• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

NSX vs. WRX

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
88
Location
San Clemente, CA, USA
OK.. I am really confused.
I read all of the auto magazines, and I read great reviews on the Impreza WRX. After reading all of the magazines, I thought it would be fun to get one, modify it, and maybe even track it.

I drove my 94, NSX to the dealership and took the WRX out on the street. The young sales person told me to have some fun, so I figured what the heck and pushed it. I reved the engine, dropped the clutch and off we went..

the mags say the WRX can: 0-60: 5.40 seconds and 1/4: 14.1 seconds. My NSX: 5.60 and the 1/4 Mile, 13.90 -

But I dont get it. The car felt like a slow fat pig. There was absolutely no power under 3500 RPM and there was no rush of power after that.

I dont understand how this car possibly could be running the same times as my car- When I get into my car, either driver or passenger seat, there is always a feeling of HOLY COW.. Im hauling ass... In the WRX, I was waiting to be blown away, but that feeling never came. I felt like I was cruising along without dramatics in econobox.

Do these times indicate that if I were going 30 mph- side to side with a WRX, and I punched it, he would be right next to me the entire time? Where my passenger would be gripping the "oh shit bar" and his passenger would be nonchalantly flipping through the CD case?


now I know the NSX is all about the turns and what not, but if I am running the same numbers as a 23,000 econobox, something is wrong.. Is this car hiting great numbers becuase of a great launch or something?

What am I missing her?
does anyone have the 0-10, 0-20, 0-30, 0-40 ----> 0-150mph breakdowns of these two cars? I need to understand how these performance numbers work.


Thanks
 

Tel

New Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 6, 2001
Messages
8
Location
Penshurst, Kent, UK
I run a WRX STI Version V Type R aswell as '91 NSX, all I can say is the WRX will see off an NSX up to 100mph in a straight line and loose it in the wet. However on a dry road on a twisty road or track the NSX is better. The STI Type R has short ratios so will hit 60 in about 4.5 and 100 in 11.5.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jun 22, 2000
Messages
133
Location
Irvine,CA
Well, I believe he was asking for a comparison between the U.S. spec WRX and not a special edition WRX STI Version V Type R, that is not avaiable here. The WRX that is avaiable here is much slower and probably costs much less than that special edition version. Now, if you compare a NSX Type S-Zero vs your special edition WRX, the Type-S Zero will be dead even at the start to 60mph then the S-Zero should start to pull on you.


Originally posted by Tel:
I run a WRX STI Version V Type R aswell as '91 NSX, all I can say is the WRX will see off an NSX up to 100mph in a straight line and loose it in the wet. However on a dry road on a twisty road or track the NSX is better. The STI Type R has short ratios so will hit 60 in about 4.5 and 100 in 11.5.

[This message has been edited by 19inchNSX (edited 25 December 2001).]

[This message has been edited by 19inchNSX (edited 25 December 2001).]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 4, 2000
Messages
27,000
Location
Chicago IL
the mags say the WRX can: 0-60: 5.40 seconds and 1/4: 14.1 seconds. My NSX: 5.60 and the 1/4 Mile, 13.90

Well, right there is one part of your problem. You've got the numbers wrong.

WRX (Road & Track 5/01): 5.7 and 14.4
WRX (Motor Trend 7/01): 5.6 and 14.2
NSX (Car and Driver 9/90): 5.2 and 13.8
NSX (Motor Trend 12/90): 5.4 and 13.7

A difference of half a second in the 1/4 mile is significant.

Also, keep power-to-weight ratio in mind; it explains a lot about acceleration capabilities. Compared with the NSX, the WRX has 16 percent less power (227 vs 270) and weighs 2 percent more (3085 vs 3010). Which is why the magazine tests find that the WRX is significantly slower than the NSX.

Of course, there's a lot more to a car's capabilities than just acceleration - handling, braking, reliability, etc. - all areas where the NSX is far superior to the WRX.

The WRX is a nice car in the sport compact category. But it's not an NSX.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 25 December 2001).]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 13, 2000
Messages
1,797
Location
Near Rotterdam
I'll suppose that WRX is about the same as the last 555 we had here in Europe (4 cyl boxer with turbo +/-220 HP).

I do come along these cars all the time, and occasionaly one wants to race. From 0 to 200Kph it's close (stock NSX little bit faster), after 200Kph, you start to pull away big time.

Or do you guys get the 6 Cyl in the Sub?


Dutchy
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 28, 2001
Messages
25
Location
Santa Clara, CA
I test drove the WRX 2 times. The car didn't feel that fast in acceleration.

