0-60/5.3sec. forester
07-01-2003, 07:28 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Peaty is it faster than a WRX?? My dealer only has auto so I dont want to drive them. I do understand that a truck SUV type vehicle could have less emission #$$%# but I still dont see it being faster than the WRX. Not just a pride thing cause I have a WRX. I mean how?.. lets use and some examples... these should be witin a few hundred pounds of each other.. V6 Passat wagon.. not faster than 4cyl sedan.. 4.0 Ranger not faster than 3.8 mustang....2.4 Element not faster than 1.7 Civic....V8 Envoy XL not faster than 6Cyl base... just my dumb examples anyone think of more?..or maybe its just the TMIC looks more like an afterthought to me.. and as the other guy said motor trend august estimates it to have a 8.5 0 to 60...maybe one will be at the track tomorrow and this will be solved
07-01-2003, 07:40 PM
#25
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lawrence, Kansas
Posts: 1,644
Car Info: 19' Impreza Sport Manual / 99 Miata / 13' OB
C&D did an actual test:
5.3 sec 0-60 and 1/4 mile in 13.8 @ 97MPH
Have a look here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...31#post4166331
and here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...hreadid=383106
I have the art scanned in but don't want to post it anywhere to avoid getting a site in trouble. It's a good write up though.
But to answer the question, yes it seems fast w/ no perceptible turbo lag. This coming from a guy that had a 99 RS though and hasen't gone over 4K rpm's yet in the forester
Peaty
5.3 sec 0-60 and 1/4 mile in 13.8 @ 97MPH
Have a look here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...31#post4166331
and here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...hreadid=383106
I have the art scanned in but don't want to post it anywhere to avoid getting a site in trouble. It's a good write up though.
But to answer the question, yes it seems fast w/ no perceptible turbo lag. This coming from a guy that had a 99 RS though and hasen't gone over 4K rpm's yet in the forester
Peaty
07-01-2003, 09:02 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well I read one theory on another board. Maybe this is it.. Dont know why I am so wrapped up in this..210 Hp is very underated as people say the neon srt-4 is. Subaru wanted to keep insurance costs down.. and not P$$$$ off WRX owners saying the Forester has like 240 plus HP.. does that make any sense?.. Maybe its just that I am mad that with 93 octane and a few mods my best time is 14.6.. sea level cool night..
07-01-2003, 10:30 PM
#27
NASIOC Slut
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 4,723
Car Info: 1995 Subaru Impreza 1.8 L
Originally posted by autolove
Some disturbing news is that 'Motor Trend' estimates that the Forester XT automatic does 0-60 in 8.6s!
Some disturbing news is that 'Motor Trend' estimates that the Forester XT automatic does 0-60 in 8.6s!
07-01-2003, 11:53 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
WTF? I had my heart set on getting the 04 wagon because there was nothing else in its class that could match performance with utility with price, now this BS? The Forester is a direct competitor to the wagon (what were they thinking?) I can't believe they made the forester faster. Perhaps with the price difference of the two (I think about a grand or two at the most), the wagon could keep up if not beat it? Also, what about handling?
07-02-2003, 12:18 AM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Joe Schmoe
WTF? I had my heart set on getting the 04 wagon because there was nothing else in its class that could match performance with utility with price, now this BS? The Forester is a direct competitor to the wagon (what were they thinking?) I can't believe they made the forester faster.
WTF? I had my heart set on getting the 04 wagon because there was nothing else in its class that could match performance with utility with price, now this BS? The Forester is a direct competitor to the wagon (what were they thinking?) I can't believe they made the forester faster.
woo for subaru! what other car company can boast a line-up like ours? the wrx, the forester xt, the legacy b4 AND the STI?