YES

stock for stock that wont kill a mach 1

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

read rest of the thread first

Yukonart

iTrader: (1)

I'd roll one.

Debadge it, relocate intercooler to the front and camouflage, and you're all set.

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

Don't even need to debadge it... it already gets dissed by people on here!! Imagine pulling on a buddy with his Honda S2000 or BMW Z4...

AZD17A2

Wow, this thread is getting heated. I would expect the average times to fall between C&Ds somewhat optimistic times and MTs really slow ones. And S2000man01 is right, being a car mag aficionado, C&D sucks, frankly. And I agree that Subaru would be wise not to rate the XT higher than their WRX, that would be bad from a marketing standpoint. Kinda like how AHM doesn't want to bring the CTR here because it would steal RSX-S sales. So they gave us the base Si with the same rating as the base RSX, no harm done in their eyes. Well, as for the XT topic at hand, it looks nice and fast, but I'm imagining if I turbo'd my wife's '03 CR-V!!!! THAT would be a sleeper SUV!!!!

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

It won't pull on an S2000.

AZD17A2

Funny, I was thinking that comment was somehow directed towards you, S2000man01. And it probably wouldn't pull, although off the line would be interesting.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

Well here's why it won't pull. It's entire advantage is off the line. It's AWD launch will outlaunch an S2k. But the S2k will pull the entire rest of the way. Look at the trap speeds. A 13.8 S2000 traps at 101 or so. Where as car and drivel's f'd up numbers say 97mph for the forester.

Then again one is a soccer mom, kid hauling SUV, and the other is a sleek and nimble roadster.

prototype

iTrader: (16)

DAMN EVEN AN SUV IS FASTER THAN OUR CIVICS...WHAT A SHAME

AZD17A2

Many, many SUVs are faster than our civics. SUV does not = slow any longer, at least for many of them. Now if you substitute "minivan" for "SUV", which also can be true, THAT is a shame...

Validus

Thats my exact point on the Mach 1. If you considered "tailights to mach 1s, bmws, etc" being ahead in the first 3 seconds before the Mach 1 pulls the entire rest of the way, as even the numbers you quote prove.

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

Hey, if you haven't read about the S2000... it's HARD to launch. They stated many times that a normal joe (ie - you, me, and that guy over there) would only muster 0-60mph of 6 to 7 secs. You got any timeslips yourself?

But ANYBODY can launch a AWD car.

Believe me, I raced 3 s2000's before in my lexus gs4000... won all.. highway pulls, off the line, whatever... been there, done that. Off the line, it was CRAP. I never even see good times at the race track either. WRX on the other hand took off like a bastard off the line.. and its consistancey shows at the track as well.

I know you own an S2000 and you think it's the king ****, but you'd get owned by WRXs.. and you will get owned by Forrest 2.5XT (which is quicker) when it comes out. Hell, a Baja Turbo will own you.

Keeping it on the subject of Forester, why don't just be a man admit the fact that it's quicker than 8.5secs.

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

Pulls AHEAD after 3 secs??

Ummm... Forester is quicker up to 70mph.. and ties the Mach1 to 1/4 mile.

Oh yeah, when a 50-something highschool teacher takes off on you in a Forester when you are sitting behind a Mach 1, it *IS* ownage.

In real life stoplight to stoplight racing, Mach1 is no match. Despite your beliefs.

Validus

Well If your idea of racing lasts 7.3 seconds, then guess thats UbEr o3nAgE I dunno but in new jersey where I live stop light to stop light is alittle longer than a 1/4 mile. If you were racing stop light to stoplight in NYC then the forrester would win. And I still don't see two cars with the same 1/4 mile as 0wnage... but maybe thats just me? Oh and btw, check out some mustang forums (www.mustangworld.com) and ask them if a Mach 1 stock can't do better than 13.8 1/4 mile. 305 hp 320 tq with comparable weight to the forrester.

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

Mustangworld.com LOL..

