Whats faster VY SS ute or 02 WRX

[Mark Anagnostou]

Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
power.
But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.

[Scotty]

"Mark Anagnostou" <markaias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:429c3fc4$0$5086$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
> power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>
>

So based on the 1-400m times you will go out and buy that car!?!?


Damn wheres that Gene Pool chlorine again...........

[Mark H]

> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
> power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.

WRX should pip it, in the dry, with an average driver in each car.

Chuck in some rain or a brutal clutch dump, hell, both - the WRX will be
over the line while the Commy's still burning rubber.

Of course, there's no real contest between the two. Small jap AWD turbo
sportscar versus Aussie v8 ute.
If you are tossing up between the two, chances are you'll be more interested
in pulling a burnout in the ute than visiting some wet, twisty roads in the
Rex.

Given any situation where it's not all about straight-line speed, the rex
will win.
As for just traffic light drags, it all comes down to the driver. Very
similar performance.

-mark

[sheik yerbouti]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 20:43:17 +1000, "Mark Anagnostou"
<markaias@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
>Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
>Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
>Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
>power.
>But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>

i think it is fairly close on the 'fully sick' stakes, but i would
give it to the rexxy if you put a giant blow off valve on that sounds
like a tyre puncture with every gear change, even when idling through
heavy traffic.

the VY is fairly up there too bro, but you need chrome-looking alloys
and impractically low ride height so that you cause a traffic jam when
you arrive at a speed hump, also the HOLDEN sticker across the front
or rear windscreen is a necessity!



---
sheik's auto service centre
88 Wilsons Rd Doncaster 3108
(03) 8855 8077, http://www.freewebs.com/sheik_yerbouti
specialising in transmission service
5% discount if you say you saw us on aus.cars

[Ben Willcox]

Traction is the hardest part for the ute. At willowbank the 2 wrxs ive ran
both got me on the start back even at 1/8th and the my ute gets home by a
easy car length. It a lot to do with the driver but wrx drivers tend to do
massive clutch dumps, my utes a auto and i launch at around 2k rpm.
ben

"Mark Anagnostou" <markaias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:429c3fc4$0$5086$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
> power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>
>

[Rainbow Warrior]

"Mark Anagnostou" <markaias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:429c3fc4$0$5086$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
> power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.

I've heard the WRX seats more people, but the ute also carries gravel &
chickens better.
VY Wagon is better for towing.

[reg-john]

02 wrxes look like complete shit. they are better performance cars.

vy ss utes are good all round grunty things, a lot more comfortable in terms
of suspension and seats, especially if you get one with leather seats.

if you want outright cornering and speed, go the rex. if you want to
sacrifice a little of that for a torquey, easy to drive rwd, go the ute.

depends on your idea of fun. the complete lack of torque below 3grand in the
rex turned me off it, as well as the seats. not that bad, but long journeys
kill me in rexes.


"Mark Anagnostou" <markaias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:429c3fc4$0$5086$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
> power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>
>

[girl-sat]

Bloody Ricers.....Can't stand'em

[reg-john]

or you could buy a shitheap vn, try in vain to fix the transmission
constantly, and then pretend you own a decent car on a newsgroup...


"sheik yerbouti" <delbo21@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cego91hsrsm2vi79k65pu9504kas3covmo@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 31 May 2005 20:43:17 +1000, "Mark Anagnostou"
> <markaias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
>>Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
>>Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
>>Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
>>power.
>>But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>>
>
> i think it is fairly close on the 'fully sick' stakes, but i would
> give it to the rexxy if you put a giant blow off valve on that sounds
> like a tyre puncture with every gear change, even when idling through
> heavy traffic.
>
> the VY is fairly up there too bro, but you need chrome-looking alloys
> and impractically low ride height so that you cause a traffic jam when
> you arrive at a speed hump, also the HOLDEN sticker across the front
> or rear windscreen is a necessity!
>
>
>
> ---
> sheik's auto service centre
> 88 Wilsons Rd Doncaster 3108
> (03) 8855 8077, http://www.freewebs.com/sheik_yerbouti
> specialising in transmission service
> 5% discount if you say you saw us on aus.cars

[girl-sat]

WRX is faster,they were at 5.5sec to 100k a few years back and faster
down the quarter,as I had to upgrade my Mazda'a slightly to stay at
par,since the corvette 5.7l noidea if offered in ss utes things have
not changed much in holden speed department.

