MT: MS3 vs. Subaru Impreza WRX

[Kansei]

wow read that yesterday when it was 2 pages and thought that most of the nasioc guys were mature individuals... dear god that went down hill fast.. lol some people on there were very open minded but the fan boys were a bit crazy... as i am sure will happen to the ms3 it will have its far share of fan boys... omg my car is f4st3st!!! as there are/were with the msp crowd... you don't find as many as those chest thumper people in the regular (2.5rs, mzda3, p5) models... ???

Because of P5, normal 3, 2.5RS people bought cars that weren't marketed as being "the wild child", or "faster than a porsche boxter".. we bought economical cars that are pretty damn nice and bring smiles to our faces. I've always noticed this.. the MSP people in general are the least satisfied with their cars.. hence why they are always trying to sell their cars... to get the WRX they wish they'd have dropped the few extra Gs on before they even bothered with Mazda.

 

[Kansei]

omg omg on page 2 of that thread someone actually referred to our beloved FS-DE as being a "solid engine"!!!!!

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15397462&postcount=28

 

[gimpo2]

omg omg on page 2 of that thread someone actually referred to our beloved FS-DE as being a "solid engine"!!!!!

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15397462&postcount=28

yeah solid like my poo

 

[shark77]

COBB Tuning is going to at least come out with their AccesPort for the MS3, it has already been announced on the COBB forums and linked here....they have a MS3 on order to test with and are planning on first releasing the AP tuned for the stock intake, if they feel the need after testing to creat an intake/AP/Exhaust package they will do so....

my thoughts are if the stock mazda ecu on the ms6 bumps th HP up about 15 the AP from COBB can do at least 20-25, plus a nice exhaust and your above evo pwr levels for under 1500 aftermarket.

Doing a little arm chair dyno'ing...

From CP-E on the MS6
Down Pipe: ~29whp
Exhaust: ~25whp
CAI: ~11whp

So say combined you are probably looking at around ~45whp from those 3 bolt-ons. If you add some ecu tuning from Cobb for 15-20... So potentially we could be looking at 60-70whp from 4 relatively simple bolt-ons.

If the MS3 dyno's around 225whp were going to be close to 300 with those bolt-ons. I know it's just speculation, but hopefully this will be the case.

 

[CTGrey02]

Those numbers are so grossly exaggerated that I dont even think its worth commenting... but... my toy car has a v8 with a blower on it.. and a catback exhaust (2 pipes) on that only added about 5 HP.. I dyno ... (ya know.. on rollers) about twice a year, just to make sure everythings kosher. Not even a mid pipe or boost pipe added anywhere near those numbers and we're talking a much larger engine with less compression. I'd be amazed to see those numbers on a small 2.3 liter high compression FI motor, with just those mods.

 

[shark77]

Those numbers are so grossly exaggerated that I dont even think its worth commenting...

You can find dyno charts from the three mods I referenced on CP-E's website under the MS6. (The ecu is just a guess)

http://www.cp-e.com/scan/co=yes/fi=products/sf=category/se=speed6/op=eq.html?open=

but... my toy car has a v8 with a blower on it.. and a catback exhaust (2 pipes) on that only added about 5 HP.. I dyno ... (ya know.. on rollers) about twice a year, just to make sure everythings kosher. Not even a mid pipe or boost pipe added anywhere near those numbers and we're talking a much larger engine with less compression. I'd be amazed to see those numbers on a small 2.3 liter high compression FI motor, with just those mods.

Superchargers and turbos are completely different animals when it comes to the exhaust side of the equation.

Turbo efficiency is directly related to exhaust flow. The best situation for a turbo is no back pressure. Becuase this will decrease the heat and improve flow through the turbo increasing it's ability to turn higher RPMs.

Superchargers "themselves" do not lose efficiency because of exhaust flow. In essence, to improve a supercharger the way a turbo is improved by better exhaust flow, you would need to decrease its parasitic mechanical drag.

Exhaust flow to a turbo is like engine RPM to a supercharger. Where parasitic losses and boost capability increase with RPM in a supercharger, the same can be said with exhaust flow to a turbo.

So it is not amazing that exhaust upgrades yeild higher results in turbo applications. Where N/A and supercharged engines improve cylinder head flow with better exhausts, turbos improve not only better cylinder head flow, but also compressor performance.

Larger power gains in relation to exhaust for turbo engines are not uncommon in comparison to N/A or supercharged engines. Especially with higher boost engines.

 

[seanw]

Those numbers are so grossly exaggerated that I dont even think its worth commenting... but... my toy car has a v8 with a blower on it.. and a catback exhaust (2 pipes) on that only added about 5 HP.. I dyno ... (ya know.. on rollers) about twice a year, just to make sure everythings kosher. Not even a mid pipe or boost pipe added anywhere near those numbers and we're talking a much larger engine with less compression. I'd be amazed to see those numbers on a small 2.3 liter high compression FI motor, with just those mods.

