it close to 3500 lbs) and fun factor is a subjective term since we were talking about track performance I never talked about the functionality, seats etc..

AWD is nice for winter for sure but when it comes to pure, neutral, proper handling RWD still wins with its simplicity and ability to handle more power and torque respectively

Sure, the STi weighs 3400lb or so, but that's still 450lb lighter than a 1LE (that's as much of a weight gap as there is between a Cayman and an STi). As for your final statement, sure, RWD handles nicely, but AWD can handle more power and torque than RWD (as proven by every stupid-fast AWD supercar out there today).

[DeeezNuuuts83]

RWD can handle it too, it's just that you become traction limited with that much torque. But there are still plenty of "stupid-fast" supercars that don't have AWD, like the LaFerrari and McLaren P1.

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by chrisl

Sure, the STi weighs 3400lb or so, but that's still 450lb lighter than a 1LE (that's as much of a weight gap as there is between a Cayman and an STi). As for your final statement, sure, RWD handles nicely, but AWD can handle more power and torque than RWD (as proven by every stupid-fast AWD supercar out there today).

Not correct It takes a lot more complex and beefier drivetrain to handle more power with AWD systems which also adds a lot of weight and complexity . Ever wondered why so many GT-R s dealt with transmission and differential issues? In the manual it says "if the car is used for high performance event change your transmission oil every 3k miles".

Also a lot more hp to compensate the drivetrain loss in AWD platform compared to RWD or FWD.

Also, you have to take a look at the weight difference in percentage since the effect of the 450 lbs in sub 3000 lbs cars a lot bigger. Even with the weight difference (with about 12-13%) Camaro 1LE has the lbs per hp advantage ( 11.52 lbs/hp on the STI and 8.95 lbs/hp on the Camaro)

In addition to that, not all HP is created equally when it comes to real world performance, as you may know
See below chart and notice even with the aftermarket turbo vs LS3 stock power, V8 is miles ahead of the game ( it says Z06 but it's misprinted)

[glamcem]

let's admit V8 is a different league and no matter what you do to your small 4 cylinder engine ( gigantic turbo ..etc) you can never keep up with the power levels and insane torque delivery of a V8...for instance, my old C5 Z06 made about 300 lb/ft of torque at idle!!! I repeat at idle!!

[chrisl]

I'm not disputing that the camaro is faster or that it makes more power. I'm disputing that it's more fun to drive, or that I would prefer it. I've driven a Camaro SS, and it really wasn't that impressive. It cornered flat, it had a ton of grip, and it felt heavy and slow to respond. It really wasn't what I'd look for in a fast car. Because of the heavy feeling and the lack of responsiveness, it felt substantially slower (even in a straight line) than my Cayman S, even though in reality, it's significantly faster. There's a significant difference in what makes a car fast vs what makes a car feel fast, and I'll go for the latter over the former every time. From the reviews I've seen so far, the new WRX/STi have improved substantially in that area as well, though I still doubt they feel as light or agile as I would like (but at least they have the practicality of the extra space and AWD going for them, which as I said before, would probably be the deciding factor between a 1LE and STI for me).

As for the AWD vs RWD comparison? Sure, the drivetrain itself is simpler in a RWD car - I was referring to the ability to put the power down, especially on a non-ideal road surface. There's a reason why GT-Rs, 911 Turbos, and Veyrons all use AWD rather than RWD (and I'm pretty sure it isn't to make them more usable in the snow). The LaFerrari and P1 are somewhat special and unusual cases - neither of them could put down their power without significant downforce (which already makes them an extreme rarity in the world of road-going cars), and even so, I bet the average supercar driver would struggle to use either of their power coming out of a corner or in any normal situation (sub-100mph). Not that any of this is relevant to Camaro vs STI comparisons anyways...

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by chrisl

I'm not disputing that the camaro is faster or that it makes more power. I'm disputing that it's more fun to drive, or that I would prefer it. I've driven a Camaro SS, and it really wasn't that impressive. It cornered flat, it had a ton of grip, and it felt heavy and slow to respond. It really wasn't what I'd look for in a fast car. Because of the heavy feeling and the lack of responsiveness, it felt substantially slower (even in a straight line) than my Cayman S, even though in reality, it's significantly faster. There's a significant difference in what makes a car fast vs what makes a car feel fast, and I'll go for the latter over the former every time. From the reviews I've seen so far, the new WRX/STi have improved substantially in that area as well, though I still doubt they feel as light or agile as I would like (but at least they have the practicality of the extra space and AWD going for them, which as I said before, would probably be the deciding factor between a 1LE and STI for me).

