Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

Fast competition under 400hp to watch out for!


phr3121

Recommended Posts

Road & Track, June 2007 Link to article...

Cars: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X vs. Subaru Impreza WRX STI

 

Butt ugly? Definitely, but fast! :chairshot:

 

MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION X *

Price: $32,000

Curb weight: 3500 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & head, turbo inline-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 300 bhp @ 7000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

---------------------------------------------------

 

SUBARU IMPREZA WRX STI *

Price: $35,000

Curb weight: 3300 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & heads, turbo flat-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 320 bhp @ 6000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

post-9484-1188454741_thumb.jpg

post-9484-1188454741_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last years WRX STI was a 13.4 sec car with 300 hp. So 20 hp jump makes it a middle 12 car now? I will have to see the first one before I believe it. The evo was a tick slower than the WRX as well. I am not afraid of either in my 04' Lighting, just a waste of time for a GT500, especially one with a pulley and intake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bring it.

 

Absolutely! I just don't want to hear any bullcrap about wanting to race from a dig, on the street, to 60mph. RWD will not equal AWD on the street for acceleration. I will race from a roll though.

 

The red one needs a higher rear wing, that should make it look less boxy and the blue one looks like a wedge of cheese slightly over ripe :hysterical:

 

Spoiled cheese wedge looks indeed!! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, my Shelby is still stock too!

By the way, this thread was not started as a Shelby GT500 "bashing" session as some folks might think, I was merely trying to generate some discussion on these Japanese cars.

 

The good thing about racing one of these cars (stock-on-stock) is that it would really come down to the driver and his driving. Here is a good quote from another post:

 

"...fast cars vs. slow ones - drag and street racing relies on a lot of things, and weaker cars take stronger cars every day due to gearing and traction and driving issues that can toss a conditional advantage to the lesser car in a certain situation. I've beaten plenty of faster cars than mine on the street. I used to kill my buddy's built and nitroused 11-second 5.0 in streetlight sprints with my '93 6-speed Corvette, only because he couldn't hook on street tires, and I could. That didn't cause me to go out and say that my Corvette should run 11's..., it just caused my buddy to say "damn, that thing hooks and goes!!", and we both knew who's car was truly dominant...I saw a fumbling bumbling C6 Z06 owner who couldn't break into the 12's at my local track. It's not easy walking that razor's edge out of the hole with 500hp under your foot, so guys who aren't terribly "gifted" in manipulating machinery really can look like bozos out on the strip, even if they paid $70 grand for the latest and greatest mouse-trap. That doesn't mean the car is slow though." ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Road & Track, June 2007 Link to article...

Cars: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X vs. Subaru Impreza WRX STI

 

Butt ugly? Definitely, but fast! :chairshot:

 

MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION X *

Price: $32,000

Curb weight: 3500 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & head, turbo inline-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 300 bhp @ 7000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

---------------------------------------------------

 

SUBARU IMPREZA WRX STI *

Price: $35,000

Curb weight: 3300 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & heads, turbo flat-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 320 bhp @ 6000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

 

Kind of like overweight, ugly women. They have all the right parts to get it done, but they just don't do it for me. :hysterical2:

 

HSURB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you trying to :stirpot: ?

 

:rolleyes: I knew this would be coming from someone. Dave, you missed my statement above:

 

By the way, this thread was not started as a Shelby GT500 "bashing" session as some folks might think, I was merely trying to generate some discussion on these Japanese cars.

 

I'm trying to get a discussion going on the pros-and-cons of small cars (stock) that hit the 1/4 mile between 12 and 13 ETs with 400hp or less.

I'm a 2007 Ford Shelby GT500 owner by choice. I don't understand why some folks get so temperamental when discussing possible drawbacks to this vehicle.

I'll take the bad with the good! :ohsnap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to spend a fair amount of time doing performance driving training in these cars. I just drove the 08 in LA last week for a intro by Subaru. On tracks like the "Streets of Willow" these cars are able to run 1:30 on most days stock. The Evo historically has less understeer than the STI, overcoming that is one of the bigger tuner challenges. STI's also enjoy a adjustable front/rear diff that is located in the center console

 

At Buttonwillow raceway the track record for Time Attack is in a modified version of the EVO. BTW the Subaru is on a completely different chassis than last year.

 

Cost no object, Id take the Gt500 all day for a driver!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PHR3121

- I know this thread was not started as a "GT500" bashing thread. No offense or defensive reaction taken by me. Heck I even owned a 2005 STi and an 06 Evo IX MR. They are both wonderful and fast cars. I loved both of them very much and ultimately they were probably a better fit for me with these South Dakota winters due to their AWD and turbocharged engines. Performance per dollar on those cars really cannot be matched anywhere else and they deserve respect.

 

With that said....I did not regret selling the 05 STi to get the 06 EVO IX MR nor did I regret selling the MR to get the GT500. It's more grown-up, faster, and has more culture/legacy behind it.