Dude, you should know by now, the FOURMS ARE FULL OF LIES. Guys on here do 15's with their stock Civics... and guys on RSX sites do 13's with their stock Civics. Preludes guys even say their cars are actually 14-sec cars.

Maybe you don't see Forester 2.5XT as a 13-sec car (despite two proper tests already, and the 173HP Euro-Spec S-Turbo comparison I gave you), but the truth is, it is.

I'm not going to say any more. People called Neon SRT4 times BS when it first came out. Now it's Forester. You will once again find out the meaning of under-rated horsepower.

I want you to keep a couple of things in mind:

- Forester 2.5XP is indeed quicker than a WRX Wagon, as already stated by several journalists (oh yeah, and ask WRX fourm if they can do better than 13.8s.. they'll say yes.. internet fourms!)

- Subaru has a HISTORY of under-rating cars in Japan for legal reasons

- WRX is the "badboy" of Subaru, and the image of it cannot be tainted; hence why Forester 2.5XT and Baja Turbo are not "pushed" as high performance cars, and are rated only at 215HP


There is no point of arguing about this anymore until another month, when everyone will publish their test times. So until then, let's just be patient and wait.

Validus

I never said it isnt a 13 second car, I just disagreed with you on the basic fact ths\at 2 cars with the same 1/4 mile doesnt make one own the other.
EDIT: If you dont believe them ask for time slips.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

Are you serious? You do know I run high 13's on average with a best of 13.7. I don't see either of those cars "owning" me in stock form. And as for off the line, IMO, it's one of the easiest cars to launch. On top of that, people that actually OWN S2000's (not spout crap they hear in magazines) DO run times. In fact, the average S2k owner will get 14 flat. Head over to s2ki.com and spout your BS and they will politely correct you.

You, however, have unfortunately fallen prey to this media hyped frenzy that the S2000 can't be launched easy and blah blah blah. There's nothing to it. Rev to 6000rpm. Dump clutch and floor it. You don't feather the gas, you always launch at nearly the same rpm, there is NOTHING difficult about launching an S2000.

Get your facts right, and don't swing into media hype. It's been made out to be this unlaunchable beast that no one can get better than 7 seconds 0-60, when that's simply not true.

and stop basing your "facts" on what you have or haven't seen at the track. I've seen several WRX's run 15's.... so friggin what. Does that mean I should come into this thread and **** on the WRX because I've never seen a stock one get under 14.9? No, because I know that simply isn't true.

YES

s2kman is right, his car is easily to launch. i thought you reved to 5.5k not 6 though.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

Well depending on how bald my back tires I've launched as low as 4000. But never higher than 6500. And that's only with near spankin new tires on a hot day.

Personally I'd rather have a car where I can just dump the clutch and floor it, rather than have to feather the clutch and gas to try and get the right balance.... ala AWD cars.

O1Coupe

iTrader: (2)

Umm... the point of it was the fact that CARS ALWAYS GO FASTER than what magazines say.

As in if a Mach1 is capable of beyond 13.8s, then so are other cars that are rated at 13.8s. But you read **** on different fourms, you should know.

I'm not buying the media's hype, but when every freakin media absolutely testifies the fact that it's harder to launch than cars like 350Z or Stangs................. I think there's a BIT of truth in that, despite your personal beliefs.

And also it's a given FACT that a torquey car is way easier to launch than a high RPM car. Unless you absolutely master it, it will either BOG or over-spin. No chance of bogging with Camaros and such.

But enough of the off-topic cars.. back to 2.5XT...

I just got that copy of MotorTrend, BTW... 8.5s indeed... but it's estimated numbers. They didn't even test it. I can't believe you are banking on that over tested numbers from C&D.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

As I've said, I trust NOTHING car and drivel says over anyone. Those people are morons.

Zzyzx

I don't trust any auto magazine, its to easy to slip the editer a little $$$ to have an article sway more your way. (you think auto manufacturers wouldn't do it?)

the only one I do trust is Grassroots Motorsports. but thats because they actually do timed tests, Vs other cars/parts or setups.
rather then just spouting out HP and 0-60 times.