If had to choose I would chase an R32 Skymobile,you get a complete
package this way.....ha ha

[DalienX]

Mark Anagnostou wrote:

> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down
> too. Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit
> load of more power.
> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.

Depends....

If you want a car thats going to win the drag race to 400 meters, get
the wrx

If you want a car thats going to last more than a year, wont break down
every month, can tow just about anything, sounds shit loads better, can
overtake trucks on the highway easier... then get the ss ute.

--
DalienX

[reg-john]

completely wrong. thanks for coming.


"girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117540526.537113.106860@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> WRX is faster,they were at 5.5sec to 100k a few years back and faster
> down the quarter,as I had to upgrade my Mazda'a slightly to stay at
> par,since the corvette 5.7l noidea if offered in ss utes things have
> not changed much in holden speed department.
>
> If had to choose I would chase an R32 Skymobile,you get a complete
> package this way.....ha ha
>

[OzOne]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:05:51 GMT, "reg-john" <a@a.com> scribbled
thusly:

>completely wrong. thanks for coming.
>
>
>"girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1117540526.537113.106860@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
>> WRX is faster,they were at 5.5sec to 100k a few years back and faster
>> down the quarter,as I had to upgrade my Mazda'a slightly to stay at
>> par,since the corvette 5.7l noidea if offered in ss utes things have
>> not changed much in holden speed department.
>>
>> If had to choose I would chase an R32 Skymobile,you get a complete
>> package this way.....ha ha
>>
>

She's not coming......she's still diddling around


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

[girl-sat]

The only thing you could consider wrong is that ss bombs are about
..5sec faster than 10 years ago down the quarter,and .2 or .1 sec faster
to 100k.
Big improvment.....its like man on the moon for bombadore fans.
It was the GTR that I was concerned about at about 3.4sec to 100k, and
12 sec quarters however someone informed me they were discontinued,made
to order,or a failure ,whatever takes your fancy,
Do ya think its easy to get a mazda to do 3.4sec to
100k.......$10,000.00 will do it and alot of fucking arround.Happy as
Ray in rainbow colored pants.

[sheik yerbouti]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 11:53:20 GMT, "reg-john" <a@a.com> wrote:

>or you could buy a shitheap vn, try in vain to fix the transmission
>constantly, and then pretend you own a decent car on a newsgroup...
>

in vain? i'm rebuilding it you sunnafabitch

---
sheik's auto service centre
88 Wilsons Rd Doncaster 3108
(03) 8855 8077, http://www.freewebs.com/sheik_yerbouti
specialising in transmission service
5% discount if you say you saw us on aus.cars

[Vulture]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 20:55:51 +1000, Mark H wrote
(in article <429c42bc@duster.adelaide.on.net>):

>> Hi all,just wondering wich of these two cars is faster in a 0-400.
>> Also any general opinoins to the virtues of each car.
>> Im in the market and these two are what ive narrowed my choice down too.
>> Looking at the stats the VY aint much heavier but has a shit load of more
>> power.
>> But freinds have told me the WRX is quicker.
>
> WRX should pip it, in the dry, with an average driver in each car.
>
> Chuck in some rain or a brutal clutch dump, hell, both - the WRX will be
> over the line while the Commy's still burning rubber.