CP-E is pretty reputable and has dynos, too, you know. Maybe they're cherry picking a little, but maybe your exhaust started out a lot less restrictive than the MS6's. The exhaust sound has not been referred to as being like a "psychotic vacuum cleaner" for nothing. But, assuming the numbers in the post are what CP-E published, I still gotta wonder if you really can just add 'em up like that. Some of the advantages gained by an individual mod may be not be cumulative. Not that I have any idea, so I'm always open to being corrected.

 

[shark77]

I still gotta wonder if you really can just add 'em up like that. Some of the advantages gained by an individual mod may be not be cumulative. Not that I have any idea, so I'm always open to being corrected.

I agree with you that you just don't add things up, because 29+25+11 = 65. So I just WAG'd a 30% decrease and came up with 45 for the CP-E parts. Just playing with numbers, but it will be interesting to see everything put together on one car.

 

[CTGrey02]

CP-E is pretty reputable and has dynos, too, you know. Maybe they're cherry picking a little, but maybe your exhaust started out a lot less restrictive than the MS6's. The exhaust sound has not been referred to as being like a "psychotic vacuum cleaner" for nothing. But, assuming the numbers in the post are what CP-E published, I still gotta wonder if you really can just add 'em up like that. Some of the advantages gained by an individual mod may be not be cumulative. Not that I have any idea, so I'm always open to being corrected.

Not for nothing, but I still dont think they'll see those gains from such small displacement by just opening up the exhaust and retuning a little. Your still talking roughly 75 wheel HP, and granted superchargers are not as effiencient (I've also done twin turbo installs on the same cars as well as helped with quite a few DSM's.) but I still cant see those numbers coming out. Time will tell I guess.

 

[seanw]

I agree with you that you just don't add things up, because 29+25+11 = 65. So I just WAG'd a 30% decrease and came up with 45 for the CP-E parts. Just playing with numbers, but it will be interesting to see everything put together on one car.

Right, when I said "add", I should have actually or even roughly added them up. Of course, Mazda, herself, says 30 hp out of just intake and exhaust mods. Assuming that's at the crank, WHP's probably 15% less, so 25-26. Downpipes are new, but there should be some people dynoing with all three pretty soon if they haven't already. As far as the ECU, that sounds reasonable since I think Mazda had an MS6 at a show in Japan putting out 300 at the crank largely based on ECU changes. Sounds like even the staged Caliber SRT-8 will have some competition in the insane hp for a FWD category.

 

[Micah]

lol try telling that to the nasioc guys trashing the ms3.
some of them are just so blinded by faith. Subarus are great cars but they wont compare the handling and the interior is miles away; they wont catch up for at least 2 production rotations i think.

Maybe so - but the Subaru AWD can handle more power - and the aftermarket tuning options are there. Cobb Stage I is only $645 and brings the car up to 260hp. Check the dyno here to see awhp:

http://cobbtuning.com/wrx/images\ae-stage1-dyno_2006.jpg

A 2006 Stage 2 (only needs addition of downpipe to the above, catback is optional - though recommended) puts out 285hp.

The MS3 has a very nice interior from the looks of it, I have the new motor trend next to me - it arrived in the mail a couple days ago. I'd still take the Subie, but I'm loyal because I've own one. So far as handling - the WRX is designed to have ground clearance and suspension travel. I took mine off road before I changed the suspension, and the car doesn't bottom out like you would expect it to. If you have the mag - check page 44 for the box about autocrossing. Both drivers would rather have the Subaru.

Out of the box - Mazda FTW. Reflash to stage 1, tires, rear antisway bar - things would change. Now people in NJ buy some MS3's already so I can see them on the road.

Interestingly both cars weigh 3140(curb weight).

 

[p5sundevil]

If the WRX can benefit that much from COBB stage 1 and 2 the MS3 will gain just as much if not more....

And the part about WRX's being better offrd, i mean common lets go compare apples and oranges....the WRX is a RALLY CAR...the MS3 is a TRACK CAR...not that hard to figure out that the wrx will bet better setup for offrd/rally use....

 

[Micah]

If the WRX can benefit that much from COBB stage 1 and 2 the MS3 will gain just as much if not more....

And the part about WRX's being better offrd, i mean common lets go compare apples and oranges....the WRX is a RALLY CAR...the MS3 is a TRACK CAR...not that hard to figure out that the wrx will bet better setup for offrd/rally use....

apples to apples???

ok, so what about the AWD vs. FWD you are basing this on in the first place. Also, don't be so sure the MS3 will benefit quite so much, they are limiting torque from the factory for a reason.

