Compare WRX to Integra Type R (1 Viewer)

[John Garcia]

continued from this thread
#1 - you cannot take what the magazines say as gospel. The R is much quicker than they list, though probably not 5.8 sec. (6.0 flat easily) Not to mention the WRX is boosted... Regardless, 0-60 DOES NOT WIN A RACE. If you want to compare magazine numbers, the 1320 times are very close, with the R usually quicker. The R is very easy to drive quick, and someone who drives it for one day may not get the hang of it right away. Not easy to get used to the very high redline at first. It pulls hard, all the way to an indicated 9000rpm. The R has perfect gearing for the engine, and takes full advantage of all the RPMS. Third gear is just plain awsome (my R also dynoed higher stock than most).
Yes, it was on the street, he asked for it each time, and it was up to excessive speeds that will not be disclosed (well into 3rd gear). I gave him 3 shots to be sure. He had plates, so he had it a while. (yes, I did it, but please don't race on the street!!)
I also have a friend who happens to own both. He raced his girlfriend (who normally drives the WRX), then they switched places. Two runs driving each, and the R won each time.
I DROVE the WRX and it did not feel as quick to me.
*sorry, we can move this to another thread if we need to*

 

[John Garcia]

On another note, I also drove the RSX-S, and I was also not impressed. Solid chassis, nice interior, decent handling, average brakes, and relatively quick thanks to the 6m tranny. This car also did not make me have to have it like the R did.
Pic of my R

I am not a member of SRO, they just took a picture of my car because I was there...

 

[Charles J P]

Hmmm. well, there will always be fans of each car. I'm still a little surprised. Of course the Integra is gone, and the RSX only comes in a coupe. I'm sure I'll leave my car stock (except the stereo) so I have consider performance as is, but I'm sure there are civics out there that would kill both cars since a if you bought a pretty cheap new civic you would have about $6-$8000 for mods left over. You didnt mention whether your races were from a stand still though. AWD is tough to beat if someone who knows how to launch is driving.

 

[Jeffrey_Jones]

Street racing is never a very good judge of how fast a car can go. It's usually a much better judge of how fast someone is willing to drive to win a race and take the chance of losing their car and ending up in jail.
Race tracks and/or test courses are the only true judge of a car's full potential. The tests are performed in a controlled manner, using a proven method and are repeatable. There are still going to be some differences between tests but these differences are much smaller then with street racing.
I test drove an Integra Type-R and it did feel very fast. Most high revving cars feel very fast to me. I have also recently test driven the WRX and it seemed faster then I remember the Type-R being.
When it comes to the full potential of a car, I have to trust the numbers from Motortrend, Car and Driver, etc. and all of these publications give a much faster 0-60 time to the WRX then the Type-R.
John, if it's true that the times for the Type-R are faster then these publications say, wouldn't it make sense that the WRX is also faster then the numbers published? I doubt there is a conspiracy against the Integra.
- Jeff
PS - I have no bias toward the WRX. The look of the car just isn't for me. I drive a 2000 Jetta VR6, you're both much faster then I am...until I supercharge

 

[John Garcia]

The races were from a stand still. (very long, straight expressway, late at night) Had he been on boost, from a rolling start, he most likely would have pulled ahead. The extra RPMs allow me to stay in a gear longer though.
Nobody has to tell me about street racing or speeding...I will show you a pic of why I no longer have the R later...
I know Civics that leave me like I'm not moving
Actually, I like the look of the WRX, both the coupe and wagon. I was hoping for a bit more in performance though, which is why I have taken the "wait and see" stance for now. The STi is coming, the Evo is coming, and even the new Z, that should be interesting. I really wanted to like the WRX, but so far I don't.
I'm not saying that the WRX is a piece of crap, because it's not. It's MUCH better than basically anything else on the market in the price range today, and already has plenty of aftermarket available. I guess I'm going to have to spend a little more money for something else.
Unfortunately, I won't buy another R :frowning: I have no less than 6 friends who had their Rs stolen in in less than 1yr. Too highly sought after by thieves.
The RSX-R currently on sale in Japan, Europe and Australia is slated to make it's way to the states, but I don't think it will be quite the same as the 3rd Gen R. The turning radius of the RSX is horrendous - Acura admits it is worse than the MDX! This alone disappoints me. Maybe the new R will be better.

 

[Jeffrey_Jones]

John,
I hope I didn't come off sounding holier then thou about street racing. When I was younger I bought and restored a race ready 911 SC. Two reckless driving tickets in one month...massive court fines and I almost had my car taken away from me when a cop pulled me over along with a 300ZX Turbo racing at over 90 MPH in a 45 zone. I was young and stupid. I don't do that anymore.
I was just pointing out that it is hard to truly judge the potential performance of any car during a street race.
- Jeff
PS - I was ahead of the Nissan when the cop pulled us over

 

[Charles J P]

The turning radius of the RSX is horrendous - Acura admits it is worse than the MDX!

I dont know if that says more about the RSX or the MDX

 

[Paul Wu]

Just curious, when is the STi expected to go on sale?

