Car and Driver Comparo 13.4@103 (MERGE)
Jan 26, 2008, 09:35 PM
#18
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
Jan 26, 2008, 09:59 PM
#21
boostez, the video you are referring to was best motoring, unless jeremy clarkson quit top gear and they hired a bunch of japanese guys. And also, the car that was run in that test was a preproduction model with the ecu not finalized and the kinks worked out, just like motor trend got when they put out the slow 1/4 mile times. The x launches harder than the 9 because of the better torque down low and beefier clutch/tranny. This is why the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are on par. The 9 would probably be noticeably faster from a roll because of the weight difference, but the x beats the 9 in all other categories. Read road and tracks most recent review of the car, edmunds, now car and driver, soon motor trend; the car is almost as fast as the 9 now that the ecu is finalized and the car is running properly. It's the better car, and it should be... it has improved on an already incredible car. Admit it and move on.
since they fixed their upper rpm hesitation issues. Good numbers. Cant wait to see real owner tests at the strip and track.
Jan 27, 2008, 08:00 AM
#27
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Diamond Bar, California
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan 27, 2008, 08:03 AM
#28
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Diamond Bar, California
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by 3000ways; Jan 27, 2008 at 08:12 AM.
Jan 27, 2008, 09:12 AM
#29
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It baffles me that so many of you only reference the peak HP numbers. When do you actually get to use the peak HP? at 7000rpm? How much of the time, while getting to your 1/4 mile, are you at 7000rpm using the peak HP?
I think the new engine/tuning is quite impressive myself. Yes, like everyone, I was hoping/dreaming of ~320, but if you think about lugging ~300Lbs more, with only ~5hp more over the IX and being just a fraction slower is still impressive. If you added 300Lbs penalty to the IX, would it beat the X or STI?
Anyway, my point is that the new engine, although having lower peak numbers than everyone expected, is still quite impressive. I think it has to do with the area under the curve that no one is comparing.... I think the new engine has more overall umph in a much broader rpm range and that is how it is able to lug the extra 300 lbs around and still be competitive with the STI
I think the new engine/tuning is quite impressive myself. Yes, like everyone, I was hoping/dreaming of ~320, but if you think about lugging ~300Lbs more, with only ~5hp more over the IX and being just a fraction slower is still impressive. If you added 300Lbs penalty to the IX, would it beat the X or STI?
Anyway, my point is that the new engine, although having lower peak numbers than everyone expected, is still quite impressive. I think it has to do with the area under the curve that no one is comparing.... I think the new engine has more overall umph in a much broader rpm range and that is how it is able to lug the extra 300 lbs around and still be competitive with the STI
