msp vs 92x aero

[CHICO2003]

So my friend and I were driving down the hwy late last night... he drives a saab 92x aero (A/T) while I obviously drive an msp. Mine's a couple year's older and is riding on snow tires but they're both basically stock.

Anyway, I usually don't race but, with it being so late and the hwy basically ours, I figured what the hell. We did 3 runs... from a roll to about 60 or so I walked all over him. Probably a good 2 car lengths, or more. He claimed I got a headstart so we did it again but with the same result. The last one was a bit closer (60-100) but I still pulled on him from about 80-100 finishing at least a car length ahead.

Even though his car is auto, I figured with all the hp that he'd have me beat. That wouldn't have bothered me since I didn't buy the car for that purpose anyway. Even still, it was cool to see my car's got some balls in the straights as well as the turns.

[Zhan]

That's the Saab WRX wagon right? Might be AWD drivetrain loss that got him.

[quatelate]

sabb= ghey

[vcinsanity1523]

sabb= ghey

i have 2 agree with this

[jeffmsp]

whats a normal awd 5-speed lose like 20% so a auto I would think would be even more then that plus a full tank of gas and junk in the trunk = one slow car. plus the disadvantage being auto to begin with and a stationwagon vs 4 door.

[SHMENGIE]

Those Aeros are f-ing dogs, I could beat one on my moped.

[03MzdSpdSTP]

this from a guy drivng a festiva. good luck!

[CHICO2003]

LOL you guys are brutal. I almost bought one of these things! (so they can't be THAT bad) Granted, it was when they were offering them with like 10k worth of rebates. While most people thought that was a huge savings, I later realized it was Saab simply pricing the car where it should have been to begin with.

Nevertheless, the saab version is definitely a lot better looking than the Subaru. I think it only weighs like 350lbs more than the WRX sedan so, in a MT, I'm sure it would fly. With regard to this race, I figured that since we were already in cruising speed, the inherent disadvantage of having an AT would be out the door. (he said his odometer was at 3.5k while driving 60mph) can't imagine there being too much turbo lag there.

I don't know guys... I think you're being a bit harsh. I've driven the car and, though it definitely takes longer than ours to spool up... at least 1k worth... once the turbo kicks in it definitely moves.

I didn't ask him if he had a full tank but I know I definitely did... plus, slim's like 50 lbs lighter than me. I just checked out car-stats.com they have an AT subaru hatch doing the 0-60 in 6.8 and the 1/4 in 15.2 so I guess our cars are pretty even

[chuyler1]

Those Aeros are f-ing dogs, I could beat one on my moped.
Hahah...you said moped.

[Zhan]

It's only like 50 lbs heavier than the sedan, if it has the same specs as the WRX wagon, which it should have.

[mountjonas]

...he said his odometer was at 3.5k while driving 60mph...

wow, that's pretty high. my manual revs around 3k at 75mph.


It's only like 50 lbs heavier than the sedan, if it has the same specs as the WRX wagon, which it should have.

i think it weighs a little more (not sure how much, though) because i think they put more sound insulation into it to quiet the cabin down.

[DE31]

i heard the suspension has also been softened up for the luxury feel

*edit* thats odd, i just checked edmunds.com and it says the 9-2 is actually lighter 3208 lbs(9-2) vs 3252 lb(WRX), these are numbers for 2006 models, im going to check out the 05s since they both have the older 2 liter engine vs the new 2.5.

*edit 2* ok the 05 9-2 weighs 3210 lbs while the 05 WRX weighs 3165 lbs.

keep in mind that these are all manuals, edmunds didnt have anything on the autos.