Jump to content
Please check your junk folder for registration emails ×

gemini

General Member
  • Posts

    124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by gemini

  1.  GC8E2DD said:
    Pray tell, what is the official size/ width to weight ratio that defines regular vs lightweight wheel?

    If you look at the table at the start of this thread comparing wheel weights. You'll see Volk TE37 and Advan RG are noticably lighter than average. Would you describe those as light weight wheels?

    The other thing you could do to understand further is compare the weight of regular stock wheels to the wheels in the table. Most factory subaru 16s weigh 16.5lbs see here boy http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2239019

  2.  newsuba said:
    Or too big, effectively raising your gearing.

    What size wheel/tyre did you start with and what did you end up with ?

    Same circumference

    It's a simple fact that 17s weigh more than 16s and 7 inch wide weighs more than 6 inch wide.

    If you want to go bigger but not gain weight you have to go from a regular wheel to a lightweight wheel when you upsize

  3.  gemini said:
    Only been on a few days but gotta go - looking good is not worth that big a hit in performance

    Next wheels will either be lightweight 17s possibly with narrow tyres or back to 16s

    Looking at not just 16s but lightweight 16s and had a question

    Do the quality lightweights Advan, Volk etc use different alloys otherwise they'd be more prone to bending?

  4.  newsuba']

    [quote name='newsuba said:

    Mazda ftw

    WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

    Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

    An embarrassment to the badge.

    /quote]

    Yeah had heard WRX S-GT was soft

    But isn\'t it lighter with the engine and gearbox same as previous WRX tho? Or did they cut costs/improve economy?

    Yes it is lighter, hard to look that one up as it wasn\'t committed to memory...

    ;D

    From the NZ brochures...

    MY06 (hawkweye) WRX wagon;

    2.5L turbo

    169kW@5600rpm

    320Nm@3600rpm

    1430kg unladen mass

    F 4-pot/R 2-pot ventilated disc brakes

    17" wheels with 215/45-17 tyres

    MY08 (fugly) WRX hatch;

    2.5L turbo with AVCS

    169kW@5200rpm

    320Nm@2800rpm

    1395kg unladen mass

    F vented/R solid sliding calliper/1-pot brakes all around

    17" wheels with 205/50-17 tyres.

    Both run the same (ratios, final gearing) manual gearbox.

    Yeah hawkeye is nicer lookin

    Any auto trans option?

  5.  newsuba said:

    Mazda ftw

    WRX S-GT is a bag of pooz.

    Soft and wallowy, laggy engine, laggier auto gearbox, feeble brakes.

    An embarrassment to the badge.

    Yeah had heard WRX S-GT suspension was more compliant. New better independent set up in the rear but softer springs

    But isn\'t it lighter with the engine and gearbox same as previous WRX tho? Or did they cut costs/improve economy?

  6.  Marky said:

    I wouldn\'t go that far - I\'d just say they\'re aimed at different market segments - the mazda is meant to be more of a "sporty" but still economical hatch type thing, whereas the WRX is aimed more as competition for the likes of your turbo ford focus / lancer ralliart / mazda MPS etc end of things I guess? (Then you get up to STi vs EVO territory beyond that)

    The mazda feels "stronger" round town than my GTB does purely cause of the auto box and instant pickup so in that regard it has a tick in the box - I had an airtrek turbo before that and that was a prime example of an auto/turbo combination working perfectly well, downside was horrific gas bills - even driven with a light foot it spent a lot of time on boost - the WRX may be the same? I have no idea

    Sorry I\'m not much help with a comparison - honestly you need to drive both cars, its not like comparing commodore/falcon or wrx/evo, its very different sorts of cars

    Ok guess it\'s different types of cars like Legacy GT vs Legacy H6 3.0

    Out of interest have you compared Mazda SP25 to Legacy H6 3.0?

  7. Just to clarify. Subaru factory immobiliser controls the cars ECU and always requires subaru transponder key to allow the car to start. An add on alarm can be added to protect against break in but remote will not enable/disable subaru immobiliser but can control remote central locking.

    In my case this Is a backup key so will get a transponder key only. That will allow me to get into the car, override the Dynatron alarm and start it.

    If I lose my original transponder + remote key I'll have to get either a dynatron remote also or upgrade the key to a full transponder + remote key.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 90 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...