I beg to differ: in the dry, the SS any day UNLESS the WRX driver is
capable/willing to dump the clutch at revs that would make a mechanic cringe.
I haven't been bettered by a WRX not launched this way yet in a pretty
standard VY SS. If the WRX driver is willing to thrash the shit out of his
driveline or in the wet then sure, it is quicker. IMHO it the difference
between the "real world" and reading the back of a magazine spec sheet. I
think there are many youngsters out there who think that since a WRX does
under 6 for 0-100 then it must be easily reproducible.

A friend of mine has an MY04 and was shocked to be blown away by a standard
Falcon 6. It's usually easy to pick the ones who are going to launch it fast
as one can hear the rex rev its tits off immediately prior. If not, then it's
all smiles to the V8 and you should see the look on their faces! Noisy blow
off valve nonsense won't save you against a quick V8.

[sheik yerbouti]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 22:29:32 +1000, Vulture <noton@mywatch.com> wrote:

>I beg to differ: in the dry, the SS any day UNLESS the WRX driver is
>capable/willing to dump the clutch at revs that would make a mechanic cringe.

very true. i've been in a WRX when the clutch was dumped on a 1/4 mile
run and it wasn't pretty... the beauty of RWD is you can just spin it
up the right amount without too much concern for the driveline.

---
sheik's auto service centre
88 Wilsons Rd Doncaster 3108
(03) 8855 8077, http://www.freewebs.com/sheik_yerbouti
specialising in transmission service
5% discount if you say you saw us on aus.cars

[girl-sat]

Yeah you gotta cain the shit out of them,you are specifically talking
midrange torque now.
Sure the big motor will beat it midrange,however in all general talk I
don't ever hear many V8's cain the shit out of their engines in drags
off the lights first time round and are generally beaten by my over
reving RX.There is no second chance.

The street drags you get in are obviously alot different to the ones
arround here off the lights at night,120Y innocent buzz boxes with 4
inch crossply tyres verse 5L hypo Bombadore 10inchTires off the line is
a site to see and hear in a small,but busy night main street.
Let me assure you the V8's only thash when they got beaten doing what
you implied,its second time round all the action happens,and it
happenes over and over again,neither give up,and big engines and the
blokes driving them are prepared to loose and generally do.
You would be wasting your time in a stock SS here but dose not stop
them from from going round and tring,I even got the shit thrashed out
of me by a Datsun 120Y(Must have had Nitros it did not spin wheels
once)Never felt the same again.....ohhhh.

[reg-john]

"girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117541916.497777.209580@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> The only thing you could consider wrong is that ss bombs are about
> .5sec faster than 10 years ago down the quarter,and .2 or .1 sec faster
> to 100k.
> Big improvment.....its like man on the moon for bombadore fans.
> It was the GTR that I was concerned about at about 3.4sec to 100k, and
> 12 sec quarters however someone informed me they were discontinued,made
> to order,or a failure ,whatever takes your fancy,
> Do ya think its easy to get a mazda to do 3.4sec to
> 100k.......$10,000.00 will do it and alot of fucking arround.Happy as
> Ray in rainbow colored pants.
>

10grand will see a twin turbo thrown onto Gen3 and itll do a low 10 second
ET, with low boost.

[ardz]

"girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117541916.497777.209580@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> The only thing you could consider wrong is that ss bombs are about
> .5sec faster than 10 years ago down the quarter,and .2 or .1 sec faster
> to 100k.
> Big improvment.....its like man on the moon for bombadore fans.
> It was the GTR that I was concerned about at about 3.4sec to 100k, and
> 12 sec quarters however someone informed me they were discontinued,made
> to order,or a failure ,whatever takes your fancy,
> Do ya think its easy to get a mazda to do 3.4sec to
> 100k.......$10,000.00 will do it and alot of fucking arround.Happy as
> Ray in rainbow colored pants.
>

Hmmmm.....95 SS...Low 15sec quarters and low 7sec 0-100 times.
Now.............05 SS...High 13/Low 14 quarters and high 5s/Low 6s 0-100
times.

Thats a big difference if ever i saw one. Especially with that weight gain
over the years. I would hate to see what an LS2 powered SS would do when the
time comes.