The second time I test drove it, the salesman took it off the lot and he punched it. As a passanger I felt the speed and power of this car. We had two more people in the back seat so that really suprised me.

After the switch to the driver seat again it felt weak but the two passagers in the back assured me that this car was fast.

I was confused also but I think it's the AWD system. I had an AWD Eclipse before and it just didn't pull like the FWD version.

I almost got a WRX also but now I want to wait for the lancer.




[This message has been edited by jimshih (edited 25 December 2001).]
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 31, 2001
Messages
174
Location
Navarre, FL
I wouldn't blame it on the AWD. My first car was a Eclipse AWD and that thing nearly gave me whiplash. Just rev it up to 5000 rpm, drop the clutch and hold on...The front wheels would give a quick chirp before the rear wheels caused the car to bound forward. Thinking back to that, jeez I loved that car....although I think I'll keep my NSX for now...
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 17, 2000
Messages
2,492
Location
San Francisco, CA
I was in Buttonwillow raceway driving a civic with type R engine about a month ago and we were dead even. Our driving skills was pretty much even.

Couple weeks ago I was in Laguna with a bunch of Subaru guys, and their USTCC car is only slightly faster than me in a civic with type R engine. And I was struggling with brake and suspension problem all day. I turned in 1:54 in Laguna with the Civic with A032R tires. My guesstimate is if we get everything setup properly, we should be able to hit 1:51 or maybe slightly lower.

This time is still slower than me in my NSX with street tires.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
736
Location
Lawrence, KS
I test drove the WRX. My impressions: Besides quick accelation times. It lacked in a couple of areas. 1. Build quailty, I would like to see how one of these holds up after 4 or 5 years! 2. The other was a buzzy engine, on long trips (which is what I do) this thing would drive me crazy.

WRX ,is what it is, a great little AWD, ecno box, with an performance engine and a fair price.

Besides quick 0-60 times, I felt no simulaity in driving the WRX to my NSX. I would say, to remedy the build quality try an RSX-S.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 22, 2000
Messages
356
Location
vancouver canada
Stock WRX isn't fast at all, at least it doesnt feel that fast. I wonder how did those magazine journalists run 5.x 0-60 and 14.x 1/4 mile in the WRX, in real life, I've seen a few WRX run 15 sec or even 16 sec 1/4 1/4 in WRX. On the street, it seems Type R can take on the WRX without any problem.
If the WRX was modded, it's totally different story. With downpipe, remove the 3 cats, cat back exhaust, boost controller and intake, the car just keeps pulling and pulling. With Turbo upgrade, it runs in 4 sec territory.
But would I want something like that? nuh..I'd rather get a TL-S with competitive price and much better build quality and comfort.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 9, 2000
Messages
553
Keep in mind that when comparing quarter mile times, trap speed is a better indicator or power than the quarter mile time is.

A car running 13.9 at 110mph is a much faster car than a car running 13.8 at 100mph.

The AWD nature of the Subaru allows it to run good 0-60 and quarter mile times. The AWD gives it a traction advantage off the line and getting off the line quickly makes all the difference.

If you were to place Nitto drag radials on an Integra Type R, you would probably take nearly a half second off of it's quarter mile time.

The car isn't any more powerful, it's just now getting a better launch and less wheelspin during the 1-2 shift. Additionally, you have shifting time, clutch wear, track conditions, temperature, humidity, etc. etc. that all play into quarter mile times.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 23, 2000
Messages
61
Location
Schaumburg, IL
Test drove 1, and:
Boost off - WRX feels way slow
Boost on - WRX feels WAY fast, as much pull as my M3 had.

Like C&D said: If you can find a better $24K car, buy it!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 23, 2000
Messages
13,885
Location
Saint Augustine, FL
Having driven both cars, I would say there is no comparison at all. The subaru does feel pretty quick though once you get over 3,500 RPM. It would be a good beater car for those that store the NSX in the winter.


------------------
NetViper -= 100% Stock EBP 2000 Civic Si =- Still looking to get an NSX, but at least I can live life at 8,000 RPM!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 11, 2002
Messages
2
Location
Sherwood, OR
One thing to keep in mind about the WRX is that it does get quicker after its broken in...

When I first drove one, I had my S2000 and wasn't too impressed.

Being a student, leaving the S2000 at the park and ride was not a good thing. That was my main concern for trading.

Its been years since I've been in an NSX, so I don't remember the "VTEC kick". It was very pronounced in the S2000 and I don't doubt that from a first gear punch, the WRX's turbo lag would be far less than the S2000's "VTEC lag"...

However, on the big end, the S2000 went great. How is the NSX off VTEC? Is it only ho-hum until the VTEC engages?