 

[jred321]

Not for nothing, but I still dont think they'll see those gains from such small displacement by just opening up the exhaust and retuning a little. Your still talking roughly 75 wheel HP, and granted superchargers are not as effiencient (I've also done twin turbo installs on the same cars as well as helped with quite a few DSM's.) but I still cant see those numbers coming out. Time will tell I guess.

fwiw an evo 9 with tune, exhaust, intake, fuel pump and mbc usually gets between 330 and 350whp, or ~100 over stock. flash alone puts them close to 300whp, or ~50hp over stock. ones with just a tune run high 12s, exhaust, tune, fuel pump are low 12s. similar size engine, probably lower static compression actually but higher boost? def lower fuel pressure. if people can figure out how to tune the direct injection better they should actually have bigger gains

the big issue the ms3 will have, made even worse when you mod, is traction. snow and rain i imagine will be difficult to drive in


edit: some dyno #s of evo 9s, some don't have baselines so they're kinda useless but some do http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=177892

 

[Renesis8]

The MS3 will lose if you start modding it, its FWD vs AWD, FWD doesnt stand a chance when you have higher horsepower. There are pros/cons for both cars, I appreciate both the WRX and MS3.

What I am intersted to see is how much HP the 2.3L DISI can handle, I am hearing 500crank hp with stock internals on the mazda6club board, this person attended a Mazda informational class about the new 2.3L DISI engine. Can it really push 500hp stock? no one knows yet, but looking at the development and NA version of this engine, I think it could, we would have to wait and see.

It'll be useless to put that much power to the MS3, but there is still hope as we have the AWD Mazdaspeed 6. It'd be awesome if it has the potential of the Subaru and Mitsu motors.

 

[jred321]

What I am intersted to see is how much HP the 2.3L DISI can handle, I am hearing 500crank hp with stock internals on the mazda6club board, this person attended a Mazda informational class about the new 2.3L DISI engine. Can it really push 500hp stock? no one knows yet, but looking at the development and NA version of this engine, I think it could, we would have to wait and see.

what upgrades does the turbo engine have over the normal one? besides the obvious direct injection and turbo

 

[CTGrey02]

fwiw an evo 9 with tune, exhaust, intake, fuel pump and mbc usually gets between 330 and 350whp, or ~100 over stock. flash alone puts them close to 300whp, or ~50hp over stock. ones with just a tune run high 12s, exhaust, tune, fuel pump are low 12s. similar size engine, probably lower static compression actually but higher boost? def lower fuel pressure. if people can figure out how to tune the direct injection better they should actually have bigger gains

the big issue the ms3 will have, made even worse when you mod, is traction. snow and rain i imagine will be difficult to drive in


edit: some dyno #s of evo 9s, some don't have baselines so they're kinda useless but some do http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=177892

I understand that and I've tuned my own car with SCT Tuning software. We were talking basic bolt on's hitting 300 WHP... which I still think is ludicris. I wont be modding mine as theres just no point. I already have a 12 second car (by no means fast) and it took a lot more than intake and exhaust work to get that way, I'm not about to do that with a car I'm going to use as a beater. The EVO you mentioned also had a boost controller and a re-tune. Changing the fuel maps and timing on a boosted car makes a world of a difference, but simply adding on a CAI and turboback isnt going to find ya 75 whp. Not with out supporting mods for fuel and spark, and tuning. All of thats gonna cost a lot more time and money than most are willing to invest.

 

[Micah]

if people can figure out how to tune the direct injection better they should actually have bigger gains

Don't be so sure, for the size of the engine, it's already making quite a bit of power. I don't think the gains are in any direct proportion of percentage. What is the compression ratio on that engine? What about the limited torque in lower gears, can that be defeated - and if/when - can the tranny and associated driveline components take it?

To be real about it. How much boost can the stock engine and turbo handle - can the drivetrain keep up? That's what needs to be answered first. Trial and error is the only way this will happen. People will need to blow engines - that's the long and short of it. Also - Cobb is supposed to be working on the ECU. Engine Management needs to be addressed.

 

[jred321]

tuning is definitely necessary, i missed that we were talking bolt-ons without tuning. unless the ecu is really smart so it can account for the added air, which usually doesn't happen (and let's be honest, in a mazda that's not gonna happen cause their ecus are special). the first mod people do to evos (or should do) is to get a proper tune so i was just assuming that was part of the equation. tuning is why people on bone stock evo 9s with just a mail in tune ($200 or so) hit 300whp and run 12s. cai + turbo back won't get you 75whp, ever. but if people figure out the ecu and can get a proper, mail in style tune, 300whp won't be a problem at all, might not even need intake and exhaust

 

[jflo]

the Motor Trend comparison was done with the stock tires of both cars, the WRX's being all-season bridgestone re92s, and the mazdaspeed3's bridgestone potenza re050 summer tires, which are naturally a helluvalot stickier. i think the tests as far as handling would go would be pretty different if they used the same tires