Those subaru's and mitsu's are fast, but they also represent a younger time in my life as I am now 27 and needing a more mature car like the GT500 :hysterical2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says that the performance report is estimated. The test I saw on those 2 same cars from Edmunds.com HERE said that they ran 13.3 & 13.6 @ $35K. I'll run them anytime with my cheaper GT, there better be a good driver at their wheel. Anyways, they look like souped-up economy cars!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says that the performance report is estimated. The test I saw on those 2 same cars from Edmunds.com HERE said that they ran 13.3 & 13.6 @ $35K. I'll run them anytime with my cheaper GT, there better be a good driver at their wheel. Anyways, they look like souped-up economy cars!

 

 

They ARE suped up economy cars!! :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They ARE suped up economy cars!! :hysterical:

 

Yeah I thought the STi was ugly before, but making it a hatchback brought it to a whole new level of vomit. You know what's bad, is the pictures actually make that thing look better than it really does. Next time you see a Subaru dealership, pull in and look at the hatchback WRX which is fundamentally the same car or the Hatch STi if they have one.

 

I seriously couldn't decide whether to hurl, laugh, or do both so I split. :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. folks!

The performance of these cars remind me somewhat of the Pontiac GTO, nice bang for the buck! I don't understand why the designers couldn't come up with a better looking car for all three models. Good point about the AWD on the Mitsubishi and Subaru. Anyone with less money could purchase any of the three (or a Mustang GT) and after some modifications have the same or superior performance to a (stock) Shelby GT500.

 

Anyway, the idea of having my (stock) Shelby GT500 being beaten by a stock/modified smaller car doesn't make me very happy! I'll definitely race them stock!

 

Like the man said:

"...fast cars vs. slow ones - drag and street racing relies on a lot of things, and weaker cars take stronger cars every day due to gearing and traction and driving issues that can toss a conditional advantage to the lesser car in a certain situation....you don't have to have the fastest car at the track to win a bracket race. It is very important for you to practice your launch and work on your reaction time. If you want to win races you need to be as consistent as your vehicle, or you might as well just sit and watch."

 

Check out the door detail on this blue Shelby.....and modifications on this red Mustang GT:

post-9484-1188508435_thumb.jpg

post-9484-1188508450_thumb.jpg

post-9484-1188508435_thumb.jpg

post-9484-1188508450_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: I knew this would be coming from someone. Dave, you missed my statement above:

I'm trying to get a discussion going on the pros-and-cons of small cars (stock) that hit the 1/4 mile between 12 and 13 ETs with 400hp or less.

I'm a 2007 Ford Shelby GT500 owner by choice. I don't understand why some folks get so temperamental when discussing possible drawbacks to this vehicle.

I'll take the bad with the good! :ohsnap:

That's not what I meant phr...sorry if it came across that way. I'm wondering why you posted essentially the same thing twice...one week apart.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave, yes, the article was posted as part of another thread in the Off Topic Forum but there wasn't much of a response.

I just put my disclaimer in there since at times, my experience, it seems that some folks take things the wrong way and get very defensive about anything that remotely resembles a criticism or a challenge to the Shelby GT500. Understandable, since it is a great car and this is a Mustang/Shelby Forum. I hate it when this :gang: happens!

 

No hard feelings :beerchug:

Paulo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Road & Track, June 2007 Link to article...

Cars: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X vs. Subaru Impreza WRX STI

 

Butt ugly? Definitely, but fast! :chairshot:

 

MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION X *

Price: $32,000

Curb weight: 3500 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & head, turbo inline-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 300 bhp @ 7000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

---------------------------------------------------

 

SUBARU IMPREZA WRX STI *

Price: $35,000

Curb weight: 3300 lb

 

Engine:

Type: Alum. block & heads, turbo flat-4

Valves: 4-valves/cyl

Horsepower: est 320 bhp @ 6000 rpm

 

Performance:

0–60 mph: est 4.5 sec

0–1320 ft (¼ mile): est 12.5 sec

 

as a wise man once said (on this forum, I believe?)

 

you can shoot a turd out of the barrel of a gun..... and it's a fast turd!.... but it is still a turd in the end. :hysterical2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your Shelby has OE suspension, that "ugly pig with lipstick" Subaru will eat your lunch on a tight, twisty road course (as slidemaster implied earlier). Now if the track has any decent long straights or big sweepers they're no match for us.

 

But if 1320' is your thing, then "happy hunting"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your Shelby has OE suspension, that "ugly pig with lipstick" Subaru will eat your lunch on a tight, twisty road course (as slidemaster implied earlier). Now if the track has any decent long straights or big sweepers they're no match for us.

 

But if 1320' is your thing, then "happy hunting"!

I know I know, just having some fun. They are fast but I'd rather have the Mustang. :)

 

Nice G.O. GT500!!! :happy feet:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...