STi v Cobra
25 horses isnt much when the STi is also 400 or so pounds lighter, mated with a close ratio 6 spd. I'm not sure of the mustang tranny so don't go all flamer on me if the mustang has a 6spd too
claimed hp doesnt mean crap. i have seen many as in 5 or 6 sti's dyno no higher then 225 or so hp, subaru is notorious for extreme parasitic loss through the drive train, also it is 4wd and the interior is crap the seats suck and many of the engines have been grenading because of knock... how does subaru fix this problem. you bring in your car and they retard timing on your factory ecu costing you power. and in turn making you slower than say, a stock evo with 30 less horsies. all in all good car but they should have stayed with the 2.0 instead of the 2.5... too many problems. the mustang is in a much higher class then the sti... no comparison.</P><edited><editID>bikejr68</editID><editDate>37961.8010648148</editDate></edited>
I saw PHR show today and all I have to say is the guys that did the drag testing are pathetic. They were getting 14's and had to ice the intakes to get them to run low 13's. Pretty sad.</P>
</P>
biker your dyno numbers are true that I wont argue but saying the interior is crap is just your opinion...everyone whos seen my interior loves it, as do i. The knocking your complaining about, is a rareity and is caused by s**t gas, namely californias, where many of the STis were sold. Hmmm that correlates pretty well.
About the only good thing I can say about the post '95 Mustangs is that Ford still uses the 8.8 rear. The engine is junk. Sorry, it's a fact. The modular motor has never worked right from the beginning. The SOHC one is a dog, and the DOHC makes good top end, but has no low torque. They had to force feed it in the Cobra to get respectable numbers. The new IRS in the Cobra explodes on a regular basis, and barely works in stock form. Serious racers swap back to a solid rear axel to gain durability. The car is basically the same design produced since '79. It worked well until '95, but the death of the 5.0 basically ended its reign as a performance car. The new modular cars are slow, heavy, and very dated. The interiors aren't any nicer than the ones in the Subaru. The seats wear well, but all of the other components will chalk up and look like crap in about five years (I know because a friend of mine has a '95 Cobra, and most of the plastic has been replaced to make the car look decent). Who cares about wheel horsepower? Stock STis are running 12.9s and are considerbly cheaper than the Cobra, which can't match these times stock. The STi runs fine when you can get 93 octane. The timing is a bit much for areas where 91 is all that is available. At least Subaru didn't have to change heads and intakes to get the power claimed in their literature like Ford did with the first modular Cobras. AWD is way better than RWD, and that's a fact. Have fun with your Mustang in 8" of snow when they don't plow the streets. Hell, have fun in the rain.
The Mustang started as a great car. I know because I own two of them. The new ones stick to the basic Ford mentality though, which is sell cars first and make them perform well second. Obviously this works for Ford, as it killed the Camaro and Firebird when both would dust any Mustang, even the Cobra. They are worried now though because Subaru is stealing market share from them. Times are changing, and you can either change with them or turn a blind eye to it. Fast is fast, and that's all that matters to me. The WRX is the 5.0 of the new millenium.
About the only good thing I can say about the post '95 Mustangs is that Ford still uses the 8.8 rear. The engine is junk. Sorry, it's a fact. The modular motor has never worked right from the beginning. The SOHC one is a dog, and the DOHC makes good top end, but has no low torque. They had to force feed it in the Cobra to get respectable numbers. The new IRS in the Cobra explodes on a regular basis, and barely works in stock form. Serious racers swap back to a solid rear axel to gain durability. The car is basically the same design produced since '79. It worked well until '95, but the death of the 5.0 basically ended its reign as a performance car. The new modular cars are slow, heavy, and very dated. The interiors aren't any nicer than the ones in the Subaru. The seats wear well, but all of the other components will chalk up and look like crap in about five years (I know because a friend of mine has a '95 Cobra, and most of the plastic has been replaced to make the car look decent). Who cares about wheel horsepower? Stock STis are running 12.9s and are considerbly cheaper than the Cobra, which can't match these times stock. The STi runs fine when you can get 93 octane. The timing is a bit much for areas where 91 is all that is available. At least Subaru didn't have to change heads and intakes to get the power claimed in their literature like Ford did with the first modular Cobras. AWD is way better than RWD, and that's a fact. Have fun with your Mustang in 8" of snow when they don't plow the streets. Hell, have fun in the rain.
The Mustang started as a great car. I know because I own two of them. The new ones stick to the basic Ford mentality though, which is sell cars first and make them perform well second. Obviously this works for Ford, as it killed the Camaro and Firebird when both would dust any Mustang, even the Cobra. They are worried now though because Subaru is stealing market share from them. Times are changing, and you can either change with them or turn a blind eye to it. Fast is fast, and that's all that matters to me. The WRX is the 5.0 of the new millenium.
you are the moron of the new millenium. AWD sucks, especially in texas where all it does is make for more driveline loss and it helps pussies launch better. im not even gonna get started about anything else cause i dont want to argue andyou absolutely cannot argue against the driveline loss.