As for the AWD vs RWD comparison? Sure, the drivetrain itself is simpler in a RWD car - I was referring to the ability to put the power down, especially on a non-ideal road surface. There's a reason why GT-Rs, 911 Turbos, and Veyrons all use AWD rather than RWD (and I'm pretty sure it isn't to make them more usable in the snow). The LaFerrari and P1 are somewhat special and unusual cases - neither of them could put down their power without significant downforce (which already makes them an extreme rarity in the world of road-going cars), and even so, I bet the average supercar driver would struggle to use either of their power coming out of a corner or in any normal situation (sub-100mph). Not that any of this is relevant to Camaro vs STI comparisons anyways...

I wasn't actually comparing STI to Camaro 1LE, I was just pointing some facts about the Mustang and Camaro, and bang for buck factor..because comparing both (performance wise) is plain absurd. No one can really argue with personal preferences I actually like AWD too (not for road course track of course)..but raw V8 power and RWD is also fun for many people, "different strokes for different folks"

One thing to mention though, STI and Evo both used to be considered as performance bargain back in days (2003-2004) ..they used to cost low $30k and offered a performance comparable to M3s, Mustang GTs, 911s and even basic LS1 C5 Corvette but both lost their edges..nowadays, even Hyundai or Camry comes with near 300 hp cars unless they have to do something about this and go back to their roots they will lose competition ..that engine in the new STI is 13+ years old and still problematic, seriously?

RWD vs AWD is a whole different debate and beaten to death, the reason why some manufacturers prefer AWD is because it's easier to drive especially in the hands of an inexperienced driver..and the cars you listed are mostly rear biased torque ( 90% to 10% IIRC) ...putting 600+hp on AWD car is of course a lot easier, but let's not forget AWD is exception when it comes to Supercar levels not the RW

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by chrisl

As for the AWD vs RWD comparison? Sure, the drivetrain itself is simpler in a RWD car - I was referring to the ability to put the power down, especially on a non-ideal road surface. There's a reason why GT-Rs, 911 Turbos, and Veyrons all use AWD rather than RWD (and I'm pretty sure it isn't to make them more usable in the snow). The LaFerrari and P1 are somewhat special and unusual cases - neither of them could put down their power without significant downforce (which already makes them an extreme rarity in the world of road-going cars), and even so, I bet the average supercar driver would struggle to use either of their power coming out of a corner or in any normal situation (sub-100mph). Not that any of this is relevant to Camaro vs STI comparisons anyways...

If that were the case then why does Porsche even bother with the GT3 (which is faster than a 911 Turbo) and the GT2? The LaFerrari & P1 could handle the power with just RWD, just look at the Koenigsegg Agera, with over 1000 hp routed to the rear axle.

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

If that were the case then why does Porsche even bother with the GT3 (which is faster than a 911 Turbo) and the GT2? The LaFerrari & P1 could handle the power with just RWD, just look at the Koenigsegg Agera, with over 1000 hp routed to the rear axle.

The GT3 vs the Turbo is an interesting comparison - the Turbo is faster around some courses, the GT3 around others (though if I remember right, the Turbo tends to be a bit faster around most courses if you run both on identical tires). The GT3 is definitely not putting down as much power or torque though - it gets its advantages from a more aggressive suspension setup, stickier tires (from the factory), and less weight. The 911s also benefit from a rear-biased weight distribution, so they don't have as much difficulty putting down power as many cars with similar horsepower and 2 wheel drive. As for the LaFerrari and P1, I already addressed those - especially the P1 has so much downforce that it's really not comparable to most normal cars (and even so, most people will probably have difficulty using its power). As for the Koenigsegg, the original Koenigsegg is one of the few cars that the Stig has ever spun on the Top Gear track - it clearly has difficulty putting down all its power (especially coming out of corners) at any reasonable speed.

I'm not disputing that you can make a really fast RWD car, and that a professional driver can make it go incredibly fast around a track. However, all wheel drive can make a high-horsepower car much more usable by normally-skilled drivers on less than perfect roads, which is an important aspect of a road car (in my opinion).

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by chrisl

As for the AWD vs RWD comparison? Sure, the drivetrain itself is simpler in a RWD car - I was referring to the ability to put the power down, especially on a non-ideal road surface. There's a reason why GT-Rs, 911 Turbos, and Veyrons all use AWD rather than RWD (and I'm pretty sure it isn't to make them more usable in the snow). The LaFerrari and P1 are somewhat special and unusual cases - neither of them could put down their power without significant downforce (which already makes them an extreme rarity in the world of road-going cars), and even so, I bet the average supercar driver would struggle to use either of their power coming out of a corner or in any normal situation (sub-100mph).

But the GT-R, 911 Turbo and Veyron also benefit a lot from aerodynamics as well as helping with their stability, from the GT-R having something like a 0.26 Cd to the 911 Turbo and Veyron both having wings that pop-up at speed. Take those away and drive them at speed, and you'll notice a difference, and it still applies in far less powerful scenarios. For example, in 2005, Motor Trend did a comparison between the three Evo VIIIs available (the regular model, the wingless and stripped down RS and the top-dog MR), all of which have the same engine. While the RS accelerated the most quickly (thanks to it weighing less than the others), the winged models not only went around the track faster but also had better slalom speeds, which the testers believed were attributed to the rear-end stability aided by the wing. So yeah, downforce helps AWD too, and you don't need to be going above 100 mph.

