Motor Trend Mazdaspeed Protege Article

[Gro Harlem]

Anyone read the latest issue of Motor Trend?

They get even better numbers than Car & Driver!!!

Check out this:

Original Mazda MP3 numbers:

0-60mph: 8.9 sec
1/4 mile: 16.8@82.3mph
braking 60-0: 132 feet (no abs)
slalom, MPH: 64.8

Mazdaspeed Protege numbers:

0-60mph: 6.5 sec
1/4 mile: 14.9@93.2mph
braking 60-0: 124 feet (no abs...a ABS model will be offered later apparently)
slalom, mph: 68.3


Damn!!! those are VERY impressive numbers. Maybe C&D happened to get a less powerful one or something from the assembly line (hey..some engines put out more power than others, its all luck).

Anyways, the original C&D results were:

0-60: 6.9 sec
1/4 mile: 15.4 @ ???

And SCC dynoe'd it at 151hp at teh wheels. Mazda could easily get away with advertising the car as 180-195 hp and still be on target. Look at the WRX! SCC dyno'ed it at 147 whp. Thats a HUGE loss in power compared to the advertised 227.

SO if anyone bitches about the "lack of power" stfu and read those numbers I just posted.....b/c your an obvious retard if you think this car is slow!!

[sleeper_]

heh, you must realize that the power for the wrx is going to all 4 wheels, not two. Consequently, there is considerably more power loss through the drivetrain.


as for the MS-P.. there are now 3 mags from which it got sub 7 second 0-60 times (autoweek, c&d, motor trend) and 2 mags in which is got sub 15 sec 1/4 mile ties ( autoweek & motor trend)

:D :D :D

[Antoine]

Was colin949 on to something...looks like the published MSP 0-60 and 1/4 mile numbers are getting lower and lower.

[Mosel]

Can you tell me which month's issue of Motor Trend? Is it the October issue? And is it a full article testing the MSP or is it just a blurb?

[colin949]

haha

[Kooldino]

Wow, they got it into the 14's! Impressive! I wonder what the 60' times were...that LSD must help quite a bit off the line.

[Gro Harlem]

It was the latest issue...I guess October (i'm too lazy to get up and go look at the magazine ;)).

It was on page 141? or something. It was only one page, but it was pretty much a complete write up about the car. I doubt they'll do another full feature on the car since MT sucks anyways.

They might do a comparo, but I don't know...MT doesn't seem to give a shit about import compacts...more with corvettes and stuff.



And I realize the WRX is 4wd, but....a loss of 80 hp? thats inexcusable! The largest "allowable" loss on a FWD or RWD car is generally 20-25%. On 4wd...is around 25% or so.

But this is a 36% loss...thats MAJOR. Subaru is seriously full of shit about the numbers. The car should be advertised as having 205 hp at the most.

[tritonheat1]

205hp for the subaru no way man
with the Spec#'s being at:

0-60.... 5.6-5.8sec
1/4mile....14.4sec
Topspeed.... 142mph


i mean if you take a look at the 95-99 Eclipse GS-T/GSX.

0-60....6.6-6.8sec
1/4mile....15.2-15.4sec
Topspeed 130mph (GS-T)


And plus the GSX is rated at 210hp with 214lb-fts of torque, all wheel drive, boost is at 14psi. curb weight is at 3306lbs compared to the WRX's 3085lbs.

[APEXistud]

Once again, I think it would be wise to realize that the WRX is all-wheel drive. This means that a lot of power is lost through the drivetrain. I assumed that this information would have been common knowledge, but it's clear that a few people are still unaware.

[Gro Harlem]

who doesn't know that subaru's are awd? I know that......but a 80 hp loss is still not acceptable.

36% loss in power? uhh............i've never seen such a high power loss.

Maybe SCC had a less powerful model or some kind of prototype.......but i'm just saying, thats the only stock dyno i know of.

And stop trying to argue, b/c i'm not trying to. I 'm just stating that I think its a load of BS that its advertised that high. i'm entitled to an opinion right? if its faster, then great!!! by a lot? then great!! but who cares! i know this, you know this, so lets drop it.

[Fulminatus]

i'm not trying to argue, but just wanted to bring up a point/question.

Aren't the values that for bhp and torque that manufacturers give out are HP from the crank anyways? So it's not really misleading since they are stating the power of the engine. So it's not really a "rating" but the actual measured max value isn't it?

But I'd rather hear numbers at the wheel =)

[Clumsy]

Originally posted by Gro Harlem
who doesn't know that subaru's are awd? I know that......but a 80 hp loss is still not acceptable.

36% loss in power? uhh............i've never seen such a high power loss.

Maybe SCC had a less powerful model or some kind of prototype.......but i'm just saying, thats the only stock dyno i know of.

