'I would not class the scoobie as a hothatch!'
Too true. Scoobie's are saloons not hatchbacks.
Golf GTIs are where I usually buy. I would love the Seat. How much would a used one cost.
Yes it would kill the WRX if it had 300 BHP, but it doesn't does it. I didn't want to get into a tit for tat discussion, but WRX engine's are begging for more power, they only need to be breathed on to get to 300 BHP (you do not need a turbo change LOL). If you wanna talk about transmission losses, the WRX with 225 BHP takes just over 10 seconds to go from 60 - 100 MPH, not bad since everyone always goes on about losses. The astra VXR with FWD and 15 BHP more only does it a second less. But the over all 0-100 times are about the same.
Yes, log onto www.seatcupra.net and ask any questions you have there. You'll more than likely have a dodgy dump valve or MAF sensor. These are the usual suspects when it comes down to an under performing 1.8t engine. As to remaps, Revo/Jabba/APR/Custom code, are popular choices.
As to WRX 225 standard performance, a Cliosport 172 will keep up with it, if not slightly edge ahead! As a member on Scoobynet, I have read numerous threads on how WRX drivers have been shocked and surprised that a little french hatchback with 170 BHP manages to match, if not slightly better, the mighty Impreza's performance.
Oh and yes, you do need a turbo change to take a 225 WRX through the 300 barrier. Usual mods (exhaust/filter/IC and remap) will only take it to around 270-280 BHP at a very maximum, as the turbo runs out of puff. I am an ex WRX owner; I should know ;)
4WD loses around 25% to a FWD car's 15%, hence the reason why a Clio with 170 BHP will keep up with an Impreza with 225 BHP.
Can anyone tell me what the pull on a cupra that has been chipped to 270bhp?
What would the 0-60 times be then?
I've been looking around and can't find any info on it.
Reason being. I'm looking to buy a chipped cupra and wonder how fast it will actually be.
Well you can repeat yourself as many times as you like mate, it won't make it any more credible, and I didn't know Imprezas once ruled the world! I'm just saying Clio 172's are not a match.
Times have moved on with super minis too (if you could call them minis anymore). If a 865 KG Vauxhall Nova or Saxo had 172 BHP, it would beat the WRX, but not a 1150 KG Clio, and the WRX is light for a saloon at 1395 KG. Most modern ones are about 1500 or higher.
On the subject of BHP, in my Max Power days I've seen 2.0 N/A Calibra engines with 250 BHP, so it wouldn't take much boost to take it up to 300 BHP now would it, IE: there are plenty of mods you can do, turbo or otherwise.
WRX and STI not special? Yeah, if you've got a Lambo! LOL I've got a 54 WRX PPP, and its 261 BHP, 257 lb ft torque; quicker than even the STI, so with a few mods, that will be capable of 300 BHP, won't it? All it's got is a remap and exhaust, it's just a WRX still. Then there's the WR1, 320 BHP, 0-60 4.2 seconds, 0-100 10.6 seconds. It only takes 6 seconds to get from 60-100, you can't tell me this is possible with only 245 BHP at the wheels! (well you can try).
The percentage of power lost through transmission decreases the more power you gain, some parts of the transmission (in any car) have fixed losses. You claim to know a lot about Imprezas, yours aren't the RC type are they?
There are standard scoobys that will match your 0-60, and the WR1 will get to 100 one and a half seconds slower (if it really is 9.2) so it wouldn't need much playing with would it? Fair play if it's a good 'un, but being a french car I can't imagine it being that reliable with that sort of power. But I bet its quite a fun car.
I bought an LCR at the start of December, and for the record I have never owned a Clio 172 or Scooby ;)
I can honestly say I have not regretted my purchase for a second and I totally love it. In my view it looks awesome (mine's black) and once past 3,000 revs it pulls like a train. It's also very comfortable for cruising on the motorway and pottering around town. A great all rounder you might say.
Some call LCRs a poor mans S3. I would call them a wise man's S3. Just as quick, both in a straight line and around the corners (in the dry) and a damn site cheaper to buy and run. A no brainer really.
This makes me laugh. Someone said the WRX and STI are poor performers today. You should try one mate; all I can say is they must be more than the sum of their parts. I bought EVO mag for the first time the other day, and me being a bit sad I went through most of the performance stats at the back, EVO is a well respected mag, there are hardly any hot hatches that will match even the UK WRX on 0-60 or 0-100 let alone the STI or WRX PPP. And I mean the 60-100 times too, and a lot of these times are their own tests. The 60-100 times are a good indicator of pace. They just can't cut it even with the odd few with more power and FWD. Handling? well don't even go there. Anyway, if I didn't have a WRX it would be a cupra, certainly not a 172!
Good comment, it is where you would find a true winner, and then swapping cars and doing it again to cut out the driver factor.
A Cupra R would nail a Clio 172 Cup, but then again, so would a Ferrari!
No-one has said otherwise though mate.
Upto around 70-80mph, the clio 172/182 and cupra R will be close, but beyond that the cupra will pull the legs quite a bit.
So what is the 0-100 times of a revo stage 1 cupra r, I've just sold my 182 for a standard cupra r and it's a lot faster in the real world, torque you see!
In the region of 14secs.
It would obviously be quicker if the front could get traction, but you have to part throttle 1st/2nd as to avoid wheelspin and this affects the 0-100 time.
Remapped cars come into their element 40mph and upwards when traction is not an issue! They sail past 100mph quickly all the way to around 160-165mph indicated.