And then you've got a lot of RWD cars that don't have huge wings or the best aerodynamics either but handle well... you've got the Viper and the various Corvette models (from the regular one to the Z06 to the ZR1), which have RWD and a truckload of torque. And then there are the RWD variants of certain Lamborghinis and Porsches too.

Originally Posted by glamcem

One thing to mention though, STI and Evo both used to be considered as performance bargain back in days (2003-2004) ..they used to cost low $30k and offered a performance comparable to M3s, Mustang GTs, 911s and even basic LS1 C5 Corvette but both lost their edges..nowadays, even Hyundai or Camry comes with near 300 hp cars unless they have to do something about this and go back to their roots they will lose competition ..that engine in the new STI is 13+ years old and still problematic, seriously?

They were both still performance bargains beyond that (I'd say 2006-2007), though pretty much the 2008 models and onward lost a lot of the bang-for-the-buck aspect when they got a little more expensive with no significant improvements over prior models, while other cars such as the ones that you mentioned made huge advances, like the C6 getting the LS2 (and then the LS3) or the Mustang GT eventually getting the Coyote engine.

Originally Posted by glamcem

RWD vs AWD is a whole different debate and beaten to death, the reason why some manufacturers prefer AWD is because it's easier to drive especially in the hands of an inexperienced driver..and the cars you listed are mostly rear biased torque ( 90% to 10% IIRC) ...putting 600+hp on AWD car is of course a lot easier, but let's not forget AWD is exception when it comes to Supercar levels not the RW

But you need a really beefy AWD system, and that takes a lot of development and can have some painful warranty/repair costs. Not that RWD systems don't need attention, but they can spin their tires more easily and let those consumables take on the load, rather than letting axles and differentials deal with the abuse and potentially break, which we saw with some of the original models of the WRX (2002), Evo (2003) and GT-R (2008), which resulted in some safeguards or updates being implemented in later models. And other than the GT-R, those are far from powerful.

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

If that were the case then why does Porsche even bother with the GT3 (which is faster than a 911 Turbo) and the GT2? The LaFerrari & P1 could handle the power with just RWD, just look at the Koenigsegg Agera, with over 1000 hp routed to the rear axle.

Launch control and automated shifting has helped tame a lot of what makes high-powered RWD cars so dangerous, along with more effective LSDs and traction controls, especially when they have varying levels of intervention.

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

But you need a really beefy AWD system, and that takes a lot of development and can have some painful warranty/repair costs. Not that RWD systems don't need attention, but they can spin their tires more easily and let those consumables take on the load, rather than letting axles and differentials deal with the abuse and potentially break, which we saw with some of the original models of the WRX (2002), Evo (2003) and GT-R (2008), which resulted in some safeguards or updates being implemented in later models. And other than the GT-R, those are far from powerful.

I actually mentioned the same exact thing in my previous post

[glamcem]

As I mentioned earlier it's really argue about intangible things (people's preferences, needs, wants, ..etc) but when it comes to track data numbers don't lie ..our beloved AWD cars ( STI and Evo) are no longer value and this is really sad if you ask me.. I've been reading Nasioc and Evo forums since 2005-2006 and with each generation owners were demanding more power ..this is not 2000s anymore the newer muscle cars (made in the U.S) also perform better at the track.. (and this comes from someone who is originally from Europe and owned various European cars you name it VW, Audi, BMW, Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Seat ..etc ) ..

it's funny when many people here in the U.S. think that European cars or even exotic cars technologically more advanced, when in Europe many people praise American cars..I think the term "grass is always greener .." is true, lol..

Have you guys ever seen this post regarding the Z28, that car is spanking some serious cars at track

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=125

take a look at the top 3-5 cars in the below list and pay attention to VIR lap times and pay close attention how many of those top five or ten cars RWD, how many of them domestic (supercar killer quite literally) and how many below $50k made below 3 mins ( hint.. starts with C and LE ..lol)

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/virgin...l_raceway.html

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html

This a whole new era, and unfortunately Japanese and European cars have been behind the game for a while

[glamcem]

and my other post in that related thread

Corvette was always a great performance bargain and recently with the advanced suspension such as magna ride and PTM (Performance Traction Management) it became a Supercar killer.. look at the newer Corvettes' track times and you will see what I am talking about ..PTM technology was so advanced, even Ferrari purchased the system from GM to use in their cars..

In addition, I've recently learned from a close friend that the Z28 shares the same suspension that is currently being used by F1 Redbull team which is called
"Multimatic Dynamic Suspension Spool Valve" for the money GM is light years ahead of the competition IMHO and Ford is even imitating the Camaro with their 15 Mustang haha