1999corvettels1

Yesterday at work going to lunch, a 21 year old coworker got all excited about a WRX that was idling and said he would like to race him.

I said "you would get beat big time, that car has a turbo and all wheel drive, your car (Scion TC) has no turbo and is front wheel drive."

I walked over as he was asking the owner about the car, he asked if it had one or two turbochargers, guy didn't know and I said probably one as it's a 4 cylinder.

The owner has just gotten it and the temporary license plate said it was a 2016, he popped the hood and I noticed the intercooler right above the engine, and the air scoop on the hood must ram air through the intercooler.

Guy said it runs 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. I didn't ask how much horsepower or torque or vehicle weight was.

Later I googled 1999 C5 6 speed 0-60 and saw that it may have been 4.5 seconds?

I'm sure that would beat a stock non Z06 C5?

1999corvettels1

"And so, here’s how we hit 60 mph in 4.8 seconds: We held the engine at the 6700-rpm redline, jumped off the clutch, shifted out of first at about 5300 rpm, and held on to second until the car hit the redline in second at 61 mph. To get down to a repeatable 4.8-second time, we subjected the WRX to this mechanical mayhem 14 times. To its credit, it didn’t utter a peep of discontent. The clutch didn’t slip, no driveshafts turned into fusilli, and the six-speed ’box shifted and responded exactly as it did when we started. Will you try this with your new WRX? We doubt it. And if instead you just ease off the line, your times will likely be somewhere closer to our 6.3-second rolling-start 5-to-60-mph figure."

So maybe it's not that fast/quick.

MikeyMcFly

Stock for stock the WRX would likely lose to a C5 unless the WRX owner knew how to drive and the C5 owner didn't. They are quick, but not quick enough yet. 3.8 isn't a real number, it's more like 5 seconds to 60. You have to launch them to do it and with the AWD it's tricky and if you get it wrong it's a pricey mistake.

The C5 was never a 4.5s to 60 car. Magazines in the day were in the 4.9 to 5.0 range. However it's a lot easier to get a fast time out of a RWD car than a AWD car assuming neither has launch control.

The STi could give a C5 fits if it's well driven and the owner launches it. My old STi was clocked in the magazines at 4.6 seconds launched when new.

Most WRX / STi guys throw a downpipe and tune on them which is a quick and easy boost. My old STi was up 60 hp over stock with just a tune and turboback exhaust.

dbgoodwin

Waaaaayyyyy quicker on dirt, gravel, and snow.

ztheusa

I would never even give it the SLIGHTEST care. One is an American iconic sportscar.

The other is a foreign fartcan.

neutron82

be careful, some of them are quicker than you think

MikeyMcFly

Agreed. My STi was so much fun in the snow. It was shockingly controllable when I was sliding around.

grantv

There are some very nice foreign cars, the Subaru brand doesn't fit IMO. The fart muffler, the hood scoops, overall appearance...
That said, I couldn't care less if some ugly (or nice looking) car can beat mine. There's always a quicker car.

whalepirot

Our 2015 Outback fit the Lemon Law perfectly!

a striper

When the STi was brought to the US in late 2003 one of the magazines said it out cornered, out braked and was quicker in the 1/4 mile that a non-Z06 Vette. They said the Vette got better mileage and had a higher top speed. My wife and I checked out the strange looking little import, bought two and loved having them for about a dozen years. Sold them and put the money towards a new Vette two years ago. You can hate their looks but they were a blast to drive.

knewblewkorvette

Huh?
My 400 HP AWD Eagle Talon would smoke my 905 HP C5 off the line. My C5 would spin it's tires and the Talon just went...fast. It took the C5 awhile to catch up.
Chevy had the 02 C5 at 4.7 seconds to 60 mph but I've also seen other numbers. My near stock C5 would lose to my Talon until the 150 mph mark as that's about all my Talon will do.

acuevo

One day I'm hoping to have a WRX as a daily. Corvette is king to me, faster or not. I love it. Was just having a discussion yesterday with a friend about how a lot of cars today are as fast or much faster, but its still a Vette and thats why I love it.