I totally agree with the C&D quote. If you can find a better 24k car, get it!

Having to step down from an S2000 is tough. Sadly, Honda offers nothing I'd want (Civic, no and Accord, no way). I know the Si is coming back though. The RSX-S was nice enough, but the whole package (high quality as it is) did nothing for me.

maybe the turbo appeal is in the ease (and low cost) of modifications... I dunno...

BTW, it may not be apparent, but I've loved the NSX since day 1 back in 1991. I was 17 then. When I purchased my first sports car back in 1999 it was either going to be a new C5 or a used NSX. GM's great strides in refinement led me over to their camp. But, I'd still love to have an NSX in the garage next to my WRX wagon (total sleeper with plenty of go and utility to boot).

As for the 02 reskin... I like the improvements, but really wished Honda would have held off until a totally new NSX could be released.

I've lurked here for a while, and the WRX thread got me to finally register and post
smile.gif


I've got about 1 yr of college left to finish. Who knows, I might be one of you guys soon
smile.gif


New cars don't do much for me, so about the only sports cars I could see owning (that are reasonably affordable) are the NSX, the 944 Turbo, and the C5...

I love Honda's though.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 13, 2001
Messages
163
Location
Lafayette, CO
The only thing I can add to this topic is that one day a WRX was next to me at a light and he launched hard (I did not because of traffic) and I was VERY impressed with how quick it was off the line and I'm running a SC (with trimmins) and ~350RWHP. I noticed in his launch that he had no tire spin at all - just a little 'squeak' and he was gone.

I was impressed. Note that he might have been modified, but I will say that the WRX I encountered that day seemed to be quicker in launch than my supercharged 3.2L NSX.

Now taking it up to 150 would probably be a completely different story
smile.gif


------------------
David Allen
'00 Silverstone NSX-T
Comptech SC, Headers, Intake, Exhaust & a little Mark Basch tweakage
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 14, 2001
Messages
2,326
Location
Sandy Eggo, CA
Originally posted by David Allen:
...and I was VERY impressed with how quick it was off the line and I'm running a SC (with trimmins) and ~350RWHP. I noticed in his launch that he had no tire spin at all - just a little 'squeak' and he was gone.

I was impressed. Note that he might have been modified, but I will say that the WRX I encountered that day seemed to be quicker in launch than my supercharged 3.2L NSX.

"That's the beauty of All-wheel drive."
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 4, 2000
Messages
27,000
Location
Chicago IL
However, on the big end, the S2000 went great. How is the NSX off VTEC? Is it only ho-hum until the VTEC engages?

VTEC extends the level torque curve and keeps torque from dropping off as revs rise. When you hit the VTEC crossover point, the engine gets slightly louder, but there is no additional acceleration; acceleration stays relatively constant within each gear. (The additional loudness may create a perception of greater acceleration, though.)
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
88
Location
San Clemente, CA, USA
Thanks for the feed back. how about we put this in a REAL world Perspective and not a track persepective.

SAY: there was a WRX stock, a NSX 3.0 and its litle brother the S2000 all putzing along at 10 miles per hour in first gear.( so about 2500 rpm or so for the Hondas, and about 2000 rpm for the WRX.) All three drivers make eye contact and at the same time punch the gas.. nothing else.. is the NSX going to walk away from the other two becase of HP difference and no grip factors? assuming everything is stock.

next question: by the time the first car hits 100 mph.. how fast do you think the second(S2000 or wrx) will be going?

------------------
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 4, 2000
Messages
27,000
Location
Chicago IL
Start with power-to-weight ratio:

NSX 3.0 270 hp, 3000 lbs
S2000 240 hp, 2800 lbs
WRX 227 hp, 3100 lbs

The WRX does a bit better than the power-to-weight would indicate, thanks to the 4WD traction. Basically, the WRX will accelerate about as fast as the S2000 (high fives 0-60) and the NSX 3.0 is significantly quicker (low fives 0-60).

is the NSX going to walk away from the other two becase of HP difference and no grip factors?

Depends on what you mean by "walk away". It's quicker; figure a few car lengths in the quarter mile.

by the time the first car hits 100 mph.. how fast do you think the second(S2000 or wrx) will be going?

All three will be slowing down for the fourth vehicle approaching from behind, the one with the flashing lights on the roof.
biggrin.gif
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 22, 2001
Messages
91
Location
antwerp, belgium
[
All three will be slowing down for the fourth vehicle approaching from behind, the one with the flashing lights on the roof.
biggrin.gif
[/B][/QUOTE]


biggrin.gif

that's exactly what I was thinking.
nsxtasy, you're the best !
best wishes for 2002 & thanks for your
replies.
 
Top