IW STi Forum banner

Why the GR is slower

14K views 73 replies 41 participants last post by  TonyT  
#1 ·
55% stiffer springs in the rear = less squat.
Less squat = less acceleration

Bigger turbo = slower spool
Slower spool = slower bottom end acceleration

Taller gearing = slower acceleration

Long throw shifter on most stock
Good for adding .1 second to 60

It's really no mystery why it's slower, but a full second slower in the qtr is inexcusable.
 
#2 ·
STIs are: Not. For. Drag. Racing.

They corner and accelerate out of said corners as good or better than 90% of cars on the road. Not to sound like a ****, but if you're concerned with 1/4 mile times, you could've gotten something cheaper and faster than an STI.
 
#6 ·
While I agree the STI was not built with the intent of drag racing, I still believe it is not excuse for the car to get slower or maintain the same power. The engine setup hasnt really changed since the STI came to the US in 2004. Every other car maker has advanced and built faster cars which are now passing the STI.

IMO, Subaru needs to step up their game and build a car that puts the fear back in the other car companies. 300-305hp is not much these days.

Im not hating on the GR. It is still a very capable platform. But if you want to run with some of the better cars these days, you need to have your mod budget in order.
 
#7 ·
The Ops point is valid even if the car wasn't specifically designed for drag racing.Nobody wants their new $35K-$40K Subaru to be slower than the 8 year old model whether its in a straight line or through corners. Its like saying If you care so much about cornering, you should get an old Miata and put coils on it and you will beat most cars in corners but you will do 0-60 in 15 seconds. Would you be satisfied?

Fact is these STI cars no longer stand out as handling all that well compared to other new vehicles either. Mustangs, M3s, 370Z(350Z) were cars that used to perform worse back in 04. They have all stepped up their games while Subaru stagnates. This did not stop me from getting a new 11 STi because a modded STI is very entertaining. If I were staying stock, I would not buy an STi
 
#8 ·
other than the new mustang what other cars supposedly stepped up and also fall into the 32k or less range?

When OP says why is the GR slower, slower than what, a GD? Is it really, seems they run right around the same times on a 1320
 
#9 ·
I think the 370Z is a good example. I had an 03 350z and at the time it was very competitive in the market and pretty quick. It could turn well and would do high 13s and trap 100 mph. Nissan put the new engine in and made the 370Z much quicker. I think they trap like 106 stock and pull close to a G. Subaru didn't do that with the STi.

My currently Stock 2011 STI is no faster than my 2003 350Z whether you're talking straight line or twisties. That is just Sad. Fortunately once I mod and get tuned the sadness turns to happiness in the form of toque way beyond and Z car that isnt FI
 
#14 · (Edited)
O.P.-Worthless information. Wrong car, wrong forum. Stop reading magazines and learn to drive your car how it was designed to be driven. Problem solved.

Ever go to a meet and see all the hellaflush cars with BBKs that still have the molding nubs on the side walls...
 
#19 ·
The GR isn't slower..

Also, I don't care about power, I just wish the car would lose some weight. IMO the STi shouldn't be in the same class as a mustang. It should go back to its roots as a homologation special and come stripped out like a race car should be... i guess you would have to keep all the safety equipment though, which Im sure has added enough weight over the years.
 
#20 ·
It hasn't really added very much weight; 120 pounds or so? But that's a whole different argument anyways. It has gone up over the years.

But I do agree that lighter is better. It would be nice to see a 500 pound lighter STI, even if it were smaller in every dimension. What would be the right move would be to discontinue the 4-5 door STI altogether, still sell a WRX based on the 4-5 door Impreza, and create a 2 door STI tuned Toyobaru.
 
#30 ·
Like dyno numbers you can only compare if they're done under the same conditions i.e. basically back to back and even then there's driver error etc.

But yeah you can create a thread 100 pages long going around in circles about it...
 
#32 ·
Sorry guys.. My stock GD did 12.95 w a 1.6 60'.
I can and have posted the slip.
Baselined, I had 280+ pound feet of torque at the wheels stock, 50 deg 50% humidity.
No correction.
Went stage 2, pro tune, weight reduction and CF drive shaft.
12.59, and my 0-60s were often 4.2ish or less. According to my gtimer that was accurate at rte 66 to within .1sec

I posted some of the fastest times in my autox events, and I tracked the car at autobahn.

My stock GR was outgunned in a 4th gear run by a modded ser spec v.
My GD stock could pull on a c5 vette in 4th gear until 5k rpm.
My modded GD could keep even with the new short geared 2012 5.0. From a roll.
All I'm saying is wtf happened to this car?
So a buddy who's a certified mechanic mentions all these changes to me and I needed to post for some validation.
My personal feeling is when cruise control in I mode gets 18.6 mpg on a flat 5 mile road w no traffic, and I get 26.7 w my right foot, I question the skill of the powertraon programming team.
On another note, my GD was built in Hiroshima, where my GR shows Indiana.
Hmm.

I am now a disappointed owner and no longer love my Subaru.
I'm probably trading this car after the winter.
I'm not modding it, and I think I'm done posting.

I'll get a 370z or a C6 next.
 
#34 · (Edited)
On another note, my GD was built in Hiroshima, where my GR shows Indiana.
Imprezas are only built at Ota Gunma in Japan currently. Care to post a picture of your window sticker that says an STI was built in Indiana?

Also, my stage 2 GR is just as fast as my buddy's decently modded EJ257 and 6-spd swapped 04 WRX. I'm putting down about 10 more WHP as well, though the GR is a bit heavier.

The GR isn't slower (well, maybe stock).
 
#33 · (Edited)
Didn't know Indiana made imprezas. They have a very good plant there and use good quality materials. The legacys from Indiana had less problems then the ones in Japan.

Also baseline 280 torque? Cmon... I never heard of such a base without major correction factors. Even RWD/FWD cars have a much higher drivetrain lose then that and the STi is known for having some pretty major drivetrain lose.

MPG rating on 5 miles? You need at least a couple tanks to get a good reading...

Were any of these "readings" done at a drag strip or all through some gadget like what you find on smart phones? You mention some GTimer?

Something definitely seems wrong with what you're saying.
 
#36 ·
Well it seems unsatisfied people buy their STIs for the wrong reasons- flooring it in a straight line and street racing. Happy owners use them as intended- going fast around corners.

It's not the car- it's the misguided owner that's the problem...
 
#38 ·
lol @ impreza made in indiana.

Enjoy your next car. Previous GD owner here that's completely satisfied with the improvments to his GR sedan.

I went 13.3 @ 103 stock with 1.69 60'

I'm almost positive my GR stock could do virtually the same. If not, it sure feels like it could. And if it couldn't, I don't give a damn, because I don't street race or run the 1320 anymore. If I did and I bought an STI, I should be kicking myself in the pants because I completely screwed the pooch.