 

[CharlesD]

I have a WRX. I don't know much about the RSX though, but I seriously doubt that one could out-accelerate a WRX.
To address some of John's points in the other thread:
When I first got my WRX I was dissapointed with the brakes but they did seem to get better after putting a few miles on the car. The stock tires do suck and should be replaced.
The interior qulity (aside from the seats and wheel) is a little on the cheap side, but this is intended as an enthusiast's car, and, as an ethusiast, it doesn't bother me one bit.
It does have all the basic ammenities you would expect in a car of its price, electric windows, mirrors, remote entry & an in-dash 6-CD changer. I agree that it should have boost-gauge standard. The column mount is not the only option, however, there is also a center dash mounted pod with three gauges including boost. After-market is the best bet for gauges for this car IMO.
The AWD handeling is fantastic, but can catch the in-experienced out. Depending on weight transfer and boost, it can behave very differently in similar corners. The worst-case scenario has bad understeer (like many FWD cars have) but that is more than made up for by fantastic 4-wheel drifting in other situations, and more neutral handeling in better situations than those that produce the under-steer.
Other observations:
Like most turbo cars it is easy to get more power out of the WRX. I am planning on getting a Vishnu Stage 0 kit in the next few months... it's good for about 40 extra hp at the wheels for about a grand while also flatenning the torque curve to remove some of the on/off nature of the stock engine.
I've seen some silly RSX vs WRX wars on various auto web sites, but I think it is comparing apples and oranges, the two cars are not competeing head to head. Someone who buys a RSX is likely not to want a WRX and vice versa, they each have different strong points.
Now if you bought a RSX to go as fast as possible for the money, well you bought the wrong car

 

[CharlesD]

Paul:

The rumor is that STi will go on sale Spring 2003, but it is not yet official.

We can only hope that they are brought in quantity to prevent dealer gouging. If they are still reasonably priced (I don't want to have to borrow money to have a car) I will trade my WRX in on one.

 

[Kelley_B]

STi is a year and a half away according to Subaru.

I'm waiting until January when the Mits Evolution VII will be out here in the states and will compare that to the "rex"(WRX)...and will then buy the one that I like the best.

 

[John Garcia]

I've seen some silly RSX vs WRX wars on various auto web sites, but I think it is comparing apples and oranges

Agreed. The RSX-S is not better than the WRX, IMO. Understeer in the WRX surprised me, but I chalked it up to the tires...
I also drove the Audi S4. Better handling, much nicer power delivery, more refined, but not necessarily warranting the price they are asking for it. I hated the feel of the gear box.

 

[CharlesD]

John: OUCH! what happened? I hope no-one was badly hurt!
re: WRX understeer: I too was surprised by the understeer, and while the crappy stock tires do contribute, I've found through 3,000 miles of driving that the understeer is quite conditional, there was definately a learning curve to get the most from the car.
S4s are sweet, but they are $15,000 more than the WRX. For me the minuses were: 1) Quatrro (FWD until fronts slip then torque tranfer to the rear vs. base line 50/50 split for the WRX) and 2) more weight, pluses are the 2.7 V-6 twin turbo with better low-end torque and a much nicer interior.
Since I would have had to borrow money to get a S4 I went with the WRX instead

 

[John Garcia]

Link Removed
Link Removed
Going too fast around a sharp corner, found some debris, lost the back end and ended up upside down after flipping end over end down an embankment.
Fortunately, I was the only one involved and injured, but I'm still here and I didn't injure or kill anyone else.
This was last Oct. I can walk again now.

 

[Scott L]

Were you racing anyone? Thank God you're ok.

 

[John Garcia]

I was not racing, just foolishly speeding.

 

[AviTevet]

Yikes! That sucks :frowning:
I have a WRX and it definitely takes some finesse to drive it to its full potential. The understeer can be really bad but it's all around manageable. I haven't found it too hard to get the back to come around. It's not set up stock to be a tarmac beast because of its relatively soft suspension, long suspension travel, and tires, but it does well enough and that also makes it a great daily driver. It's also really easy to get more power out of... just add MBC for $5 and you can be running under 14s in the 1/4 and low-mid 5's to 60mph. I didn't notice the interior was significantly worse or better than any other car, but I usually don't notice those things. I wish it had come with a factory sunroof option, a standard boost guage (what was Subaru thinking?) and rain-sensing wipers though.
The Evo VII will pretty much spank the WRX in every performance aspect I think. But then you have to worry about Mitsu's spotty reliability and (more troubing) a harsh suspension everywhere you go. Subaru has not put out any official word on the STi in the US, just a bunch of rumors are flying around. But if they do I think it would at least be competitive with the Evo VII, if not better.

 

[Max Leung]

Odd, isn't the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 7 for North America not anything at all like the Japanese/Euro versions? My understanding is that it is a very underperforming car that is a poor shadow of its overseas counterpart. Similar to the Mitsibushi Eclipse, right?

I hope I'mwrong. Racing the Lancer in Metropolis Street Racer engages my drool glands!

 

[Brad_V]

You didnt mention whether your races were from a stand still though. AWD is tough to beat if someone who knows how to launch is driving.

-------------

The beauty of AWD (on similar-powered cars) is that the driver can be an absolute bozo and still get off the line well. And if the driver is serious and doesn't mind putting a little extra wear and tear on the drivetrain, then he can launch it from 4000+rpms and make everyone else play catch-up.

I laughed so hard when I read an issue of Sport Compact Car from a year or two ago where they drove a modded Eclipse AWD. They said how difficult it is to launch an AWD car. Gimme a break. Any bonehead can launch an AWD at least as well as a good driver in a FWD can. AWD cars are like little toys... wind 'em up and let 'em go.

It's hard to believe SCC bought-out Turbo Magazine a couple years back. No wonder I then dropped my Turbo Mag subscription.

 

[Brad_V]

Max, the U.S. EVO will be the same but it's expected to come in around 260hp instead of the Japan-version's 280-300+. Most of the power decrease looks to be from the stricter emissions laws here, but also from the front-mount intercooler causing problems for the bumper in crash testing.

Word is they might take off the front-mount and use a side-mount intercooler instead like Talons and Eclipses always had. Whether that side-mount is any bigger/more efficient than the previous ones, we'll have to see. I'm also curious if the U.S. will actually get the car with the factory 3" exhaust.