That said, the practicality of a WRX with four doors, mid 20s gas mileage (which given my history of cars is high) and ease of making it faster make it a very attractive candidate for a daily driver. Just have to make sure the vette is putting down plenty of power before I get one lol.

jackthelad

The mags get good Subie 0-60 times by dumping the clutch with plenty of revs on, and basically forcing clutch slip as there's not enough power in stock form to spin all four wheels in the dry. We had Subies, both turbo and N/A from 1997 until this year, and there are more "in the family". If you want the clutch/flywheel to last and don't want to break driveshafts, you don't hammer them too hard from a standing start. They beefed things up (bigger drive shafts, stronger diffs, etc.) for the STI, but the clutch is a weak spot in general - even our non turbo 5 speed needed a new clutch at about 80k, it was was not driven hard at all. The turbo lasted to about 90k before its clutch went.

What the turbo engine does allow, is almost instant bolt on power - 400bhp is quite easy to achieve, so be wary. And yes, there is the tendency among owners to bolt a really noisy "muffler" on, and go blatting round the place - it just makes the motor sound rough in my book.

The one I liked best was the 2005 and up Legacy GT 5 speed which had a turbo unit with a bit more power than a WRX, but was lower geared, so in normal traffic it was every bit as quick. Appearance wise, it was a sleeper (and quiet) - they were referred to at the time as the grown up's WRX. That having been said, my C5 always got better gas mileage than the Subaru - full time AWD (only on the MT's, "on demand" for the autos) and not much in the way of aerodynamics will do that. I did the same journeys at different times in both cars, and point to point times were always essentially the same.

MikeyMcFly

I was considering stock for stock. You risk the driveline launching an AWD car if you do it wrong and that's what you need to get the best times out of them. I had a launch control program on my STi. Set the launch RPM and go. However it's vicious on the driveline, especially if you don't do it right, which is why in 10 years of ownership I never launched the car. A stock C5 is a lot easier to dump/feather the clutch and go.

Also for those bashing these cars, to the younger guys, including myself, these were the cars that weren't available in the US until 2004, the ones we played on Gran Turismo and watched in rallying with Colin McRae and Petter Soldberg. For the older crowd the Corvette was something to aspire to, for the younger guys it's the WRX / STi. I bought my STi in 2007 and it was that same feeling. It pretty much blew away anything else in its class. 300 / 300, 6MT, AWD with a driver controlled center diff, huge brakes, functional hood scoop, big dumb wing that I still love, etc. etc. I mean they made 120 hp / L. I've never driven anything better in the snow.

There is absolutely a group of people that will never get these cars which is obvious by the comments I've read, but to those who do, they are something special, something unique.

Lexybird

I would rather drive an 82' ford fairmont than a teenagers import weeny mobile like the wrx .

novasscnc

I raced one from 30 mph to 80 my 02 is supercharged 464 rwhp beat so bad felt bad for the guy, that being said they are nice cars

no vtec 4me

I had an '11 WRX i bought brand new a few years back. Stock for stock a c5 will smoke them in probably every aspect. The only advantage the wrx would have is off the line quickness with the awd. They are fairly easy to launch, and almost everyone that has been tuned will have launch control and no-lift shift built into the tune which really turns those cars into light to light monsters. I put some work into mine and got it just under 400awhp...i will say theres nothing like being able to punch it in 1st gear from a roll and no-lift shift into 2nd gear with virtually no wheel spin at all with all that power! That car was a blast.

1999corvettels1

Is no lift shift just slamming into another gear without letting off the accelerator pedal?

no vtec 4me

Yes, but on a car that is tuned for it when you press the clutch in the rpms will not go past a certain point. So it is super smooth and arguably better for your transmission since it takes out a lot of the "slamming".

kawtipin

To each his/her own I had sti loved it. I had Evo 8 and 9 loved them more easy to make power and they took a beating w no complaint. My 9 was 500 whp pump gas 30 lbs of boost. I drive a vette now because I like the na setup rwd for road course. They all fit somewhere