And stop trying to argue, b/c i'm not trying to. I 'm just stating that I think its a load of BS that its advertised that high. i'm entitled to an opinion right? if its faster, then great!!! by a lot? then great!! but who cares! i know this, you know this, so lets drop it.

Thw WRX Dynoes at 170whp dumbass:mad:

[LinuxRacr]

Hey guys,

Let's keep it kool in here.:cool:

[Gro Harlem]

Originally posted by Clumsy


Thw WRX Dynoes at 170whp dumbass:mad:

read the f**king SCC articles....they have that dyno chart in at least 2 different issues. Are you denying they exist?

And I wouldn't be surprised if someone DID get a 170 number in stock form, but I haven't seen it yet, and still stick with my OPINION. So call me a dumbass, b/c you can't even refer to what you are talking about

So.....Where is this 170hp dyno sheet?

[MSpeed]

ok easy guys, seriously... who cares
the fact is that the wrx does 0-60 in 5.4s :cool:

[colin949]

the wrx may lose a lot of power from that but if anyone of you that has ever raced one or driven one knows that the car is very fast.

[JasonH]

Originally posted by colin949
the wrx may lose a lot of power from that but if anyone of you that has ever raced one or driven one knows that the car is very fast.
Yeah, but with so many WRXs out there, your chances are good of finding one with a driver that can't make it go fast.:D

[sleeper_]

people shoudl realize why the wrx is so "fast" in the 0-60 and quarter mile times.. it's b/c of the superiority of the AWD launch.

[MSpeed]

i totally agree with you
my buddy owns a wrx and ive driven it plenty of times. its only fast off the line but once u get goin and try to stomp on it its not fast at all. i dunno, maybe its because of what im used to driving

all i know is that it hauls ass when u drop it from 5500 :D

[sleeper_]

the explanation for the drivetrain power loses in an awd is simple if you think of the following. With 2 wheel drivetrain, there's less mass in the drivetrain to accelerate before accelerating the drive wheels. On the other hand with AWD drivetrain, there's much more mass to accelerate before the power gets transmitted to the ground, hence the greater power losses.

[Maniac8888]

Being the prowd owner of an '02 MP5 and a '02 WRX, I can certainly attest to the accuracy of factory numbers for the WRX. I paid $23,500 (all prices USD) for mine new a year ago and put about $1,500 in engine modifications and I can do consistant 1/4 mile times of mid to high 13's. My 0-60 times are always around 4.3-4.5. Not bad for a $25,000 investment and I get AWD on top of that. Believe me I am no competition drag racer. I do it for fun just to see what the car will do. So, it's a fast car and for little money, will haul butt. Just food for thought.

[appler]

Hey Sleeper, AWD cars are typically SLOWER on launch than a RWD car. Some wheelspin before hook-up is preferred for the fastest possible drag time. The WRX does not allow this wheelspin w/o brutal, high rpm clutch-dumping to keep it on boil. It is very quick now (even with the low-rent tires that 95% of them come with) but it would be faster if it were just RWD. My father unloaded his WRX after just 10,000mi in favor his second Spa Yellow S2000 because he said the WRX has no soul. After driving it (and a lot of other cars), I have to agree. Great rally car, not a great sports car.

[MSpeed]

yup i agree, the car feels very detached from the road

but you have to agree that the potential for tuning is definately there. i wouldnt mind having a 400+ hp AWD WRX :D

ill sacrifice feel for straight out speed

[JasonH]

WRXs are wasted on 90% of the people who buy them. Why? Because they don't drive them like they want to break them. (Neither would I if I was making payments on it.) But, that's when the WRX shines. High RPM launches, full throttle upshifts, hard on the brakes and slamming into lower gears for turns, the WRX really seems to like it like that.

[Proto-JB]

Originally posted by JasonH
WRXs are wasted on 90% of the people who buy them. Why? Because they don't drive them like they want to break them. (Neither would I if I was making payments on it.) But, that's when the WRX shines. High RPM launches, full throttle upshifts, hard on the brakes and slamming into lower gears for turns, the WRX really seems to like it like that.

Well, enough enough rex owners out there drive them hard enough to break their glass trannys. :p

[JasonH]

Originally posted by Proto-JB
Well, enough enough rex owners out there drive them hard enough to break their glass trannys. :p
Not enough for a recall. :p

[APEXistud]

Oh no, not the glass tranny issue again. :bs: I say, if you beat the shit out of any tranny it will break. It's as simple as that. There are people on the I-Club and people I've met in person who have ripped off a little under a 100 passes with only a boost controller on their car and they've yet to break their trannies. Hmmm....

Anyway, lets now return this post to it's original topic.....

Who cares what Motor Trend thinks anyway.